DESIGNING REDD+ PROJECTSLessons from the Past

John PielemeierIndependent Consultant

Types of Programs to Learn From

• Integrated Rural Development (late 60s-70s)• Integrated Conservation and Development

(mid-1980s – today)• Landscape projects (mid-1990s-today)

Variations on the theme –Congo Basin, Madagascar, Senegal, Cross-sectoral Approaches

• Payment for (non-environmental) Services

Integrated Rural Development

What is it: - “Extending development to low-income

subsistence populations”- Province or District-wide. Ag focus, but a wide

range of productive and social services- $50-100M over 5-10 years- Often managed via Project Management Units

Lessons Learned: “The Design of Rural Development” Uma Lele, WB. 1975

• IRDs tried to accomplish too much too fast• Were too complex for recipients• Were too complex for donors• Suffered from inadequate knowledge of socio-

political and administrative environment

IRD Recommendations (1)

• Complex projects need careful phasing• Consider a planning year• Start with indigenous capacity building,

careful data collection, identification and resolution of policy constraints.

• Begin with “only the simplest interventions to remove the most critical constraints”

IRD Recommendations (2)

• Train field and administrative staff• Develop indigenous human, institutional and

financial capability• Strengthen regional administration • Establish admin. systems that incorporate

clear definitions of objectives and target ways of implementing and evaluating these targets

Integrated Conservation and Development: What is it?

• Created to “move beyond fines and fences” & work with people inside and around the PAs (buffer zones)

• 50+ by 1995; estimated 300 ICDPs today• “BD conservation projects with rural development

components”.• Activities: Social Development (educ., health, roads,

water), Alternative Livelihoods, participatory planning, multiple use zones, benefit sharing.

ICDP Lessons Learned: Brandon and Wells; and Worah

• Tenuous linkage between development and conservation

• Difficult to measure conservation impact• ICDPs too limited in size to resolve many

“external” threats; PAs too small to effect national/sub-national conservation needs

• Few visible achievements (NGO inexperience)

ICDP Lessons Learned- Madagascar SAVEM evaluation (1997)

• Conservation NGOs unable to respond effectively to multiple community priorities (bee-keeping, school construction, water systems, improved seeds, etc).

• Limited NGO management capacity• Limited Community management capacity• Hard to avoid elite capture/internal conflict

ICDP Recommendations

• Longer project cycle needed to change behavior• Prioritize on implementing a few activities,

ideally with local participation and leadership• Start small, learn and scale-up gradually as

capacity improves• Approach conservation and development within

the broader context of regional planning• Address wider policy/legal/market constraints

Landscapes – What is it?

• A geographic unit composed of one or more (micro) basins and/or land mosaics that are interconnected and interdependent ecologically, sociologically and / or administratively, thus providing connectivity for species, communities and ecological processes

• The landscape approach is all about ensuring that land is optimally used for various purposes—from protected areas to agriculture, including restoration

Landscapes – Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE) Lessons Learned

(1)• Need sufficient resources and time• Deal with root causes as well as symptoms

simultaneously• Use both macrozone and microzone land use planning• Establish adequate overarching legal and policy

framework• Figure out stakeholder relationships• Establish the incentive system as close to the

deforestation problem as possible (address slash and burn and fuel harvesting behaviors)

CARPE – Lessons Learned (2)

• Establish systems to share information for decision making See http://carpe.umd.edu/ for CARPE mapper. CARPE Data Explorer and CARPE Information Management

• See Lessons Learned from CARPE for a treasure trove of case studies at http://www.iucn.org/fr/propos/union/secretariat/bureaux/paco/programmes/paco_forest/carpe_paco/lessons_learned_from_the_carpe/

Senegal: Wula Naffa – Lessons Learned

• Nature-Wealth-Power approach. Early identification of markets for local products helped communities see the nexus between enhanced conservation and more income

• Best if local governments (rural councils) decide the content of tools (Local Conventions and Forest Management Plans) that set the management structures and control the use of their “commons”.

• Community-based facilitators can successfully provide support to clusters of targeted villages and to new producer groups and producer networks.

• http://www.rmportal.net/library/content/frame/evaluation-of-usaid-agriculture-and-natural-resources-management-program-wula-nafaa

Madagascar National Environment Action Plan -What is it?

Nation-wide, phased multi-donor programLandscape Development Initiative in 3 eco-

regionsTransform traditional farming systems to improve

livelihoods and indirectly conserve remaining forest corridors.

Use integrated sustainable development approach to gain support and ownership of broader objectives

Madagascar Landscape Development Initiative: Lessons Learned

• Lead with sustainable development, not BD conservation. Direct economic benefits are key

• Get quick, visible results in order to build trust with communities

• Must work at multiple scales: spatial, temporal and institutional

• Ensure linkages and coordination between these scales

• Eco-regional conservation and development in Madagascar. Thomas Erdmann. Development in Practice Vol. 20 #3, May 2010.

Landscapes – Lessons Learned

• Local participation is a key ingredient, perhaps THE key ingredient, in long-term success.

• Sovereignty and jurisdictional issues must be addressed in planning.

• Local capacity is very weak and it’s strengthening requires early attention.

