Project Name:
Participatory gazettement and forest management
of the Itombwe Massif, DRC.
Project Location:
Bukavu/DR Congo
Project Number:
CD0013
Project Budget:
Average of NOK 712,000/year (NOK 3,560,000 total)
Local Partner(s):
WWF Eastern Africa Regional Programme Office (EARPO), in close
cooperation with ICCN and WCS
Contact Person(s):
In Africa: Marc Languy, Bisidi Yalolo; in Norway: Andrew Kroglund
Start Date:
January 2007
Expected End Date:
December 2011
Priority Issues1
%
Contributes to which milestone(s)?
Forests
70
FL 1.1; FL2.5
30
SP 1.2; SP 1.3
Freshwater Ecosystems
Oceans and Coasts
Species
Toxics
Climate change
Other
Total
100
Global 200 Ecoregion(s)2
The Albertine Rift Montane Forests Ecoregion
Part of an ecoregion action programme?
1
2
Yes
Indicate overall percentage of project relating to each of the six key issues.
Indicate the ecoregion(s) in which the project has a conservation impact.
x
No
WWF
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction and Project Background
Meeting development and conservation objectives in high conservation value forest of Eastern
DRC: Towards the participatory gazetment of Itombwe massif
This is a project proposal for establishing Itombwe, DRC as a protected area through a forest
gazettement process that will allow the identification of forest sections reserved for conservation
of species of global importance and forest sections allocated to communities to undertake
Community Forestry and Community Based Natural Resources Management, as well as other
forest and land uses in the Itombwe massif.
The project will assist local authorities and DRC Protected Areas Authorities (ICCN) in securing a
legal conservation and forest management status of Itombwe massif, by assessing opportunities
and proposing possible scenarios for gazetting by 2010 at least 100,000ha of Itombwe massif
with support from DRC civil society and administration, as a follow up of a recent Ministerial
decree creating a “Réserve Naturelle d’Itombwe” but for which the specific forest and land uses,
nor the limits, have been agreed on.
This proposal is for the second year of a five-year programme whose goal is to assist the
Democratic Republic of Congo Park Authorities (ICCN) in increasing the area surfaces being
protected in the country (from 8 – 15%), by gazetting parts of the Itombwe Massif through a
sound and participatory process. This project is also part of the larger Albertine Rift Montane
Forest Ecoregion programme, started in 2004 and running through to 2014.
Biological importance of Itombwe massif
Itombwe Massif is situated in Eastern DRC, north-west of Lake Tanganyika and has always
attracted much attention from the conservation community. The biological surveys that were
carried out in the 1990’s confirmed the exceptional biological value of the massif, which harbors
583 species of birds of which 30 are endemic to the Albertine Rift, 72 species of mammals (4
endemic), 35 Species of reptiles (5 endemic), 23 species of amphibians (16 endemic)
In its biodiversity assessment and priority setting exercise, the Albertine Rift Core Group has
identified Itombwe as among the top 3 sites out of 88 in terms of conservation priority.
Besides the vast array of species endemic to the Albertine Rift (that are targets species for the
Ecoregion) Itombwe also holds important populations of Eastern Lowland Gorillas Gorilla beringei
graueri, Eastern Robust Chimpanzees Pan troglodytes schweinfurthi and Forest Elephants
Loxondonta africana cyclotis.
Importance of Itombwe massif for maintenance of livelihoods of rural communities
Preliminary results of a socio-economic survey carried out by WWF in 2005 and 2006 indicate
that well over 90% of rural communities directly derive socio-economic benefit from the forest but
that, at the same time, the forest is under threats and is already showing signs of recession and
degradation, therefore directly threatening the very base for rural development of Itombwe.
Without sustainable management of these forests, rural poor and indigenous people will suffer
from depletion of forest goods and services on which they rely.
Current situation
The ministerial decree published in October 2006 still lacks many critical information such as
location of the boundary Reserve (no limits are given), the total area or the management system
for the different use zones. This leads to multiple and at times conflicting interpretations by
different parts of the civil society.
The governmental agency in charge of managing the Reserve is not yet fully operational. Their
current involvement is limited to some staff advocating for the Reserve, collecting biological and
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
2
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
socio-economic data and supporting local NGOs through a working group (GTI) that has been
supported with NORAD funding in 2007.
No part of the forest is set up yet under a Community Forest that would allow local communities
to sustainable exploit natural resources and derive tangible benefits.
However, the preliminary contacts clearly indicate that communities are interested in formally
gazetting parts of the massif as Community Forests under the new Forest Code of DRC. This has
been largely confirmed through the project’s work in 2007 which has criss-crossed the area in the
last few months. Local leaders have already committed towards the formal gazetment under a
“Réserve Naturelle” status, the details of which need now to be worked on so as to arrive at a
definite gazetment.
Desired situation
The (at least partial) gazetting of Itombwe has been considered as an important need by leading
Conservation bodies for the last 20 years, given its critical importance for conservation for
species of global value. It is probably not realist to consider gazetting of most of Itombwe massif
as a National Park that would exclude local communities presently living in, or extracting
resources, from the area.
The new Forest Code in DRC, however, provides for Community forestry in formally gazetted
Community Forests.
The results of the meetings held by the project in 2007 show that local communities wish to see a
core Protected Area (with full protection) surrounded by various zones with multiple-use schemes
in which communities can access and exploit natural resources under a sustainable plan.
Previous Experiences (if this is a continuation of a previous phase or project
funded by Norad or another donor)
WWF initiated work in Itombwe in 2004, first through scoping work to assess the value of the
forest and the interest of local communities in protecting it and/or using it sustainably, according to
the areas concerned. This has resulted in the publication of the results of a large socio-economic
survey undertaken by WWF. Following the encouraging results of this survey and the publication
of a ministerial Decree, the project increased its level of efforts through NORAD funding in 2007.
Work undertaken during this first year (2007) resulted in:
-
Increased data collection on current land use and mapping such information so as to get a
first idea on where various land-use zones could be delineated.
-
Setting up of a formal platform for sensitization in order to ensure that the 2006 decree is
known to local communities and that these understand its scope and related opportunities
and limitations; to explain the various types of protected areas and related laws; and on
the biological, ecological and economical importance of Itombwe forest.
-
Inception of small scale interventions and practices that are compatible with long term use
of natural resources of Itombwe forest (such demonstration zero-grazing scheme).
-
Capacity building of selected CBOs and the ICCN (the State agency in charge of
Protected Areas).
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
3
WWF
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
Goal and Purpose
Long-term overarching development goals
The vital ecosystem (ecological, economical and cultural) services of the Itombwe Massif
conserved and sustainably used with support from, and with benefits for, present and future
generations.
The purpose / immediate objective of the programme for the entire period of the
agreement
To assist local authorities and DRC Protected Areas Authorities (ICCN) in securing a legal
conservation and forest management status of Itombwe massif, by assessing opportunities
and proposing possible scenarios for gazetting by 2010 at least 100,000ha of Itombwe
massif with support from DRC civil society and administration
Output 1 Socio-economic issues understood and integrated
The socio-economic and socio-geographic status of the people –including indigenous forestdwelling people- living in Itombwe massif are understood and taken in full consideration in the
proposed scenarios for gazetment of Itombwe massif: a land-use map is produced by 2008 that
documents the socio-economic dimensions, infrastructures and (positive and negative) drivers for
forest management. A study on traditional rights and use (undertaken in 2006) will feed this
process and help identify best scenarios.
Output 2 Proposed gazetment scenarios developed
A 1/100,000 map showing proposed limits and coverage of different conservation and forest
management zones of the future protected area complex is produced by 2008.
The proposed legal status of the protected area and surrounding zones is developed with local
communities and is submitted to various stakeholders end of 2008 and is in line with the national
Forest Code and Law on Conservation of Nature.
Output 3 Large-scale sustainable use of natural resources promoted
A Land-use plan for at least 300,000ha is negotiated in 2007-2009 and is produced by 2009 and
validated by 2011, that clearly shows the various categories of conservation and forest
management areas including: core protected area (category II of IUCN) surrounded by
Community Forests (category V), Community-Based Natural Resources Management areas and
buffer zone areas as sustainable agriculture and agroforestry areas.
Output 4 Local communities empowered to sustainably manage their forests
The recent DRC Forest code is popularised and effectively used by local communities to
formally introduce at least 3 requests for Community Forests under that code, by 2010 and
communities are trained and receives technical support for sustainable Community Forestry
that benefits the rural poor, indigenous people and both genders.
Output 5 Communication, sensitization and policy framework in place
The different stakeholders, international organisations and the public at large will have read,
heard or seen relevant information on the why, how, when, where and by whom, the
gazetment process of Itombwe Massif has taken place.
Project Implementation Arrangements
WWF Eastern Africa Regional Programme Office (EARPO) will have lead responsibility for
overseeing project administration, management and finances. This is done in cooperation
with the Technical Working Group of Itombwe (GTI; Group technique de travail à Itombwe),
consisting of WWF, ICCN (the Congolese Protected Areas authorities - l´Institut Congolais
pour la Conservation de la Nature), the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and other local
NGOs.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
4
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
The current proposal is based on a model where WWF-Norway has a contractual
relationship with the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) in Oslo.
WWF-Norway is ultimately responsible for the Project and its deliveries, while WWF Eastern
Africa Regional Programme Office (EARPO) in Nairobi is responsible for the overall
supervision of the Project.
The project will be implemented in the general framework of the Itombwe-Kahuzi-BiegaTayna-Maiko Forest Landscape, in which WWF is active through its Kahuzi-Biega
Conservation Programme (PCKB). This framework has a formal Planning Forum of which the
WWF PCKB project executant and the WWF Albertine Rift Montane Forests Ecoregion
Coordinator are members. The project will be implemented on a day to day basis by the
Kahuzi-Biega Conservation programme based in Bukavu (DRC), with support form the
Albertine Rift Montane Forest Ecoregion Coordinator, based in Nairobi (Kenya).
Budget (NOK)
B/Line
Budget for Itombwe Gazetment: Year 2 (2008)
NOK
50
Staff costs
192,802
51
Third party fees
89,400
52
Small grants to the Local NGOs and CBOs
72,000
53
Travel, meeting and training costs
105,720
55
Miscellaneous costs
18,000
56
Office Running costs
50,904
57
Field running costs
111,000
58
Office and field equipment
30,000
59
Project management and supervision costs
83,728
GRAND TOTAL (NOK)
753,554
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
5
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..........................................................................................................................2
Previous Experiences (if this is a continuation of a previous phase or project funded by Norad or
another donor) ..........................................................................................................................................3
Goal and Purpose .....................................................................................................................................4
Output 1 Socio-economic issues understood and integrated ...................................................................4
Output 2 Proposed gazetment scenarios developed ...............................................................................4
Output 3 Large-scale sustainable use of natural resources promoted ....................................................4
