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