ForestsTreesAgroforestry – Presentation for Discussion with Donors and Partners – June 2013

  • 390 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
390
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Forests, Trees and AgroforestryMontpellier, 21 June 2013
  • 2. The contextWe have exceeded 3 of the 9 Planetary boundaries: greaterrisks and uncertainty emerging.
  • 3. Forests, Trees and Agroforestry forGreen Growth
  • 4. Our general theory of change
  • 5. Research to impact
  • 6. Example impact pathway
  • 7. Actual impact pathway
  • 8.  Enhancing productivity and sustainability ofsmallholder forestry and agroforestry practices(food security and nutrition) Increasing income generation and marketintegration for smallholders Improving policy and institutions to enhancesocial assets to secure rights to forests, treesand landTheme1 Smallholder production systems and marketsLead Center:ICRAF
  • 9.  Understanding threats to populations of important treespecies and formulating E3 genetic conservationstrategies Conserving and characterizing high-quality germplasm ofhigh value tree species in the forest to farm gradient Developing improved silvicultural and monitoringpractices for multiple use management of forestecosystems Developing tools and methods to resolve conflicts overdistribution of benefits and resource rightsTheme2 Management and conservation of forest and treeresourcesLead Center:Bioversity
  • 10.  Understanding patterns and drivers of forest(tree cover) transition in decline andrestoration phases Understanding consequences of tree covertransition for livelihoods, environmental goodand services, and adaptive policy Active learning landscapes where innovativeresponses and policy options are testedTheme3 Environmental services and landscape managementLead Center:ICRAF
  • 11.  Harnessing forests, trees and agroforestry forclimate change mitigation Enhancing climate change adaptation throughforests, trees and agroforestry Understanding the role of forests, trees andagroforestry in achieving synergies betweenclimate change mitigation and adaptationTheme4 Climate change adaptation and mitigationLead Center:CIFOR
  • 12.  Understanding the processes and impacts offorest-related trade and investment Enhancing responses and policy options tomitigate negative impacts and enhancepositive impacts from trade and investmentTheme5 Impacts of trade and investment on forests and peopleLead Center:CIFOR
  • 13. Overarching andCross-cutting Gender Capacity building Communications,outreach Monitoring,Evaluation andImpact Assessment
  • 14. Sentinel Landscapes
  • 15. PartnershipsLevels/Types Research Partners Policy and PracticePartnersKnowledge-sharingPartnersInternational CIRAD, IRD, CSIRO, ForestLandscape Denmark, IUFRO,Norwegian University of LifeSciencesCPF, FAO, UNEP, WorldBank, UN-REDD, IPCC, FSC,IUCNBBC World Service Trust,Panos, UN-REDD, CPF,IUCNRegional CATIE, Amazon Initiative,ANAFE, FARA, SEANAFE;ASARECA, CORAF, SAARD,STCP, SA/AP/LAFORGENAFF, COMIFAC, Asia ForestPartnership, ECOWASRECOFTC, STCP, CATIECountry or local NARS, local/nationalresearch organizations,FORDA, KEFRINARS, government, CBOs,NGOs, private sectorcompaniesLocal NGOs andnetworks, government
  • 16. Phase 1, 2011-14DevelopmentPhase 2, 2015-17RefinementPhases 3 + 4, 2018-23Stock take & adaptationTeams and processesCommon Operational PlanMapping projectsMEIA & Gender strategiesBuilding partnershipsExternal Evaluation 2013Impact assessmentsTheme evaluationsIDOs + targets↗ collaboration betweenCRPs (esp. 1.x)↗ harmonization↗ integration of partnersinto governance andimplementationMid-term impact “overview”Evaluation of implementationof gender and MEIA strategyMilestones to IDOsOverall approach revisitedand modified based onresults of CRP impactassessment, successes &failures, etc.Revisiting original themes,focusing, addressing gapsand emerging issuesNew themes, continuationof relevant onesOverall impacts (targetachievements - 2023)External evaluations 2018,2023Phased work planDefining research themesData management andplatforms
  • 17. Intermediate Development Outcomes1. Policies and practices supporting sustainable and equitablemanagement of forests and trees developed and adopted byconservation and development organizations, national governmentsand international bodies.2. Greater gender equity in decision-making and control over forest andtree use, management and benefits are improved through women’sempowerment.3. Income from products and environmental services derived forests,trees and agroforestry systems enhanced.4. Productivity, production and availability of foods, fuel and otherproducts from forests and agroforestry systems increased for poorrural people.5. Resilience to environmental and economic variability, shocks andlonger term changes of rural communities enhanced through greateradaptive capacity to manage forests, trees and agroforestry.6. Forest, land and water resources and biodiversity conserved andimproved and net carbon sequestration increased in key targetcountries.