Output 4 Local communities empowered to sustainably manage their forests ........................................4
Output 5 Communication, sensitization and policy framework in place ...................................................4
Project Implementation Arrangements .....................................................................................................4
Budget (NOK) ...........................................................................................................................................5
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS .....................................................................................................9
1
INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT BACKGROUND ...................................................................10
Area desc²ription: ...................................................................................................................................10
Location and physiography...................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Natural resources and biodiversity values ...................................................................................10
Conservation areas ....................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Socio-economic Issues...........................................................................................................................10
Cultural Issues ........................................................................................................................................12
Institutional and Legal Issues .................................................................................................................12
1.1 Threats, Problems and Opportunities ..........................................................................................14
1.2 Stakeholders ................................................................................................................................16
1.3 Contribution to the implementation of national plans ...................................................................17
1.3.1 Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) r .....................................................................17
1.3.2 Environmental Plans and strategies ..................................................................................18
1.3.3 (Other national, sectoral, regional and local development plans .......................................18
1.4 Global Thematic programme, ecoregional target or global policy initiatives................................19
Contribution to WWF’s Global and Regional Priorities ...........................................................................19
Global Priorities ............................................................................................................................19
Regional Priorities ........................................................................................................................19
2
PROJECT ACHIEVEMENTS, LESSONS AND DEVIATIONS ...................................................19
2.1
Describe the extent to which the expected results have been achieved during the last
years .............................................................................................................................................19
2.2 Describe internal or external factors that have particularly affected project performance or
the planning ..................................................................................................................................20
2.3 Describe significant changes in geographical and thematic areas of priorities or work in
the project .....................................................................................................................................20
Not relevant ............................................................................................................................................20
3
PROJECT GOAL AND PURPOSE .............................................................................................20
3.1
3.2
Project Goal ..................................................................................................................................20
Project Purpose ............................................................................................................................20
( LIST THE QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE INDICATORS FOR THE PROJECT)ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DE
(THE FULL LFA SHOULD BE IN AN APPENDIX AND SHOULD BE REFERRED TO)ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEF
4
PROJECT OUTPUTS ..................................................................................................................21
4.1
4.2
Output 1 (Socio-economic issues understood and integrated) ....................................................21
Output 2 (Proposed gazetment scenarios) ..................................................................................21
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
6
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
(cartographie participative) ...................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3 Output 3 (Large-scale sustainable use of natural resources) ......................................................21
4.4 Output 4 (local communities empowered to sustainably manage their forests) ..........................21
4.5 Output 5 (communication, sensitization and policy framework) ...................................................21
5
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ...................................................................................................22
5.1
5.2
5.3
Overall Approach / Implementation Strategy ...............................................................................22
Activities .......................................................................................................................................24
Implementation Arrangement .......................................................................................................26
5.3.1 Project Organisation ..........................................................................................................27
5.3.2 Local cooperation partners: ...............................................................................................27
5.3.3 Relationship with Other Relevant Initiatives ......................................................................28
5.3.4 Added Value by WWF Involvement ...................................................................................28
Main Beneficiaries and Target Groups.........................................................................................28
5.4.1 International Communities .................................................................................................29
5.4.2 Implementing Institutions ...................................................................................................29
Sustainability and Exit Strategy ....................................................................................................30
5.5.1 Sustainability criteria ..........................................................................................................30
5.4
5.5
Policy support...................................................................................................................... 30
Institutional management capacity ..................................................................................... 31
Economic and financial viability .......................................................................................... 31
Socio-cultural factors .......................................................................................................... 31
5.5.2 Exit strategy .......................................................................................................................31
6
INPUTS ........................................................................................................................................32
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
Personnel .....................................................................................................................................32
6.1.1 WWF EARPO and WWF Norway technical supervision....................................................32
Materials, Equipment and Infrastructure ......................................................................................32
Budget ..........................................................................................................................................32
Other donors’ contribution to the Project......................................................................................32
7
ASSUMPTIONS AND RISKS ......................................................................................................33
7.1
7.2
Assumptions .................................................................................................................................33
Risks .............................................................................................................................................33
8
REPORTING AND MONITORING ...............................................................................................34
8.1 Reporting Schedule ......................................................................................................................34
8.2 Monitoring and Indicators .............................................................................................................35
8.3 Evaluations ...................................................................................................................................35
Evaluations .............................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................36
8.4 Contribution to the Implementation of National Plans ..................................................................37
Fighting Poverty ...........................................................................................................................37
Environment and Sustainable Natural Resource Management ...................................................37
Strengthening Civil Society (CSO) ...............................................................................................37
Good governance .........................................................................................................................38
Country specific priorities .............................................................................................................38
WWF’s experience .................................................................................................................................38
Geographical Area .......................................................................................................................38
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
7
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1
Map(s) showing the project location/area
Appendix 2
Logical Framework Analysis
Appendix 3
Activity Schedule
Appendix 4
Project Organisation Chart
Appendix 5
Job description(s) for key position(s) (Terms of Reference(s))
Appendix 6
Detailed budget
Appendix 7
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
8
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AFD
Agence Française de Développement – French Development Agency
CARPE
Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment
CAWHFI
Central Africa World Heritage Forest Initiative
CBFP
Congo Basin Forest Partnership
CBNRM
Community-Based Natural Resource Management
CF
Community Forestry / Community Forest
COMIFAC
Conference of Ministers in charge of forests of Central Africa
EARPO
Eastern Africa Regional Programme Office (WWF)
ERZ
Extractive Resource Zone
EU
European Union
FFEM
Fonds Français pour l’Environnement Mondial – French Global Environment Facility
GEF
Global Environment Facility
GTI
Groupe de Travail technique d’Itombwe (ICCN/WWF/WCS)
GTZ
Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit - German Technical Cooperation
HIPC
Heavily Indebted Poor Countries
ICCN
Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature
IISD
International Institute for Sustainable Development
IMF
International Monetary Fund
KfW
Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau/German Bank for Reconstruction – German Financial
Cooperation
MECNEF
Ministry of Environment, Conservation of Nature, Water and Forests
NGO
Non Governmental Organization
NTFP
Non Timber Forest Products
PNKB
Kahuzi-Biega National Park
PCKB
Kahuzi-Biega Conservation Programme (WWF)
PA
Protected Area
RAPAC
Réseau des Aires Protégées d’Afrique Centrale – Central Africa Protected Area
Network
USAID
United States Agency for International Development
WB
World Bank
WCS
Wildlife Conservation Society
WWF
World Wide Fund for Nature
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
9
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
1
INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT BACKGROUND
1.1 Area description
Itombwe massif is situated in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), North-West of Lake
Tanganyika within South Kivu Province and is shared between Mwenga, Fizi, Uvira and Walungu
territories. The area is characterised by a mosaic of mountain and sub mountain forests
interspersed with savannah woodlands and is approximately 16.000 km2 large, with 700,000 to
