BROWN BAG  ON   Impact Measurement  and  Stakeholder Engagement  in HARO’s Program on  Productive Water Rights in Ethiopia...
OVERVIEW <ul><li>30 minutes presentation (with Q&A): </li></ul><ul><li>4 program background slides </li></ul><ul><li>5 sli...
BACKGROUND <ul><li>Agriculture </li></ul><ul><ul><li>C ontributes 45%  to the GDP </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Generates 85%...
<ul><li>Opportunity window: </li></ul><ul><li>Agri-development led industrialization </li></ul><ul><li>CC Adaptation fundi...
Goal:   To enable SHs access & manage water resources for enhancing their production and food security in a fair, equitabl...
BACKGROUND 2008 - 2009 Financial crisis
THEORY OF CHANGE Core-Value Proposition: CO-INVESTMENT
IMPACT DOMAINS <ul><li>Smallholders’ food security; </li></ul><ul><li>Smallholders’ water access and local governance of w...
MEASURING  COMPLEX SYSTEMIC CHANGE … 13. HH food security 1. Eq access to prod opportunities  (land & water) 2.&3. Prices ...
Core Value Proposition CO-INVESTMENT   SYSTEM <ul><li>Input price paid by WUA and non-WUA farmers  </li></ul><ul><li>Farm ...
STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION WORKSHOP    Addis Ababa (Ethiopia), February 22-23, 2010 <ul><li>Purpose  </li></ul><ul><li>Creat...
FACILITATION APPROACH No Power Point! Every-body is Expert Listen  ->  Scan  ->  Focus  ->  Act
STAKEHOLDER ROLES MONDAY MORNING
CHANGE LANDSCAPING MONDAY AFTERNOON  FEBRUARY 22, 2010
 
 
CHANGE MODEL SYNTHESIS TUESDAY MORNING FEBRUARY 23, 2010
IMPACT INDICATORS IDENTIFIED AND APPROVED  <ul><li>Increased productivity (variables: unit of water use per hectare of lan...
DISCUSSION ON INDICATORS  <ul><li>Most indicators are composites that are depending on variables also influencing other in...
VALIDATION OF CHANGE MODEL <ul><li>Conclusions </li></ul><ul><li>active involvement of the communities     co-investment ...
Communities STAKEHOLDER ROLE PLAY TUESDAY MORNING
In English: Our role  is like, mm…  this big! Zonal & Regional Governments
FINAL REPORT TUESDAY AFTERNOON <ul><li>Indicator timeline  –  What to measure when? </li></ul><ul><li>Gender mainstreaming...
Indicators Timeline
Sustainable Agriculture & Water Technology
FEEDBACK FROM COMMUNITY REPRENSENTATIVES <ul><li>“ People have come from far to organize this workshop. People have come f...
GETTING TO MAYBE…    (Page 1) <ul><li>“ Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate.  Our deepest fear is that we are p...
The End
DISCUSSION <ul><li>Why is it important to engage stakeholders in the discussion around impact? </li></ul><ul><li>What are ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Brown bag impact measurement stakeholder engagement in the water program may7 2010 (limited animation 2) (2)

661 views

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
661
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Points of discussion Most indicators are composites and depending on variables also determining or influencing other indicators. There is no one-to-one relationship between indicators and outcomes, and thus that they need to be measured as a system . It’s important to have some quantified indicators, but we also need qualitative measures for assessing social relations (such as gender). Measuring progress and impacts will happen in phases, thus not all have to be monitored and evaluated at the same time. Only the core proposition of co-investment and core changes in the coming program phase needs a baseline now and formal evaluation in 3-4 years. Other clusters of indicators (such as water distribution and conflict) will need separate, more specialized research. Some need ongoing monitoring by implementing partners and the communities (such as those on the different sustainability dimensions). Annual aggregated analysis of all these data streams will show whether our change model is actually working. The stakeholders will be invited to reflect on the annual aggregated analysis and draw conclusions for further action.  
  • Brown bag impact measurement stakeholder engagement in the water program may7 2010 (limited animation 2) (2)

