Success message
error message
warn message
Terminal Evaluation of Mainstreaming Incentives for Biodiversity Conservation in the Climate Resilient Green Economy Strategy (CRGE) of Ethiopia
Commissioning Unit: Ethiopia
Evaluation Plan: 2017-2020
Evaluation Type: Project
Completion Date: 10/2019
Unit Responsible for providing Management Response: Ethiopia
Documents Related to overall Management Response:
 
1. Recommendation:

6.2 Recommendations

Ten recommendations are presented below. They highlight the need for further engagement with the GoE to ensure that the PES legal framework is approved as soon as possible, coordination with CRGE is established, and that expanded livelihood options are promoted for communities who are actively managing and rehabilitating the project protected areas. The final stages of the project should include presentation of a clear investment case to the government, based on the MIBC model that combines CBO mobilization and CPA responsibility, local authority cooperation line agency technical support, leveraging of PES funding, and management oversight and reporting by EFCCC. These recommendations are presented as an integrated package that is intended to build upon the significant momentum established by the project.

1. MIBC should update the PES Action Plan and facilitate its post-project implementation by EFCCC and UNDP including action on the Terminal Evaluation Recommendations and the related capacity development in support of the PES approach.

Rationale: As part of the exit strategy for MIBC, the project needs a commitment and action plan for necessary follow-up on the PES approach by EFCCC and UNDP. The progress to date and the importance of the project to community protected areas warrants a short, targeted output-based program that focusses on (i) finalizing the legal instruments, (ii) securing additional PES agreements with prospective high priority buyers, (ii) developing a concise PES Procedures Manual, and (iv) providing for PES process and procedures development within EFCCC. GoE is appointing an external advisor to expedite the legal aspects. This work should be linked to organizational development to strengthen and institutionalize PES processes within EFCCC and within the CRGE and other relevant programs and projects (e.g., CALM). PES brokering services could be part of the business plan of the Directorate for Ecosystem Valuation and Management within EFCCC. A well-defined one-year workplan would greatly enhance the sustainability of the MIBC project results. 

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/14] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
prepare and annex an action plan to the strategy & road map document
[Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/04/27]
PMU 2020/02 Completed Completed History
2. Recommendation:

2. MIBC should prepare a concise, stepwise PES Procedures Manual based on PES principles and the project experiences to date to guide Commission staff and to supplement the PES Strategic Plan.

Rationale: Further consolidation and communication of the basic requirements and steps in formulation and implementation of PES agreements are needed to clarify the specific procedures. The MIBC approach as defined in the PES Strategy, “whereone or more providers sell one or more well-defined Ecosystem Services to one or more beneficiaries, for a well-defined period of time”, needs more operational precision and technical rigor that meet international PES criteria. Proposed nonvoluntary cost recovery mechanisms and revised resource use tariffs should be clearly distinguished from revenues pursued through voluntary PES agreements. More emphasis is needed on the ‘payments for specific ecosystem services provided’ under PES agreement. These procedures should consider, for example,

(a) the identification of ecosystem services and objectives that PES investment will serve;

(b) the appropriate site strategies to achieve these objectives under the PES agreement;

(c) the selection of key performance indicators (KPIs) for the enhanced ecosystem services;

(d) the preparation of budgets according to accepted cost norms for the proposed work;

(e) the negotiation of the PES agreement between sellers and buyers;

(f) the roles and responsibilities of the partners to the agreement;

(g) the administration of funds and disbursements under the scheme; and

(h) the legal documentation on government authorisation of PES schemes under the supervision of EFCCC.  

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/14] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Prepare PES procedure manual
[Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/04/27]
PMU 2020/03 Completed Completed History
3. Recommendation:

3. MIBC should strengthen the mandate and capacity of the Directorate for Ecosystem Valuation and Management in EFCCC to oversee and assist development and marketing of the PES approach for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem-based climate change adaptation (EbA), and to provide PES brokering services to regional and zonal offices.

Rationale: The PES program needs an institutional home within EFCCC with a few designated professional staff who have been empowered and trained to implement the program. This will require commitment of staff from EFCCC, and possibly additional capacity building support such that the staff are able to pursue and facilitate PES agreements with public and private sector partners and the communities in accordance with the established procedures. An EFCCC program plan for PES expansion is also needed as part of the project exit strategy and implementation of the PES Action Plan. The EFCCC staff should be involved in advocacy to show how PES initiatives complement the CRGE program. 