1,000,000 ha centred around 03°30’S, 29°E. The area is hilly with altitude varying from 600m to
3,475m, providing an exceptional uninterrupted forest gradient likely to withstand, if protected,
large altitudinal shifting following climate change.
The area is situated at the western edge of the Albertine Rift Montane Forest (higher reaches of
the massif, in the North-East) and at the eastern edge of the lowland congolian forest (in the
West). The area still has a relatively low human population density. The four main “collectivités”
(the administrative unit below the territories in DRC) that are the main target of the project had a
total population of 262,296 people in 2004.
Natural resources and biodiversity values
The biological surveys that were carried out in the 1990’s confirmed the exceptional biological
value of the massif, which harbours 583 species of birds of which 30 are endemic to the Albertine
Rift, at least 72 species of mammals (4 endemic), 35 Species of reptiles (5 endemic), 23 species
of amphibians (16 endemic) and a wide range of plant species, as the area lies at the edges of
two major biomes (Montane forest and lowland congolian forest)
The area is characterised by a mosaic of mountain and sub mountain forests interspersed with
savannah woodlands, providing a unique patchwork of ecological assemblages and processes
among which speciation: Itombwe is the area with the most endemic subspecies, indicating an
important evolutionary processes fuelled by the dynamic between forest and savanna as well as
between western congolian and eastern montane forests.
Itombwe holds important populations of Eastern Lowland Gorillas Gorilla beringei graueri, Eastern
Robust Chimpanzees Pan troglodytes schweinfurthi and Forest Elephants Loxondonta africana
cyclotis, three target species of WWF under its Global Framework Programme.
Socio-economic Issues
The main socio-administrative grouping in DRC below the provincial level is called the “collectivité”
which gathers several “groupements”, themselves gathering villages. Four main “collectivités” will be
directly impacted by the project. These are outlines in the following table and map.
Tableau à changer : voir Kilindo / MLusuna
COLLECTIVITES
Men
Tanganyika
Women
Boys
Girls
Total
10.308
12.293
20.782
18.02
61.403
Itombwe
3.131
3.989
6.62
8.95
22.69
Basile
6.134
8.111
8.773
8.169
31.187
Wamuzimu
32.245
35.642
40.724
38.405
147.016
Total
51.818
60.035
76.899
73.544
262.296
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
10
WWF
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
Figure 1: Macro Zones, territoires and collectivités
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
11
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
^_
Kaziba
Suivi des activités
Lac Tanganyika
Massif d'Itombwe
Luwindja
Burhinyi
Collectivités
^^_^_
_
^_
^_^_
^_
^^_
_
^_^_
Wamuzimu
Basile
Bafulero
Lwindi
^^_
_
^_
^_ ^_^_ ^_
^_^_^_
Ruzizi
Ruzizi
Kaziba
Bafulero
Lulenge
Basile
Luwindja
Bavira
Lwindi
Burhinyi
Mutambala
Itombwe
Ngandja
Wamuzimu
Tanganyika
Bavira
Itombwe
Tanganyika
Lulenge
´
Mutambala
Ngandja
10
5
0
10 Kilometers
Agriculture is the main activity and mostly consists of cassava and maize as well as palm oil. All
these activities are undertaken at the household level and for subsistence.
A socio-economic study undertaken by WWF in 2004-2006 indicates that rural households are
very poor and rely on subsistence agriculture and extraction of forest resources. Hunting is also a
common practice.
Cultural Issues
The area has always witnessed migrations of people from neighbouring areas. This has resulted
in a complex and very rich mix of socio-geographic groups.
The Babembe live in the southern part, the Barega in the west, the Bafulero and Bavira in the
east, the Banyindu and Bashi in the north while the Banyamulenge are found in the forest
savanna mosaic in the high altitude central areas. The latter are mostly pastoralists while the
former are mostly agriculturalists.
The ethnic groups have different cultures and lifestyles and a particular attention will be given in
the involvement of all groups and in particular the pastoralists, to ensure they don’t feel left out of
the gazetment process, as they may be considered by some as “non forest dwellers”, therefore
not part of the puzzle. This could potentially fuel tension between communities and the Peace
and Conflict Impact Assessment is planned to be conducted with support from the International
Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD).
Institutional and Legal Issues
Since no part of the Itombwe is properly gazetted yet, there is no formal institutional set up for its
management per se. The 2006 ministerial decree however stipulates that the ICCN (Institut
Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature, the DRC state agency in charge of protected areas)
will be in charge of managing the Reserve -even though this still needs to be delineated, located
and its multiple zones defined-.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
12
WWF
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
However, an institutional set up has been put in place to facilitate the process of gazetting the
forest. This is referred to as the Group de Travail à Itombwe (GTI). GTI is made up of four
entities:
1. The Ministry of Environment, Conservation of Nature, Water and Forests (MECNEF:
Ministère de l’Environnement, Conservation de la Nature, Eaux et forêts) is the Ministry in DRC in
charge of Environment and Forests. It is therefore at the center of any policy that relates to forest
management AND to Protected Areas gazettement.
2. The Congolese Institute for Nature Conservation (ICCN: Institut Congolais piur la
Conservation de la Nature) is the parastatal in charge of Protected Areas, including National
Parks and faunal Reserves.
3. WWF, the World Wide Fund for Nature, which is operating in the area since 2003 (and more
sporadically since 1989)
4. WCS, the Wildlife Conservation Society, which has been undertaking biological surveys in
the area in order to identify to most important sections of the massif, from a conservation
perspective.
5. Local NGO member of GTI trained and support by WWF and ICCN to deal with sensitization
campaign and data collection on the ground.
6. Local Community Representative at collectivitiés level.
The Institutional and legal framework for the activities centered on CBNRM and Community
Forestry is provided by the MECNEF and the Forest Code, respectively.
From an operational point of view, the project will operate as provided for by the “accord de
siège” between WWF and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Kinshasa, the MOU between
WWF and ICCN stipulating respective roles of the two institutions and the MOU between the
Ministry of Environment, Conservation of Nature, Water and Forest, ICCN, WWF and WCS,
establishing the GTI and its mandate is the main driving document to implement the project.
(see section 7.3)
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
13
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
1.1
Threats, Problems and Opportunities
LOSS OF BIODIVERSITY AND
ECONOMICAL AND ECOLOGICAL
SERVICES OF ITOMBWE FOREST
SIMPLIFIED PROBLEM TREE
Loss of animal species
Unregulated hunting
awareness
campaign on value
of forest and the
need for its
sustainable
management not
structured
alternatives to
unsustainable
exploitation of
natural
resources not
promoted
DIMINISHED ECONOMICAL
OPPORTUNITIES AND
UNSUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Overharvesting/Deforestation
Unregulated mining
Unsustainable slash and burn
agriculture
Absence of protection and management status leading to
lack of a legal framework for sustainable Natural resource
extraction
Over-harvesting of timber
(no management plan)
Limited capacity of local communities and
authorities to engage into CBNRM and CF
2007: Recent Ministerial decree creating a “Réserve Naturelle
d’Itombwe” but for which the specific forest and land uses, nor the
limits, have been agreed on.
NB. Further causes on which the project can not have a significant impact (such as wars, poverty, unemployment ...) have
not been included. This tree is not meant to be exhaustive or to show the complexity of interactions and drivers.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
14
Project Proposal – [Project name]
WWF
Key-problems (described in terms of decline in state, either quantity or quality, of the environment)
Causes of the key problems
Scale of pressures (quantify and/or
Underlying causes (list at least 2 causes per
(describe pressures)
describe significance)
pressure)
Possible responses by the
Project
Key problem 1: Loss of key species of global value and commercial value
Unregulated hunting
High (socio-economic surveys)
Alternative livelihood; and management of
wildlife Non promoted
Formalise agreements for
sustainable hunting
Trade of wildlife/meat
Unknown but know to exist and
suspected to have a medium to high
impact, judging to what nearby KahuziBiega NP experienced
Uncontrolled army groups; lack of
alternative of income for small scale traders
Create areas where hunting is
prohibited and set up law
enforcement systems; create
sustainable hunting zones
Unsustainable agricultural practice (slash
and burn)
Promote more intensive practices;
support agroforestry initiatives;
Gazet part of the massif where
agriculture is prohibited and buffer
zone with sustainable agriculture
Clearance for agriculture (or for Medium: clearly exists but human
mining operation)
population still low
No awareness campaign structured, on
ecological and economical values of
alternative land use
Demonstrate value of alternative
land use; launch awareness
campaigns
Unsustainable exploitation of
timber
Lack of a formal set up for Community
Forestry. Limited capacity to engage into
exploitation under a management plan
Gazet parts of massif as Community
Forests; popularize Forest Code;
train communities and give technical
support for CBNRM and CF
Key problem 2: Loss of primary forest
Clearance for agriculture
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Medium: clearly exists but human
population still low
Suspected to be low but steadily
increasing (socio-economic surveys)
Page 15
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
1.2
Stakeholders
The main stakeholders, interests and roles are described in the table on next page.
The primary stakeholders for this project are the rural communities living in Itombwe Massif, and
in particular the most disadvantaged ones, as they are on the one hand the ones that rely most
on access to natural resources and on the other hand, the ones that will benefit most from
CBNRM, Community Forestry and the maintenance of ecological and economical services
provided by the forest. These primary stakeholders can be further divided into individuals,
villages, community groups etc. A further important distinction are between “forest-dwellers” and
pastoralists, as they have different stakes in this programme and it is important to bring all of
them on board.
A second group of stakeholders are those who exploit, for most of them illegally or at least in an
unregulated way, resources from the forest: game meat, ivory, mines. These groups are included
as stakeholders as it is not the intention of the proposed project to alienate them from the
processes to be put in place. To the contrary, these groups can be turned from being part of the
problems to being part of the solution. They include individuals, middlemen for ivory/game meat
trade; army groups etc.
A third group of stakeholders are the institutions in the broad sense: national and local
governmental institutions (such as ICCN, MECNEF, Ministry of Mines etc.) but also traditional
institutions such as bwami
List stakeholders per category in
relation to the Threats Analysis
Matrix
Describe the "stake"
Describe potential role in the
Project
Who make use or benefit from the Natural Resources (Distinguish between commercial and
subsistence & indicate who is threatening them)
1) Stakeholder group 1: Local
community (agriculturalists, hunters)
Subsistence (looking for land for
farming ; access to game meat;
timber and NTFP collection etc. )
Identify, develop and
implement CBNRM and
Community Forestry initiatives
2) Stakeholder group 2: Miners
Commercial (small scale mining
of gold, coltan etc.)
Ensure operations are done in
allocated areas and in a way
that doesn’t threaten ecological
services of forests
3) Stakeholder group 3: Shepherd
(South-East of Itombwe)
subsistence & Commercial
(securing and/or increasing
pasturel)
Support the gazetment process
and agree on modes of access
to forest and pastures
4) Army groups
subsistence & commercial
(illegal trade of game meat and
ivory, control of illegal mines)
Moving from insecurity to
security, support ICCN in their
operation ; secure villages
1) Stakeholder group x : government Implementation of national
/ Environment Ministry
laws and policies relating to
Fauna and flora as well as
water
Fauna and flora management
2) Stakeholder group y : owners of
the land( chefs coutumiers)
Holding and distributing
traditional land; controlling
communities through
traditional customs
Decision making: management
of ancestor’s land
3) Stakeholder group z : Mining
ministry
Allocation of mining
concession (underground
resources)
Mining Management
Who are responsible for the NR
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 16
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
Who has specific interests in the problems?
1) Stakeholder group a :Local
community(agricultures, hunters
(looking for land for farming ;
access to game meat; timber and
NTFP collection etc.
2) Stakeholder group b :Miners