    1. 1. BROWN BAG ON Impact Measurement and Stakeholder Engagement in HARO’s Program on Productive Water Rights in Ethiopia Adinda van Hemelrijck – MEL Advisor Friday, May 7, 2010 1:00 - 2:00pm
    2. 2. OVERVIEW <ul><li>30 minutes presentation (with Q&A): </li></ul><ul><li>4 program background slides </li></ul><ul><li>5 slides on program goal & objectives, theory of change, and impact measures </li></ul><ul><li>8 slides on stakeholder consultation workshop (purpose & outcomes, process & results) </li></ul><ul><li>30 minutes discussion </li></ul><ul><li>On Padare: </li></ul><ul><li>Presentation: http://padare.oxfamamerica.org/content/23370 </li></ul><ul><li>Water Program: http://padare.oxfamamerica.org/content/227 </li></ul>
    3. 3.
    4. 4. BACKGROUND <ul><li>Agriculture </li></ul><ul><ul><li>C ontributes 45% to the GDP </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Generates 85% foreign currency </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>95% Smallholders (0.93 ha/HH) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>99% rain-fed </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Land </li></ul><ul><ul><li>74.3 mln ha Arable land <-> 12.3 mln ha, cultivated (2008) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>3.7 mln ha, irrigable <-> 0.6 mln ha, irrigated </li></ul></ul>
    5. 5. <ul><li>Opportunity window: </li></ul><ul><li>Agri-development led industrialization </li></ul><ul><li>CC Adaptation funding </li></ul><ul><li>Water policy - Water for consumption & productive use </li></ul><ul><li>Water sector development program </li></ul><ul><ul><li>- Irrigation development program established </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Goals, targets for 15 years </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Plans (127,138 ha in 4 regions: USD 599.4 mln) = over 80% of the regional budget allocation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>> Achievements are not satisfactory </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>> Regions are very committed & OA investment can help a lot in realizing targets </li></ul></ul></ul>BACKGROUND
    6. 6. Goal: To enable SHs access & manage water resources for enhancing their production and food security in a fair, equitable and sustainable manner. SCO1 SHs’ rights over water for production SCO2 SHs’ sustainable use and management of water resources SCO3 Equal opportunities for women vis-à-vis men in use & management of water resources
    7. 7. BACKGROUND 2008 - 2009 Financial crisis
    8. 8. THEORY OF CHANGE Core-Value Proposition: CO-INVESTMENT
    9. 9. IMPACT DOMAINS <ul><li>Smallholders’ food security; </li></ul><ul><li>Smallholders’ water access and local governance of water rights; </li></ul><ul><li>Access to markets and positive private sector engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Co-investment, institutional coordination and local capacity reg. water resource development for/with smallholders; </li></ul><ul><li>Productive water needs & interests by social group, and women’s influence on decisions/priorities reg. water resource development for smallholders; </li></ul><ul><li>Sustainable water productivity & efficiency </li></ul><ul><li>Equitable distribution of water rights across different types of users (public, smallholder, investor, industry…) </li></ul>
    10. 10. MEASURING COMPLEX SYSTEMIC CHANGE … 13. HH food security 1. Eq access to prod opportunities (land & water) 2.&3. Prices for produce & inputs (users vs non-users - savings & credit) Water governance (ownership) 7. Federal investments (from donors / from internal revenue) 5.Woreda budgets & tax base Resource allocation from Reg gov to Woreda Opportunity cost of allocations to SSPWRD 10.Women leadersh infl & dec-power in HHs & Com Inst 11. Women leadership, infl & dec-power in loc, reg & fed govs 12. Water productivity Techn & financial sustainability Environmental sustainability 4. NGO Investments & capacity-building efforts 6. Woreda capacity (HR, operatons, coord) Conflicts (across localities) Legal protection (><competition) 8. Prod water needs & interests met (by social group) 9. Women leadersh, infl & dec-power in NGOs
    11. 11. Core Value Proposition CO-INVESTMENT SYSTEM <ul><li>Input price paid by WUA and non-WUA farmers </li></ul><ul><li>Farm produce prices / nearest market prices </li></ul><ul><li>Current NGO investments directly in “water for productive use” (hard & soft ware) </li></ul><ul><li>Woreda budgets for SSPWRD </li></ul><ul><li>Woreda capacity to support community organization & WR management </li></ul><ul><li>Donor $$ / fed gov investment plans for SSPWRD </li></ul>10. % leadership positions in NGOs and influence on priorities/decisions 13. Household Food Security <ul><li>Productive water needs & interests met (by social group) </li></ul>12. Water productivity Community Loc & Reg Gov Donors NGOs <ul><li>Equal Access to productive opportunities related to land & water </li></ul><ul><li>% leadership positions in community institutions </li></ul><ul><li>and influence on community priorities/decisions </li></ul><ul><li>% leadership positions in local and regional Gov Offices </li></ul><ul><li>and influence on priorities/decisions </li></ul>
    12. 12. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION WORKSHOP Addis Ababa (Ethiopia), February 22-23, 2010 <ul><li>Purpose </li></ul><ul><li>Create a space where key stakeholders </li></ul><ul><ul><li>can get their head around the system </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>are prodded to listen to each other and create a common language </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>can start to learn together about impacts of contributions /co-investments </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Launch of a curriculum of impact reflection & learning with key stakeholders </li></ul><ul><li>Outcomes </li></ul><ul><li>Shared Model of Change </li></ul><ul><li>Agreement on impact domains and impact indicators </li></ul><ul><li>Map of stakeholders’ roles & contributions </li></ul><ul><li>Agreement on Co-investment approach </li></ul><ul><li>Inputs (if any) in impact baseline research design </li></ul>
    13. 13. FACILITATION APPROACH No Power Point! Every-body is Expert Listen -> Scan -> Focus -> Act