  • 18.  IDO: Productivity, production and availability offoods and fuel and other products from forestsand agroforestry systems increased for poor ruralpeople. (SLO1, SLO2, SLO3) Specific CRP targets (within 12 years):– Enhanced production and management options for forestand agroforest based products benefiting at least 2million producers and traders and their families;– At least 1.5million producers benefiting from increasedconservation efforts related to tree diversity;– Enhanced production and management technologiesraising tree, land and labor productivity of target groupsby at least 30%IDO example targets
  • 19. Agenda setting
  • 20. Policy influence
  • 21. Gender: Research and Action
  • 22. Greater gender equity in decisionmaking and control over forestand tree use, management andbenefits are improved throughwomen’s empowerment. (ALLSLOs)IDO
  • 23. Gender equality in decision-making andcontrol over FTA resources and relevantvalue chains results in increasedincomes and benefits for women.Incomes of men and women, and spendingdecisionsIncome from FTAgoods and servicescontrolled by women and men hasincreased such that gender inequality inincome from these goods and services hasdecreased by at least 30 percentWomen’s increased control over FTAresources enhances family nutrition andhealth.WEIA At At least 20-30% of women and theirfamilies have improved health conditionsor have reduced incidence of commonillness due to nutritional deficiency inprogram countries.More secure tenure and rights for menand women increases access todiversified and improved food and treespecies/varieties.NuNumber of days without foodshshortage in dry seasonAt least xx women and their familiesbenefit from FTA products for foodsecurity for xx additional days during thedry seasonGender equality in participation in andinfluence over resource use decisionsand benefits increases investments insustainable resource management andreduces degradation.Number and type of trees planted Xx million women are newly empoweredto plant and manage FTA resources in xxcountriesNumber of women and men in forestcommittees/councils20-30% of members elected/appointed toforest management committees are womenRange of rights to forests and trees held bywomen and men10-15% of women in program areas havecontrol (i.e. stronger rights) over FTAresources at household and communitylevelsNumber of NRM activities Increased number of women-initiated andAchievement of IDO Metrics Targets
  • 24.  Mainstreaming approach, within themes, FTA-wide Gender strategy approved Capacity building: training, workshops, resource materials,fellowships, recruitment, consultants Institutional architecture: proposal development and approval Learning: annual monitoring of processes Sentinel landscapes Partnerships: multiple levels; multiple organizations (research andpractice, policy) Institutional architecture: Proposal process (scientists/managers)Current
  • 25. Onward: Sustaining momentum Capacity—critical mass Institutional architecture: performance assessment;accountability; Partnerships across the research/action cycle:– Cross-CRP– Cross-level Learning: mid-term evaluation of gender strategy
  • 26. Forests, Trees and AgroforestryPlanning, Monitoring and Learning
  • 27. The simplest questions“Describe progress along impact pathways, anydeviations, unexpected results, and associatedcosts and lessons learnt”“Develop aggregate targets across CRPs”
  • 28. 120+ active grants across 4 centers
  • 29. Some pre-CRP, some post-CRP
  • 30. Most use their own results vocabularyDeliverableSpecific objectiveBroad objectiveOverall aimMilestoneOutputOutcomeImpact
  • 31. Most use unique high-level resultstatementsOverall partnership aims are to reduce poverty(protection of local livelihoods, protection ofrights and land tenure, protection of vulnerablegroups) and increase resilience to climatechange, including mitigation.The programme will contribute to the globalimpacts of poverty reduction, biodiversityconservation and climate protection throughimproved management of forests.
