1. implement sustainable farming practices

2. monitor on-farm carbon; 3. manage the carbon

payment; and4. contribute to farmer and

community development

Stakeholders Assessed Community members (women’s group) Community members (mixed group) CBI (mixed group) Local government Project staff (mixed group)

Tools Used Self-reporting guides, End-of-project questionnaire and Group discussion guide

BUILDING INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY OF AGRICULTURAL CARBON PROJECTSParticipatory Action Research with Vi Agroforestry in Kenya and ECOTRUST in Uganda

HOW TO STRENGTHEN LOCAL INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY?

Hypothesis1. Build capacities of community-based intermediaries (CBIs)2. Build local partnerships with government and NGOs3. Support a more active role played by women

PAR was used to provide a platform for project managers to share experiences, develop a clearer understanding of the challenges they face, jointly generate research questions, collaboratively develop solutions, and track the impact of these efforts.

Each project implemented customized actions guided by 3 themes:

References Deshmukh, Ian, Karin Sosis, and Guy Pinjuv. 2014. Eastern Africa Forest Carbon Projects Study. Washington, D.C.: USAID Forest Carbon, Markets and Communities

(FCMC) Program.

Goldstein, Allie, and Gloria Gonzalez. 2014. Turning over a New Leaf: State of the Forest Carbon Markets 2014. Washington, D.C.: Forest Trends’ Ecosystem Marketplace.

Shames, Seth, L.E. Buck, and S.J. Scherr. 2011. “Reducing Costs and Improving Benefits in Smallholder Agriculture Carbon Projects: Implications for Going to Scale.” In Agriculture and Climate Change Mitigation, edited by E Wollenberg, A Nihart, M Tapio-Bistrom, and M Grieg-Gran. London, UK: Earthscan.

Shames, Seth, Ecoagriculture Partners, Quinn Bernier, and Moses Masiga. 2013. Development of a Participatory Action Research Approach for Four Agriculutural Car-bon Projects in East Africa. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.

Carbon projects with smallholder farmers in developing countries have begun to emerge to take advantage of carbon-finance to support the broader benefits of climate-smart agriculture (Goldstein and Gonzalez 2014; Deshmukh, Sosis, and Pinjuv 2014).

But problems remain with high costs of project development, risk management, and securing benefits for smallholder farmers (Shames, Buck, and Scherr 2011).

Strengthening local institutional capacity in 4 KEY AREAS could increase long-term development benefits, reduce project costs, and help scale up initiatives (Shames, et al 2013).

PARTICIPATORY ACTION RESEARCH

MBALE, UGANDA

BUNGOMA, KENYAVi Agroforestry and the Western Kenya Agriculture Carbon Project

¾ Sustainable agricultural land management (SALM) practices using Verified Carbon Standard (VCS)

Environmental Conservation Trust (ECOTRUST) and Trees for Global Benefits (TFGB) program

¾ On-farm tree planting using the Plan Vivo system and standard

ACTIVITIES1. Building the capacities of CBIs to train and recruit farmers2. Engaging with local governments and other partners3. Supporting women’s participation

4 KEY AREAS

Seth Shamesa, Krista Heinera, Martha Kapukhab, Lilian Kigulic, Moses Masigad, Pauline Nantongo Kalundac, Annet Ssempalac,John Rechae, Amos Wekesab

CAPACITY BUILDING LOCAL ENGAGEMENT WOMEN’S PARTICIPATIONDeveloped training manuals and tools

Drafted local policy memos Focused outreach on benefits important to women

Organized and conducted trainings for community- based intermediaries

Trained government extension officers

Supported CBI’s to identify, recruit and train 1-2 women’s groups

¾ CBIs work well to recruit farmers and train on land-management tech-niques, but lack the capacity now to move into management roles for the technical ‘carbon’ elements of the project, such as monitoring and payment.

¾ Involvement of the local government is essential and their role could increase substantially, especially with carbon monitoring and payment.

¾ NGOs and private sector could play a larger role in providing training, farm inputs, and markets for products

¾ Use of CBIs and standardized curriculum were effective in training and engaging more farmers.

¾ Women’s participation was enhanced by emphasizing project benefits, including women in project design, and making training accessible.

¾ Carbon payments alone do not provide sufficient incentives for farmer participation, but can be helpful if effiicientally targeted.

¾ A shift from carbon project models to larger programs supported by lo-cal and national policy is needed to effectively bring benefit to scale.

DISCUSSION

Building the training and recruitment capacities of CBIs• Vi Agroforestry: 30 CBIs trained 4,178 farmers on SALM and recruited 1,833 new farmers• ECOTRUST: 26 CBIs followed up with 299 farmers (who were previously mobilized) and

helped 59 farmers to register in the program

Influencing government through training and advocacy• ECOTRUST and ViAgroforesty built the capacity of government extension officers

Enhancing women’s participation in the project• Vi Agroforestry: 2,686 women trained and 1058 women recruited to the project• ECOTRUST: 71 women trained and 10 women registered in the carbon project• For ECOTRUST, women’s participation is restricted due to land ownership constraints

Strengthening community groups• CBIs were able to connect community groups to external partners and strengthen their

organizations

Building partnerships • Farmers developed informal partnerships with NGOs and government agencies to pro-

vide farm inputs and seedlings

Strengthening the community-based carbon monitoring system• Training materials improved monitoring capacities of farmers and CBIs• It is unlikely that farmers and CBIs will take on additional technical roles in the near fu-

ture

Distributing the carbon payment• Vi Agroforestry: about 112 new groups adopted SALM practices and were paid an average

of USD 40 per group over a 2-year period • ECOTRUST: 70 farmers have received first and second payments of about USD 75-100;

150 are anticipating first payment of about USD 40-60

Increased capacity for project staff• Vi Agroforestry and ECOTRUST staff improved their own skills in giving trainings and

demonstrations, developing training materials, interacting with government officials, and influencing policy

OUTCOMES

aEcoAgriculture Partners, bVi Agroforestry, cEnvironmental Conservation Trust of Uganda, dENR Associates, eERMCSD

This work was undertaken as part of the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agricul-ture and Food Security (CCAFS), which is a strategic partnership of CGIAR and Future Earth. This research was carried out with funding by the European Union (EU) and with technical sup-port from the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).

The views expressed in the document cannot be taken to reflect the official opinions of CGIAR, Fu-ture Earth, or donors.