(small scale mining of gold, coltan Ensure operations are done in
etc.)
allocated areas and in a way
Oversee gazetment process,
ensure linkage with national
laws and policies ; coordinates
stakeholders and international
NGOs
that doesn’t threaten ecological
services of forests
3) Stakeholder group c: Shepherd
(South-East of Itombwe)
(production de lait et viande et
vente des bétail)
Support the gazetment process
and agree on modes of access
to forest and pastures
4) Army groups
(hunting and trade of bush meat)
Becoming part of the project
and society and being a
positive actor. Moving from
insecurity to security, support
ICCN in their operation ;
secure villages
Who has most knowledge or are most capable of dealing with the problems?
1) Stakeholder group I: ICCN (Park
authorities)
Securing 15% of DRC under
Management and monitoring of
protection ; managing wildlife ; gazetted areas
monitoring status
2) Stakeholder group ii International
NGO
Securing survival of species
and habitats of global value
Provide technical and financial
input, facilitate dialogue
3) Stakeholder group III civil society:
Local NGOs
Promoting development of
rural livelihoods
Training and Support local
communities; link between
different levels of management
Local chiefs
Protecting forest of ancestral
values
Maintaining traditional customs
and use of forests
1.3
Contribution to the implementation of national plans
1.3.1
Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP)
The poor, particularly those living in the rural areas, often rely on a variety of natural resources
and ecosystems services as a direct source of livelihood. Both environmental conditions and
access to a variety of natural resources are crucial to the ability of the poor people to sustain their
livelihood.
The initial surveys undertaken by WWF in Itombwe confirm that the huge majority of poor
households derive a significant share of their incomes from natural resources. Therefore natural
resource degradation and biodiversity loss are undermining the livelihoods and future livelihood
opportunities of large numbers of the poor. This is most evident with respect to agricultural
systems. Soil and water degradation are major threats to the improvement of agricultural
productivity, which underpins the livelihood of the vast majority of the rural poor. Poor people are
affected by natural resource degradation and biodiversity loss much more than better off because
of their limited assets and their greater dependence on common property resources for their
livelihoods.
The Itombwe ecosystem provides essential ‘services’ that contribute in numerous ways to
productive activities of the rural poor as well as downstream water users far from the Itombwe
area itself. Some of the services that support livelihoods include the provision of natural habitat
for wild pollinators that are essential for food crops; natural predators that control crop pests and
soil organism important for agricultural productivity; watershed protection and hydrological
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 17
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
stability, including recharging of water tables and buffing of extreme hydrological conditions that
might otherwise precipitate drought or floods conditions; maintenance of soil fertility through
storage and cycling of essential nutrients; and break down of waste and pollutants.
Besides the maintenance of ecological services, the forest can also provide tangible, direct
economical benefits through Community Forestry. The new Forest Code in DRC provides for
Community Forestry through which timber and other can be sold to markets under a legal
framework that guarantees that cash benefits return to the communities.
In the much longer term, other benefits will certainly include tourism, since the area has an
incredible potential for eco-tourism: gorillas, chimpanzees, elephants are key wildlife that are the
targets of tourists, the mountainous scenery, the forest - savanna mosaic are some of other added
values of Itombwe for significant tourism development.
DRC has, in accordance with World Bank guidelines, elaborated a Poverty Reduction
Strategy Paper (PRSP), and DRC aims at finding sustainable ways of using its biodiversity in
line with both this and the proposed project.
1.3.2
Environmental Plans and strategies
DRC has ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity and the proposed project will assist the
Government to meet some of the CBD objectives. The proposal conforms to the objectives of
CBD and in particular the requirements which mainly deal with conservation and sustainable use
of biodiversity as well as capacity building and technology transfer.
The National Strategy for nature Conservation has been established with technical support from
stakeholders and in particular the IUCN. This strategy takes into account the conservation of
natural resources based on participation of communities and this project will follow these
guidelines.
At the national level, DRC committed (in the framework of the Convention on Biodiversity) to
increase its Protected Area network to 15% of its territory, up from the current 8%. This has
been inscribed in the National Biodiversity Action Plan to which this project will therefore
significantly contribute.
1.3.3
Other national, sectoral, regional and local development plans
The National biodiversity action plan clearly identifies montane forest such as Itombwe as
key areas in need for long term conservation and management and DRC has been an active
member of the Strategic Planning process in the Albertine Rift which identified Itombwe as
the top priority for new conservation initiative in eastern DRC.
Sustainable use of forest resources is clearly recognised as a tool for sustainable rural
development and a direct contribution towards the national poverty alleviation strategy.
The Itombwe project aims at promoting sustainable livelihoods of the local communities
through increased incentives for sustainable use of natural resources. This objective is
consistent with the country’s overall strategy for poverty reduction.
The Government of DRC has issued in October 2006 a Ministerial Decree for the gazetment
of Itombwe as a “Réserve Naturelle d’Itombwe” which now needs to be further sub-divided
into different categories of forest and land uses, with agreed limits and modes of
management. The project therefore will directly contribute to the execution of the Decree by
supporting administrative and local authorities, as well as local communities, to take up the
recent decree towards the next step of formalising the gazetment of these different zones
and their management.
The gazetment of Itombwe is also formally inscribed in the ICCN strategy at national and
provincial levels and is given first priority by the Institute and Ministry which have formally
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 18
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
been supporting the creation of the “Groupe de Travail d’Itombwe” and facilitated the
Kamituga agreements.
The gazetment of Itombwe, and support for sustainable forest utilisation, is also formally part
of the regional Albertine Rift Strategic Framework, shared between 5 countries, which has
been developed from 2002 to 2004 with direct input from ICCN and culminated in the
adoption of the Framework in 2004.
1.4
Global Thematic programme, ecoregional target or global policy
initiatives.
Contribution to WWF’s Global and Regional Priorities
Global Priorities
The Project contributes to several global and strategic priorities of WWF. In terms of forest
priorities the Project will contribute to the forest protection target that refer to establishment and
maintenance of viable, representative networks of protected areas in the world’s threatened and
most biologically significant forest ecoregions, by 2010.
In terms of freshwater priorities the Project will contribute to the “Conserving river basins and
ecoregions” target that refers to freshwater habitats and environmental processes are maintained
or restored in at least 50 river basins and ecoregions by 2010.
In terms of WWF’s species priorities the Project will contribute to populations of priority species
(e.g. Chimpanzee) are stabilised or increased or their critical habitats safeguarded by 2010.
The itombwe is situated in the Albertine Rift Montane Forests Ecoregion, a priority Ecoregion for
WWF and the first one of the 117 terrestrial ecoregions of Africa in terms of priority of biodiversity
conservation.
During a biological assessment, out of over 80 sites in the Albertine Rift assessed, the itombwei
came first in terms of priority for field intervention.
Regional Priorities
WWF’s Eastern African Regional Programme Office currently has projects in six counties with the
over arching mission to curb degradation of the natural environment by conserving the rich
biodiversity heritage promoting sustainable resource use and pollution reduction. WWF EARPO
works in the four priority biomes: forest, freshwater, oceans and coasts and acacia savannas.
The Project falls under the forest and freshwater priorities. The Albertine Rift Montane Forests
Ecoregion is a key priority for WWF EARPO in particular in terms of forests but this ecoregion has
also been made a priority in terms of freshwater. WWF
2
PROJECT ACHIEVEMENTS, LESSONS AND DEVIATIONS
2.1
Describe the extent to which the expected results have been achieved
during the last years
•
An important element has been the enacting of a ministerial decree in October 2006 (n°
038/cab/min/ecn-ef/2006) for the creation of a new protected area in Itombwe. In order to
adapt and apply the degree for management of the Reserve as a Protected Area, a
participatory process of determination and development of type of the protection, as well
the reserve limits is ongoing.
•
This process involves a lot of consultation with communities at the field level to gather
data on the current use of the forest, its social and cultural value, the sources of incomes,
the preferred options for protection and/or land use in different areas etc. All these data
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 19
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
•
•
•
•
•
2.2
are being collected (a socio-economic study will be published by end of 2007 and two
other studies have been completed and will be published in 2008) and are being gathered
under a GIS database. This will help develop possible scenarios and produce base-maps,
participatory identification of different zones, and defining the integral reserve area and
the community user zones. About 60% of the participatory of land use planning process
was convened.
GIS database and processing, and the production of maps for baseline data with specific
information such as human population density, settlements patterns for the North sector
of Itombwe Community Forest is progressing well.
A successful workshop aimed at popularizing community based natural resources
management (CBNRM) under the new Forestry Code was organised for the key decision
makers of 2 localities. Other meeting / workshops are planned for FY08.
Two meetings of the Technical Working Group were organised to follow up on the
participatory identification of CBNRM's zones and its legal status, and a joint activity
planning was undertaken.
On training and capacity building, 26 staff (6 from WWF PCKB, 20 from several local
NGOs) were trained on CBNRM. In addition, ten more local volunteers were trained in
Kasika and who are involved in data collection and sensitisation campaign.
As part of support and capacity building to civil society, two NGOs; the Reserve des
Gorille de Muhuzi Buzinda (RGMB) and Association Pour La Gestion et Développement
de la Biodiversité d’Itombwe (AGDBI), were supported with equipments. In addition,
environmental education activities were promoted including setting up of an
environmental education centre at Kasika in North of Itombwe.
Describe internal or external factors that have particularly affected project
performance or the planning
Incompatibility of the government’s interests on land distribution, in particular concerning
mining exploitation as opposed to international conservation organizations’ focus on
conservation of the areas as protected zones. in this respect, while a ministerial
gazetment degree for Itombwe was issued as a result of influence by conservationists,
mining exploitation interest, with possible political influence is still taking place.
2.3
Describe significant changes in geographical and thematic areas of
priorities or work in the project
No changes in geographical or thematic areas.
3
PROJECT GOAL AND PURPOSE
3.1
Project Goal
The vital ecosystem (ecological, economical and cultural) services of the Itombwe Massif
conserved and sustainably used with support from, and with benefits for, present and future
generations.
Qualitative indicators at the goal level and over the long term include:
 Forest cover and quality remains intact
 River flows and quality provides clean water to local community
 Local communities derive ecological, economical and cultural benefits from forest resources
3.2
Project Purpose
To assist local authorities and DRC Protected Areas Authorities (ICCN) in securing a legal
conservation and forest management status of Itombwe massif, by assessing opportunities
and proposing possible scenarios for gazetting by 2010 at least 100,000ha of Itombwe
massif with support from DRC civil society and administration.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 20
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
Quantitative indicators at the Project Purpose level within the 2011 horizon include:


Options for gazetment are proposed to local and national authorities by 2008
At least 100,000ha of forest in Itombwe are formally gazetted by 2010

At least 80% of local leaders support the gazetment
The attached Logical Framework Analysis provide more information on logics and sources of
verification.
4
PROJECT OUTPUTS
4.1
Output 1 Socio-economic issues understood and integrated
The socio-economic and socio-geographic status of the people –including indigenous forestdwelling people- living in Itombwe massif are understood and taken in full consideration in the
proposed scenarios for gazetment of Itombwe massif: a socio-economic survey is finalised,
published and widely circulated by 2007 and a land-use map is produced by 2008 that
documents the socio-economic dimensions, infrastructures and (positive and negative) drivers for
forest management.
4.2
Output 2 Proposed gazetment scenarios developed
Concrete, documented and objective scenarios for gazetment are proposed as a technical file
including key agricultural and biodiversity areas by 2007; a 1/100,000 map showing proposed
limits of different conservation and forest management zones of the future protected area
complex is produced by 2008 and validated by local and provincial authorities by 2009. The
formal request by the Ministry of Environment and Forest for official gazetment is done by 2010,
based on the requirements of the October 2006 preliminary gazetment decree.
4.3
Output 3 Large-scale sustainable use of natural resources promoted
A Land-use plan for at least 300,000ha is negotiated in 2007-2009 and is produced by 2009 and
validated by 2011, that clearly shows the various categories of conservation and forest
management areas including: core protected area (category II of IUCN) surrounded by
Community Forests (category V), Community-Based Natural Resources Management areas and
buffer zone areas as sustainable agriculture and agroforestry areas.
4.4
Output 4 Local communities empowered to sustainably manage their
forests
The recent DRC Forest code is popularised and effectively used by local communities to formally
introduce at least 3 requests for Community Forests under that code, by 2010 and communities
are trained and receives technical support for sustainable Community Forestry that benefits the
rural poor, indigenous people and both genders
4.5
Output 5 Communication, sensitization and policy framework in place
The different stakeholders, international organisations and the public at large will have read,
heard or seen relevant information on the why, how, when, where and by whom, the gazetment
process of Itombwe Massif has taken place.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 21
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
5
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
5.1
Overall Approach / Implementation Strategy
The WWF has been present in the region since the 1960s, and WWF first worked in the Itombwe
Massif in the late 1970s, and then later was active in the landscape from 1992 – 1995 as an
extension of their work in Virunga National Park. This work was suspended due to war, but was
resumed in 2002 with funding from WWF-Sweden – mainly focused on conservation of eastern
lowland gorillas in the nearby Kahuzi Biega National Park.
The proposed project will allow WWF to pursue an initiative started in September 2004, when
WWF was approached by ICCN, and initiated work with the Wildlife Conservation Society
(WCS), local NGOs, as well as the DRC’s Ministry for Environment and Forests in order to
secure a legal conservation status of Itombwe forest that is fully supported by local
communities and traditional chiefs.
As mentioned and described in section 3.6, WWF currently has 8 field projects in the
ecoregion, including in Kibira National Park (Burundi), Kahuzi-Biega National Park (DRC),
Virunga National Park and the Greater Virunga landscape, DRC, Rwanda and Uganda,
Rwenzori and Lake Albert projects (both supported through WWF-Norway and Norad) and
Kasyoha Kitomi (all in Uganda) as well as different projects working on cross-cutting themes
such as environmental education, capacity building and policy development. Two of these
projects are situated in Eastern DRC of which Virunga is the most important and oldest (set
up in 1987) and Kahuzi-Biega (set up in January 2004) is the closest to Itombwe. This gives
WWF a first hand knowledge of field situation in Eastern DRC and the necessary skills,
networks and supports to operate in remote areas in a difficult socio-economic and political
context. Since 1987, WWF never interrupted its field operations in Eastern DRC and has
acquired a lot of experience as well as credit from local partners for this continued
commitment.
The broad implementation strategy is described in the next page. The strategy is base don
the following principles:
1. The project must be based on sound understanding of socio-economic issues as well
as partners and their culture.
2. Local communities as well as authorities need to be aware of the issues at stake and
of the opportunities offered by the new Forest Code
3. The civil society must have the capacity to engage into CBNRM and Community
Forestry, which is a relatively complex undertaking for which important efforts must be
given in terms of training and capacity-building
4. Communities, even if aware of the need to maintain the forest cover and to use it
sustainably, must be offered alternatives to unsustainable practices.
All outputs of the proposed project will contribute towards following these interlinked
principles.
A strong field-based, participatory approach will be an essential element of the
implementation strategy. The main field office will be based in Bukavu and WWF work will be
integrated, locally within the framework set up by the formally instituted GTI and, regionally,
within the Maiko-Tayna-Kahuzi Biega-Itombwe Forest Landscape involving ICCN, WWF,
WCS, GTZ, DFGF and CI and for which a coordination forum already exists. This will ensure
that activities implemented in Itombwe are not isolated but form part to a larger, coordinated,
initiative.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 22
WWF
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
Overall WWF strategic approach in Itombwe in which the proposed project fits
The Itombwe massif is characterized by large tracts of forests and savanna grasslands occupied by
groups from various socio-geographic background. The development of a PA and CBNRM plan in the
massif must therefore be based on a sound understanding of the socio-economic context of this large
variety of stakeholders and the PA approach and CBNRM approach will be intimately be interlinked. The
proposed steps and approaches are as follows:
1. Sound understanding of the massif, its environment, its people and its socio-economic
dynamics. Activities: finalize remote sensing work to map the land cover and land use of the
massif; finalize the analysis of socio-economic data gathered in 2005-2006 and complement by
thematic studies (bush meat, customs uses and rights pertaining to the exploitation of Natural
Resources; attitude of people towards use of natural resources; specific roles of men and
women, -segregated by main territories or ethnic groups- in the exploitation of Natural
Resources); stakeholders mapping per territory, group, wealth and sex; participatory mapping of
local territories and the role of natural resources in the livelihoods of villages as a way to better
understand the perspectives from local people and mostly to engage local stakeholders and get
their buy-in in the development of a CBNRM plan.
2. Sensitization on the need for sustainable management of the Itombwe massif and on possible
ways to achieve this, including vulgarization of the DRC Forest Code and in particular of the
provision for creation of Community Forests. Activities: sensitization campaigns in al sectors of
the massif, Environmental Education campaign; production of EE materials.
3. Capacity building of the civil society in sustainable NR management and in community
forestry. Activities: training, provision of equipment, pilot co-management forests at the village
level; training of existing local NGOs and CBOS in land use zoning, in management, data
collection and forest management. Support for sustainable socio-economic development.
Support of women groups and indigenous people to empower them in managing their natural
resources and derive an economic benefit that is not in contradiction with the proposed land use;
issuing of grants to local NGOs and technical support for CBNRM activities.
4. Promotion of alternatives to unsustainable forest exploitation by understanding the markets
and drivers for deforestation and defaunalisation and promotion of alternatives. Activities: studies
of above markets and drivers; promotion of small game husbandry; development of multiple-use
plots in natural forests; participatory identification of potential community forests and target
resources for exploitation (timber, fauna, NTFP, tourism etc.);
An important element will be to build the capacity of various group to jointly manage their resources,
identify and agree on different land use zones (be they formal PA, Community Forests or ERZ) and to
integrate this into existing laws of DRC and in particular the Forest Code. In keeping with WWF policy,
Statement of Principles on Indigenous Peoples and Conservation, approaches will be strengthened to
ensure that customary land/resource rights of indigenous peoples are understood and respected.
The NORAD-funded activities will support all of four components: component one through Output 1;
component 2 through Output 2 and 5; component 3 through Output 4 and component 4 through Output 3.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 23
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
There are several cross-cutting partnerships in operation in the area, strengthening the
overall implementation capacity, dissemination possibilities and local networking capacity.
 Some of the most critical partners WWF is already working with are the local authorities,
both administrative and traditional. Local chiefs of Wamuzimu, Basile, lwindi and Bavira
and other local authorities at village levels have been brought on board since 2004 and in
2005, this culminated in the “Kamituga declaration” where traditional authorities formally
supported the process to gazet Itombwe under different levels of protection with support
from WWF, WCS and ICCN.
 The Congolese Ministry for Conservation of nature, Water and Forests (MECNEF) who
has formally committed itself towards this programme by signing the MOU setting up the
Groupe de Travail à Itombwe in 2004.
 Civil society organisations including local NGOs such as AGDBI and ASEF who are to
promote sensitisation campaigns, data collection and training local communities through
CBNRM management, “Héritiers de la Justice” who brings the expertise from a legal and
justice point of view, the magazine ‘Kivu Safari’ and the radiostation APIDE, who are to
disseminate conservation messages.
 Various administrative institutions at the provincial level including the Ministry of Mines,
Ministry of Education and the Forest Department.
 The USAID, which recently granted support for the Congo Basin Forest Partnership
(CBFP) in Central Africa targeting 11 landscapes. One of these landscapes is the KahuziBiega-Tayna-Maiko Forest Landscape in which Itombwe is situated. While CI and DFGF-I
focus more on the northern part of the landscape, WWF and WCS, as the implementing
agencies of USAID funded CBFP activities, focus on Kahuzi-Biega and Itombwe. In this
respect, WWF has strengthened its activities in Kahuzi-Biega area (with financial support
from WWF-NL) and extended its work in Itombwe since 2004. This project and institutional
framework will offer the channel for implementation of Itombwe gazettement process.
5.2
Activities
The following activities will be undertaken to produce the above outputs (results).
Activity 1.1 Socio-economic information collection, compilation and publication
Finalise the analysis of socio-economic surveys undertaken by WWF in 2005-2006 and
publish the results as an extensive, well documented, technical report available to local,
national and international authorities by June 2007.
Activity 1.2 Understand the local use of natural resources and attitude towards
conservation of forests
Undertake further surveys on socio-economic issues including wildlife (ie bushmeat) use by
local communities, attitude towards conservation issues; baseline data on exploitation of
forest resources and possible impact of creation of various conservation and forest
management areas under the DRC Forest Code.
Activity 2.1 Meet, discuss, identify and negotiate with local communities and
provincial authorities the pros and cons of various gazetment scenarios
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 24
WWF
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
Organise village meetings across the landscape targeting at least 50% of all villages in
central Itombwe and at least 25% of all villages in surrounding areas to gather and
understand views from villagers, rural poor and indigenous people on possible gazetment
scenarios, following the October 2006 preliminary Ministerial Decree.
Activity 2.2 Produce solid and sound basemaps for proper planning
Process, by 2007, 8 SPOT satellite images (each covering a 60km x 60km area) covering
Itombwe massif and surrounding areas and produce by 2008 a basic 1/100,000 land-cover
map so as to clearly display gazetment scenarios and facilitate the CBNRM Zone forest
status monitoring, as well as land use planning process.
Activity 2.3 Update GIS database on human activities
Update the GIS database and basemap with specific information such as human population
density, settlements, roads etc.
Activity 2.4 Mapping gazetment scenarios
Produce a 1/100,000 map clearly delineating delimitation of a core protected area, of
possible Community Forests areas, CBNRM areas and sustainable agriculture
Activity 3.1 Establish process for Land Use Plan Development
Organize at least 2 annual meetings of the Technical Working Group (GTI: Groupe
Technique de Travail pour Itombwe) to coordinate the process of Land Use Planning
development.
Activity 3.2 Mapping current Land Use at village level
Participatory mapping of at least 30% of villages territories and production of mental maps of
adjacent forests and their use and upscaling of such maps showing current land use with
traditional authorities to cover at least 60% of central part of the massif
Activity 3.3 Integrate view of stakeholders in developing Land Use Plan
Organise participatory meetings to develop ideal land use of the massif that integrates
current and future, desired state of the forest massif, incl. conservation and sustainable
forest management areas.
Activity 4.1 Making legal tools known and accessible to local communities
Organize at least 5 workshops with decision makers and village representatives of at least 15
localities in Itombwe to explain and popularize the new Forestry Code and the potential for
engaging into Community Forest (with costs and benefits) and to explain why CBNRM is an
important long-term option.
Activity 4.2 Raise awareness of local communities on costs and benefits of formal
Community Forests under the news DRC Forest Code
Organise training of village representatives on the concept of Community Forests, their costs
and benefits for the communities and individuals.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 25
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
Activity 4.3 Train local communities and CBO on Community Forestry and CBNRM
Organise at least 30 training sessions on Community Forestry and CBNRM.
Activity 4.4 Promote livelihoods development that is compatible with long term
sustainable forest management and conservation
Organise stakeholders meetings to discuss how to promote and support livelihood and food
security activities benefiting local communities in order to safeguard relationship between
conservation areas, sustainable forest management areas, national protected areas
authorities and local communities.
Activity 4.5 Provide technical and logistical means to communities in CBNRM
Train and equip at least 4 women's CBOs in specific CBNRM activities in Basimuniaka
groupment (central sector) and support civil society (CBOs with equipment and training on
CBNRM practices
Activity 5.1 Popularize the new DRC Forest Code
Produce sensitisation materials on the new DRC Forest Code and other relevant legal
framework, explaining civil rights and obligations with regards to forest management
Activity 5.2 Promote and advocate for gazetment at the central government level
Promote the concept of sustainable use of forests of Itombwe massif through setting up
conservation areas and Community Forests at the central government in Kinshasa and make
the Kamituga agreements widely known and supported.
Activity 5.3 Communication
Media/outreach building on the MOU signed in 2005 between the Ministries of mining,
environment and education, as well as civil society and park authority to promote gazetment
of Itombwe reserve, of the Kamituga agreements and the desire of the local, national and
international communities to conserve Itombwe massif in the long term.
5.3
Implementation Arrangement
Overall Implementation responsibility at the field level
WWF Eastern Africa Regional Programme Office (EARPO) will have lead responsibility for
overseeing project administration, management and finances. This is done in cooperation
with the Technical Working Group of Itombwe (GTI; Group technique de travail à Itombwe),
consisting of WWF, ICCN (the Congolese Protected Areas Authorities - l´Institut Congolais
pour la Conservation de la Nature), the Minsitry in charge of Forests and Environment, and
the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS)
Coordination between field level and NORAD
The current proposal is based on a model where WWF-Norway has a contractual
relationship with the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) in Oslo.
WWF-Norway is ultimately responsible for the Project and its deliveries, while WWF Eastern
Africa Regional Programme Office (EARPO) in Nairobi is responsible for the overall
supervision of the Project.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 26
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
Guiding legal framework and agreements
1. WWF is fully registered in DRC and has “accord de siège” with the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs in Kinshasa allowing WWF to operate in DRC.
2. WWF has a MOU with ICCN guiding its work in the entire country, stipulating
respective roles of WWF and ICCN in mechanism for collaboration, communication,
and reporting as well as thematic and geographic areas for technical input and
financial support by or through WWF.
3. The MOU between the Ministry of Environment, Conservation of Nature, Water and
Forest, ICN, WWF and WCS, establishing the GTI and its mandate is the main driving
document to implement the project.
4. The Ministerial Decree of 26 October 2006 creating a “Réserve Naturelle d’Itombwe”.
The project will be implemented in the general framework of the Itombwe-Kahuzi-BiegaTayna-Maiko Forest Landscape, in which WWF is active through its Kahuzi-Biega
Conservation Programme (PCKB). This framework has a formal Planning Forum of which the
WWF PCKB project executant and the WWF Albertine Rift Montane Forests Ecoregion
Coordinator are members. The project will be implemented on a day to day basis by the
Kahuzi-Biega Conservation programme based in Bukavu (DRC), with support form the
Albertine Rift Montane Forest Ecoregion Coordinator, based in Nairobi (Kenya).
5.3.1
Project Organisation
The project organisation chart is given as an attachment (appendix 4).
5.3.2
Local cooperation partners:
The WWF network was involved in the Itombwe area in the 70s and the 90s and is very
familiar with the project area. Since 2004, the network has been working with national and
local partners to identify possible scenarios for long term sustainable management of the
Itombwe massif and the gazetment of part of it under different categories. It has also
undertaken consultations meetings at various levels (incl. village levels) and collection of
socio-economic data. Having initiated these necessary first steps and studies, WWF is now
very well placed to effectively launch a proper project together with ICCN and local
communities. There are some aspects in particular worth mentioning with regard to value
added by having WWF involved:

Technical skills and network: WWF can offer extensive and high quality expertise. There
are networks of professionals, including research and management institutions world
wide within various fields related to environmental policy and natural resource
management. These networks represent a unique source of knowledge and experience.

Links between field projects and policy: The combination of comprehensive field and
project experience in the South and a large network of expertise, as well as participation
in most major international policy processes and negotiations in the field of environment
and development, results in a broad knowledge and experience base that provides
credibility.

Local presence as well as access to and cooperation with civil society and local
authorities: As an important actor in terms of expertise with comprehensive experience
the WWF network works with authorities at local, regional and national level, contributing
to building capacity and competence. This in turn strengthens national processes and
developing countries’ contribution in international processes in environment and
development. In the particular case of Itombwe, WWF is the only international NGO with
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 27
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
permanent staff dedicated to this area and with background data. The local ancrage
gives WWF the necessary links for partnerships and discussions at the local, community
level.

Capacity and potential for scaling up: With such large network WWF is in a position to
efficiently scale up from pilot activities to large-scale interventions if needed. WWF also
has an office in Bukavu for negotiations at provincial level and in Kinshasa for support
and policy work at national level. Its partnership with IUCN, UNESCO and other global
networks will also facilitate the driving of international political, technical and financial
support once the programme is in full gear.

An important added value brought by WWF is its work on socio-economic data collection
and in acquisition of a large set of high resolution recent satellite images (covering over
25,000 km2) which will greatly help producing satellite maps and land cover maps. WWF
has expertise in these two critical technical areas that are lacking at local and ministerial
levels
5.3.3
Relationship with Other Relevant Initiatives
There is no other relevant initiative in or around Itombwe massif. The key other initiative with
which a formal link can and will be set up is the landscape approach over the entire MaikoTayna-Kahuzi Biega-Itombwe landscape (see map 1) funded by USAID and various
conservation partners (CI, WCS, WWF, GTZ). Itombwe is formally considered as an
extension of the Kahuzi-Biega “segment” of this landscape, a segment which is lead by WWF
(while Tayna is lead by CI and Maiko by WCS). This will de facto ensure this initiative lead in
Itombwe by WWF in partnership with MECNEF, ICCN and WCS will be formally part of the
larger, wider approach in the region and that synergies are secured. Such synergies may
include coordinated lobbying, economy of scales when undertaking surveys or consultancies,
provision of technical advise and lessons sharing.
WWF will provide additional funds from USAID in the framework of the CARPE programme.
It is anticipated that USAID funds will be to the tuned of USD 80,000 a year and will support
several staff and operation not included in the above budgets, as well as coordination by the
Albertine Rift Ecoregion programme and associated costs such as travel and technical input.
WWF-Sweden and WWF-Denmark will also contribute each up to USD 20,000/year for
additional data collection and for communication.
WWF-EARPO will also contribute in providing 8 SPOT images specifically ordered in the
framework of this programme and worth EUR 56,000.
ICCN will make available senior staff for LUP development, gazetment file processing and
Groupe de Travail Itombwe, free of charge.
5.3.4
Added Value by WWF Involvement
The WWF network was involved in the Itombwe area in the 70s and the 90s and is very
familiar with the project area. Since 2004, the network has been working with national and
local partners to identify possible scenarios for long term sustainable management of the
Itombwe massif and the gazetment of part of it under different categories. It has also
undertaken consultations meetings at various levels (incl. village levels) and collection of
socio-economic data. Having initiated these necessary first steps and studies, WWF is now
very well placed to effectively launch a proper project together with ICCN and local
communities. There are some aspects in particular worth mentioning with regard to value
added by having WWF involved:
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 28
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF

Technical skills and network: WWF can offer extensive and high quality expertise. There
are networks of professionals, including research and management institutions world
wide within various fields related to environmental policy and natural resource
management. These networks represent a unique source of knowledge and experience.

Links between field projects and policy: The combination of comprehensive field and
project experience in the South and a large network of expertise, as well as participation
in most major international policy processes and negotiations in the field of environment
and development, results in a broad knowledge and experience base that provides
credibility.

Local presence as well as access to and cooperation with civil society and local
authorities: As an important actor in terms of expertise with comprehensive experience
the WWF network works with authorities at local, regional and national level, contributing
to building capacity and competence. This in turn strengthens national processes and
developing countries’ contribution in international processes in environment and
development. In the particular case of Itombwe, WWF is the only international NGO with
permanent staff dedicated to this area and with background data. The local ancrage
gives WWF the necessary links for partnerships and discussions at the local, community
level.

Capacity and potential for scaling up: With such large network WWF is in a position to
efficiently scale up from pilot activities to large-scale interventions if needed. WWF also
has an office in Bukavu for negotiations at provincial level and in Kinshasa for support
and policy work at national level. Its partnership with IUCN, UNESCO and other global
networks will also facilitate the driving of international political, technical and financial
support once the programme is in full gear.

An important added value brought by WWF is its work on socio-economic data collection
and in acquisition of a large set of high resolution recent satellite images (covering over
25,000 km2) which will greatly help producing satellite maps and land cover maps. WWF
has expertise in these two critical technical areas that are lacking at local and ministerial
levels
5.4
Main Beneficiaries and Target Groups
5.4.1
International Communities
The key beneficiaries of the Project will include the international community, national level
beneficiaries and the local communities. Since the project aims at supporting conservation and
management of globally important biodiversity resources, the international community will be
among the first beneficiaries of the project. Many provisions of the global conventions among
which are the Convention on Biological Diversity and CITES will be met and carbon sequestration
will have increased to address global warming. The tourism industry will be boosted to benefit the
international community. The catchments’ values will enhance viability of the international water
bodies which are of transboundary, economic and international importance.
5.4.2
Implementing Institutions
The various governments, NGOs and private sector institutions and individuals involved in
implementation of different activities in the project, will benefit according to the inputs they will
receive from the project.
Local Communities
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 29
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
The project will facilitate the use of alternative natural resources by the local communities living
close to the project areas. The project will therefore address the problem of reducing poverty in
the area. Sustainable funding for conservation will also benefit the local communities by boosting
the socio economic and enterprise development activities they might get involved in during the
project life. Communities living adjacent to the project areas will also benefit from long-term water
supply and distribution as a result of the conservation of catchment
The rural poor at village level, including indigenous forest-dwelling people of the Itombwe massif
Local communities in and around the Itombwe massif
Traditional and administrative authorities
Local NGOs and CBOs in the area
Schools in the area
Central and local government
The international community
5.5
Sustainability and Exit Strategy
5.5.1
Sustainability criteria
Policy support
The policy environment in which the Project will operate is more conducive to the long-term
continuation of project results than for several years. The DRC has been driven by conflict
throughout its history (assassination of the country’s first Prime Minister, Patrice Lumumba, few
months after independence; a series of coups in its first years of existence followed by
dictatorship by Mobutu Sese Seko, two wars in 1996 and 1998 with different rebel faction seizing
parts of the country)
The recent civil war has ended in November 2003 through an inclusive peace accord and the
country ran their first democratic general election in July and October 2006 with a new assembly
and parliament already in place and a democratically-elected president (for the first time in over
40 years)
This new framework can be a powerful mechanism for ensuring sustainability of project outcomes
at the community and local government level. The ICCN is also very ambitious in trying to
achieve their goals. An important element is the determination of DRC to engage into sustainable
forest management. One concrete contribution to this is the new Forest Code that has been
enacted in August 2003 and provides for Community Forestry, which is the most promising
mechanism for sustainable management of Itombwe.
Two other elements are the two Ministerial decrees creating the GTI and the overall framework
for a “Réserve naturelle d’Itombwe”.
These laws and decrees however will remain meaningless if they are not followed by decrees of
application. Here, the project can play a significant role in provide technical input and on-theground experience in translating policy papers into concrete action, therefore feeding the policy
development framework with a final result of both improved legal/policy texts and improbved
capacity at ICCN and MECNEF levels to support communities in understanding those regulations
and being able to put them into practice.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 30
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
Institutional management capacity
An important feature of the project is the emphasis on building capacity of institutions already
operating in the project environment. It is intended that project implementation will be undertaken
mostly by and within the host institutions themselves (at national and local levels), existing
projects in the area and not by a separate project infrastructure that can not be sustained. The
role of the Project will be limited to providing support and technical assistance with the aim of
expanding the capacity of host institutions. As a separate entity ‘the project’ will only exist in order
to manage the support being channelled towards these institutions. The rationale is that for host
institutions to be able and willing to sustain project outputs and build lasting capacity, they must
be allowed to learn by doing, rather than by simply watching. This is the very reason why WWF
lobbied for the inclusion of both MECNEF and ICCN as formal members (and leadership role for
MECNEF) of the GTI, which is the main mechanism of coordination and operation.
Economic and financial viability
For obvious reasons, at present ICCN has few possibilities of meeting its own operating costs
from park revenues. While it is expected that project support may alleviate some of these
problems in the short-term, long-term financial viability is of great concern. By enacting new laws
and restructuring its institution, DRC will greatly improve its capacity in resuming its
responsibilities. The new forest code is a clear example and so is the current institutional review
supported by the World Bank and the European Union. Elements of economic and financial
sustainability are given under the²proposed phases 2 and 3 shortly described in section 7.2 (exit
strategy).
Socio-cultural factors
An understanding of the socio-cultural factors that influence local communities’ motivation,
participation, and acceptance of project activities is crucial to the sustainability and diffusion of
project outcomes. Issues such as land ownership, gender and status differences, and age group
participation, all need to be taken into account when planning project activities. The participatory
approach will go a long way in ensuring this.
5.5.2
Exit strategy
The Itombwe massif is one of the most outstanding area for conservation of biodiversity in Africa.
The formal gazetment of Itombwe can only been seen as the very first step of a long, multi-phase
approach.
The project will exit through a phased approach. There are several components that are
anticipated to be completed by the end of the project and for which an exit strategy is by definition
not relevant. The use of WWF employees will be phased out gradually as the project comes to
the end; it is however anticipated that some of the community based aspects of the programme
will need continued support beyond year 5.
This project focuses on the first 5-years. Phase 1 (2007-2011) will lead to the development of a
formal context and set up for sustainable management of the Itombwe forest that will give the
necessary conduit for further support from international community for the following phases that
will cover other critical aspects not covered during this first phase.
Phase 2 (2012-2016) will cover such aspects as recruitment and training of forest guards and
community liaison officers, building of infrastructures, identification of tourism potential (gorilla
tracking, cultural tourism, eco-tourism etc) and other sources of financial revenues; upscaling of
training of local communities and development of formal agreement with traders for sustainable
extraction of timber and other forest-products
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 31
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
Phase 3 (2017-2021) is anticipated to lead to full financial and institutional sustainability. This
sustainability will be based among others, on the fact that by then DRC would have fully
recovered from the 1996-2003 wars, ICCN will be fully able to pay, train, and equip forest guards,
communities will derive tangible financial benefits from Community Forestry and eco-tourism will
provide further revenues to local people and private operators.
The EU, GEF and World bank have already committed clear interest in supporting further
financial support towards end of phase 1, therefore securing the existence of phase 2 and 3 and
making sure that achievements and investments of phase 1 are not lost. A GEF/World bank
concept is being developed and is likely to be turned into formal support towards the ned of the
proposed first phase. USAID also committed continued support under CBFP/CARPE programme
beyond 2011.
6
INPUTS
6.1
Personnel
6.1.1
WWF EARPO and WWF Norway technical supervision
In addition to these specific technical inputs, WWF will provide technical supervision and
oversight of the project through EARPO and WWF Norway. EARPO will be a member of the
project Technical Advisory Committee (also on behalf of WWF Norway), and will participate in all
major project review and planning processes, such as the annual project assessment and forward
planning exercise. EARPO will take the lead in integrating the project into wider conservation
efforts throughout the Albertine Rift Montane Forests Ecoregion, as well as facilitating
communication and cooperation with WWF’s international conservation networks, especially
those specializing in forest and biodiversity conservation, protected area management, and
community participation in conservation. EARPO through its Regional Conservation Director and
the Albertine Rift montane Forests Ecoregion Coordinator will provide technical backstopping and
support tin facilitating access to relevant information and data, identifying and recruiting
consultants, and organizing exchange visits to other WWF sponsored project activities.
6.2
Materials, Equipment and Infrastructure
A vehicle has been purchased in 2007 that will greatly improve the ability of project staff and
ICCN to reach out remote villages.
Because the required ICCN staffing and Office equipment will be dependent on the final zoning
arrangement and types of protection, there is no provision in the 2008 budget for ICCN
infrastructure. Small infrastructures (less than USD 10,000 in total) will be established by local
communities under the CBNRM component. These may include tree nurseries, desks and chairs
for CBOs offices etc.
6.3
Budget
The detail budget is given in annex 6. The 2008 budget is NOK 753,554.
6.4
Other donors’ contribution to the Project
WWF will provide additional funds from USAID in the framework of the CARPE programme. It is
anticipated that USAID funds will be to the tuned of USD 80,000 a year and will support several
staff and operation not included in the above budgets, as well as coordination by the Albertine
Rift Ecoregion programme and associated costs such as travel and technical input. WWFSweden will also contribute up to USD 20,000/year for additional data collection and
communication
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 32
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
WWF-EARPO will also contribute in providing 8 SPOT images specifically ordered in the
framework of this programme and worth EUR 56,000.
ICCN will make available senior staff for LUP development, gazetment file processing and
Groupe de travail Itombwe, free of charge.
7
ASSUMPTIONS AND RISKS
7.1
Assumptions
Assumptions for the Itombwe massif.
To achieve Overall Goal