  • 32. Meaning most have their own idea ofwhat constitutes an impact pathway
  • 33. And each has its own indicators ofprogress
  • 34. We need to understand and report oneach grant, and on the aggregatecontribution of all grants to IDOsIndividual grant targets,reporting Aggregate CRP targets,Reporting against IDOsRough estimate ofFTA documentation= 4000-8000 pagesof text
  • 35. The truth is out there 4000-8000 pages of text 120+ active grants Different results vocabularies Different high-level result statements Different description of impact pathways Different targets, indicators Complex questions to answer on an annual basis
  • 36. Four key elements to make sense of it1. Common theory of change2. Common operational plan3. Individual grants mapped to operational plan4. Outcomes theory
  • 37. From research to action:FTA theory of change
  • 38. SLOsSLO1Reducing ruralpovertySLO2Increasing foodsecuritySLO3Improving nutritionand healthSLO4Sustainable management ofnatural resourcesIDO1 IDO2 IDO3 IDO4 IDO5 IDO6Theme 1OutcomesOutputsMilestonesA B C D E F G H I J K LTheme 2OutcomesOutputsMilestonesTheme 3OutcomesOutputsMilestonesTheme 4OutcomesOutputsMilestonesTheme 5OutcomesOutputsMilestonesProjectsCRP6
  • 39. SLOsSLO1Reducing ruralpovertySLO2Increasing foodsecuritySLO3Improving nutritionand healthSLO4Sustainable management ofnatural resourcesIDO1 IDO2 IDO3 IDO4 IDO5 IDO6Theme 1A B C D E F G H I J K LProjectsOutcome 1.1 Outcome 1.2 Outcome 1.3 Outcome 1.4Output 1.1.1 Output 1.1.2 Output 1.4.1Milestone Milestone Milestone Milestone Milestone MilestoneOutput 1.1.3
  • 40. SLOsSLO1Reducing ruralpovertySLO2Increasing foodsecuritySLO3Improving nutritionand healthSLO4Sustainable management ofnatural resourcesIDO1 IDO2 IDO3 IDO4 IDO5 IDO6Theme 1A B C D E F G H I J K LProjectsOutcome 1.1 Outcome 1.2 Outcome 1.3 Outcome 1.4Output 1.1.1 Output 1.1.2 Output 1.4.1Milestone Milestone Milestone Milestone Milestone MilestoneOutput 1.1.3
  • 41. SLOsSLO1Reducing ruralpovertySLO2Increasing foodsecuritySLO3Improving nutritionand healthSLO4Sustainable management ofnatural resourcesIDO1 IDO2 IDO4Theme 1A D GOutcome 1.1Output 1.1.1 Output 1.1.2Milestone Milestone Milestone MilestoneOutput 1.1.3 $ Spent$ Spent Research location Research topicResearch locationResearch topic PartnersPartnersDonors$ Spent
  • 42. Outcomes theory: a usefulframework
  • 43. Milestones Outputs Outcomes IDOs SLOsAttributable/controllable indicators@ @@@Progress/not entirely controllable indicators** **** **ImpactEvaluationIEIEIEIEProcessEvaluationPE PEEconomic and comparative EvaluationAdapted from Duignan, P (2012) http://www.outcomescentral.org/outcomestheory.html
  • 44. http://www.doview.com/plan/© Duignan, P (2012)
  • 45. Assessing our contribution to local,national and global changeLAMIL: Landscape Management for Improved Livelihoods• A joint ICRAF-CIFOR project in Guinea from 2005-2008• Now 5 years after the end of the project, impact assessment will focus on:• Livelihood and environmental outcomes• Capacity and gender outcomes in target communities• Policy changes associated to project• Hits and misses• Potential scaling up and out of hits• Assessment due to begin in August 2013, finish in 2014Congo Basin Sustainable forest management• CIFOR & CIRAD research in Congo Basin since mid-90s• Contribution analysis - examines the overall theory of change of CIFOR’s andpartners interventions• To what extent did CIFOR’s activities contribute to the changes in sustainable forestmanagement in the Congo basin, and how• Expected completion early 2014
  • 46. Independent Evaluation Arrangement• Evaluation of entire FTA portfolio• Starting now, scheduled completion August 2014CRP-commissioned evaluation of Theme 2• Scope, approach• Theory of change, impact pathways• Partner networks, etc• Started May 2013, completion in a few monthsOptimizing our approach
  • 47. Estimated funding needs (x000 USD)Flagship/ThemePhase 22015-2017Phase 32018-2020Phase 42021-2023TOTALSmall-holders, production ,markets,livelihoods69.3 80.3 93.4 243.5Managing and conserving forest and treeresources54.7 63.8 73.9 193.0Enhancing environmental services 55.2 63.0 73.9 193.0Climate change adaptation and mitigation 68.3 80.3 92.5 243.5Global trade and investment 25.2 29.2 33.8 88.2Gender mainstreaming 4.6 5.3 6.2 16.1Capacity building support 3.1 3.5 4.1 10.7Sentinel Landscape 6.2 7.1 8.2 21.5Communication support 3.1 3.5 4.1 10.7Monitoring, Evaluation, Impact Ass. 3.0 3.0 3.5 9.5Management Support Unit 1.2 1.2 1.3 3.7TOTAL 293.9 340.2 394.8 1,029.9Phase 1: 2011-2014, approved 232.0Approx. 10% Gender, 5% Cap. building and 30 to 35% to pass through partners