Small Grants Initiative - Beahrs Environmental Leadership Program, 2003

Submitted by: Olga Ramaromanana

Final Report: Monitoring Community-Based Natural Resource Management in Madagascar: Ampatsy Forest as a Case Study

Summary

Madagascar’s rapid loss of forest land and accompanying environmental impacts, such as the drying up of water sources, are resulting in the irreversible disappearance of the country’s unique biodiversity at an alarming rate. In the eastern rainforest corridor, low-yield shifting cultivation, or tavy, has induced large-scale erosion and rendered the soil increasingly infertile. Moreover, if the rate of forest loss characterized by the past twenty years continues, most of the country’s forests will disappear before the year 2020, causing rural communities to fall even further below the poverty line. Recently-introduced state and donor-sponsored programs to decentralize natural resource management to rural communities, Gestion Contractualisée des Forêts (GCF) and Gestion Locale Sécurisée (Gelose), aim to reduce tavy through establishing and guaranteeing relative local land tenure. In most cases, they include an initial transfer of resource management for three years, with a potential renewal for an additional ten years (and continual renewals thereafter), should the community successfully manage the resources. Yet, to date, limited evaluation of the programs has taken place.

With funding from the Beahrs Environmental Leadership 2003 Grant, Beahrs Environmental Leadership Program Alumnus, Olga Ramaromanana, and Berkeley collaborators, Dr. Adina Merenlender, Associate Cooperative Extension Specialist and Adjunct Associate Professor, Division of Ecosystem Management, ESPM, and Catherine Corson, PhD Student, Division of Society and Environment, ESPM, have collaborated on the design and implementation of a monitoring and evaluation system for GCFs using a case study in the Ampatsy community, in the commune of Alatsinainy Ialamarina, located in the central corridor of Fianarantsoa. The Ampatsy community comprises 123 members, and the Ampatsy Forest, an area of 430 hectares, was transferred formally to the grassroot community on July 16 2002 in a GCF contract. The Ampatsy Forest project is one of the few in-depth monitoring and evaluation systems to track the implementation of a GCF. Therefore, as many GCF programs come up for renewal after three years, and the donor community and Forest Service are scrambling for evaluation information on the success of these programs, the pilot study is providing valuable input on how to design effective evaluation and monitoring systems.

Project Goals

The goal, as stated in the awardees’ 2003 application, was to look at the efficacy of joint Berkeley-Landscape Development Interventions (LDI) collaboration to 1) identify key socio-economic factors that reflect the relative success of community based natural resource management (CBNRM) of conservation programs and 2) incorporate socio-economic, biological and geographic information into a model to improve the success of these programs. Thus, the ultimate goals of the project is to explore how to use socio-economic and biological information to both identify critical components of successful community based natural resource management and prioritize conservation areas where investment will have the most impact.

Project Accomplishments

SGI funds supported an initial joint meeting between Berkeley and LDI to discuss potential collaborative activities, as well as the initiation of an enhanced data collection and analysis process, which included gathering and evaluating additional socio-economic data and obtaining and converting current remote sensing data. Under the grant, the key socio-economic and ecological indicators for long-term monitoring of CBNRM were identified; preliminary analysis of socio-economic, biological and geographic information was conducted, in an effort to identify under what conditions community based forest management component work best; and a predictive model for successful community-based conservation and development was developed. In particular, the collaborators placed priority on identifying which indicators are the most robust for detecting change and where additional data is most needed. In addition to socio-economic surveys, aerial photos and satellite imageries were used to develop maps of regional land-use, tavy and land management. Finally, one of the goals of the project has been to empower the community to monitor its own progress.

In sum, the project outcomes include:

· Identified critical factors to GCF success, based on the GCF in Ampatsy forest as a case study (Appendix A).

· A list of biological and socio-economic indicators that will be used to monitor GCF implementation progress (Appendix B).

· A community questionnaire for self-monitoring (Appendix C).

· GIS maps showing tavy rates and locations at the community level for the past several years (see Appendix D). Aerial photography maps were ground-truthed using Global Positioning Systems and community interviews.

