Research to Policy: Final Research Workshop Successes and limitations of governance of BMCT projects 1997-2012

1. Successes and limitations ofgovernance of BMCT projects
1997-2012
Dr. Michelle Wielandand Dr. Robert Bitariho
CTPA Workshop 2013

2. Why is ICDnot working more effectively?
Governance Hypotheses
Individuals are less likely to undertake unauthorised resource use if they perceive that they:
•are involved effectively with ICD
•receive an equitable share of benefits
•receive fair compensation for the costs that they incur from the national park

3. This Talk
•Introduction of the Trust study
•Findings on Governance
–Project level--ICD livelihood and common-goods projects
–Macro-Scale—Trust engagement with communities
•Recommendations to stakeholders

4. Governance
What is good governance?
•Governance refers to the process of decision-makingand the process by which decisions are implemented(or not implemented).
•Good governance refers to the inclusion of stakeholders (particularly local people) in project design and implementation resulting in the ownership and sustainability of projects.
•Including governance in project assessments provides a foundation for future M&E and a better understanding of why projects may fail or succeed to meet local and project objectives.

5. Study Introduction
•Goal
–To carry out an impact assessment of BMCT interventions since 1997 to 2012 and develop a tool for BMCT to assess the efficacy of their approaches
•Scope
–Assessment of Trust projects in Research, Park Management, Batwa, Community livelihood Improvement (common goods, livelihoods, Conservation and Awareness activities)
–Tool development

6. Methods
•18 Parishes
•310 Surveys
–11 Park/Research
–25 Government
–196 Community
–74 Batwa
–4 LCSC

7. Findings

8. Why is ICDnot working more effectively?
Governance Hypotheses
Individuals are less likely to undertake unauthorised resource use if they perceive that they:
•are involved effectively with ICD
•receive an equitable share of benefits
•receive fair compensation for the costs that they incur from the national park

9. Involvement--Project scale
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Baynara Scheme
All water projects
Sense of involvement by recipients of water schemes
Yes
No

10. Livelihood project involvement
2
2
8
161
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Don't know
Not really
Somewhat
Very
Community attitudes on the importance of involvement
Yes
Don't Know
Involvement in project design & implementation (n=72)
Yes
No
Don't Know
Did participant feel able to speak their mind? (n=70)

11. Involvement--Macro-scale
Don't Know
No
Yes
Do the LCSCs serve as a tool for representation and ownership in Trust activities?
No
Yes
Awareness of the LCSC system by informants
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Batwa awareness of Trust programs
Not aware
Are aware

12. Resolution:
•Use local advice and review the LCSC system
0
2
4
6
8
10
Facilitation
Grassrootslcsc
M/E
Moremeetings
Oversightfrom Trust
Sensitization
Term limits
Training forlcsc
How to strengthen LCSC according to Local Government
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
LCSC workwith villages
Create LCSCreview board
Publicize LCSC
Facilitation
ConservationAwareness
Restart LCSCsystem
Other
How to strengthen the LCSC system

13. Equity
•Trust livelihood participants perception of equity in their project
•Overall Equity:
–Did the poorest of the community benefit?
Did everyone get an equal share?
No
14
Yes
53

14. Fair Compensation
•Did the Trust target those who bear the brunt of conservation impacts?
–The Trust has worked a lot with the Batwa, purchasing land, educational support, housing, and livelihoods
–Many of the projects the Trust undertakes are not in front-line communities

15. Key Impacts and Findings
•Project Governance—Local ownership and participation in BMCT projects is good
–Most beneficiaries feel strongly that they are involved and have equitable benefits from projects
–Livelihood projects are incredibly popular, but without proper targeting aren’t impacting conservation to their potential
–People don’t remember linkages of conservation to common goods projects after awhile, so there must be constant presence
•Macro-Scale Governance—LCSC system of representation needs work
–Batwa representation not good enough
–Representation must reach village level for true representation of local needs and desires
•Good governance is one key component necessary for successful projects

16. Acknowledgements

17. LCSC system
District representative
SubcountyLCSC
Parish interim representative
Villagers
LC2
LC3
LC2
LC2
LC2
LC1
LC1
LC1
LC1
LC1
LC1