No major civil unrest or war take place during the project lifetime
New government effectively in place
To achieve Project Purpose



No major civil unrest or war take place during the project lifetime
Restructuring of ministry is done, following the 2006 review
ICCN remains committed towards gazetment of Itombwe forest
To achieve outputs
 Security is sufficiently good to survey villages
 GTI remains active and members collaborate with each other
 Security is sufficiently good to organise frequent consultation meetings
 GEF/world bank programme and USAID continue to support and recognize the process
 The decree of application of the Forest code continue to be enacted and are in force by 2008
7.2
Risks
The main purpose of the project is to achieve a certain degree of protection of the Itombwe
massif. A gazetting is never a guarantee that protected areas will not be violated and risks exist
that local communities and the DRC Protected Areas Authorities do not see eye to eye, that
livelihoods continue to be poor and that war might again break out.
On the other hand, the project is designed for 5 years, and will emphasize capacity building and
development for local communities, local organisations and government personnel. Both civil
society and government have voiced their sincere interest in the project. Since most of the
ongoing project activities will be integrated in the lead institutions from the beginning, there
should good possibilities of absorbing these activities and associated costs into the relevant
annual budgets when the project ends.
It is still too early to say whether how committed the Government of DRC is to biodiversity
conservation and environmental protection in general. Since the project is specifically designed to
increase this type of commitment, risks will be minimised through promotion of effective
participation of all stakeholders in project implementation. The formal support of the Ministry and
ICCN through the signing of the MOU and the Kamituga agreements are however clear signs of
commitments
Human pressures on the forest resources are driven by lack of adequate land in expanding
populations in neighbouring communities, with no or little alternative sources of income. If
population growth and demand continue to surpass resource production, then the project area
might come under greater stress in the future. This is a problem facing biodiversity conservation
worldwide.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 33
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
DRC is still a trouble torn area and it is still too early to foresee the long-term results of both the
peace treaties in the region and the newly held elections in the country.
Precarious civil situations in neighbouring countries could also in certain unstable periods lead to
an influx of refugees, creating stress, strife and pressure on local communities and their
resources. WWF however has operated in such circumstances for the last 17 years in Eastern
RDC without discontinuation and has attained significant achievements. The risk of major
disruption in the programme is therefore minimal.
8
REPORTING AND MONITORING
Technical reports will be submitted to WWF International every six months. Financial reports will
be submitted every three months. The formats will be according to the standards required by the
WWF network. A detailed reporting schedule, including inception report, evaluation reports, final
reports etc. will be agreed upon as part of project initiation.
8.1
Reporting Schedule
The following reports will be submitted:

Semi-annual Technical Progress Report

Quarterly Financial Report

Annual Technical Progress Report

Annual Financial Report

Annual Audit Report

Project Proposal for next year (if relevant)

Evaluation Report (if relevant)

Final Technical Report (if relevant)