The SGI grant also provided critical support for Catherine Corson’s preliminary dissertation research. By funding her travel to Madagascar to discuss her dissertation idea with a number of authorities, visit the Ampatsy community, and investigate potential field sites, the grant was instrumental in furthering her research. She will likely conduct her dissertation research in the Fianarantsoa central corridor, building on some of the spatial, quantitative and qualitative data already collected as part of the Ampatsy case study. In turn, her research, which will likely focus on GCF’s ability to secure community land tenure in the presence of competing interests such as migration, as well as mining and forest concessions, will help inform Chemonics’ and other development organizations’ GCF programs in Madagascar.

Finally, most importantly, one of the most significant outcomes of the grant has been the intellectual debate advanced via email and in person. The ongoing discussion brought together complementary perspectives on monitoring CBNRM programs and challenged all parties to reflect on how best to design appropriate methods for communities, non-governmental organizations, donors, and government partners.

Process Synergies and Critical Moments

The SGI grant provided a wonderful opportunity to build on the complementary strengths of Berkeley collaborators and Beahrs Environmental Leadership Program Alumnus, Olga Ramaromanana. Over the past year, participants have found their experiences and expertise balance one another well. Dr. Adina Merenlender provided critical expertise in designing monitoring programs and modeling factors associated with landuse change, as well as geographical information systems (GIS), to the project. In line with SGI’s recognition that UC Berkeley graduate students can offer both time and expertise to increase the effectiveness of collaborative research projects, Catherine Corson has coordinated the collaboration for Berkeley and provided technical assistance in socioeconomic modeling and research design. Olga used her extensive expertise in monitoring and evaluating field projects, as well as her valuable contacts throughout the development community in Madagascar, to design a monitoring and evaluation program that can be scaled up and applied elsewhere in Madagascar. It particular, it will inform other organizations’, such as the Forest Service’s, long-term monitoring and evaluation efforts.

The most challenging aspect of the collaboration was the fact that most of the early communication was done by email. All parties were extremely responsive and committed to the process, and it went smoothly, particularly given the fact that two of the collaborators had never met and that there is an 11 hour time difference between Berkeley and Madagascar. In this sense, Catherine Corson’s fall visit was particularly important in that it ensured that both the Berkeley and Chemonics partners developed the same familiarity with the study site and the intricacies of GCF.

During Catherine’s 2003 visit to Madagascar, she and Olga visited with the Ampatsy community to discuss ways of monitoring the community’s management, and met the Ministry of Water and Forests staff and LDI field staff to discuss the modeling effort.

Olga also provided invaluable suggestions for Catherine Corson’s dissertation research, including authorities with whom to meet. Thus, Catherine also had the opportunity to talk with numerous other donors, non-governmental organizations and research institutions working on CBNRM in various regions of Madagascar. Olga’s extraordinary efforts to facilitate many aspects of her travel and discussions while Madagascar were critical. At the same time, Berkeley collaborators have assisted with purchasing computer software not available in Madagascar, and facilitated connections between Olga and other American researchers traveling to Madagascar. Finally, the collaborators’ respective French and English skills have improved significantly through mutual assistance and continual communication.

Future Challenges

The first year of funding supported a pilot project to assess the potential for collaboration. After Catherine’s visit to Madagascar, now that both Berkeley and Chemonics partners have a similar understanding of how the GCF program works, what kind of indicators are feasible, and how the models work, there is tremendous potential for future exciting collaboration. Unfortunately, without continued funding, some of the momentum built up toward the end of 2003 may be lost. While Chemonics provides much of the funding to implement these objectives, the value-added of the support from the Beahrs Small Grants Initiative to these priorities is the partnership which brings together UC Berkeley’s technical expertise in scientific evaluation methodology and Chemonics’ staff experience and knowledge in community management. Moreover, the presence of the partnership raises the priority among the donor/contractor community in Madagascar to implement a sound evaluation and monitoring system. Finally, it has been instrumental in facilitating Catherine’s dissertation research. Thus, both parties are committed to continuing the collaboration in whatever way feasible.