• Keep management systems as simple as possible (especially donor requirements)

• Implementing NGOs can work in more than one sector (e.g. conservation, basic health services, micro-credit) with “value added”;

Landscapes – Recommendations

• Work at multiple scales (regional, county/community/commune)

• Holistic vision and accompanying land-use plans essential• Can focus on specific zones within the landscape (e.g.

PAs, Concessions, Communally managed/Indigenous Lands)

• Employ high-tech (GIS, cellphone data gathering, etc) and very low-tech tools (basic community mobilization techniques such as Appreciative Inquiry, Champion Community)

Cross-sectoral Approaches within Landscapes

An integrated approach appeals strongly to clients, who do not compartmentalize their lives in single sectors; to local political leaders; and to implementing nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)

• Health- and environment-based NGOs can adapt to successfully implement two-sector (P-E or H-E) or three-sector (add micro-credit) community initiatives.

• In programmatic terms, PE projects are typically both cost-efficient and cost-effective

Pielemeier, John. August 2005a, “Review of Population-Health-Environment Programs Supported by the Packard Foundation and USAID.” www.prb.org/.../LessonsFromtheFirstGenerationofIntegratedPopulationHealth

Payment for (non-environmental) Services or Conditional Cash Transfer

• Initially in Brazil (Bolsa Escola and Bolsa Familia) and Mexico (Promesas and Oportunidades); now more than 12 countries

• These programs provide money to poor families, conditional on certain behavior, usually investments in human capital-such as sending children to school or bringing them to health centers on a regular basis

Payment for (non-environmental) Services

• WB and IDB. Rawlings, L. and G. Rubio (2005). "Evaluating the Impact of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs: Lessons from Latin America" The World Bank Research Observer 2005 20(1):29-55

• “There is clear evidence of success from the first generation of programs…in increasing

enrollment rates, improving preventive health care, and raising household consumption. Many questions remain unanswered, however…..

Payment for (non-environmental) Services: Lessons

The most important questions of program design are:

• defining the target population• selecting the appropriate conditions and size

of the transfer• setting entry and exit rules• deciding on complementary interventions

Recurring Themes (1)

• Adequate project timeframe and funding• Work at multiple scales: spatial, institutional,

temporal• Decide degree of coordination needed

between scales, etc.• Sequencing• Policy and legal framework

Recurring Themes (2)

• Capacity at community, regional and national levels

• Capacity and flexibility of funding agencies and NGOs

• Leadership and local “champions”• How to gain “trust” and provide incentives• Use of cross-sectoral approaches

Sources• 1.Integrated Rural Development (late 60s-70s)• Uma Lele, The Design of Rural Development: Lessons from Africa, 1975 World

Bank/Johns Hopkins Press

• 2-Integrated Conservation and Development (late 1980s-today) • C.B. Barrett and P. Arcese (1995). “Are ICDPs Sustainable?” World Development 23

(7). • L.K. McCoy and H. Razafindrainibe (1997) “Madagascar ICDP projects – Lessons

learned”. SAVEM project, USAID/Madagascar. • B. Blom, T. Sunderland and D. Muntiyars. “Lessons learned from ICDPs for REDD

implementation”. Environmental Science and Policy #13 (2010). • S. Worah, International History of ICDPS; UNDP 2000 Lessons Learned Workshop,

Hanoi, June 12-13, 2000.• R. Hughes and F. Flintan. “Integrating Development and Conservation Experience: A

review and bibliography of the ICDP literature”. 2001. Biodiversity and Livelihoods. Issue #3, 2001.

Sources• 3. -Landscapes and Corridors (1995-today)

• a. Congo Basin• Landscape-Scale Conservation in the Congo Basin: Lessons Learned from the Central Africa Regional Program for the

Environment (CARPE). http://www.iucn.org/fr/propos/union/secretariat/bureaux/paco/programmes/paco_forest/carpe_paco/lessons_learned_from_the_carpe/

• See http://carpe.umd.edu/ for CARPE mapper. CARPE Data Explorer and CARPE Information Management • J. Pielemeier, et al. Mid-term Assessment Report of CARPE.

carpe.umd.edu/resources/Documents/Weidemann_CARPE.../view

• b. Senegal• J. Pielemeier et al. Evaluation of USAID/Agriculture and Natural Resources Management Program "Wula Nafaa" (“Benefits

from the Forest”). http://www.rmportal.net/library/content/frame/evaluation-of-usaid-agriculture-and-natural-resources-management-program-wula-nafaa

• c. Madagascar• T. K. Erdmann. “Eco-regional conservation and development in Madagascar: a review of USAID-funded efforts in two

priority landscapes. Development in Practice, Vol 20 #3, May 2010• • d. Integrated Programs. • J. Pielemeier. Lessons from the First Generation of Integrated Population/Health/Environment programs. 2005.

www.prb.org/.../LessonsFromtheFirstGenerationofIntegratedPopulationHealth...

Sources

• 4.Payment for (non-environmental) Services• Rawlings, L. and G. Rubio (2005).

"Evaluating the Impact of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs: Lessons from Latin America" The World Bank Research Observer 2005 20(1):29-55

Thank you

Questions and Reactions Please