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Prepare Rapid review of existing capacity gap with the ecosystem valuation and management directorate and provide extra capacity building
[Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/04/27]
PMU 2020/03 Completed Completed History
4. Recommendation:

4. MIBC should focus further economic valuation studies on demonstrating the business case for PES investments in ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation at a site level under the Local PES Fund Platform currently being developed by UNDP and EFCCC.

Rationale: Ecosystem valuation studies have mostly focussed on raising awareness of the magnitude of implied monetary values from conservation and sustainable utilization of ecosystems. These theoretical studies have overshadowed the more urgent need for applied economic analysis of conservation investment options and the sound ‘business case’ that they can offer Ministry of Finance and others. For example, an assessment of the costs and benefits of community drainage control and flood mitigation in Arba Minch municipality catchment area. Demonstration of this type of analysis at the project scale would significantly assist support for the Local PES Fund Platform by highlighting marketable values and the practical costeffectiveness of conservation. It would provide more useful information on the economic and financial incentives for conservation than further generalized studies of broad ecosystem values.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Revitalise ESV and compiling evidences on contribution of community led PES initiatives
[Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/04/27]
UNDP , PMU 2020/03 Completed Completed History
5. Recommendation:

5. MIBC should ensure formal adoption of the pilot project Management Plans by the responsible government authorities including statements of commitment, budget and staff to support ongoing implementation and undertake revisions as needed and appropriate to encompass the catchment areas proposed by the implementing CBOs.

Rationale: The Management Plans prepared for each project site have provided relatively informal technical guides to land use zones and conservation/rehabilitation activities. There were assurances during the TE field mission that these plans are endorsed and adopted by regional/zonal and local authorities including certain budget commitments. Given the level of effort and importance of these plans for sustainability and ongoing implementation and expansion of the site conservation activities, at is advisable to obtain written commitment to the plans, and where necessary to update the plans based on site experiences to date and the expansion of protected area boundaries that may have recently occurred at each of the sites. Approved management plans are key documents for institutional strengthening (e.g., the proposed Choke Mtn Conservation and Development Office).

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Secure formal adoption of site management plan by the local government
[Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/04/27]
PMU 2020/03 Completed Completed History
6. Recommendation:

6. EFCCC and CRGE Steering Committee should establish an MOU to guide coordination with CRGE Task Forces in assisting PES agreements, biodiversity safeguards in CRGE and implementation of the Local PES Fund Platform

Rationale: The Local PES Fund Platform is still under development by the project. The concept needs to be fully endorsed and supported by the CRGE structure. Establishing a linkage to CRGE for mainstreaming biodiversity conservation incentives into the development sectors was a key concern expressed during the TE discussions. CRGE Tasks Forces are a main entry point for future PES agreements but they need to be formally supported and guided by an MOU with EFCCC on the proposed working relationship between the parties. Further, at the national level, mainstreaming biodiversity safeguards within CRGE investment projects needs to be clarified and highlighted. A statement of basic operational principles for protection of biodiversity should accompany the MOU. Some effort to integrate biodiversity conservation into the ATP and CRGE may have occurred but these principles now need to be operationalized in the EFCCC-CRGE working relationship.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Facilitate signing on an MoU between EFCCC work units and CRGE steering committee to sustain the project gains/initiatives
[Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/16]
UNDP, PMU 2021/06 Initiated History
7. Recommendation:

7. EFCCC, in collaboration with the Ethiopia Biodiversity Institute and CRGE Facility, should develop and demonstrate practical core indicators of ecosystem change related to (i) land cover, (ii) hydrological systems, (iii) land degradation, (iv) habitat/population status for selected species, and (v) carbon sequestration that can provide better monitoring of results of PES agreements.