Notes on the Final Report

The final report is sent in the same message. It contains:

· The body of the report, which describes in detail the activities undertaken under the grant, as well as the approaches and methodologies for putting in practice the activities presented

· Four annexes, which show how the work that was developed, including the economic model and questionnaire and the results of the field research (the map, showing spatial distribution of tavy), and the list of biological and socioeconomic indicators.

Of note during this first phase of collaboration, is what part of the anticipated work was not completed during to technical delays in receiving the second tranche of funding and the climatic difficulties of conducting research during the rainy season (see paragraph on the postponed activities). This field work is scheduled for the month of March and will be attached as an addendum to the final report to be submitted in April.

Sustainability

The monitoring and evaluation plan for the Ampatsy COBA is of great use at the moment, because the COBAs are putting together written reports on the capacity for management to the Water and Forest Services and to the organization in charge of technical assistance. The results of our evaluation will help inform a systematic evaluation program for all the GCF contracts, and to help the Ministry of Water and Forests and organizations determine if the COBAs are succeeding in the management of their respective contracts.

It is very important when the first conservation contracts of three years expire and the communities enter the contract of exploitation of natural resources. For Chemonics International, the system of evaluation and monitoring will be followed in the next grand ecoregional project funded by USAID, for which Cheminics will apply.

. APPENDIX A – Economic Model of the Ampatsy Forest

APPENDIX B

List of biological and Socio-Economic criteria and indicators

	Description	Vérificateurs	Sources	Responsable
P	La GCF contribue à l’amélioration des conditions de vie de la population
C1	La gestion locale est efficace dans le contrôle de l’accès aux ressources
1	Les droits de propriété et les droits d’usage des ressources sont clairs et respectés	Nb d’infractions et de conflits recensés	- Rapport d’activités Animateur Forestier - Comité de gestion COBA	AF, COBA
2	Le dina, les règles et les normes de gestion des ressources sont contrôlés et scrupuleusement observés	Nb d’infractions et de conflits recensés	- Rapport d’activités Animateur Forestier - Comité de gestion COBA	AF, COBA
3	Les méthodes de résolution des conflits fonctionnent sans violence	Nb d’infractions et de conflits recensés	- Rapport d’activités Animateur Forestier - Comité de gestion COBA	AF, COBA
4	L’accès à la forêt est localement perçu comme équitable	Nb d’infractions et de conflits recensés	- Rapport d’activités Animateur Forestier - Comité de gestion COBA	AF, COBA
5	La population locale ressent la sécurité de l’accès aux ressources forestières	Nb d’infractions et de conflits recensés	- Rapport d’activités Animateur Forestier - Comité de gestion COBA	AF, COBA
6	Les membres de la COBA participent pleinement à la GCF à différents niveaux tels que la planification, la prise de décision, le suivi des activités	Taux de participation aux réunions de la COBA	Fiche de présence et PV des réunions	AF, COBA
C2	La communauté a développé des activités économiques autour de la GCF
1	Un système de collecte des produits forestiers et de production est mis en place par la COBA	Volume et valeur des produits forestiers et non-forestiers commercialisés, y compris les bois de chauffe, consommation et offre y compris	Enquête	AF, COBA
2	La GCF s’efforce de renforcer et de diversifier l’économie locale, en créant des AGR liées ou non aux produits forestiers (écotourisme, artisanat, sans dépendance sur quelques produits forestiers)	- Nb d’AGR identifiées et entreprises - Nb de bénéficiaires	Enquête Comité de gestion de la COBA	AF, COBA
3	Le système de partage des bénéfices économiques générés par la GCF est jugé équitable par la communauté		Enquête MARP	AF
