[Escribir texto] EVALUATION OF THE IMPROVED MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION OF CRITICAL WATERSHEDS PROJECT FINAL EVALUATION August 2011 This report was prepared for the United States Agency for International Development USAID/El Salvador by ADEPRO Especialistas en Desarrollo Local EVALUATION OF THE IMPROVED MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION OF CRITICAL WATERSHEDS PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT This report was prepared for the United States Agency for International Development USAID/El Salvador by Especialistas en Desarrollo Local MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION OF CRITICAL WATERSHEDS PROJECT This report was prepared for the United States Agency for International Development USAID/El Salvador by Prepared for the United States Agency for International Development, USAID Contract Number AID-519-O-11- 0000054. Submitted to: Sophie Taintor, Office of Economic Growth Carlos Roberto Hasbún, Regional Biodiversity Specialist United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Urb. Santa Elena, Antiguo Cuscatlán La Libertad, El Salvador Phone (503) 2501-2456 Email: staintor@usaid.gov; chasbun@usaid.gov Submitted by: Joke Vuurmans, Evaluation Team Leader Alicia Díaz Herrera, Biologist José Ricardo Calles Hernández, Agronomist ADEPRO Contract: Condominio Las Alquerías, Local No. 203 79 Avenida y 3ª Calle Poniente, Colonia Escalón, San Salvador Tel (503) 2211-5823 Email: consultores@adepro.biz Cover Photo: Beach in the Protected Natural Area of Los Cóbanos. Photographer: Joke Vuurmans Photos in the document: IMCCW-Project, Alicia Diaz Herrera y Joke Vuurmans EVALUATION OF THE IMPROVED MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION OF CRITICAL WATERSHEDS PROJECT FINAL EVALUATION REPORT (Evaluation Ex-Post) FINAL EVALUATION REPORT August 2011 The opinions expressed in this document are responsibility of ADEPRO, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the United States Agency for International Development or those of the United States Government. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The present document constitutes the Ex-post Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds Project (IMCCW)”, which was implemented between November 2006 and March 2011 as part of a bilateral initiative between the Government of El Salvador and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID / El Salvador), and whose execution was led by Development Alternatives Inc. (DAI) in partnership with six co-executing organizations: three organizations based in El Salvador (SalvaNATURA, FUNZEL and CLUSA - El Salvador) and three organizations from the United States of America (Academy for Educational Development, EplerWood and Social Impact). The general objective of the IMCCW Project was to contribute to the effective management of areas with high biodiversity, promoting economic growth in a responsible manner in order to reach a target population of 57,185 families in six sub-watersheds of the Departments of Ahuachapán and Sonsonate, through its two main components, namely, biodiversity conservation and increased income generation derived from environmentally sustainable production systems and services. In this context, the evaluation has analyzed the effectiveness of the IMCCW Project, as well as the identification of lessons learned which might be taken into account for future projects, thus supporting USAID in defining future strategies for the biodiversity sector. To this end, the evaluation methodology took a holistic approach, generating quantitative and qualitative information, identifying and interviewing key stakeholders, and by means of data collection including reviewing existing documentation, interviews, written questionnaires, workshops and field visits. The evaluation results aim to show the strengths and weaknesses inherent in the IMCCW Project’s design and implementation, in terms of its relevance and consistency with national and international policies, insofar as they relate to the need to pay special attention to natural resources’ and biodiversity protection, recuperation and conservation. An important strength of the IMCCW Project has been its implementation strategy based on the premise that increased income generated by cost-effective and environmentally sustainable farming practices are an incentive for biodiversity conservation. Additionally, the Project emphasized strengthening human capital through environmental education and technical assistance programs. With regard to the project design, the evaluation team observed weaknesses in relation to the participation mechanisms of the various partners and key stakeholders (public, private, NGOs, community and environmental funds) which were not clearly defined, and the absence of a strategy for transference and sustainability on the basis of the competences of each of the stakeholders involved. The Project instigated a relatively autonomous operation, with little coordination with its main partners (MARN and MAG) or their local NGO partners (members of the Project Implementation Team), which would eventually affect the continuity of certain actions once the Project had finished. In addition to evaluating Project design and implementation, the evaluation team also examined its impact and outcomes, noting that capacity-building has been one of the fundamental aspects of the IMCCW Project, allowing for the consolidation of skills, technical capabilities, knowledge and know-how, at both national and local levels. In similar terms, the evaluation team analyzed the results of three KAP (knowledge, attitudes and practices) exercises concerning behavioral and attitude changes led by the IMCCW Project, and concluded that important steps were made towards increasing awareness of biodiversity issues, threats to natural resources and the need for conservation measures as a means to reducing environmental degradation. However, the methodology implemented in these KAP exercises does not adequately measure the impact of these actions, since none of the indicators used measured changes in attitudes or whether the target population really put into practice the knowledge fostered by the Project. With regard to MARN’s institutional strengthening, the Project’s support has _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" ii been crucial in achieving the transfer of 57 protected areas, providing training to Montecristo National Park’s staff thus enabling them to carry out their functions more efficiently, and in the development of the Park as a protected natural areas system (SANP) pilot project. By means of a San Salvador city resident survey, the Evaluation Team has attempted to analyze, on the one hand, the sea turtle’s contribution, in terms of it being a flagship species, to positive changes in attitudes towards the environment; and on the other hand, the effectiveness of the IMCCW Project’s 2010 advertising campaign aimed at reducing turtle egg consumption. The results of the survey reflect that 82% of the respondents had heard about the awareness campaign, and out of that percentage, 31% stopped eating turtle eggs after the campaign. Another revealing result is that 31% of turtle egg consumers began to carry out environmental practices after the campaign, indicating that the effectiveness of the campaign was high. The Evaluation Team identified a number of lessons learned, analyzing the considerations made by the Project’s stakeholders and partners in answer to the question: "what would you repeat and what would you do differently?" should you formulate, execute and/or participate in another project similar to the IMCCW Project. Among the lessons learned surged the confirmation that the donor must ensure that, from the design stage, projects must include a transfer strategy aimed at guaranteeing sustainability. Meanwhile, emphasizing the strengthening of local capacities is also crucial to the continuity of the actions. The project design should also take into account the balance between quantitative goals and qualitative processes in order to attain greater effectiveness and better achieve the proposed objectives. Another lesson learned is the confirmation that, in order to ensure the sustainable management of biodiversity conservation projects, economically viable alternatives that respond to the target population’s immediate needs and culture should be taken into account. Within this context, the systematic training of both public as well as the private sector human capital, within a framework of social and entrepreneurial responsibility, is among the most important investments in biodiversity conservation efforts. Also, the success of an intervention will largely depend on the involvement of project partners and their participation in the decision-making processes during the whole project cycle and the clear definition and formalization of mutual responsibilities (by cooperative agreements, letters of understanding, service contracts, and others). Cross-sector coordinated efforts are crucial to achieving the best results and the highest impacts. The Evaluation Team recommends that the legalization of the remaining areas within Protected National Areas System, together with the elaboration of their management plans and their integration with local communal development processes, should be among the most important actions to be continued. It is also important to continue with marine turtle conservation efforts by means of an adequate strategy and an integral action plan. In order to attain a consolidated group of coffee farmers and fruit/vegetable growers, oriented to environmental sustainability and competitiveness, major credit facilities and technical innovation programs, strengthened and supported by national and local government, should be encouraged. Finally, and based on an assessment of the current situation in the area of biodiversity, the study identified three areas of action/global strategies that should be taken into account as recommendations for future USAID programs in the biodiversity sector: 1) the coordination of conservation activities in the identification, design, financing, implementation and evaluation stages; (2) permanent strengthening of MARN’s capacities- both institutional and technical, as well as in terms of its ability to integrate and coordinate policies and actions with other ministries in terms of identifying, assessing, preventing and mitigating or compensating the potential negative effects on biodiversity and forestry; and (3) financing of priority conservation actions and ensuring that USAID programs are well designed and implemented effectively. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" iii PROJECT IDENTIFICATION DATA SHEET TITLE OF THE PROJECT: Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds (IMCCW) USAID’s Strategic Objective: Economic Freedom to contribute to a more open, diversified, and expanded Salvadoran economy. General Objective of the Project: To support the effective management of selected areas of high biodiversity importance while promoting responsible economic growth in El Salvador. Components and subcomponents of the Project: Component 1: Conservation of Biodiversity in Critical Watersheds has the objective of conserving biodiversity in the two major watersheds, Barra de Santiago/El Imposible and Río Grande de Sonsonate. Subcomponents cover: a) studies and analysis, b) support to the legalization process for protected areas, c) expansion of areas under improved biodiversity management, and d) increasing residents’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices of biodiversity and conservation. In late March 2009, at the end of the first phase of the project, were added: e) sustainable management of the Montecristo National Park and f) species based conservation on lower watersheds. Component 2 Increased Income from Environmentally Sustainable Activities and Services has the objective of developing income generating opportunities that will reinforce long term conservation within the activity areas. The project is charged to a) develop profitable and environmentally sustainable farming practices, b) promote new and emerging non-agricultural income sources, and c) develop new incentives for conservation through “payment for environmental services” (PES) mechanisms. Total Program Investment: US$12,366,816 Time Period1 : 1. First Phase of the Project: November 15, 2006 – September 30, 2009 2. Second Phase of the Project: October 1, 2009 – March 31, 2011 Geographic Areas: 1. First Phase of the Project: Two major watersheds of Barra de Santiago/El Imposible and Río Grande de Sonsonate in the southwestern part of El Salvador 2. Second Phase of the Project: National Park of Montecristo and entire coast of El Salvador Contractors: Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI) Partners: - The Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (MARN) - The Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAG) - The National Center of Registries of El Salvador (CNR) - The Fund for the Initiative for the Americas (FIAES) - The Salvadoran Ecological Foundation (SalvaNATURA) - The Cooperative League USA (CLUSA) - The Zoological Foundation of El Salvador (FUNZEL) - Academy for Educational Development (AED) - EplerWood International - Social Impact (SI) Project Directors: 1. Steve Romanoff (10/2006 – 2/2010) 2. Marvin Dreyer (3/2010 – 8/2010) 3. Christopher Kernan (9/2010 – 3/2011) USAID Officials: 1. First Phase: Brad Carr / Mary Rodríguez 2. Second Phase: Carlos Roberto Hasbún 1 In fact three different projects were included in a single implementation mechanism (IMCCW-Project under Service Contract with DAI) in order to facilitate logistics and accelerate implementation: (i) watersheds management, (ii) Montecristo National Park and (iii) sea turtles. However, being the evaluation object the entire IMCCW-Project, the Evaluation Mission decided to distinguish two project phases: 1) the first phase concerning the development of the watershed management activities, and 2) the second phase when the Montecristo National Park and Marine Turtle subcomponents started, considering them integral part of the IMCCW-project. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary i Project Identification Data Sheet iii Table of Contents iv List of Acronyms vi 1 Background 1 2 Evaluation Purpose 3 3 Methods and Procedures 3 4 Presentation of findings of project evaluation 6 4.1 Component 1: Conservation of biodiversity in critical watersheds 6 4.1.1 Studies and Analysis 6 4.1.2 Support to the legalization process of protected areas 7 4.1.3 Expansion of areas under improved biodiversity management 8 4.1.4 Increasing residents’ knowledge, attitudes and practices of biodiversity and conservation 8 4.1.5 Sustainable management of the Montecristo National Park 9 4.1.6 Species based conservation on lower watersheds (sea turtle) 11 4.2 Component 2: Increased income from environmental sustainable activities and services 13 4.2.1 Development of profitable and environmentally sustainable farming practices 13 4.2.2 Promotion of new and emerging non-agricultural income sources 16 4.2.3 Development of new incentives for conservation through “payment for environmental services” mechanisms (PES) 18 5 Presentation of Conclusions 19 5.1 Design and Implementation 19 5.1.1 Design 19 5.1.2 Strengths and weaknesses of the activity 21 5.1.3 Participation of the stakeholders 23 5.1.4 Implementation mechanisms 26 5.2 Impacts and Results 27 5.2.1 Continuity and sustainability 27 5.2.2 Benefits and capacity building 30 5.2.3 Behavior and attitude change 31 5.2.4 Supporting and capacity building of MARN 35 5.2.5 Policy changes 35 5.2.6 Consequences of chosen strategy 36 5.2.7 Effectiveness of the use of sea turtles as flagship species in El Salvador 36 5.2.8 Gender mainstreaming 39 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" v 6 Lessons Learned 40 6.1 The importance of an adequate project design and monitoring system 40 6.2 The importance of the relationship between natural resources conservation and generation of economic benefits 41 6.3 The importance of participation and sustainability of processes 41 6.4 The importance of capacity building 42 6.5 The importance of communication and dissemination of information 42 6.6 The importance of coordination and partnerships 43 7 Recommendations for future programming and strategies 43 7.1 Actions to be continued 43 7.2 Strategics and politics 45 APPENDICES ANNEX 1 Terms of Reference of the Evaluation Mission ANNEX 2 Time Table of Activities ANNEX 3 Chronology of the Evaluation Mission ANNEX 4 List of Contacts ANNEX 5 General interview guide ANNEX 6 Interview guide for the Vice-Minister MARN ANNEX 7 Questionnaire for the ex-directors of the Project and the International Consultancy Companies of the Project Implementation Team ANNEX 8 Questionnaire for the national NGOs of the Project Implementation Team ANNEX 9 Methodology of the Workshops “Systematization of Project Experiences” ANNEX 10 Participation of key stakeholders ANNEX 11 “Snowball” sampling method ANNEX 12 Methodology of the “Retroalimentación” workshop ANNEX 13 Database of the IMCCW-Project ANNEX 14 Bibliography _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" vi LIST OF ACRONYMS ADESCO Local Community Development Association Asociación de Desarrollo Comunal AED Academy for Educational Development Academia para el Desarrollo Educacional AMSS Metropolitan Area of San Salvador Área Metropolitano de San Salvador ANDA National Aqueduct and Sewage Administration Administración Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados ATAISI Cooperative of Agricultural Production Asociación Cooperativa de Producción Agropecuaria CAFTA-DR Central America-Dominican Republic-United States Free Trade Agreement Tratado de Libre Comercio entre América Central, República Dominicana y los Estados Unidos CENDEPESCA Fishing and Agricultural Development Center Centro de Desarrollo de la Pesca y la Acuicultura CENTA National Centre for Agricultural and Forestry Technology Centro Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria y Forestal CLUSA/ El Salvador Cooperative League of the United States of America, El Salvador Liga de Cooperativa de Los