Final Financial Report (if relevant)
The Project will follow the reporting schedule indicated below:
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
15th
Semi-annual Technical Progress
Reports1
Quarterly Financial Reports1
31st
15th
30th
Annual Technical Progress Report1
15th
Annual Financial Report1
15th
Annual Audit Report1
15th
Project Proposal for next year2
Evaluation Report(s)3
30th
31st
1st
15th
Final Technical Report4
1st
Final Financial Report4
1st
– Every year, 2 – For the appropriate years, 3 – Evaluation reports should be submitted immediately after
completion and preferably before 15th February the year following to be included in the Norad reporting that
following year 4 – Only following the final year of the WWF-Norway – Norad cooperation agreement.
1
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 34
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
8.2
Monitoring and Indicators
An important event in the ongoing project monitoring process will be the annual internal project
assessment exercise. This assessment will enable the project team to take a more introspective
and analytical view of project progress, successes and failures, and to use lessons learned in the
revision of future activities through the annual planning cycle. Internal project assessments will be
linked to the annual external reviews (see next section), as well as to a meeting of the Technical
Advisory Committee.
Baselines and indicators of project progress and impact are integrated in the Logicale Framework
Analysis.
8.3
Evaluations
Internal Evaluation Process: The WWF project in the field will regularly submit quarterly and
annual progress reports that describe progress by appropriate subcategories relative to project
planning (finance; administration, conservation and protection; biological and scientific
monitoring; policy and advocacy campaign ,with a focus on quantifiable measures of outcomes).
For these reports, the project will provide written evaluations and enter into re-planning exercises
as required. Supervisory staff from WWF EARPO will participate in selected, critical field activities
to visit.
External Evaluation Process: The Project Team, ICCN /park authority and WWF field project will
work in conjunction with a landscape planning committee and the ICCN CoCoSi (Site
coordinating committee) to include Kahuzi-Biega Staff and WWF technical staff to produce timely
reports and planning activities to National Government Authorities, as well as to backdonors
The budget provide for an annual project review exercise. There is an increasing body of opinion
that frequent evaluations by smaller teams provide a more constructive and timely method of
enhancing project effectiveness and impact, than the traditional mid-term and final evaluation
arrangement. Coupled with the project’s own internal assessment exercise, annual reviews will
enable the project team to respond rapidly to changing circumstances and lessons learned, and
in particular, to adapt project activities to the changing environs and security situation in particular
in the region. They will also provide an opportunity to inject expertise and experience from other
similar project initiatives, particularly from those operating within the same Albertine Rift Montane
Forest ecoregion. The reviews will be carried out by two to three specialists, at least one of whom
will be drawn from within the WWF network and another drawn from outside the network.
Representation in the evaluation from other WWF projects being implemented in the Albertine Rift
Montane Forest ecoregion will be included as appropriate.
The annual reviews will be focused on issues that are especially important at the particular stage
of the project cycle, and the review team members will be selected accordingly. The following
annual reviews are notable in this respect:
End Year 2 Review:
End Year 3 Review (Mid-term Evaluation):
End Year 4 Review:.
End Year 5 Review (Final Evaluation):
Additional focal areas for the reviews will be established according to particular needs identified
by the project team and/or the Technical Advisory Committee.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 35
WWF
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
REFERENCES
Burgess, N, D’Amico Hales J., Underwood E. and Dinerstein E. 2004. Terrestrial Ecoregions
of Africa and Madagascar. A conservation Asessment. Island Press, Washington.
Butynski, T.M. and Kalina, J. (1993). Three new mountain national parks for Uganda. Oryx
27:4, 214-224.
Herberg, O. (1963). The phytogeographical position of the afro-alpine flora. Rec. Adv. Bot. 1:
914-919. Herberg, 1961
Howard, P.C. 1991. Nature Conservation in Uganda's Tropical Forest Reserves. WWF, IUCN.
Forest Department, Ministry of Environment Protection, Uganda.
Kamau, Irene, et al. 1994. “Final Evaluation: WWF Rwenzori Mountains Conservation and
Development Project.” WWF Evaluation Report for Phase I.
Kisakye, J. 1996. “Political Background to Decentralization,” Democratic Decentralization in
Uganda: A New Approach to Local Governance. Kampala: Fountain Publishers, pp. 36-46.
Lubanga, F.X.K. 1996. “The Process of Decentralization,” Democratic Decentralization in
Uganda: A New Approach to Local Governance. Kampala: Fountain Publishers, pp. 47-59.
Lush, C. (1993). Cloud forest of the Rwenzori Mountains, Uganda: Research and Management
Possibilities. Paper presented at the Tropical Montane Cloud Forest Symposium and Workshop.
Puerto Rico. 31 May-5 June 1993. Lush, 1993
MFA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) 1997. Strategy for environment in development cooperation.
Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oslo.
National Environment Management Policy (1994) Entebbe: Goverment of Uganda.
NORAD (Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation) 1999. NORAD invests in the
future. NORAD’s strategy for 2000–2005. Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, Oslo.
The National Environment Statute, 1995. Entebbe: Government of Uganda.
Plumptre A.J, Behangana M., T. Davenport, C. Kahindo., E.Ndomba., D. Nkuutu., L.
Owiunji., P.Ssegawa and G.Eilu (2003). The Biodiversity of the Albertine Rift. Albertine Rift
Technical Reports No.3. Wildlife Conservation Society.
Ratter, A. 1998. Rwenzori Mountains Conservation and Development Project, Phase II
Evaluation, April 1998.
Salt, G. (1987) “Insects and other invertebrate animals collected at high altitudes in the
Rwenzorand on Mount Kenya,” African Journal of Ecology 25(2): 95-106.Salt 1997.
Uganda Bureau of Statistics 2002. Population and Housing Census provisional results
WWF 1996. WWF List of Projects v.5 part 1
WWF 2004. Stakeholder and teambuilding workshop report Kasese.
Yeoman, G. 1992. Uganda’s New Rwenzori National Park, Swara Vol. 15, No. 2, pp., March/April
1992
Yeoman, G. et al 1990. Rwenzori Mountain National Park: results of the public inquiry and
recommendations for establishment (unpublished).
WEHAB Working Group (2002). A Framework for Action on Biodiversity and Ecosystem
Management.
WEHAB Working Group (2002). A Framework for Action on Water and Sanitation.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 36
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
WWF
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1
Map(s) showing the project location/area
Appendix 2
Logical Framework Analysis
Appendix 3
Activity Schedule
Appendix 4
Project Organisation Chart
Appendix 5
Job description(s) for key position(s) (Terms of Reference(s))
Appendix 6
Detailed budget
8.4
Contribution to the Implementation of National Plans
The Project fits well within the priorities for Norwegian development cooperation:
Fighting Poverty
Poverty reduction is the overall objective of Norway's development assistance. The Norwegian
Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 2002 presented an action plan for poverty reduction. The plan gives
a comprehensive, if not altogether operational or prioritised overview of the Norwegian strategy in
this field. The initiative is connected with the debt relief effort towards the Heavily Indebted Poor
Countries (HIPC) and soft loans from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
National ownership of strategies and development efforts, and recipient responsibility are seen as
necessary conditions for achieving poverty reduction in the Plan. One way to promote ownership
and recipient responsibility is to support the development of national poverty reduction strategies
(PRSPs). These strategies integrate macro-economic, structural and social policies in a
potentially powerful tool to help developing countries in their efforts to reduce poverty and
promote growth. The efforts towards promoting the development of poverty reduction strategies
now need to be followed up with a more focused approach towards mainstreaming of
environmental concerns and priorities in these strategies. The Norwegian Action Plan also
highlights the important links between poverty, environment and the natural resource base.
Environment and Sustainable Natural Resource Management
The new Norwegian development cooperation policy presented by the Government (Government
White Paper no. 35 (2003–2004)) and later modified and approved by Parliament (Proposition no.
93 (2004–2005)) by the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs) highlights environment and
natural resource management as one out of five main elements in Norwegian development
cooperation. Parliament requested the Government to prepare an action plan to ensure a more
systematic implementation of environmental efforts in Norwegian development cooperation. The
Project fits directly within these priorities as it seeks to address both environment and
development issues, ensure sustainable natural resource management and protect the regionally
important water tower of Itombwe. Water resources management is receiving particular attention
within natural resource management in Norwegian development cooperation, in particular in a
transboundary context.
Strengthening Civil Society (CSO)
Strengthening civil society is an important tool for an NGO like WWF in general and is an integral
part of the Project. WWF is working with and strengthening civil society organisations (CSOs) and
enable them to participate more actively and meaningfully in the management of the Itombwe
massif and also receive more benefits from this protected area. The Project will facilitate
improved communication and cooperation between the Government’s protected area authorities
and local communities and civil society. This will assist civil society organisations in formulating
their wishes and demands and source important information to CSOs about ongoing process on
natural resource management as well as their rights and opportunities in such process.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 37
WWF
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
Good governance
Good governance is another main element in Norwegian development cooperation. Management
of natural resources contains very important governance issues. Poor governance is frequently
an important cause of environmental destruction and may also stop local communities from
benefiting from the natural resource base as the resources themselves or income from the use of
the resources are taken away from local communities. Good governance over natural resources
such as forests and water is at the core of the Project. Working through local institutions offers
opportunities for good governance as strengthened CBOs will demand participation and
accountability at higher levels of political governance.
Country specific priorities
Norway's development co-operation with Uganda is based on Uganda's own poverty reduction
strategy, which is focused around the following five pillars: Economic Management; Production,
Competitiveness and Incomes; Security, Conflict-Resolution and Disaster-Management; Good
Governance; and Human Development. The two countries have a Memorandum of
Understanding (MoU 2001–2005) concerning development co-operation, in which the following
main areas of co-operation are outlined:
 Good Governance, Democracy and Human Rights
 Economic Growth and Private Sector Development
 Social Development
Crosscutting development issues like anti-corruption, human rights, capacity building, HIV/AIDS,
gender and environment are assumed to be part of all efforts. Sub-regional development is also
included in the co-operation.
After a review of the MoU in 2004 the following specifications have been made:
 Increased focus on political and economic governance, as well as on democracy building
 Continued support to private sector development, with a special focus on the energy sector
 Support to social development is given as budget support through the Poverty Action Fund
In addition it is underlined that:
 Political and economic governance is seen as a crosscutting issue of importance to all types of
development co-operation.
 Donor co-ordination, harmonisation and division of labour are important principles for the
Norwegian development co-operation with Uganda.
The Project will in particular contribute to environmental management and sustainable
management of natural resources. Strengthening the management of the RMNP will also
contribute to good governance, transparency and capacity building, the latter being a major
component of the Project.
WWF’s experience
Geographical Area
WWF and others (Plumptre et al., 2003) have recognized the Albertine Rift as a priority area for
conservation in Africa. A recent study has shown that out of the 117 terrestrial ecoregions of
Africa, the Albertine Rift Montane Forests Ecoregion actually comes out as the most important of
all in terms of species richness, endemism and threatened species. Consequently, WWF has
initiated an important network of field projects backed up by the Albertine Rift Montane Forests
Ecoregion Programme based in Nairobi.
WWF currently has eight active projects in the Albertine Rift, five of them in Uganda.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 38
WWF
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
This set of field projects, supported by cross-cutting support from the Albertine Rift Ecoregion
Programme based in Nairobi, is a critical element that has helped building the vast experience of
WWF in the area and the expertise in conducting field projects in remote, and sometimes,
unstable areas.
In Eastern DRC, WWF has 10 permanent staff based in the field in Bukavu/KahuziBiega/Itombwe area and 55 staff in and around Virunga NP. The projects have never
discontinued their activities even during very unstable times such as the 1996 and 1998 wars. A
very brief description of these projects is following:
1) International Gorilla Conservation Programme (IGCP)
This is a cross-border conservation initiative for the endangered mountain gorillas Gorilla gorilla
beringei and their unique forest habitats in Bwindi Impenetrable Forest and Mgahinga National
Parks in Uganda and in the Virunga and Volcanoes National Park in DRC and Rwanda. The
programme promotes eco-tourism, ecological monitoring, community participation and benefit
sharing around Bwindi and Mgahinga.
2) Virunga Environmental Programme (PEVi) – DRC
This programme aims to contribute to the long-term conservation of Virunga NP by:
environmental education and awareness building for the people living near the Park; supporting
communities in their efforts to manage their natural resources; providing advice and support to
park authorities in order to improve dialogue and collaborative management with the
communities; participatory boundary delimitations. The project is anticipated to embark into a
larger assessment of PNVi after 6 years of armed conflicts. This will involve an assessment of the
level of encroachment, human activities and infrastructures, biological surveys and evaluation of
ICCN staff in view of a major restructuring.
3) UNF-UNESCO Project on World heritage Sites in danger in DRC
This project is funded by UNF/UNESCO and provides direct support to the five World Heritage
Sites in DRC. This includes Virunga National Park in the Albertine Rift for which WWF is the
project implementer on behalf of UNF/UNESCO. Monthly bonuses are given to the guards, based
on Law Enforcement work as well as medicine and rations for patrols.
4) Rwenzori Mountains Conservation and Environment Management Programme – Uganda
This project had been active in the 1990s but had to be discontinued in 1998 for security reasons
(rebel activity). With clear improvement of the situation and the reopening of Rwenzori NP, WWF
has resumed its activities in the Ruwenzori on both sides of the Massif. On the Uganda side, the
project has resumed in November 2004 with funding from NORAD. The main focus of the project
is to work with surrounding communities for Forest Landscape Restoration and sustainable use of
natural resources and direct support to UWA to implement their management plan for Rwenzori
National Park; the project also takes a larger landscape approach and insure that cross-border
activities do promote the long term conservation of the mountain on both side of the border
between DRC and Uganda.
5) Conservation of the Albertine Rift Forests in Uganda
This project, funded by GEF-UNDP as pdf-B phase, is implemented by WWF in collaboration with
the Ministry of Water, Lands and Environment (MWLE). The objective is to support the
conservation of nationally and globally important forest biodiversity resources in the Albertine Rift
Valley of Uganda. The project has three main components: development and implementation of
an agreed Conservation and Management Strategy (CMS) for the Albertine Rift Valley Forests;
develop and improve intra-district and inter-agency protocols, networks and community
institutions in which NGOs, communities and civil society have an important role to play; and
strengthen forest resource management in gazetted and non-gazetted forests by involving all
stakeholders. The project has successfully completed the pdf-B and has been formally accepted
as a full phase in October 2006. This full 5-year phase will start in February 2007, after an
inception workshop.
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 39
WWF
Project Proposal – Itombwe (DRC)
6) Building Participatory Natural Resources Management in Central Albertine Rift Forests
The recent civil unrest and political changes have severely affected forests of the central part of
the Albertine Rift, in particular Virunga (DRC) and Kibira (Burundi) forests. The purpose of this
project is to ensure the long-term conservation of these two key forests for the benefit, and with
the participation, of neighbouring communities. An important aspect of the work is a participatory
approach to Natural Resources Management and Integrated Conservation and Development
activities as well as awareness raising.
7) Kahuzi-Biega Conservation Programme
This project builds on the experience gained by its PEVi programme in Virunga. The project
supports ICCN in Kahuzi-Biega NP management, and supports local initiatives and CBOs around
the park in agroforestry, Community Based Natural Resource Management and Environmental
Education. The project has an extension in Itombwe, through which socio-economic surveys,
village meetings and other scoping activities provided the background information for developing
this project proposal.
8) Engaging the rural poor as partners in Conservation in Kasyoha Kitomi Forest Reserve,
Uganda
The project rationale is that the main weakness of ICD programmes is the short time and little
involvement of local communities in the programme development/design. This project aims at
ensuring a real involvement in an ICD programme in a forest landscape centred around Kasyoha
Kitomi Reserve, in the Albertine Rift of Uganda. The current 2.5 years design phase is ending in
December 2006 and will be followed by a full 4-year phase in January 2007. The first pahse
involved detailed socio-economic surveys and a vision-based design engaging the rural poor
living around the Forest Reserve.
The three maps have been removed so that the file
can be emailed. Simply copy and paste them from
last year’s proposal
2008 NORAD proposal for Itombwe
Page 40