Rationale: Measurable results are a central element for effective PES schemes and accountable payments. The current PES agreements state that the provider [CBO] will “achieve the conservation gain of the land under its stewardship that can be expressed in terms of restoring degraded areas“. However, there is no empirical accounting of the ecosystem services that are being funded by the PES “buyers/users”. While detailed monitoring and impact assessment may not be possible, there are feasible and cost-effective means of assessing the main biophysical results that underpin the relevant ecosystem services. Core indicators of these results could include five general accounts:

Land cover: the Biodiversity Scorecard employs remote sensing imagery and data to assess time series changes in land use and vegetation cover that generally reflect ecosystem and habitat changes;

Hydrological systems: changes in stream hydrographs (e.g, mean annual discharge), aquifer recharge (e.g., downslope well water levels), sediment discharge (e.g., sedimentation monitoring traps) have been used to measure watershed rehabilitation results and could be selectively applied to PES projects.

Land degradation: there is an established model for mapping the general status of land degradation in Ethiopia at a course scale. This could be downscaled to a finer resolution with added ground truthing by project staff to provide for measurement of land stability and productivity within project watersheds.

Habitat/population status: the land cover assessment under the Biodiversity Scorecard is used as a rough proxy for assessing habitat conditions. This is a very generalized method. More project-specific assessment of selected or indicator species of concern jn the particular project area could be used to provide better empirical data on habitat quality and quantity. In some cases, estimates of changes in targeted wildlife populations may be possible where this is a specific objective in the CPA Management Plan.

Carbon sequestration: the carbon budgets of different vegetation regimes can be estimated from available data sources to provide a general indication of GHG reduction benefits

All of the above implies a more rigorous and proactive monitoring system with the application of existing methods and feasible data sources to assess PES project results. It also advances the national results-based monitoring systems in related land rehabilitation projects. It would require technical assistance from the relevant experts and GIS specialists involved in biodiversity conservation and forest land management. But the use of a more structured and evidence-based approach to monitoring ecosystem service results would greatly improve the PES model being promoted by the project, and provide international and domestic investors with high level quality assurance on the specific results delivered. 

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Revisiting ecosystem change indicators
[Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/04/27]
UNDP , PMU 2020/03 Completed Completed History
8. Recommendation:

8. EFCCC should update the wording in PES agreements to ensure independent inspection and certification by government experts on works completed as per accepted standards.

Rationale: To ensure transparent oversight and quality assurance and the confidence of investors, it is important that the role of the “neutral verifier” referred to in PES agreements be well-defined. Many of the relevant standards for physical works can be found in Ethiopia’s Guidelines for Participatory Watershed Development (2015/2019). These best practices can serve as reference points for assessing completion of physical works on PES projects. Not all of the drainage control structures were effectively installed (see Annex 9 Review of Project Sites) and more attention to quality is warranted, especially if gully treatments are planned in the future.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Prepare quality certification for conservation work at the community level
[Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/04/27]
PMU and EFCCC 2020/03 Completed Completed History
9. Recommendation:

9. The Government of Ethiopia should undertake an Alternative Livelihoods Analysis of potential livelihood activities and opportunities at Project Sites including those aimed at increasing the participation of women, which would facilitate the future programs for conservation of these sites.

Rationale: The project document anticipated the support of GoE for livelihoods development. The current activities are very limited in type and quantity, and with few economic activities in core areas (e.g, agroforestry, NTFPs could be developed). While it may be too late to introduce expanded livelihoods, the project could prepare for future programs of the CBOs in the post-project period. 

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Sustaining alternative livelihood options
[Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/04/27]
UNDP , PMU 2020/03 Completed Completed History
10. Recommendation:

10. The CBOs involved in implementing the Pilot Projects should prioritize physical demarcation of the protected area boundaries, establish benefit-sharing agreements for work undertaken on private (non-community) lands, and simplify the public communications messaging to encourage community support for the protected areas.

Rationale: The field visits highlighted these three issues that need to be addressed. Others may be added as identified by the PMU staff in the final Quarterly work plan. There have been few organised opportunities for internal, self-assessment of field implementation performance and constraints. The final stages of the project are a good time for project implementation participants to reflect on the site work to date, the lessons learned for future projects, and the priorities for moving ahead after project funding ends.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/21]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Sustain awareness raising campaign on the roles of biodiversity and sustainable conservation and utilisation of biodiversity resources
[Added: 2019/12/25] [Last Updated: 2020/04/27]
PMU 2020/03 Completed Completed History

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