Estados Unidos de América, El Salvador CNR National Center of Registries of El Salvador Centro Nacional de Registros de El Salvador DAI Development Alternatives Inc. Alternativas de Desarrollo Inc. EU/ UE European Union Unión Europea FGR General Attorney Office Fiscalía General de la República FIAES Initiative for the Americas Fund/ El Salvador Fondo de la Iniciativa para las Américas FONAES Environmental Fund of El Salvador Fondo Ambiental de El Salvador FUNZEL The Zoological Foundation of El Salvador Fundación Zoológica de El Salvador GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GOES Government of El Salvador Gobierno de El Salvador IMCCW Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds (Bilateral Program) Mejor Manejo y Conservación de Cuencas Hidrográficas Críticas (Programa Bilateral) ISTA Salvadoran Land Reform Institute Instituto Salvadoreño de Transformación Agraria KAP /CAP Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Conocimiento, Actitudes, y Prácticas MAG Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería MARN Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales MITUR Ministry of Tourism Ministerio de Turismo MNP /PNM Montecristo National Park Parque Nacional Montecristo NGO /ONG Non Governmental Organization Organización No Gubernamental NNRR/ RRNN Natural Resources Recursos Naturales OAS/ OEA Organization of American States Organization de los Estados Americanos ODM Millennium Development Objectives Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio PES /PSA Payment for Environmental Services Pago por Servicios Ambientales PNA /ANP Protected Natural Areas Áreas Naturales Protegidas PNC National Civil Police Policía Nacional Civil SAIDC/ AECI Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional SalvaNATURA Ecological Foundation of El Salvador Fundación Ecológica de El Salvador SANP Natural Protected Areas System Sistema de Áreas Naturales Protegidas SINAMA National Environment Management System Sistema Nacional de Gestión del Medio Ambiente SNET National Institute of Territorial Studies Sistema Nacional de Estudios Territoriales UNDP/ PNUD United Nations Development Programme Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo USAID United States Agency for International Development Agencia de los Estados Unidos para el Desarrollo Internacional USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Servicio de Pesca y Fauna Silvestre de los Estados Unidos ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 1 1 BACKGROUND The “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watersheds Project (IMCCW)" is a bilateral project of USAID/El Salvador, which is supporting the second USAID Strategic Objective (SO2: “Economic Freedom: Open Diversified and Expanding Economies)2 . A bilateral agreement between the governments of the United States of America and El Salvador was formalized on September 16, 2004, by signing the Strategic Objective Grant Agreement, which refers to the Activity No. 519-0462: “Economic Growth for the 21th Century” (CRECER 21). One of the four expected results of this activity is “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watersheds”, with emphasis on the improved management of critical watersheds, and enhanced alignment and application of environmental laws and regulations3 . The intention of the IMCCW-Project was to prove that, by means of improved management and conservation of watersheds, it would be possible to achieve better economic conditions. The general objective of the IMCCW Project is formulated as follows: “To support the effective management of selected areas of high biodiversity importance while promoting responsible economic growth in El Salvador”. Initially, the total implementation period of the Project was scheduled for about three years (November 15, 2006 – September 30, 2009). However, in March 2009, USAID and GOES agreed upon an extension of an additional period of eighteen months (March 31, 2011) including two new subcomponents to the first Component of the Project: e) Sustainable management of the Montecristo National Park, and f) Species based conservation on lower watersheds (Sea Turtle Conservation Project). Originally, the project budget was accorded to be US$7,895,745. Nonetheless, the budget increased to a total amount of US$ 12,366,8164 , which was formalized by various addenda to the contract, and to which US$3 million must be added representing the partner´s contribution of MARN, MAG, CNR and ISTA. In addition to this budget, the Project succeeded to leverage additional funds of the Initiative for the Americas Fund/El Salvador (FIAES), which have been mainly used in buffer zones of the protected areas and for the development of eight sea turtle projects. The Project implementation team was led by Development Alternatives Inc (DAI), being the contractor and working in association with six partners: three of them based in El Salvador (SalvaNATURA, FUNZEL, and CLUSA-El Salvador) and three American consultancy companies (Academy for Educational Development, EplerWood and Social Impact). Although USAID anticipated the selection of six targeted sub-watersheds within the two major watersheds (Watershed C: Cara Sucia-San Pedro Belen and Watershed D: Rio Grande de Sonsonate-Banderas), early analysis indicated that the protected areas that are the object of the Project are disbursed throughout these two watersheds. Therefore, the Project area is comprised of these two major watersheds. 2 “El Salvador Country Plan FY 2003-2008”, 2004; and “Strategic Objective Grant Agreement of the Governments of the United States of America and the Republic of El Salvador - Strategic Objective No. 519-022, Activity No. 519-0462: Crecimiento Económico para el Siglo 21 (CRECER) ”, September16, 2004. 3 The other three Project Results are: 1) Legislation, Policies and Regulations that promote commerce and capital investment; 2) Market￾oriented Competitive Private –Sector Company; and 3) Better access to Markets and Financial Services. 4 Source: Addendum No. 7 to Contract No. EPP-I-01-04-00023-00. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 2 The Project target population is esteemed to be 57,185 families out of a total of 80,227 families living in the two main watersheds, and to which has been added 10% of the coastal population which has been attended by the sea turtle conservation campaign5 . In the second phase, the Project intervention area was extended towards the Montecristo National Park and the entire marine coastal zone of the country. The two main Project Components are: Component 1: Conservation of biodiversity in critical watersheds, with the objective of conserving biodiversity of the two major watersheds Barra de Santiago/El Imposible and Río Grande de Sonsonate. This Component covers six subcomponents: a) Studies and Analysis, with the objective to fix a baseline during the first year, in order to orient and prioritize project activities for the rest of the Project implementation period. b) Support to the legalization process of protected areas in coordination with MARN, CNR and ISTA. c) Expansion of areas under improved biodiversity management, through the design of strategies and interventions, in order to maintain genetic integrity of priority ecosystems. d) Increasing residents’ knowledge, attitudes and practices of biodiversity and conservation, applying innovative environmental educational mechanisms (Behavior Change Communication – BCC). e) Sustainable management of the Montecristo National Park, with the objectives to strengthen the financial-administrative system of the National Park, to increase the number of visitors, and to improve the relationship between the local communities and the Park administration. f) Species based conservation on lower watersheds, which has the objective to strengthen and consolidate an integrated program for endangered species of the marine-coastal zone, considering sea turtles as flagship species. Component 2: Increased Income from Environmentally Sustainable Activities and Services has the objective of developing income generating opportunities that will reinforce long term conservation within the activity areas. This Component consists of three subcomponents: a) Develop profitable and environmentally sustainable farming practices, focusing on coffee plantations (certification), and on fruits and vegetables growing (organic) in order to establish biological corridors as interconnections between the protected natural areas (El Imposible, Los Volcanes). b) Promote new and emerging non-agricultural income sources, with emphasis on development of the ecotourism sector. c) Develop new incentives for conservation through “payment for environmental services” (PES) mechanisms. 5 One of the few occasions the Project refers to its target population is in the Annex 2 of the “Quarterly and Annual Report (September 2009)”. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 3 2 EVALUATION PURPOSE The Evaluation Mission took place during a period of approximately 80 calendar days (ANNEX 1, 2 y 3) with the purpose to: 1) Analyze the effectiveness of IMCCW Project, 2) Identify lessons learned to be considered for future programming, and 3) Support in determining future strategies related to the biodiversity sector. Finally, it is expected that the evaluation will generate information to be used as input for the design and implementation of future USAID projects. 3 METHODS AND PROCEDURES First of all, it should be highlighted that the Evaluation Mission started more than one month after the official closure of the IMCCW Project6 ; so that, in fact, we are dealing with an evaluation ex-post rather than a final evaluation. Additionally, the activities of four of the six subcomponents of the first Component and all activities of the second Component were already completed one year and a half before the official completion of the Project. For this reason, the Evaluation Team did not have the opportunity to interview some of the key informants of the first phase, in this case principally referring to institutional authorities. For that reason, the results of the interviews include mainly the opinion of the present authorities. The Evaluation Mission has given special emphasis to answering the guiding questions as described in Chapter V of the Terms of Reference; including an analysis of the institutional strengthening of the partners of the Project implementation team, an analysis of the sustainability of the processes promoted by the IMCCW Project and the identification of the lessons learned by the experience of different stakeholders, in order to gather inputs to be used for the design of the future strategy for future USAID-projects related to the biodiversity sector. Special attention was given to gender mainstreaming. In order to facilitate a fluent communication between USAID and the Evaluation Mission, Sophie Taintor of USAID was appointed as liaison person maintaining permanent contact with the Evaluation Team. The three members of the evaluation team and the ADEPRO representative held weekly sessions giving follow-up to the achievements and planning future activities. The evaluation methodology is based on two important principles: i) Integral approach and ii) Quantitative and qualitative data production. The integral approach of the project evaluation is based on: the interrelationship between conservation/protection of biodiversity at one side, and increased revenues and improved economic conditions at the other. Due to the difference in orientation of the two Project Components (Component 1 oriented to conservation of biodiversity, and Component 2 oriented to income increase by production activities), there exists a risk that the interrelationship between both Project Components might be lost, or at least that their complementary aspects would not be emphasized. On the other hand, watershed itself is an integral concept: its management and land use planning should take into account the existing interrelationship between production and conservation factors. The more attention that is paid to the environmental aspects, the more sustainable the production systems will be and, therefore, the more durable will be their expected economic revenues. The other way around, income generating opportunities represent an incentive for continuing with environmental protection and conservation. 6 The official closure date of the Project was on March 31, 2011; while the Evaluation Mission started on May 9, 2011. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 4 The Evaluation Team shares the opinion that is essential to analyze qualitative data as well as quantitative data in order to appreciate and measure the Project achievements in all dimensions. It is not enough to state if there has been a little or total accomplishment of the quantitative Project goals, but is also vital to assess the quality of its results. We acknowledge that measuring qualitative aspects is more difficult, and that it depends mainly on subjective appreciations of the Project stakeholders. However, this qualitative information will represent an added value to the evaluation results. In order to obtain relevant data for evaluation purposes – partly to be rescued from Project documents and reports – key informants have been identified to be interviewed by the evaluation team (ANNEX 4). The following contacts have been considered the most significant for evaluation purposes: - USAID Officials - IMCCW Counterpart Officials: Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (MARN), Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAG), National Center of Registries of El Salvador (CNR), Salvadoran Land Reform Institute (ISTA) - Representatives of DAI, and former directors and project coordinators of the IMCCW Project - Representatives of the six members of the Project Implementing Team (SalvaNATURA, CLUSA-El Salvador, FUNZEL, AED, EmplerWood International and Social Impact) - Final beneficiaries of the IMCCW Project, such as: o Personnel of the Montecristo National Park o Representatives of the communities in the Project area o NGOs and Local Community Development Associations o Agricultural Cooperatives o Farmers o Representatives of Water Boards o “Viveristas” (turtle corrals) o Turtle egg collectors (tortugueros) o Salvadorian Tours (EcoExperiencia) - Others: o Representatives of the Initiative for the Americas Fund (FIAES) o Authors of the “Report on Biodiversity and Tropical Forest in El Salvador, 2010” The data collection instruments used are diverse and, amongst them, include the review of background documents, oral interviews, written questionnaires, workshops and field visits: • Review of the background documents of the USAID IMCCW Final Report hard disk (contained 19,618 files) and other documents provided by some key persons contacted by the evaluation team. • Semi-structured interviews (42 interviews; 23% women): the complete evaluation team attended some of the interviews, so as to make sure that the analysis should be done in an integrated way; other interviews were conducted together by the two evaluation experts (biologist and agronomist) and, when treating specific issues, the interview was conducted by only one evaluation expert or by the Evaluation Team Leader in order to deepen and discuss the relevant matter more. Interview guides were prepared for the semi-structured interviews, and in case of the MARN – representing the principal counterpart of the _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 5 IMCCW Project – one specific guide was designed to be used in the interview of the Vice-Minister (ANNEX 5 and 6). The evaluation team wrote a summary for each interview (included separately in the Technical Report). • Written questionnaires sent by Email (total 9): Two different versions were designed: 1) One questionnaire including questions related to the overall appraisal of the interviewee concerning the Project, its strategy, accomplishments, strengths and weaknesses (ANNEX 7), directed to:  The three IMCCW ex-Directors: Steve Romanoff (11/2006 to 2/2010), Marvin Dreyer (3/2010 to 8/2010) and Christopher Kernan (9/2010 to 3/2011). Out of the three Directors only the second Director is still present in the country.  The three international members of the Project Implementation Team which do not have residency in El Salvador: EplerWood, Social Impact and AED. 2) Other questionnaire including questions about capacity building during the Project implementation period (ANNEX 8), directed to:  The three local NGOs of the Project Implementation Team (CLUSA, SalvaNATURA y FUNZEL) in order to analyze changes in institutional capacity of each of the organizations. • Field visits (7): During the field visits, the evaluation team made observations and interviewed key informants. • Workshop Systematization of Experiences (4 workshops). The participants have been stakeholders in specific activities of the IMCCW Project and they are considered the main focal group benefited by the Project. The four different subjects treated were as follows: 1) Montecristo National Park (20 participants, 45% women) 2) Sea Turtle Project (14 participants, 29% women) 3) Environmentally sustainable production (10 participants, 10% women) 4) Eco-Tourism (6 participants, 33% women) The expert Yolanda Barrientos was contracted especially to conduct and moderate the workshops. The methodology is completely participative and dynamic, and a workshop is considered the most suitable medium to promote participation of the representatives of groups/sectors who have formed part of the changing processes and have lived the experience. The final purpose of the systematization of experiences was the reflection and analysis of the Project experiences, to create awareness on how and why the processes have occurred, and to extract the most important lessons learned. ANNEX 9 describes in more detail the methodological approach of the workshops. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 6 • Interviews based on the “Snowball” sampling method. This particular methodology is recommended to study small and dispersed clandestine populations. It consists of including new persons in the sample, through their identification by the persons who are already interviewed. The whole process starts with a small number of individuals who meet the requirements needed, and who serve to identify the other members to be included in the sample. There are not strict rules/criteria to decide upon the sample size and it is designed in accordance to the information needed. In this way, one of the principles that guide the sampling process is the saturation of data i.e. until no new or useful information is obtained anymore. Through this methodology 116 persons were interviewed (total 35% women). The objective of this instrument was to study the effectiveness of the use of sea turtles as flagship species, and has been aimed at the population in the metropolitan area of San Salvador (ANNEX 11). • Workshop “Retroalimentación” (1 workshop with 15 participants): Before completion of the first draft of the Final Evaluation Report a workshop was conducted to get feedback by presentation and discussion of the preliminary results of evaluation process. Institutional representatives were invited to participate (MARN, MAG, CNR), as well as representatives of the NGO-members of the Project Implementation Team (SalvaNATURA, CLUSA, FUNZEL) and final beneficiaries (farmers, Communal Water Boards, Municipalities). The workshop was conducted by the Evaluation Team Leader with assistance of the other two evaluation experts (ANNEX 12: Methodology of the Workshop). 4 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS OF PROJECT EVALUATION 4.1 COMPONENT 1: CONSERVATION OF BIODIVERSITY IN CRITICAL WATERSHEDS The objective of the first component of the IMCCW Project was biodiversity conservation in the two main watersheds Barra de Santiago/El Imposible and Río Grande de Sonsonate (1,554 kms2 ). This component originally consisted of four sub-components aimed to carry out Baseline Studies, the delimitation and legalization of protected natural areas (PNA), the promotion of a better biodiversity management, and awareness raising with training to increase the knowledge, attitudes and practices related to biodiversity and conservation. In 2009, the implementation of the first four subcomponents was considered to be finished and the Project changed its geographical intervention area when it included two new subcomponents: sustainable management of the Montecristo National Park, and species based conservation on low watersheds (sea turtle project). 4.1.1 STUDIES AND ANALYSIS During the first two years, the IMCCW Project produced nine Baseline Studies on a variety of topics, with the objective to make effective decisions during the implementation period and also to be able to measure the progress and impact of the actions regarding the two Components of the IMCCW Project (ANNEX 13: table 1). The Baseline Studies included, among others, the identification of the major threats to biodiversity, inventories of biodiversity emphasizing the protected areas, studies on land use and land tenure, water balances in the six sub￾watersheds, geographical analysis of the shade-grown coffee being an important element in biological corridors, a Baseline on knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP), and a gender study. The IMCCW Project also conducted a monitoring in the southwest of the country of key species as indicators of the biodiversity, registering during five years the changes in bird populations in the biological corridor of Apaneca￾Ilamatepec. The results of the study showed a population decline of indicator species in the three areas of El _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 7 Imposible, Los Volcanes and the coffee plantations of the Izalco Volcano, confirming that those ecoregions are losing their biodiversity within a relatively short period. On the other hand, the study found out that birds were moving towards the coffee plantations using these cultivated areas as corridor or interconnector. Additionally, the IMCCW Project carried out other studies with reference to aspects covered by Component 2 and the sub￾components Montecristo National Park and the sea turtle project. 4.1.2 SUPPORT TO THE LEGALIZATION PROCESS OF PROTECTED AREAS El Salvador has 118 natural areas to be integrated in the protected natural area system (SANP in Spanish), and which are included in the 15 main conservation areas (CA) and to which potentially can be added the remaining mangrove areas (according to the Law of Natural Protected Areas). Before the IMCCW Project started, only two of all these areas were legalized by the Executive Decree (Montecristo National Park and El Imposible National Park), and only one had a Legislative Decree (Laguna El Jocotal, declared RAMSAR site at international level). After the agricultural land reform in 1980, most of the properties considered as protected areas were managed by Salvadoran Land Reform Institute (ISTA), which did not have the physical, human and financial resources to conclude their transfer to the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (MARN). Due to this situation, many of the areas with primary vegetation were misappropriated by ex-combatants and local communities. In the beginning of the Project implementation, the delimitation and legalization process was delayed as the National Center of Registries of El Salvador (CNR) needed a formal agreement with the USAID. Once it was signed, the IMCCW Project supported the institutional involvement of CNR, ISTA and MARN in the process, and accelerated the process of delimitating a total area of 33,229 hectares and transferring 12 properties (eight of them are officially declared as PNA) to the MARN, including the delimitation of the mangrove swamps Metalío, Bocana de San Juan, Barra de Santiago, Garita Palmera and Bola de Monte mangrove (ANNEX 13: Table 2). Among the most important PNA, because of its richness in natural resources, are El Imposible National Park, Izalco Volcano, San Marcelino and Los Cóbanos, the last one being the first legalized Marine Protected Area in the country (November 27, 2007). The intervention of the IMCCW Project in the delimitation and legalization of the PNAs was well accepted by the MARN, asserting that without the Project it would not have been possible. The Project contributed US$564,000 from the USAID - CAFTA-DR budget to finance the demarcation and legalization of the protected areas7 . The list of the areas, the delimitation, transfer, legalization and the declaration were all approved by the MARN. The area of greatest importance is considered the Natural Complex Los Cóbanos being the first legal marine protected area in El Salvador (547.97 hectares land and 20,732.51 hectares ocean). In 2009, an agreement of co-management of this protected area was signed between MARN and FUNDARRECIFE. 7 Modification #2 to the USAID/DAI Contract _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 8 4.1.3 EXPANSION OF AREAS UNDER IMPROVED BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT The actions performed in this subcomponent were aimed at alleviating major threats to biodiversity identified in the Project area, through the management of protected areas, buffer zones and biological corridors. Identified vulnerable ecosystems were the dry forest and mangrove forests; the principal threats being unsustainable agricultural practices and residential development. The strategy was directed to involve the users of natural resources (coffee and agricultural farms, private landowners, municipalities, and protected areas) in the implementation of best sustainable management practices, with the objective to increase the area under better biodiversity management (biological corridors). The IMCCW Project tried to link various economic opportunities, such as the certified coffee production, sustainable tourism which covers sites of environmental interest (national parks, beaches, coffee routes and routes of sea turtles nesting), environmentally sustainable agriculture, cultivation of mollusks, small enterprises like the group of tourism guides and the craftsmen of bamboo of the Montecristo National Park, and payment for recollection of turtle eggs. The actions included the elaboration of sustainable watershed management plans, organization of groups interested in managing natural resources in those watersheds, land use planning of protected areas and their buffer zones, agreements with municipal governments and private sector, environmental education and other activities overlapping those of Component 2, like technical assistance to develop municipal tourism development plans (Nahuizalco, Izalco, Caluco, Apaneca, Salcoatitán, Acajutla, and San Francisco Menéndez), support to small and medium-sized tourism enterprises in the preparation of their business plans, and the creation of the EcoExperiencias portal inserting sustainable tourism companies in the national and international markets. In the protected areas Barra de Santiago and Los Cóbanos, workshops were held about land use planning and restoration of the connectivity between fragmented landscapes in order to consolidate a biological corridor allowing the flow of wildlife between the upper and lower part of the watersheds. Other subjects included were conservation of mangroves and coral reefs. Additionally, the Project gave technical advice to the review and final elaboration of the Management Plan of Los Cóbanos. 4.1.4 INCREASING RESIDENTS’ KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES AND PRACTICES OF BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION The objective of this subcomponent was to change the negative behavior of the target population of the IMCCW Project (estimated at 57,185 families in the two main watersheds of the project intervention area) affecting environmental sustainability, through environmental education, training and economic incentives. Its goals were the following: • Elaboration of a Baseline Study about knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP I). • Training of 11,000 persons. • 75% of the target population with more awareness about the biodiversity threats and the natural resources in the two watersheds requiring major protection. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 9 In the first year, a Baseline Study on knowledge, attitudes and practices on biodiversity and conservation was completed with a sample of 652 persons (KAP I). Two years later – after a series of workshops, radio spots, campaigns, and trainings events about major threats to biodiversity and ecosystems, the importance of forestry and mangroves, combined with other issues such as the environmentally sustainable production of coffee and vegetables, eco-tourism, conservation of soil and water, environmental services – changes in knowledge, attitudes and practices attributed to the intervention of the project were measured in a sample of 360 surveys and through two different methodologies (ANNEX 13: Table 5). According to Final Technical Report of the IMCCW Project (March 2011), 77% of the target population had gained more environmental awareness (fixed target was 75%) and at the end of the Project a total amount of 22,174 persons were trained (11,208 men and 10,966 women). 4.1.5 SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF THE MONTECRISTO NATIONAL PARK This subcomponent was included in the second phase of the IMCCW Project at special request of the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (from previous administration) and has the following objectives: (1) To strengthen the administrative and financial system of the Montecristo National Park, (2) To increase the number of visitors to the Park, and (3) To improve the relationship between the Park management and the local communities. The MARN of the current administration puts a lot of emphasis on the integration of local communities in protected area management, thus avoiding an isolated and individual park management. At the same time the MARN promotes the social aspects of ecosystems internalizing the benefits of ecosystem services and recognizing their contribution to the quality of life of local communities and the Salvadoran society. The Montecristo National Park has a strategic position due to its geographical location and its proximity to Honduras and Guatemala. Out of the national parks of El Salvador it has the best infrastructure for tourism. It has high biological and endemic richness: 2,000 species of trees and plants, including 198 species of orchids and the highest concentration of birds in the country. It is characterized by its cloud forest, has the oldest geological formations in the country and forms part of the El Trifinio biosphere reserve. The Park is very suitable for tourism development, research and environmental education. It has a colonial infrastructure: the Hacienda San José Ingenio dating from the 18th century, with an old iron foundry. Nevertheless, the Park had a limited capacity to generate and manage its own funds, inadequate infrastructure to receive tourists, and its ecosystem was under pressure. The IMCCW Project improved the Park´s infrastructure and its management capacity, supported training and environmental education, and promoted economic alternatives and facilitated better relationships between the Park administration and the communities living within the Montecristo National Park. As far as the infrastructure is concerned, the IMCCW Project reconstructed trails, camping areas and housing accommodations for the technicians, as well as provided the Park with radio equipment for internal communication. The Project also produced documents including tourism carrying capacity plans, a proposal with regard to the decentralization of the Park management and to the sustainable use of the cypress plantation (ANNEX 13: Table 3). The Project trained the staff of the Park as well as the local communities in various issues such as: rehabilitation of critical areas, improving trails, first aid and biodiversity. In addition, two officials of the Park participated in an international course about protected natural area management. Also, guides of species of flora and fauna of the Park were updated. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 10 With regard to the creation of economic alternatives, the IMCCW Project supported the formation of two local small enterprises: the tourist guides of the Park and the Bamboo Craft Association. Only the latter succeeded to organize its legal constitution, while the group of tourist guides never was able to legalize its status. It is important to mention that the Project did not finish the rehabilitation of some of the infrastructure because of a problem of consensus with the MARN. The IMCCW Project carried out a socio-economic study about the knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP III) of the Majaditas and San José Ingenio communities, who participated in the planning of the Park. The Project also organized training in natural resources management and supported the signature of a cooperative agreement between the communities and the Park´s staff, which is valid up to now. The objective of the activities carried out in the Park was directed to the strengthening of three basic aspects on which the sustainability of the Park depends: natural, social and financial aspects. The idea was to develop a model to be replicated in other natural protected areas of the country. The Park´s annual operation cost is US$ 210,780 of which 96% corresponds to salaries; the remaining 4% is used for the purchase of fuel, payment of electricity and telephone, cleaning products and office equipment. According to the Annual Reports of the IMCCW Project, the Park was generating an income of US$36,369 through tourism, leaving a deficit of US$ 174,411 per year. The MARN has a Fund for Special Activities (FAE) for the fees charged by selling products and services in the natural protected areas (among others: entrance fees, sale of forest products, wildlife management). In the case of the Montecristo National Park its revenues by Park visitation contributes to about 4% of the total costs of the Protected Natural Areas System (SANP) 8, which was legally established in 2006 by the Executive Agreement No. 1280 of the Ministry of Finance and administered by the MARN. According to the law of financial administration (Act AFI) the funds are reinvested in the management of natural areas based on manuals and regulations9 . According to the study “Plan de Negocios Parque Nacional Montecristo Análisis de la Situación Actual y Posible Generación de Ingresos” an increase of visitors of 30% was expected by the improvements in infrastructure in the Park and the promotion of its tourism10. With this increase of visitors and an increase of entry fees, together with the sale of local products, it would be possible to generate approximately US$ 100,000 annually. According to the Law of Environment, the MARN is authorized to use and to sustainably exploit the natural resources. The law of natural protected areas, in chapter VI (economic and financial regime), article 40, establishes a series of mechanisms that can be used to generate additional revenues out of the SANP, including payments or fees from the entrance charges, payments for environmental services and others. The business plan elaborated by the IMCCW Project proposes a number of measures to be implemented in order to generate the funds necessary for proper functioning of the Park: • Operational restructuring of the Park´s personnel to make the operation more efficient; • Increase of the entrance fee from US$ 3 to US$ 5 for national visitors, and from US$ 6 to US$ 10 for foreigners, which will result in at least US$33,000 annual incremental income (considering an increase of 30% in number of visitors); 8 I Informe Nacional Estado Actual de las Áreas Naturales Protegidas El Salvador. I Congreso Mesoamericano de Áreas Protegidas, MARN. 2003 9 II Informe Nacional del Sistema de Áreas Protegidas de El Salvador. MARN. 2006 10 Nevertheless, according to the information provided by the MARN, the visitors flow has not increased during the last few years. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 11 • Sale of souvenirs and handicrafts, assuming an average purchase of US$ 1 for per visitor to the MNP (total 12,000 visitors expected) which represents US$12,000 per year; • Sale of food and beverages in two cafeterias (one in the lower part and the other in the upper part of the Park), with an average consumption of US$ 1 per visitor represents another US$12,000 per year; additionally, the cost of the concession is estimated at US$ 200/month for each cafetaria, which makes US$4,800 per year; • Construction and rental of cabins and deck-campsites, considering 2 units of each type, with an occupation of 20% and at an average cost of US$ 30, represent almost US$9,000, which makes it possible to meet the costs of the concession of US$ 50 each, allowing an extra revenue for the MNP of US$ 1,200 per year; • Authorization to use the Colonial part for a hotel and restaurant, with a leasing fee of US$ 500 per month which makes US$ 6,000 per year; • The exploitation of the wood of the cypress plantations with a volume of 63,000 m3 in 113 hectares, at an average price of US$ 415,000 per year will generate US$ 14.5 million during a period of 35 years. In order to be able to implement these proposals mentioned above, a heavy investment in Park improvements is required which, together with the operating costs, will amount to about US$ 440,000 per year during the first five years (at the end of this period no investment is needed anymore, only maintenance of the infrastructure and equipment). According to the study, the balance between the new projected income and the required investment will be positive and will be an average of US$ 63,000 annually during the first five years. Finally, the IMCCW Project supported a research program in the Montecristo National Park, whose basic elements were: the development of park management policies; the assignment of a research team and a communication team within the technical and administrative Park staff; learning from the successful experiences and results of other research programs from the neighboring countries; establishment of formal agreements with national, regional and international research institutes; elaboration of a prioritized research plan; and creation of a biological research station with analysis of its costs of implementation. 4.1.6 SPECIES BASED CONSERVATION ON LOWER WATERSHEDS (SEA TURTLE) This subcomponent was included in 2009 by special request of the MARN and as a support to the ban on the consumption of sea turtle eggs11, aiming for effective and sustainable conservation of sea turtle species in El Salvador and with the objective to set up a National Program for Sea Turtles introducing technical, financial and institutional measures for the implementation of a strategy of co-management. The IMCCW Project started its intervention with a study of the commercialization of sea turtle eggs and the development of a national educational campaign against the consumption of eggs. The following year, the Project addressed its activities to four different areas: institutional development in order to achieve the sustainability of the program, education, awareness and communication, and improvement of the legislation concerning the turtles and the management of the egg incubation corrals. 11 Ban enacted February 3, 2009. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 12 With regard to the institutional development, the IMCCW Project concentrated its attention to the strengthening of the Zoological Foundation (FUNZEL), with the premise that it was considered to be the leading institution in the conservation of sea turtles. The institutional capacity building activities included the elaboration of a plan for institutional development, revision of statutes, updating financial records, support of the Project in payment of the salaries of its personnel. Also a national network of “tortugueros” was created in order to support the Sea Turtle Program and two national meetings of tortugueros were organized, with a participation of 111 “tortugueros” representing 30 coastal communities. On the basis of the study of the IMCCW Project “La Comercialización de los huevos de tortugas en El Salvador”, it was found that 72% of the total national production of turtle eggs is consumed in the metropolitan area of San Salvador. With respect to this information, a big awareness campaign in the urban area of San Salvador was financed by the IMCCW Project, to raise awareness among the population about the consumption of turtle eggs and their knowledge of the turtle egg ban. According to the results of the study, the campaign in association with the ban had resulted in a reduction in consumption of 68.4%. The IMCCW Project also analyzed the existing legislation on the protection of sea turtles and proposed a model of ordinance for the coastal municipalities, and made agreements with the Mayor of San Luis Talpa and the Naval Force to protect the nesting beaches of Amatecampo, Zunganera, El Pimental and Isla Martin Perez. The Project supported local organizations interested in the implementation of the sea turtle conservation actions. This support included technical assistance in the management of corrals for incubation and the recollection of sea turtles eggs for their incubation and the release of young neonates. The Project also promoted the creation of public-private partnerships obtaining a total commitment of US$ 1,465,864 for a period of five years including US$293,174 in cash from the private sector in the 2010 season. The Project invested US$126,110 to develop economic alternatives through the creation of small enterprises benefitting directly 866 “tortugueros” and 4,330 persons indirectly. Research on adult turtles and their mortality was carried out. The results are considered to be very important to define the most adequate measures for sea turtle protection and conservation (ANNEX 13: Table 4). The evaluation of the impact of the advertising campaign to reduce the consumption of turtle eggs provided the following results: - 72.8% of the respondents remembered the campaign, and out of these 60% were male. The most viewed media were: TV 52.4%, advertisement fences 28.4%, advertising panels 23.8%, radio 20.4%, and newspapers 12.4%. Television was not included in the plan of the campaign, but it is the medium that has the most impact (stories, videos and news): 66% of the respondents use 1 to 3 media. According to the study, 63% of the respondents were convinced by the campaign, and out of these 17% started looking for more information about the turtles, mainly by the Internet. - 79% indicated that they knew that the consumption of eggs of sea turtles is illegal. With regard to the egg consumption a positive difference in percentage between "before" and "after" the campaign of 13.1% can be observed, a difference of 19.5% with regards to their support to the egg consumption ban, and a 5.7% difference to the question whether it is acceptable or not to eat sea turtle eggs. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 13 - A statistical T-test was carried out for pairs of data (average) at 95% significance, and it was found that 8 out of the 9 increases show a highly significant difference, with exception of the opinion whether consumption of turtle eggs is acceptable or not, although the difference always is positive. - 70% of the respondents said that they will not eat turtle eggs even in case it was legal; 23% will do so. Those who will not eat turtle egg anymore are mainly of the age between 15 and 50 years old; 63% of the respondents older than 70 years old will continue eating turtle eggs. - Only 27% claimed to know the species baule and carey (37% women and 63% men). 4.2 COMPONENT 2: INCREASED INCOME FROM ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABLE ACTIVITIES AND SERVICES The objective of this component is the development of income generating opportunities oriented to achieve long￾term conservation in the Project intervention area. This component has achieved results in the following aspects: a) development of cost-effective and environmentally sustainable agricultural practices; b) promotion of new and emerging sources of non-agricultural income; and c) development of new incentives for conservation through mechanisms of "payment for environmental services" (PES). After completion of the implementation of this component, the Project concluded that the intervention had supported the generation of at least US$10 million from the sale of products or services, which reinforces the conservation in protected areas, buffer zones and the biological corridors in the project intervention area. 4.2.1 DEVELOPMENT OF PROFITABLE AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE FARMING PRACTICES The IMCCW Project differentiated the profitable and environmentally sustainable agricultural practices into two productive areas: a) Coffee production; and b) Fruit and vegetable growing. Most of the territory involved in the Project corresponded to coffee plantations, whose management practices have contributed to improve the quality of the natural resources of the region. 4.2.1.1 COFFEE According to the annual reports of the IMCCW Project, adequate management of certified shade-grown coffee (a total of 381 plantations, equivalent to 17,446 hectares) was fomented, which has encouraged generation of employment, increase in income by products and services, soil protection, and increased diversity of habitats in the ecological corridors that interconnect the protected areas of El Imposible National Park and Los Volcanes. The coffee farmers, who have been interviewed, admit that the certification of the coffee plantations formalizes and recognizes the compatibility of ecosystems conservation with coffee production, while it also allows to them to gain better prices thus improving their incomes out of agricultural activities. In other words, the high market value of certified coffee was for them an incentive to comply with the strict principles of environmental management required by certification, such as Rainforest Alliance and Starbucks. The main results in this component refer to 987 farmers (722 men and 265 women as individual owners or members of cooperatives) located in coffee production areas within the critical watersheds. The most important project activities were the following: (i) rapid diagnosis of the coffee plantations; (ii) technical assistance in the preparation of the plantations in order to get qualified for the certification or verification; (iii) advice and training _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 14 of temporary and permanent workers in the plantations; (iv) provision of connections with international buyers; (v) training in subjects related to the requirements for certification; (vi) assistance to agricultural technical personnel in supervision of the improvements that are required for certification; and (vii) support in the preparation of programs and plans as required by certification norms or verification guideline standards. It should be noted that the projected number of beneficiaries was 600, which establishes that the Project surpassed the target by 164.5%. The IMCCW Project signed 175 "Letters of Agreement" with coffee farmers in order to ensure their participation in the certification or verification processes, aiming for social and environmental sustainability. The objective of these letters was to agree upon the mutual coordination and the planning of the activities to develop in the area of the technical improvements of the coffee plantations, and aimed to benefit producers, processing plants and exporters. The Project worked with intermediary organizations, including cooperatives (both the associations and cooperatives societies), exporters and processing plants; with a total of 20 agreements signed (as described in the Final Report of the Project). On the other hand, as recorded in the Final Report of the IMCCW Project (2011), results were obtained with regard to additional sales of special certified coffee, both in volume and monetary value. The information collected provides evidence of a total value of additional sales of US$6,817,570, i.e. a 227.3% of the target planned by the Project (US$3,000,000); this value is equivalent to a volume of 331,607 quintals12. If one takes into account that the Project planned to achieve a volume of 300,000 quintals, its goal was surpassed by reaching 110.5% of the target. A summary of these findings, detailed by year, are presented below: Description Target of the Project 2007 2008 2009 Results % Target of the Project Number of coffee farmers and plantations in the critical watersheds, who have increased their sales of special certified coffee Men 450 517 170 35 722 160.4% Women 250 201 34 30 265 106.0% Total 600* 718 204 65 987 164.5% Additional sales of special certified coffee, due to the IMCCW Project (monetary values) $3,000,000 $2,283,629 $1,448,140 $3,085,801 $6,817,570 227.3% Additional sales of special certified coffee, due to the IMCCW Project (volumen in quintals - qq) 300,000 qq 81,577 qq 135,266 qq 114,764 qq 331,607 qq 110.5% * NOTE: In fact, the sum should be 700, or there is an error in number of men or women. However, as the data were taken from official Project Reports, the Evaluation Team decided to copy the same data as those from the IMCCW Reports. Source: Quarterly and Annual Reports of the IMCCW Project CW (September 2008 and September 2009) Other result of the IMCCW Project is the technical assistance to 30 farmers to complete the Rainforest Alliance certification audits, and to seven farmers to complete the Starbucks verification audits. In addition, 29 education events were held to explain Rainforest Alliance standards on child labor in which 440 persons participated (409 men and 31 women). The Project also carried out 129 events of environmental education with the owners and workers in the coffee plantations, which was attended by 1,457 persons (1,164 men and 293 women), and 1,266 technical assistance visits to the coffee plantations were completed. Also two gender workshops for owners and workers of the coffee plantations were organized in the Cooperative ATAISI and the Cooperative Los Pinos, and the Project helped to develop a manual of operations for the Cuzcachapa Cooperative. Although the Project´s activity in the subject of sustainable land use linked to income generation covered the main part of the geographic area of the IMCCW Project, its direct intervention with respect to coffee ecosystems covered an area of 17,446 hectares only, which represents 37.2% of the total coffee area in the IMCCW area (reported 46,801 hectares) and only 10% of the total shade-grown coffee area reported for the whole country (161,000 hectares in 2009 according to the Salvadoran Council of Coffee). 12 1 quintal (qq) = 46.0396 kg _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 15 In the same line of analysis, the activities with respect to soil and water conservation in the fruit and vegetable growing areas linked to the local market (subcomponent 2a2), took place in an area of 4,391 hectares out of a total of 45,778 hectares identified as "anthropogenic ecosystems", which represents 29.54% of the territory included in the IMCCW Project. The IMCCW Project carried out an important study: “Are Rainforest Alliance certified coffee plantations bird-friendly?” According to this research there is convincing evidence that the certified shade-grown coffee plantations have a greater abundance of migratory birds and a greater attraction to the birds (an indicator of habitat quality) with respect to any other coffee plantation or open agricultural areas in El Salvador, mainly due to the forest fragments that have included the certified production systems, which constitute "reserve areas for conservation". 4.2.1.2 FRUITS AND VEGETABLES A number of small fruit and vegetable growers live in the territory involved in the Project, and their agricultural practices have a direct effect on the quality of the natural resources of the area. The hypothesis of the IMCCW Project was that environmentally sustainable agricultural practices can reduce pollution, protect the soil and water, provide habitat for biodiversity, and integrate productive systems to the ecological corridors. Similarly, these sustainable practices can increase the income by the productive activity, representing an important incentive for the protection of natural resources. The IMCCW Project included small fruit and vegetable growers (1,926 producers: 1,478 men and 448 women, and a total area of 4,391 hectares) so that they would adopt agricultural practices compatible with biodiversity conservation, which include: (i) agricultural diversification, (ii) use of organic fertilizers, (iii) improved seeds, (iv) soil conservation, (v) efficient irrigation systems, and (vi) best marketing practices. In addition, the Project prompted environmental education activities to improve the understanding of the producers about the dependence that exists between the sustainable management of production systems and the conservation of natural resources and biodiversity. The IMCCW Project signed a total of 900 agreements with producers with the aim to implement activities aimed at the technical improvement of production activities and soil and water conservation which would benefit the producer. The services and benefits obtained by the producer were: (i) development of rapid diagnostics of plots; (ii) elaboration of plans for soil conservation and product management; (iii) technical assistance in the implementation of soil conservation practices, and the sowing and cultivation of selected crops; (iv) advice and training in harvest and post-harvest techniques of fruit and vegetable products; (v) identification of potential purchasers; and (vi) training in different topics such as sustainable production, integrated pest management, soil conservation, efficient use of water, good agricultural practices and basic elements of commercialization and marketing. The IMCCW Project obtained concrete results in the number of small producers that expanded their environmental sustainable production of fruits and vegetables and their inclusion in the local markets (local municipal, wholesale markets, processing plants and supermarkets). It was expected to achieve an increase of the number of these producers from zero to 1,000 (850 men and 150 women); however, this goal was surpassed, and the Project was able to assist a total of 1,204 producers (916 men and 288 women), which corresponds to 120.4% of the proposed goal. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 16 In addition, the results registered by the IMCCW Project show additional sales at local markets, as generated by the expansion of the fruit and vegetable production, earning a total of US$6,242,153, which corresponds to 124.8% of the target. The results confirm also that the male producers obtained a total of additional sales equivalent to US$4,559,253 while the female producers reached sales of US$1,682,900. These findings, detailing the years and differentiated by sex, are presented below: Description Target of the Project 2007 2008 2009 Results % Target of the Project Number of small fruit and vegetable growers assisted by the IMCCW Project to expand their environmental sustainable production with inclusion to the local markets Men 850 316 471 129 916 107.8% Women 150 74 130 84 288 192.0% Total 1,000 390 601 213 1,204 120.4% Additional sales as result of the increase of fruit and vegetable production, compatible with conservation norms and with inclusion to the local markets Men $4,250,000 $452,856 $1,893,053 $2,213,344 $4,559,253 107.3% Women $750,000 $334,969 $431,765 $916,166 $1,682,900 224.4% Total $5,000,000 $787,825 $2,324,818 $3,129,510 $6,242,153 124.8% Source: Quarterly and Annual Reports of the IMCCW Project (September 2008 and September 2009) Other results include (according to the information of the Annual Reports of the IMCCW Project) technical assistance to 1,204 producers; 3,658 technical field visits completed; technical assistance was provided to install seven drip irrigation systems, training of 9 farmer´s associations in improved irrigation methods; development of 14 projects with Salvadoran organizations (public and private) to introduce environmentally sustainable agricultural practices on fruit and vegetables farms (12 with PREMODER, one with AVES / FOCAGRO / MAG, one with FUSADES / CENTA / Mayor of Izalco). 4.2.2 PROMOTION OF NEW AND EMERGING NON-AGRICULTURAL INCOME SOURCES According to the information of the Annual Reports of the IMCCW Project, the sector of sustainable tourism was considered to be an important driving force for economic growth and, additionally, an incentive for the protection of the natural resources. Within this context, the IMCCW Project identified value chains in the area of the biological corridors, linking existing tourism enterprises and developing marketing alliances. The Project worked with representatives of communities, enterprises of food services, hotels, attractions, tourism guides, transportation services and others, helping this sector to develop the tourism business through specific plans. The Project promoted the creation and strengthening of tourism committees (e.g.: Izalco, Salcoatitán, Apaneca) and established action plans with them. Finally, the Project assisted in the development of best practices for eco￾tourism through workshops organized in collaboration with Rainforest Alliance. Through the support of the Project, additional earnings generated by sustainable tourism were achieved in the selected critical watersheds, representing a monetary flow of US$2,298,106 which exceeded the target set by the Project (US$ 2,000,000). This amount refers to an additional value setting the baseline at a value of zero at the start of the intervention. Other results of the Project include: the preparation of 9 business plans for small and medium-sized tourism enterprises; architectural designs and plans for the Estación Verde in Plan de Amayo; development of the EcoExperiencias platform based on web marketing linking sustainable tourism enterprises with national and international markets; transfer of EcoExperiencias to Salvadorean Tours as permanent owner as well as technical assistance to enable the company to develop a business plan; design and production of materials related to sustainable tourism advertising distributed in local and national tourism offices; development of the brand of the Los Pinos Cooperative; technical assistance for the _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 17 development of 31 events on tourism (fairs, festivals, celebrations of coffee); technical assistance to develop seven municipal tourism development plans (Nahuizalco, Izalco, Caluco, Apaneca, Salcoatitán, Acajutla y San Francisco Menéndez); and 7 workshops about ecotourism (145 participants). The IMCCW Project registered the tourism increase in several ways: (i) reports of the events supported directly by the Project (fairs, special markets and festivals). This support was directed to the organizers of events (committees for tourism, for example). The responsible persons of the events provided their reports to the Project with estimates of the number of visitors, and (ii) sample survey of establishments to determine their sales and number of employees during the period 2007-2009. In addition, the IMCCW Project developed the study “El Crecimiento del Turismo de Pequeña y Mediana Escala en la zona del Proyecto Mejor Manejo de Cuencas en El Salvador”, with the intention to estimate changes in gross sales of tourism at small and medium scale in the South of Ahuachapán and Sonsonate between 2007 and 2009, in order to compare the changes with the targets set by the IMCCW Project, taking into account four zones: La Ruta de Las Flores, the western beaches, Los Volcanes National Park and El Imposible National Park. According to the results of this research, the estimated total sales of tourism businesses (restaurants, hotels, gastronomy, crafts, other) increased from 2007 to 2008 by 29%, and from 2007 to 2009 by 52%. The accumulated total change from the baseline of 2007 reached $7.1 million. Tourism estableshments Change 2007 to 2008 (US$) Change 2007 to 2009 (US$) Change acumulated (US$) Restaurants 274,506 726,509 1,001,015 Gastronomic 247,135 480,930 724,065 Hotel 148,220 589,347 737,566 Handicraft 1,514,045 2,134,102 3,648,147 Parks and its enterprises 13,425 62,050 75,475 Other 321,214 629,178 950,391 TOTAL 2,518,545 4,622,116 7,140,659 Source: Annual Report IMCCW Project (September 2009) Based on the same study, the Project achieved an increase in employment of the small and medium tourist enterprises, which reached 10% between 2007 and 2008, and 22% for two years between 2007 and 2009. It is important to mention the strong support to the functioning of EcoExperiencias, not only by the IMCCW Project but also by the suppliers of local products, tour operators, private companies, FOMILENIO and the Ministry of Tourism. In 2008, the website EcoExperiencias was launched in order to provide detailed information about 20 ecotourism experiences developed by the Project at the national and international level. In 2010, the website recorded 1,500 visitors per month (Source: Technical Report EplerWood - March 2010). Within this context, the Project published a quarterly newsletter presenting descriptive information about the products (in Spanish and in English), which is distributed in local hotels, offices of the Ministry of Tourism (MITUR), and all the partners of the IMCCW Project. Specialists in biology and conservation of sea turtles worked closely with the ecotourism project team to develop five new tourists’ products including visits to nesting sea turtles centers, where one can participate in their release and learn about conservation and ecology. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 18 4.2.3 DEVELOPMENT OF NEW INCENTIVES FOR CONSERVATION THROUGH “PAYMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES” MECHANISMS (PES) The IMCCW Project admits the payment for environmental services (PES) as an important means to establish long￾term capital flows that support improvements in land use and biodiversity conservation. The intervention strategy of the Project in this component was based on the assumption that the PES represents a mechanism which makes the rational management of natural resources sustainable due to its relationship with economic incentives. Within this context, water boards, community development associations (ADESCO), and other local organizations were identified and trained in PES administration. The IMCCW Project developed guidelines for farmers, community groups and small enterprises who were interested in the payment mechanism. This also included the elaboration of formal agreements between buyers and providers of environmental services, the organization of the providers/buyers of environmental services and training in order to improve the understanding of the participants about the PES mechanism. According to the annual reports of the IMCCW Project, the providers of environmental services received technical assistance in the subject so as to obtain an increased income by the environmental services payments. The Project intervention was focused on transparent mechanisms and identifiable payment services, such as: quantity and quality of water, soil fertility and soil conservation, tourist experiences, etc. The goal set by the Project in regards to this subcomponent was the generation of US$100,000 by the concept of PES. The most important results include: support to three Water Boards that incorporated a PES share in their billing of water service which has generated US$48,100 to be used for watershed protection (reforestation); 36 workshops related to PES with participation of 45 Water Boards, 4 Irrigation Associations, 5 ADESCO and 1 Watershed Organization; and PES audits in 138 farms quantifying US$614,577 in investment of watershed management (soil conservation, tree planting, protection of biodiversity, etc.). The Project also facilitated the signing of three letters of understanding (Ahuachapán Sur, Pacific Microregion of Sonsonate, Caluco) and the signing of agreements to establish tree nurseries for reforestation of the watersheds (Company Diana, Mayor of Armenia, and the Mayor of San Francisco Menéndez). Technical assistance was provided to establish nurseries to distribute 89,115 seedlings for reforestation purposes with a value of US$114,366. Finally, a total amount of US$831,514 in PES (directly or indirectly) has been quantified by the IMCCW Project. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 19 5 PRESENTATION OF CONCLUSIONS 5.1 DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION 5.1.1 DESIGN El Salvador is characterized by its small size (approx. 21,000 km2 ) and high population density (more than 6 million inhabitants), which is one of the main reasons - along with the effects of the agrarian reform, deforestation, industrialization, overexploitation and inadequate agricultural practices – of the accelerated process of loss of its natural capital and biodiversity. In this sense, the IMCCW Project has been very relevant insofar as it is related to the necessity of paying special attention to the protection, recovery and conservation of natural resources and biodiversity. The general objective of the IMCCW Project (to support effective management of areas of high biodiversity) is consistent with the international policies on environmental issues, such as: (i) The Millennium Development Objective (MDO) related to environmental issues; (ii) Convention on biological diversity (ratified by the GOES in May 1994); (iii) United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification and Drought - UNCCD (ratified by the GOES in June 1997); (iv) Convention on Wetlands of international importance - RAMSAR (ratified by the GOES in July 1998); (v) United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (ratified by the GOES in November 1998); and the (vi) Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora - CITES (ratified by the GOES in 1986). As far as the congruence of the IMCCW Project with the national policies of the Government of El Salvador is concerned – and in more specific terms – with the strategies and priorities of the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (institution established in 1997), it is important to emphasize that the Project was formulated during the previous Government administration, but was completed and closed during the current Government administration: two administrations of opposite political parties and different strategies. The national environmental policy is governed by the Constitution of the Republic of El Salvador, which in its article 117 emphasizes the duty of the State to "protect natural resources, as well as the diversity and integrity of the environment in order to ensure sustainable development, and to declare of social interest the protection, conservation, rational use and restoration of natural resources". As a matter of fact, a policy framework exists and funds are created especially with regard to environmental issues, such as: - Initiative for the Americas Fund/ El Salvador – FIAES (1993) - Law of wildlife conservation (1994, with reforms in 2001) - Environmental Fund El Salvador – FONAES (1994) - Environment Law (1998, with reforms in 2001 and 2009) - Forest law (2002) - Law of Natural Protected Areas (2005) - Draft of the General Water Law (2011) Despite the fact that the Constitution and the national legal framework transcend different administrations, in practice, each administration and each authority of the MARN decide on what they define being priority and determine their own environmental strategy. Representatives of the current MARN and some consultants confirmed to the evaluation team that, in general terms, the previous GOES showed a greater political interest in _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 20 participating in the IMCCW Project13 and had a higher interest in biodiversity and its conservation than in the current GOES. The previous MARN (2004-2009) produced in 2005 the document "National strategy for management of natural protected areas and biological corridor", and demonstrated to USAID its interest in the legalization process of the PNAs, the consolidation of the biological corridors, and the sea turtle protection (Decree of total ban of sea turtle egg consumption), and they requested that USAID include the Montecristo National Park as a new subcomponent in the IMCCW Project. On the contrary, the priorities of the MARN from the current GOES as described in their "Strategic vision 2009-2014"14 are oriented towards issues such as: (i) socio-environmental risks; (ii) pollution; (iii) energy; and (iv) territorial governance, reflecting less consistency with the USAID strategies and policies in the biodiversity sector. The IMCCW Project is partially consistent with the policies of USAID as far as the strategic guidelines15 in the "Country Plan El Salvador 2003-2008 " of USAID (approved by USAID/Washington in July 2004) are concerned and, in particular with its second strategic objective (SO2: "Economic Freedom: Open, Diversified Expanding Economies") and its fourth intermediate expected result ("Intermediate Result 2.4: Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds"). Nevertheless, it is important to remember that the Country Plan puts more emphasis on water resource than the IMCCW Project did in its implementation, and emphasizes the organization and strengthening of water boards and local governments, the creation of public-private partnerships and the introduction of the PES, with the objective to conserve watersheds and ensure quality and quantity of the resource water. The Country Plan does not give high priority to the conservation of ecosystems as such. There is more coherence of the IMCCW Project with USAID strategies as proposed in the paper "El Salvador: Biodiversity, Tropical Forestry and Water Resources Assessment", which was prepared in 2004 by USAID / El Salvador. Its main recommendations are: a. Strengthening of the interrelationship between the different environmental programs of the MARN, with emphasis to water and watershed management, and the adoption of a PES system. b. Awareness-raising and training of government officials. c. Greater attention to the opportunities of FIAES promoting applied research in environmental issues. d. Strategic approach to strengthening the protected areas system. e. Focus on the conservation of endangered species. With regard to the proper design of the IMCCW Project, it includes two different phases that do not coincide in intervention area or in topics/subcomponents developed. Furthermore, the watershed approach, which is expected because of the title of the IMCCW Project, is not reflected in the structure and its subcomponents, and it looks like the watersheds were only used to delimit the intervention area in the first phase of the Project. In reality, the IMCCW Project was much more focused on ecosystems and the interconnections between them (biological corridors), and was linked to a strategy which was based on the increase in income, through the development of environmentally sustainable and profitable farming practices as incentive for the conservation of biodiversity. The major weakness in the Project design is the absence of clearly defined participation mechanisms of the members of the Implementation Team and other stakeholders, and the absence of a strategy to guarantee the sustainability and continuity of the activities and development processes. 13 In the first phase of the IMCCW Project a “Comité de Seguimiento” was formed, with regular biweekly meetings in which participated representatives of MARN. In the second phase the Committee stopped functioning (which coincides with the new and current GOES). 14 Document for Public Consultation, 25-August-2009 15 Strategic Objective (SO): SO1 - Ruling Justly: More Responsive, Transparent Governance; SO2 – Economic Freedom: Open, Diversified, Expanding Economies; SO3 - Investing in People: Healthier, Better Educated People. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 21 5.1.2 STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF THE ACTIVITY 5.1.2.1 STRENGTHS One of the main achievements of the IMCCW Project is that the Project has been be able to prove that its strategy based on the increase of income through environmentally sustainable and profitable farming practices as incentive for biodiversity conservation, has worked, confirming that adequate management of coffee production (Rainforest Alliance standards, organic certification, verification of Starbucks, among others) is rewarded by higher market prices. The differential in prices in the international markets represents to the farmers (individual or collective) an important incentive, not only to improve soil and water protection and reforestation, but also to expand their production systems, which will contribute to a major diversity of habitats and will ensure the sustainability of the ecological corridors that interconnect the protected areas in the Project area. This Project approach also has positive effect in the case of fruit and vegetable growing, as the agricultural diversification, the use of organic fertilizers, improved seeds, soil conservation, the introduction of efficient irrigation systems and best marketing practices, have led to an expansion of sustainable production related to local markets, evidencing additional sales and significant contributions to the conservation of natural resources and biodiversity. Within this context, these positive results confirm that the environmental education and technical assistance provided by the IMCCW Project were appropriate and have generated the skills necessary to introduce environmental and social improvements in the existing production systems. Another important achievement of the IMCCW Project is the demarcation and legalization process of natural protected areas that resolved one of the old-aged problems of the MARN16. The Project created an inter￾institutional Committee with representatives of CNR, ISTA, and MARN, with the objective to give follow-up to the delimitation activities of 57 areas (33,229 hectares) and the transfer of 12 properties of which 8 have officially been declared as NPA. It is important to highlight the delimitation of the areas of El Imposible, Los Volcanes, and Los Cóbanos Marine Park; the latter being the first marine protected area in El Salvador. The IMCCW Project developed a management plan for the Los Cóbanos Marine Park, in order to recuperate and conserve its natural resources. The IMCCW Project has given strong support to qualified information generation and data collection/ actualization through studies, inventories and production of different brochures for their respective dissemination, such as: a biodiversity inventory, guides about the Montecristo National Park (orchids, flowers and fruits, amphibians and reptiles, birds, mammals), a study about the carrying capacity of the Montecristo National Park, water balance studies of six sub-watersheds, a study of coffee under shade in biological corridors, inventories of the conditions of nesting beaches of sea turtles and socio-economic characterization of their coastal communities, etc. It is worth mentioning that the documents produced in the first phase of the Project respond to higher professional and scientific standards than those produced in the second phase of the Project. Another strength in the Project implementation is its chain approach; in order to reach a greater number of coffee producers interested in certification more quickly, the Project opted for identifying and working with coffee mills and coffee exporters (companies or cooperatives) with potential to enter into the market or who were already taking advantage of the market for certified coffee. This strategy generated greater motivation to work with the 16 According to Addendum No.2 of the USAID/DAI Contract, the Project budget is increased by US$2,000,000 (US$1,436,000 to carry out activities as described under DAI Task Order + US$564,000 FY06 CAFT-DR Environment Funds) with the objective to delimitate and legalize 33,000 Has of Natural Protected Areas. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 22 Project aiming to expand the certified area of their plantations, or to initiate with the certification process, and so increase their sales. This chain approach multiplied the effectiveness of the Project: through each of the exporters and cooperatives a number of farms and producers were included in the process. This same chain approach was applied to the ecotourism sector. Similarly, the choice to include SalvaNATURA and CLUSA as members of the Implementation Team17 was very adequate, because of their technical knowledge and their experience with the farmers in the region who already had shown their interest in the protection of natural resources and in the application of environmentally sustainable practices. The involvement of the NGOs has contributed to the achievement of the “volume” and "monetary value" objectives, which in the case of coffee in particular has been possible because of excellent international prices, bonds generated by certification, and a substantial increase in coffee production in some of the farms. Whether the Montecristo National Park will become sustainable depends on how the current Government will manage the Park. Anyhow, the relationship between the Park management and the two communities living within the Park has improved through the intermediation of the IMCCW Project and resolution of the existing conflicts between them. The Project also positively supported the Park in the following aspects: (i) analysis and characterization of the local population, (ii) compilation of technical information about the Park, (iii) strengthening of the organization and administration of the Park, and (iv) training and education. 5.1.2.2 WEAKNESSES One of the major weaknesses of the IMCCW Project is its design, that resulted in autonomous project implementation and very little articulation with its main counterparts (MARN and MAG) and their local implementation partners (SalvaNATURA and CLUSA specifically). This situation has greatly affected the continuity of actions once the Project finished. There was much prominence in the project management, also due to the low response and participation of the counterpart on the one hand, and the vertical way of operation within the IMCCW Project with a concentration of decision making on the other hand. In short, the IMCCW Project assumed an execution role rather than a facilitating role. The frequent changes of the Project director18 - each one of them with a different way of working combined with a great diversity of topics treated by the Project, actions little interrelated, and a marked difference between the two phases of the Project - created the impression of being a very heterogeneous project with a dispersion of actions. In addition, the Project had quantitative targets only and did not take into account qualitative goals and was not process-oriented. The Project lacked a clear strategy in order to guarantee the sustainability and continuity of most of the processes. For the first year of the Project implementation, nine Baseline Studies were scheduled in order to facilitate the monitoring of the progress of the Project in the subsequent years of its performance (ANNEX 13: Table 1). However, only two of the nine Baseline were used by the Project: 1) the Gender Assessment Study, and 2) the Knowledge, Attitude and Practices Study (KAP), due to the big delay in the preparation of the final products of 17 SalvaNATURA provided to the IMCCW Project 27 experts in the areas of biodiversity, environmental education, coffee certification, management of protected areas and GIS. The total value of the service contract was US$1,378,706. CLUSA provided experts in the area of small scale organic horticultural production. The value of the service contract was US$485,216. 18 The IMCCW Project had three different directors during the total project implementation period of only four years and a half. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 23 studies (referring particularly to the inventories of flora and fauna of the sub-basins and biological corridors, and the analysis of shade coffee) and because of the generally little practical use the Project has made of the information generated by the different experts. Another weakness of the Project was the lack of feedback of information and documents to their stakeholders. It is worrying that, so far, most of the actors and beneficiaries do not know the key documents, and do not have the information generated by the experts who worked in the IMCCW Project (for example, CLUSA and SalvaNATURA do not have the database of the farmers who received technical assistance from the Project). It should be emphasized that, while the Project has contributed a lot in terms of innovative research (for example: "Are Rainforest Alliance Certified coffee plantations bird-friendly?”), the results not only were not disseminated to the beneficiaries - mainly individual producers, cooperatives, and exporting enterprises - but that information was obtained only when the Project implementation period was almost completed. In other words, the generation of information has been strong in the Project, but its use/application and dissemination has been very poor. 5.1.3 PARTICIPATION OF THE STAKEHOLDERS In this section about participation of the different stakeholders in the IMCCW Project, it is necessary to take into account the distinct levels and ways of participation, as well as the different sectors involved. The different levels/ways of participation are the following: (i) decision-making; (ii) implementation/execution; (iii) contribution (technical knowledge and experience, information, funds); and (iv) reception (training, information, resources). As far as the sectors are concerned, a distinction can be made between: (1) the public sector (MARN, MAG, CNR, ISTA and municipalities); (2) NGOs (SalvaNATURA, CLUSA and FUNZEL); (3) private sector (coffee cooperatives, associations of agricultural farmers, and tourist enterprises); (4) community sector (ADESCO, water boards, tortugueros); and (5) FIAES. In order to clarify the effectiveness of the participation of the above mentioned sectors, a matrix has been elaborated to facilitate its analysis, taking into account not only the real participation of each sector involved, but also identifying the optimal recommended level of participation necessary to achieve the objectives of the Project as well as the continuity and sustainability of the activities after finishing the Project. It is important to note that the recommendations of optimal involvement in the Project are different for the distinct sectors because of their different characteristics and relationships with the project activities. In this sense and with regard to the public sector, both MARN and MAG were involved by bringing in knowledge and experience, and according to the experts of the IMCCW Project, the involvement of these ministries was supposed to include the contribution of information and financial resources, which does not necessarily convert them into partners in the implementation team. It should be noted that there was effective participation of MARN, ISTA and CNR in the delimitation and demarcation process of the protected natural areas (PNA) and, despite the Level/Sector Decision Implementation Contribution Reception Public: - MARN - MAG - ISTA/CNR - Local Governments X X X (x) X X X X X X NGO: - SalvaNATURA - CLUSA - FUNZEL (x) X X (x) X X X X X X Private: - International Consultants - Coffee Cooperatives - Farmers - Tourim enterprises X (x) (x) (x) X X X X X X Communal: - Water boards - ADESCO - Tortugueros (x) (x) (x) X X X X X X FIAES X X = Real Participation; (x) = Partial Participation; X = Optimal Participation _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 24 complexity of the requirements to declare a property as PNA, the institutions succeeded to define a methodological consensus and to establish priorities. This shows that the participation of the public sector, especially MARN, only will be effective if they are treated as real stakeholders who “join” the activity and “share” responsibilities, which makes them responsible and committed to the Project and the achievement of its objectives. For this reason, it is essential that a project propitiates synergies and institutional relationships, taking into consideration national initiatives and the civil society as a kind of strategy of sustainability and strengthening of the institutional framework which is required to establish commitments and responsibilities, once the project is complete. The participation of the local governments was very specific as they committed themselves to give maintenance to the infrastructure built by the IMCCW Project, and to provide facilities in the municipality to organize meetings, training sessions and workshops. Some municipalities also contributed additional funds and provided key information on topics of interest to the Project. However, the IMCCW Project did not promote the local government´s leadership in the coordination of the protection of the natural resources of the municipality, with the only exception of three municipalities (Acajutla, San Francisco Menéndez and San Luis Talpa) that pronounced Municipal Ordinances to regulate the conservation and protection of the sea turtles in their respective territories. With regard to the NGO sector, the participation of SalvaNATURA and CLUSA was essential for the success of Component 2 of the IMCCW Project. The knowledge and experiences of their experts related to environmentally sustainable and profitable farming practices contributed largely to the effectiveness of the Project. It should be noted that the participation of the NGO (being official member of the Project Implementation Team), was based on service contracts signed by the NGO and the executing agency (Development Alternatives Inc.), which does not mean that this implies a real involvement of the NGO in the implementation phase. In fact, if these NGOs would have participated as organizations in the design and implementation of the Project, even a better utility would have been given to their knowledge and broad experience. In the case of FUNZEL, the situation is different. Compared to the first two NGOs, FUNZEL is the organization with most experience with sea turtle conservation, but it is the weakest in terms of administration and management capacity. In spite of this, its relationship was considered as "co-ejecutora" of the sea turtle program together with the IMCCW Project and MARN. One of the purposes of the IMCCW Project was the strengthening of the technical, financial, and administrative capacity of FUNZEL, in order to enhance its support to MARN to implement a national sea turtle conservation program in the coastal zone of El Salvador. With regard to the effectiveness of the participation of FUNZEL, it is necessary to admit that due to its little management experience, its contribution to building synergies and alliances was very limited and still a lot has to be done in the implementation of the ambitious national conservation program and the development of economic alternatives for a population which for decades has collected sea turtle eggs. The private sector was represented by the coffee cooperatives, associations of agricultural farmers (fruit and vegetables), and tourism companies, all of them involved in the Project mainly as recipients of the benefits of training activities and of incentives for the biodiversity conservation through the implementation of sustainable practices in their production systems, and achieving important impacts, not only as to physical targets, but also with regard to the strengthening of local capacities and the successful insertion in special markets. The IMCCW Project received assistance from the private sector in supporting the Project´s training programs, and in sharing important information about the production systems. Although the "Acuerdos" signed by the Project and the farmers stated that the farmers must commit themselves to share and replicate their knowledge and experiences with other farmers in the region, no attention was paid by the IMCCW Project to work on the integration of these farmers and their organizations into organizational structures of a first grade (e.g. producers demonstrators committees) with the objective of solving special problems in the production, marketing, management, and to negotiate and develop communal projects. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 25 The participation of the private sector has been essential in order to prove the Project´s hypothesis that environmentally sustainable agricultural practices can contribute to natural resources protection and conservation, and to the integration of productive systems into the biological corridors. Nevertheless, due to the lack of attention of the Project to strengthen these farmer´s organizations and to promote alliances between them and with other sectors, the organizations are facing the difficulty to continue after Project termination without any support from the local and national governments. Within this context, the international organizations like EplerWood International, Social Impact, and AED (although it is an NGO) are considered part of the private sector in this report. Like SalvaNATURA and CLUSA, these three organizations provided knowledge and expertise to the IMCCW Project for sustainable tourism, gender and environmental education, respectively. However, they are not based in El Salvador, and after finishing their participation in the Project, many of their experts returned to their country of origin, confirming that their involvement was only oriented to short term results, showing little interest in processes and sustainability. The community sector is represented by ADESCOs, water boards, and “tortugueros” who participated merely as beneficiaries of training activities and providers of information to the IMCCW Project. With regard to the effectiveness of their involvement, it is important to mention that a significant contribution of the Project has been the increase of the knowledge of these groups about their ecosystems resulting in an increased feeling of belonging to these ecosystems and identification with their own environment. In the particular case of the group of “tortugueros”, the IMCCW supported them with the organization of a “National network of Tortugueros” and with the preparation of a petition to maintain the ban on the marketing of the sea turtle egg to be presented to the MARN. The participation of FIAES was effective because of the coordination and the joint implementation (training and technical assistance) of small sea turtle conservation projects financed by the environmental fund. The cooperation of FIAES has made it possible to extend the geographical area of sea turtle preservation. It is clear that participation was significant, and above all effective, mainly because of the opportunities to access information and knowledge. However, public-private alliances, synergies and mutual commitments to make social and environmental development viable, are necessary if we want to effectively contribute to the conservation of biodiversity and to the improvement of the quality of life of the people. For that reason, participation must be active and continuous; passive and timely participation without a clear strategy can easily turn into activism without any impact. Real participation is a process that integrates different sectors, even with various interests, assuming the challenge to institutionalize the protection of the natural resources. The projects that include dialogues and create room for proposals, negotiation and consensus turn out to be the most effective. As a recommendation for future actions, it is important to take as basic premise that civil society should participate not only as a matter of performance of a project, or a question of conditionality, but because it is a right acquired by the civil society. The civil society, in their multiple and legitimate manifestations, must be consulted and take part in the monitoring and follow-up of the projects, so that any initiative or project must include an analysis of how to incorporate the participation of the most important sectors as an integral part in its design, implementation and follow-up. Additionally, it is desirable to define and outline the most appropriate patterns and kind of participation for future programs. Therefore, these dimensions should be clearly identified, as the nature of participation is different in diagnosis and design phases and in stages of implementation and follow-up. A clear identification of the actors/stakeholders is important to contribute to a better design of the nature of participation within the project itself and their participation in the implementation. A comprehensible exercise is needed in order to make clear the implications of participation in each stage, and what we really want to achieve; in this sense, the nature of participation can vary from information gathering to real co-managing and co-responsibility. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 26 5.1.4 IMPLEMENTATION MECHANISMS The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is an independent agency which promotes world￾wide development cooperation. In the case of El Salvador, it focuses on promoting democracy and good governance, economic growth and diversification, contributes towards maintaining a healthier and better educated population and in assisting the country in its response to natural disasters and the global financial crisis. Within this framework and the wider Salvadorian democratic process, it is worth pointing out that development aid effectiveness forms a key part of the government’s Five-Year Development Plan 2010-2014. Consequently, it is pertinent to highlight the following priority work areas: i) To strengthen member countries’ national development strategies and their operational frameworks (E.g. planning, budgets and performance evaluation indicators); ii) To increase the alignment of development aid with member countries’ priorities, systems and procedures, helping them improve their capacities; iii) To augment and intensify the mutual responsibility of donors and member states towards their citizens and parliaments, in terms of their development policies, strategies and performance. Such priority areas are particularly relevant in terms of the following environmental institutional framework which characterizes El Salvador: 1. The legal and institutional framework (Environment Law and the creation of the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources at the end of the Twentieth Century). 2. MARN’s limited budget and heavy dependence on external resources. 3. The lack of a long-term government policy on the environment, which contributes towards swings and changes in priorities with each new administration or due to changes in leadership. With each of these elements in mind, the following table presents a comparison of the two Implementation Mechanisms that USAID does apply to its aid programs in the environmental field. Table 1: Comparison of two Implementation Mechanisms for development in the environmental field Implementation Mechanisms FOR AGAINST Cooperative Agreement “To carry out a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by a law of the United States” Implies substantial involvement at the Project execution stage by the US and Salvadorian Governments/ local NGOs/ private companies; and generates commitment on the part of the participating institutions. Generally with the GOES implies more bureaucracy; with NGOs/ private companies it might be more efficient. Gives priority to strengthening national capacities. Slow managerial processes if management capacity of the institution is low Specifies roles and responsibilities for each party. Could be influenced by political criteria. Facilitates the institutionalization of results. Less effective normative framework (due to the conditions for cooperation having been formulated in wider terms, taking into account the criteria of each party) Contract “A legally binding relationship in which the principle purpose is to acquire (by purchase, lease, or barter) property or services for the direct benefit or use of the U.S. Government” Managerial agility Predomination of organizations with little knowledge of the context Administration by Results Higher administrative costs Greater managerial control Reduced emphasis on processes More effective regulatory framework (More specifically binding terms of contract defined by the contractor, principally) Everything ends on contract termination _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 27 The current MARN authorities wish to supervise the national environmental management process, as required by law. To this end, they have activated various mechanisms, amongst which the following are cited: 1. To promote a culture of respect for the current environmental legislation. 2. To favor greater public participation in the design, implementation and evaluation of environmental policies, strategies and programs in El Salvador. 3. To promote open public access to wide-ranging environmental information; the strategic environmental evaluation of public sector policies, plans and programs; a national system of environmental management (SINAMA); environmental land-use planning within development and territorial land-use planning. These mechanisms will be activated in order to make progress on three wider strategic objectives: 1. Strengthen active and wider public participation and awareness of environmental problems and issues; 2. Strengthen public environmental management by means of an exemplary and articulated, responsible and transparent state apparatus; and 3. Promote cleaner and more efficient production and consumer practices through the application of science and technology. Within this context the Evaluation Team recommends to combine the two Implementation Mechanisms for USAID´s environmental and biodiversity programs as follows: - Endorse Cooperative Agreements between USAID and government organizations involved at the national and local level during the project cycle phases (design, implementation and evaluation), specifying their roles and responsibilities. It is paramount that such Agreements establish the technical and financial aspects that are to be covered in terms of public policy, national strategy and/or legal and institutional norms. - Create a Committee of Environmental Partners in El Salvador, to allow for the institutionalization of USAID’s activities and the integration of sustainability criteria as part of project design. - Endorse Service Contracts for the implementation and evaluation phases of environmental projects. - Introduce a contractually binding clause with the service providers with a view to incorporating, from the outset, the formulation of and compliance with a sustainability plan, together with the participating government organizations and NGOs. - Promote partnerships between international consultancy companies and foreign NGOs with national counterparts, for services contracts and the implementation phase of environmental projects. - Endorse Cooperative Agreements with specialized national institutions (NGOs, universities and others) for the supervision and evaluation phases. - Allow for, as part of the Cooperative Agreements, wider public participation in the environmental Project cycle. 5.2 IMPACTS AND RESULTS 5.2.1 CONTINUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY As previously mentioned, the IMCCW Project failed to integrate a handing-over and sustainability strategy from its outset, which negatively affected the continuity of its actions. Many activities prospered while the Project was ongoing, but stopped short once the project ended, due to the lack of resources or because it failed to identify, create or strengthen linkages with other existing and thematically-related organizations and institutions, which might have had the capacity and willingness to assume and follow-up the project’s results. __________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project One of the few examples of a correct analyzin ecotourism an NGO or the private sector (Salvadorian Tours), it was finally decided that this service which ultimately has demonstrated a sound administrative pointing out that this company never participated in the The continuation of the legalization process of capacity to administer and capture new funds to finance it. This would also apply to the continuity of research and monitoring programs (E.g. of Los Cóbanos Marine Protected Area) and the databa the different ecosystems of importance. According to data provided by MARN, the MNP (Montecristo National Park) has not seen an increase in tourism numbers (ANNEX 13: Table 8); however, whereas previously there by the park, in 2010 42% these monies were duly reinvested in the MNP. For this year, increases in investment are predicted thanks to the sale of coffee and cypress. For marine turtle conservation monitoring, a legal instituted, however it is difficult to foresee a reduction in the selling of black market eggs in the absence of better control, environmental awareness and economic alternatives for turtle proposal for FUNZEL to continue, with USAID finance, its marine turtle conservation program on However, the Evaluation Team has serious doubts about the institutional and administrative capabilities of this NGO to take on such a responsibility at this time, in spite of the fact that the NGO received the most support from the IMCCW Project. Regarding the process of certification and verification of plantations, it seems that producers and beneficiarie maintained the social and environmental improvements attained during the 3 years following the Project’s end, thanks mainly to the continued application of the international certification process during this time. In most cases, the required sustain practices are expected to continue according to the established standards, these being the larger purchasing houses must sign a document which guarantees a fair price and deal to the producer; quality, assured through product sampling; aspects are evaluated, most importantly the rational use of agrochemicals, water protection, improvements to farmers’ livelihood options (social security, d As a consequence, environmental education and capacity building are processes that have been justly maintained, being important catalysts toward the social and environmental changes that must be respect for certification and/or verification; training for farm personnel which is still ongoing, is given in themes such as: Environmental policy; 2. Integral p Water resource conservation; 6. Ecosystem conservation; 7. Soil conservation; 8. Environmental education and hygiene; 9. Manual of agrochemical management; and 10. The standard manag addition, the Project’s model for direct and indirect technical assistance in agricultural production has allowed for an increased technical capacity amongst farmers in the establishment and agronomical management of crops, b transmitting to them new technologies that include: the selection and adoption of genetically improved stock; the _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" One of the few examples of a correct transfer process was with EcoExperiencia analyzing the most viable options to find the most adequate ecotourism sector promotion platform (web site), whether an NGO or the private sector (Salvadorian Tours), it was finally decided that this service and its brand (EcoExperiencias) should be handed over to a private which ultimately has demonstrated a sound administrative pointing out that this company never participated in the Project. The continuation of the legalization process of the NPA is dependent on the degree of MARN’s interest and its capacity to administer and capture new funds to finance it. This would also apply to the continuity of research and monitoring programs (E.g. of Los Cóbanos Marine Protected Area) and the databasing of biodiversity inventories in the different ecosystems of importance. According to data provided by MARN, the MNP (Montecristo National Park) has not seen an increase in tourism however, whereas previously there was no reinvestment of the income generated by the park, in 2010 42% these monies were duly reinvested in the MNP. For this year, increases in investment are predicted thanks to the sale of coffee and cypress. For marine turtle conservation monitoring, a legal instrument (ban on commercialization of turtle eggs instituted, however it is difficult to foresee a reduction in the selling of black market eggs in the absence of better control, environmental awareness and economic alternatives for turtle-gathering families. Currently, there is a proposal for FUNZEL to continue, with USAID finance, its marine turtle conservation program on eam has serious doubts about the institutional and administrative capabilities of this NGO to take on such a responsibility at this time, in spite of the fact that the NGO received the most support from Regarding the process of certification and verification of coffee plantations, it seems that producers and beneficiaries have maintained the social and environmental improvements attained during the 3 years following the Project’s end, thanks mainly to the continued application of the international certification process during this time. In most cases, the required sustainable agricultural practices are expected to continue according to the established standards, these being: ( the larger purchasing houses must sign a document which guarantees a fair price and deal to the producer; ured through product sampling; and (iii) social and environmental responsibility, for which several aspects are evaluated, most importantly the rational use of agrochemicals, water protection, improvements to farmers’ livelihood options (social security, donating of corn seeds, health care, schooling As a consequence, environmental education and capacity building are processes that have been justly maintained, being important catalysts toward the social and environmental changes that must be respect for certification and/or verification; training for farm personnel which is still ongoing, is given in themes such as: pest management; 3. Solid waste management; 4. Environmental education; 5. Water resource conservation; 6. Ecosystem conservation; 7. Soil conservation; 8. Environmental education and hygiene; 9. Manual of agrochemical management; and 10. The standard management of chemical spillage. In addition, the Project’s model for direct and indirect technical assistance in agricultural production has allowed for an increased technical capacity amongst farmers in the establishment and agronomical management of crops, b transmitting to them new technologies that include: the selection and adoption of genetically improved stock; the _______________________________________________________ IMCCW" 28 process was with EcoExperiencias: By adequate partner for the platform (web site), whether the Ministry of Tourism, an NGO or the private sector (Salvadorian Tours), it was finally decided that this handed over to a private company, which ultimately has demonstrated a sound administrative capacity. It is worth roject. the NPA is dependent on the degree of MARN’s interest and its capacity to administer and capture new funds to finance it. This would also apply to the continuity of research and sing of biodiversity inventories in According to data provided by MARN, the MNP (Montecristo National Park) has not seen an increase in tourism einvestment of the income generated by the park, in 2010 42% these monies were duly reinvested in the MNP. For this year, increases in investment are ban on commercialization of turtle eggs) has been instituted, however it is difficult to foresee a reduction in the selling of black market eggs in the absence of better ering families. Currently, there is a proposal for FUNZEL to continue, with USAID finance, its marine turtle conservation program on 17 beaches. eam has serious doubts about the institutional and administrative capabilities of this NGO to take on such a responsibility at this time, in spite of the fact that the NGO received the most support from : (i) transparency, by which the larger purchasing houses must sign a document which guarantees a fair price and deal to the producer; (ii) iii) social and environmental responsibility, for which several aspects are evaluated, most importantly the rational use of agrochemicals, water protection, improvements to onating of corn seeds, health care, schooling, etc). As a consequence, environmental education and capacity building are processes that have been justly maintained, being