Terminal evaluation - Mainstreaming Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Conservation into Production Sectors in Sindhudurg Coast, Maharashtra (GEF)

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2013-2017, India
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
10/2017
Completion Date:
12/2017
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
25,000

Share

Title Terminal evaluation - Mainstreaming Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Conservation into Production Sectors in Sindhudurg Coast, Maharashtra (GEF)
Atlas Project Number: 00058538
Evaluation Plan: 2013-2017, India
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 12/2017
Planned End Date: 10/2017
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Environment & Sustainable Development
  • 2. 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 $): 25,000
Source of Funding: Project
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 23,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Virginia Ravndal International Consultant
Ravishankar Thupalli National Consultant
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title: Mainstreaming Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Conservation into Production Sectors in Sindhudurg Coast, Maharashtra
Evaluation Type: Terminal Evaluation
Focal Area: Biodiversity
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-4
GEF Project ID: 3941
PIMS Number: 4242
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: INDIA
Lessons
1.

The thematic scope as defined in the PRODOC was ambitious given the project funding and time frame.  The project added further to what was already an ambitious project, increasing its thematic scope beyond what was intended in the PRODOC.  This resulted in being overly ambitious and was one reason why the impact of the project in the production sectors of original focus (i.e., fisheries and tourism) is not as strong as it might otherwise have been


2.

Although not stated as such in the PRODOC, in addition to other aspects of the project, the project is intended to demonstrate approaches (some but not all of which are, according to the UNDP CO, new to both the District of Sindhudurg and to India) including:  1) How to effectively incorporate biodiversity conservation considerations into production sector policies and practices, 2) how to adopt a landscape/seascape level approach to biodiversity conservation (as opposed to a species specific, habitat specific, or ecosystem specific approach), 3) how to plan across a landscape/seascape and across sectors (e.g., how does sewage from coastal communities going untreated to the sea affect marine tourism, fisheries, health, coastal and marine biodiversity and what needs to be done to reduce negative impacts), 4) how to ensure livelihoods of those most directly dependent on natural resources can be shifted so as to avoid negative impact on biodiversity.  Although the project contributed to all of these, it fell short in one of the four (#3) in the sense of providing a true model, and, although a helpful intervention, it did not provide a comprehensive model in any of the four


3.

The Landscape/Seascape plan could, in principle, be utilized as a tool to ensure biodiversity conservation is mainstreamed into development planning and practices but not in its present form. Development of the plan was severely delayed and is still in draft form with only weeks to project closure.  Although it compiles a lot of information including new data gathered with the project support, there is scope for improving the plan to make it a more practical and useful decision-making tool.  Being the first plan of its kind in India, it is important to do so if this is to be used as a model to be replicated elsewhere.


Findings
1.

Many of the successes achieved during the project period have a good chance of being sustained, replicated and scaled-up as a result of both Government commitment (especially at District and State levels) and the establishment of the Mangrove and Marine Biodiversity Conservation Foundation (hereafter referred to as “the Foundation”).  

By supporting the technical establishment of the Foundation, the project served to catalyze a mechanism which allows for flexibility and innovations in future conservation activities in and by the State


2.

Extension of the responsibilities of the Forest Department to include coastal areas was unprecedented (the District of Sindhudurg representing the first case of its application in India) and coincided with the project start.  The project provided a mechanism whereby the relevant government entities could adopt the flexibility needed to undertake certain new activities.  It is not always the actual funds that make the biggest difference in a project’s ability to bring about positive change.  Although the funds are important, sometimes it is the flexibility that a project enables that is equally or more important.


3.

As a result of this project, many new partnerships were formed which would certainly not have been formed otherwise and which if sustained can make a positive difference for biodiversity.  Joint fishing patrols by Forest, Fisheries and Police are one such example.  The model is important including the deputizing of Fisheries Officers to enable them to enforce regulations which would otherwise only be enforceable by Forest Department personnel.  Clearly, the project was successful in initiating and demonstrating this innovative model of joint patrols, nevertheless the sustainability of this model is in question as the Fisheries Department has only filled 2 of the 7 posts in Sindhudurg (so staff is a big constraint to further implementing these joint patrols) and none of the 3 partners has a boat fast enough for patrolling purposes therefore leaving in question the sustainability of the activity.


Recommendations
1

Even at this late stage, an Exit Strategy should be prepared which outlines specific step-by-step actions required to ensure the project-initiated activity is sustained and if possible replicated and scaled up.   A presentation of the exit strategy should be made to the key entities that need to follow up on matters.  This presentation should be made before project closure

2

The draft Malvan Marine Sanctuary management plan should be prepared (an early first draft was available at the time of the TE) without further delay incorporating the technical data based on the studies undertaken during the project.  This draft plan should then be shared jointly by the Forest Department and the District Administration with stakeholders for gaining their inputs

3

 Scale-up solid waste management efforts which in part through project support have become highly successful but require scaling up to maximum impact

1. Recommendation:

Even at this late stage, an Exit Strategy should be prepared which outlines specific step-by-step actions required to ensure the project-initiated activity is sustained and if possible replicated and scaled up.   A presentation of the exit strategy should be made to the key entities that need to follow up on matters.  This presentation should be made before project closure

Management Response: [Added: 2017/12/21] [Last Updated: 2017/12/21]

Noted and a presentation would be made

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
A presentation on exit strategy to be made
[Added: 2017/12/21] [Last Updated: 2018/05/22]
UNDP & PMU 2018/05 Completed History
2. Recommendation:

The draft Malvan Marine Sanctuary management plan should be prepared (an early first draft was available at the time of the TE) without further delay incorporating the technical data based on the studies undertaken during the project.  This draft plan should then be shared jointly by the Forest Department and the District Administration with stakeholders for gaining their inputs

Management Response: [Added: 2017/12/21]

The draft plan is under review which will be shared with stakeholders soon

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Discuss and finalize the 'draft' plan to share with the stakeholders
[Added: 2017/12/21] [Last Updated: 2018/07/17]
UNDP & PMU 2018/05 Completed History
3. Recommendation:

 Scale-up solid waste management efforts which in part through project support have become highly successful but require scaling up to maximum impact

Management Response: [Added: 2017/12/21]

Eventhough the project is over, it will be discussed further to scale-up at the appropriate level

Key Actions:

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

1 UN Plaza
DC1-20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org