    14. 14. STAKEHOLDER ROLES MONDAY MORNING
    15. 15. CHANGE LANDSCAPING MONDAY AFTERNOON FEBRUARY 22, 2010
    16. 18. CHANGE MODEL SYNTHESIS TUESDAY MORNING FEBRUARY 23, 2010
    17. 19. IMPACT INDICATORS IDENTIFIED AND APPROVED <ul><li>Increased productivity (variables: unit of water use per hectare of land) </li></ul><ul><li>Increased household food security </li></ul><ul><li>Improved household health </li></ul><ul><li>Increased household income </li></ul><ul><li>Better market prices for inputs, products & services </li></ul><ul><li>Financial sustainability </li></ul><ul><li>Technical sustainability </li></ul><ul><li>Equitable water access and use (or equitable allocation of water users rights within water users associations or cooperatives) </li></ul><ul><li>Equitable decision-making power in government at the federal, regional and local levels </li></ul><ul><li>Equitable decision-making power in NGOs and CBOs </li></ul><ul><li>Environmental sustainability (variables: erosion, salinity, water size) </li></ul><ul><li>Less conflict (between up & downstream users, different types of users, and migrating communities) </li></ul><ul><li>Resource allocation from regional to local government (and resource mobilization from local to regional level) </li></ul><ul><li>Increased federal investments (from donors / from internal revenues) </li></ul>
    18. 20. DISCUSSION ON INDICATORS <ul><li>Most indicators are composites that are depending on variables also influencing other indicators. </li></ul><ul><li>There is no one-to-one relationship between indicators and outcomes, and therefore they need to be measured as a system . </li></ul><ul><li>It’s important to have some quantified indicators, but we also need qualitative measures for assessing social relations (such as gender). </li></ul><ul><li>Measuring progress and impacts will happen in phases. Only core proposition and changes relevant to this program phase needs a baseline now. </li></ul>
    19. 21. VALIDATION OF CHANGE MODEL <ul><li>Conclusions </li></ul><ul><li>active involvement of the communities  co-investment & ownership </li></ul><ul><li>tri-partite agreements  mutual accountability between communities, local & regional government and NGOs </li></ul><ul><li>post-construction support  ensuring sustainability </li></ul><ul><li>down-ward accountability  communities’ feedback on program delivery </li></ul><ul><li>appropriate water technologies  existing sources and local conditions (agro-ecological, institutional, livelihood systems, socio-cultural practices) </li></ul><ul><li>integrated watershed management  other organizations working on different water usages </li></ul>
    20. 22. Communities STAKEHOLDER ROLE PLAY TUESDAY MORNING
    21. 23. In English: Our role is like, mm… this big! Zonal & Regional Governments
    22. 24. FINAL REPORT TUESDAY AFTERNOON <ul><li>Indicator timeline – What to measure when? </li></ul><ul><li>Gender mainstreaming – what does “equitable decision making power” mean in practice? </li></ul><ul><li>Co-investment and tri-partite agreement – Draft a charter </li></ul><ul><li>Sustainable agriculture and water technology – What action and collaboration is needed? </li></ul><ul><li>Complementary topics (affecting or are affected by the program, but not at the core of the strategy) – Who can do this? </li></ul>
    23. 25. Indicators Timeline
    24. 26. Sustainable Agriculture & Water Technology
    25. 27. FEEDBACK FROM COMMUNITY REPRENSENTATIVES <ul><li>“ People have come from far to organize this workshop. People have come from far to participate and contribute to this event. I have learned a great deal. We thank the facilitators for giving us the opportunity to participate, and we hope this will happen more and more in the future. It was fascinating to discuss and learn together with so many smart people in the room. It was an honor to sit side by side of all these people who have studied and are experts. We have brought our knowledge and experiences to the discussions. We have acquired new insights and gained a more complete understanding of the challenges we face around water, the possible solutions and who is part of these solutions. All of us have spoken great words and made great promises. If a year from now we come together again, and find out that none of these great words and promises were implemented and nothing has changed, than we have wasted all these people’s time! So we all have the responsibility to make this program work. The work is not finished!” </li></ul><ul><li>“ I appreciate the strong focus on gender equality and women’s needs and positions. I was sent by my village to speak out for the women who still don’t have the same opportunities as men. We want to change that. The approach this program is taking is very promising. But be aware that women still are not sufficiently involved in the planning and management of irrigation and water systems, and are often left on the sideline. Although they show good intentions, development and extension workers do often fail taking into account women’s perspectives on all the things they do. They forget that most of the times when the men are gone to work in the cities, the women are managing the farms! Women are perfectly capable of doing all this. However technical training and management support is mostly organized only for men. We hope that through the kind of discussions that we had in the past 2 days, these practices will change.” </li></ul>
    26. 28. GETTING TO MAYBE… (Page 1) <ul><li>“ Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. </li></ul><ul><li>It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, who am I to be brilliant gorgeous talented fabulous? Actually who are you not to be? Our playing small does not serve the world. (…) </li></ul><ul><li>We are all meant to shine, as children do… It is not just in some of us; it is in everyone . (…) As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.” </li></ul>
    27. 29. The End
    28. 30. DISCUSSION <ul><li>Why is it important to engage stakeholders in the discussion around impact? </li></ul><ul><li>What are the risks and how can we mitigate them? </li></ul><ul><li>How does this contribute to robustness of our impact measurement systems? </li></ul>

    ×