4	La mise en œuvre de la GCF reconnaît et valorise les services rendus par la forêt et ses ressources tels que les fonctions écologiques assurées par les bassins-versants.	Mesures de protection/conservation prises par la COBA	- Rapport d’activités Animateur Forestier - Comité de gestion COBA	AF, COBA
C3	La population établit un lien entre la GCF et le futur de leurs descendants
1	Les paysans investissent leur temps, argent et efforts dans la mise en œuvre de la GCF	Nb de participants	Enquête MARP	AF, COBA
2	Le taux d’émigration vers les régions environnantes est bas	Nb de ménages immigrants	Enquête	COBA
3	La COBA reconnaît la nécessité d’équilibrer le nombre de population avec l’utilisation des ressources		Enquête MARP	AF
4	Les enfants sont (formellement ou non) éduqués sur la gestion des ressources naturelles		Enquête MARP	AF
5	Les pratiques de destruction des ressources sont rares (feux de brousse, tavy, coupe illicite, etc.)	Nb d’infractions recensées	Comité de suivi COBA	COBA
P	L’utilisation et l’exploitation de produits forestiers sont durables et pérennes
C4	La GCF est mise en œuvre sur la base d’un document légal reconnaissant le droit d’usage et les droits coutumiers
1	Des documents spécifient toutes les conditions sous lesquelles la GCF est mise en œuvre par la communauté (cahiers de charge, dina, statut, etc.)		Contrat GCF	E&F
2	La majorité des membres de la COBA ont connaissance de cause des implications de ces documents légaux		Enquête MARP	E&F, COBA
3	Les informations sur l’identification, la localisation et le dénombrement des populations et ethnies concernées par la GCF existent		Comité de gestion COBA	COBA
4	La délimitation traditionnelle des terroirs et des forêts ancestrales existe sur les cartes		Plan d’Aménagement	E&F, COBA
C5	Le Plan d’Aménagement est complet
1	Les objectifs du plan d’aménagement sont clairement définis selon les différentes fonctions de la forêt et leur répartition spatiale.		Plan d’Aménagement	E&F, COBA
2	Le plan contient la description des ressources forestières à gérer, les contraintes environnementales à observer, la situation actuelle de l’occupation du sol et des droits de propriété, les conditions socio-économiques et la situation des terres dans les zones périphériques.		Plan d’Aménagement	E&F, COBA
3	Le plan spécifie la justification des quantités des espèces à prélever par la communauté		Plan d’Aménagement	E&F, COBA
4	Le plan mentionne les mesures de protection environnementale et les méthodes d’identification et de protection des espèces rares ou menacées.		Plan d’Aménagement	E&F, COBA
5	Les méthodes de collecte des produits forestiers sont explicitement indiquées afin de réduire les impacts environnementaux		Plan d’Aménagement	E&F, COBA
6	Le plan d’aménagement est soumis à des révisions périodiques en réponse aux résultats de suivi écologique et de recherche scientifique		Plan d’Aménagement	E&F, COBA
7	Les sites archéologiques, religieux et culturels importants sont identifiés, cartographiés et protégés		Plan d’Aménagement	E&F, COBA
8	Le plan d’aménagement a été conçu avec la participation des bénéficiaires		Plan d’Aménagement	E&F, COBA
C6	La mise en œuvre du plan d’aménagement est effective et efficace
1	Les zonages des périmètres dont les zones de conservation et de droit d’usage sont marqués sur le terrain		Transect	E&F, COBA
2	L’inventaire des produits forestiers et de leurs utilisations existe		Plan d’Aménagement, rapport d’inventaire	E&F, COBA
3	Les membres de la COBA ont reçu des formations adéquates sur l’aménagement forestier et la conservation	Nb de membres formés	Enquête MARP	AF, E&F, COBA
4	La réhabilitation et l’aménagement des zones dégradées sont réalisées suivant les normes et les techniques requises		Transect	AF, E&F, COBA
C7	Un système de suivi et de contrôle efficace évalue la GCF en conformité avec le plan d’aménagement
1	Un comité de suivi composant les parties prenantes à la GCF est fonctionnel			AF, COBA
2	Des inventaires forestiers sur des périmètres de contrôle sont effectués régulièrement			E&F, COBA
3