important catalysts toward the social and environmental changes that must be respected in order to qualify for certification and/or verification; training for farm personnel which is still ongoing, is given in themes such as: 1. est management; 3. Solid waste management; 4. Environmental education; 5. Water resource conservation; 6. Ecosystem conservation; 7. Soil conservation; 8. Environmental education and ement of chemical spillage. In addition, the Project’s model for direct and indirect technical assistance in agricultural production has allowed for an increased technical capacity amongst farmers in the establishment and agronomical management of crops, by transmitting to them new technologies that include: the selection and adoption of genetically improved stock; the _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 29 implementation of pruning and planting space techniques; and the undertaking of diverse production management and maintenance techniques, which have been key to improving harvest quality, in accordance with market requirements and demands. Fundamentally, one of the Project’s main areas of support has been through consolidating know-how, skills and technical capabilities at a national, regional and local level, with particular reference to the sustainable management of productive systems, elements that were not previously noticeable. Thanks to investing in human capital, the provision of field technicians and accompanying specialists, training, field trips, consultancies and the diffusion of technical materials, produced and promoted by the IMCCW Project, the different stakeholders have gained new skills, know-how and technologies which has enabled them to alter their points of view and give new value to the productive sector in terms of a short and long term investment opportunity. It is worth noting, that in terms of income generation through non agricultural activities, the promotion and marketing of tourism options via the EcoExperiencias website, intended to improve the administration and access to funds to promote tourism at a national and rural community level, as well as institutional strengthening, currently represents one of the major challenges faced by the tourism sector. In hindsight, the Project failed to install the necessary capacities to fulfill such a task. It seems clear that the absence of an important component relative to incentives will greatly affect the follow up and replication of the Project’s actions. In this sense, the reintroduction of the financial support given to the implementation of sustainable practices would be deemed worthwhile, especially of those accepted by international (and local) markets as an incentive towards natural resources protection and conservation. Important to this end, are the consolidation of local organizations and the financing of incentives that contribute to replicating these experiences in new farms. On analyzing the changes generated in terms of productive infrastructure (above all, for horticultural irrigation systems), it is clear that the sustainability of these is linked to the size and reasoning behind the respective productive systems and units. In general terms, those farmers producing less than 3 hectares of vegetables and that were directly benefitted by the Project, have not registered significant changes in their productive infrastructure, two years on from Project’s termination. However, this is due more to entrenched cultural processes and precedents amongst producers in terms of productive systems management than to a deficient Project intervention. Moreover, due to the inadequate access to financial mechanisms they have not been able to take on the investment costs of these infrastructures. In this sense, most investment directed at the establishment of horticultural production and the use of technologies aimed at infrastructure improvement usually derives from personal resources or from external cooperation funds. Within this context, it is clear that the IMCCW Project failed to adequately foster relationships between the different stakeholders in the productive cycle and other institutions, with a view to attaining financial support for infrastructure, horticulture production, processing and marketing projects. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 30 5.2.2 BENEFITS AND CAPACITY BUILDING The IMCCW Project has made important inroads in terms of environmental management, contributing through enhanced plantation management to an increase in vegetation cover, especially in those areas where the agro ecological conditions and inadequate management practices made them prone to soil erosion. Productive reforestation has allowed for positive changes in the rural landscape, a greater scenic value, biodiversity preservation and has contributed to create habitats for species that are, in some regions, endangered. Furthermore, it is hoped that a reduction in the use of artificial fertilizers and the adoption of soil conservation techniques will impact positively in the recovery of aquifers and water quality. The IMCCW Project has contributed towards an enhanced entrepreneurial outlook amongst farmers and marketers/exporters that now look upon environmentally friendly production as a means to generate new jobs and income in the communities, catalyze regional economies and increase social and environmental well being. Individual farmers, cooperatives, private associations, local government and public institutions have cited the great benefits derived from training in the following areas: (i) Ecology and environmental legislation; (ii) Water resource conservation; (iii) Integrated solid waste management; (iv) Integrated pest management; (v) Rainforest Alliance certification procedures; (vi) Soil and natural areas conservation; and (vii) Sustainable water management. These training courses should be continued and fitted to specific needs. Another project benefit has been thanks to the reforestation program which has resulted in positive changes in terms of soil humidity and infiltration, as well as improvements in yields due to improved seeds. Increased land value is paramount to ensuring the continuity of natural resources protection schemes. The adoption of new practices and the visualization of the changes to farming systems achieved by farmers have provoked a shift in attitudes among many project beneficiaries in terms of the sustainable use of resources and the valorization of these, leading to changes such as the move towards certification. Strategies that link farming units within a wider territory and a wider organizational strategy will be needed if the supply and sustainability of environmental services is to be maintained and the impact of sustainable management practices on coffee, fruit and horticultural farms, beyond the farms directly benefitted, is to be observed. In terms of protected areas management, the 29,000 ha legally declared has led to a 300% increase in the area under the Protected Area System compared to 2006. Consequently, the impact on this system can be measured in an improved integral management of these areas thanks to improved management plans, administrative and tourism infrastructure, the recuperation of critical ecosystems, territorial land-use plans, co-management schemes, park wardens, species monitoring, etc. The declaration of natural areas gives the MARN the legal back-up it needs to enforce environmental laws, thus helping in the preservation of the country’s natural and cultural heritage. The participation of two officials of the Montecristo National Park in a Protected Area Management course in Colorado, as well as the participation of park staff and communities in trainings on protected area conservation, biodiversity and management, natural resource-use planning, critical zone restoration, trail design and maintenance and conflict management, are clearly reflected in the improved technical and administrative effectiveness of the Park, improved visitor services and better community relations. Currently, the central authorities are implementing some of the Project’s studies (for example, the utilization of coffee, bamboo, cypress, concession plans, etc.). _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 31 The national partners SalvaNATURA and CLUSA, which were involved during the Project’s first phase, have been strengthened thanks to the experience gained, the contracting of their services, the overhead accrued and the final donation of equipment, furnishings and administrative inputs, at the end of the project (ANNEX 10: Table 2). FUNZEL, in particular, has managed to acquire a new office, a permanent staff base and take on, at a national level, the co-management, together with MARN, of the marine turtle program. All this is thanks to the Project’s strong support at a technical, financial and institutional level, as well as, the completion of a strategic and business plan. Nevertheless, it should be noted that in spite of the attempts to strengthen CLUSA and SalvaNATURA, not all the staff involved in the IMCCW Project were able to return once the Project had finished (in CLUSA’s case, 3 out of 5 technicians and in SalvaNATURA’s case, I out of 25); this is not directly attributed to the Project, though it can be argued that their participation in the Project provided them with the opportunity to obtain new and better jobs, or in the case of SalvaNATURA, the organization did not have the financial capacity to rehire its complete team. The Project’s intervention in the delimitation and legal declaration of the Los Cóbanos Protected Marine Area, has enabled FUNDARRECIFE to better manage its projects for the conservation, protection and development of one of the country’s and region’s most important coral reef systems, which, moreover, is the largest nesting area in the eastern Pacific for the hawksbill turtle. The final revision of this area’s management plan, once approved by MARN, will allow for its operability. Additionally, thanks to the training courses provided in biodiversity and the donation of office and diving equipment, the NGO staff is better able to assist tourists in terms of information and guided aquatic tours, as well as continue with aquatic species monitoring, especially of cetaceans. The impact on coastal communities can be appreciated by the level of organization attained (Red de Tortugueros), their clarity of vision (the search for self-sustainability and improved living conditions) and the technical skills acquired in managing incubation enclosures. This impact has been reinforced in two ways, increased self-esteem thanks to a sense of belonging to a national and global effort to protect endangered species and the increased environmental awareness of older turtle gatherers who are now conscious of the coastal and marine resource problem. Additionally, the small and medium tourist enterprises supported by the IMCCW Project are currently operational (E.g. Estación Verde – Training Center in Plan de Amayo, Restaurante Los Pinos part of the Los Pinos Cooperative, Casa de Cristal- former initiative of the ATAISI Cooperative, etc.); the same applies to the coastal zone (Los Cóbanos Tours – tourism guides) and an association of bamboo artisans in the Montecristo National Park which is also active. The impact of these actions can be seen in terms of a range of new options available to the communities, linked to EcoExperiencias, a platform established by the IMCCW Project intended to strengthen tourism related activities and businesses. 5.2.3 BEHAVIOR AND ATTITUDE CHANGE By means of introduction to this section, it is worth mentioning that three studies in KAP (knowledge, attitudes and practices; in Spanish – CAP) were carried out. The first study (KAP I) was undertaken in 2007 in the municipalities that form the Cara Sucia hydrographic region - San Pedro Belén and Río Grande de Sonsonate - Banderas. This was done as an input for the planning of the communication and education activities, as well as to generate important information to measure the Project’s impact. As a part of this study, 652 questionnaires were completed in coastal areas, intermediates valleys, mountain areas and municipal capitals. The themes upon which these focused can be found in ANNEX 13 (List A). The main outcomes related to the Project’s two components were: _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 32 64% of those questioned did not know what a natural area was, of these 12% conceived them to be a place where animals and plants can be found; 4% as sources of water; 10% forest; 6% where there are trees and fruits. A mere 5.4% thought of a natural area as a place where animals, plants and water and river sources are protected. Of the total number of families who farm their land (56%), 23% of these are in coffee-growing communities. Only 9% had heard about coffee growing practices that were not harmful to the environment. 5% alone practiced environmentally-friendly techniques. 3% of coffee farmers belonging to the intermediate valleys practiced some form of protection of the flora, fauna, water and soil. The benefits of environmentally friendly practices are better understood by the intermediate valley coffee farmers, in terms of higher yields (20%), healthier produce (40%), access to better market prices (20%), savings related to production costs (20%) and improved living conditions (20%). Only 2% of those interviewed had knowledge of coffee certification. In 2009, a second, more explorative, study (KAP II), focused its attention on 14 of the indicators established in the first study (ANNEX 13: List B). KAP II was intended to measure the degree to which environment awareness has changed during the Project’s lifetime, via two methods. The first method was based on the quarterly KAP reports and their data relating to the number of participants in adult education and youth training courses, radio listeners and recipients of educative material, to which 10% from the marine turtle campaign was added, attaining this way, 77%. A second method consisted of taking a sample of the 14 indicators directed at half the sampled population in KAP I and then asking questions on specific themes, producing a more reliable result. The results from KAP II demonstrated considerably higher scores than those from KAP I, indicating that half the families within the project area had improved their KAP scores. The third exercise (KAP III), took place in 2010 in order to study the degree of knowledge, attitudes and practices of those communities with the Montecristo National Park and buffer zone, in terms of environmental themes and the linkages between the Park and their living conditions, as well as to generate inputs towards the design of an environmental education plan. 344 interviews were carried out: 190 aimed at adults (52.2%) and 154 at children between 7 and 17 years old (44.8%). 15.5% of those interviewed belong to San Jose Ingenio, Majaditas and Los Planes, communities situated within the Park. The themes covered in the interviews and their results can be seen in ANNEX 13 (List C). As has been shown, the IMCCW Project made great strides toward incrementing public awareness on themes related to biodiversity, the threats to natural resources and the conservation measures required to reduce environmental degradation. Indeed, the Project managed to improve upon the goal of 75% of the adult population within the project area holding a better attitude and putting into practice pro environmental conservation actions, attaining 77% with respect to the baseline study, as can be appreciated in the section 4.1.4 (increased Knowledge, Attitudes and Environmental and conservation practices). This was thanks to the implementation of a series of actions with the environmental education component, among which the following stand out: (i) training events; (ii) educational material distribution; (iii) environmental awareness activities; and (iv) broadcasting of radio spots and messages. These activities were planned on the basis of the results obtained from the Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices questionnaires on natural resources and environmental services (KAP, _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 33 2007). According to Project registers, 22,174 people participated in these training events, of which 10,966 were women and 11,208 were men (ANNEX 13: Table 5 – some of the themes included in the training program); while 16,409 were recipients of educational material or listeners to the radio messages (ANNEX 13: TABLE 6 – some examples of educational material), meaning that the project reached a total population of 38,583 people. According to the baseline study data, the total target population covered by the Project was 57,185, meaning that the IMCCW Project’s above-mentioned activities reached 67% of this target. As mentioned, 10% should be added to this percentage as a consequence of a change in KAP strategy to cover an area outside the first direct area of influence of the Project as a result of the campaign to reduce the demand for turtle eggs in the city of San Salvador. By which means, the various environmental education and awareness activities reached a total of 77% of the target population. Without doubt, the number of people who have benefitted from environmental education activities is high: however, this is based on a numerical relationship which sums up the number of people who have been recipients of the distinct project messages, through formative activities (for adults, youths and children), radio campaigns and educative material. In this sense, the evaluation method for measuring KAP increases has to be questioned, in that the number of people (registered in training event lists) does not necessarily reflect changes in their attitudes or perceptions, as would have been the case (for example) by correlating the number of farmers that participated in training activities with those implementing sustainable practices at a farm, community or household level; or, for that matter, the number of radio spot listeners who were sufficiently motivated to practice some form of environmental protection. Although an evaluation of this type is not available, it is worth pointing out that the most noticeable impact resulting from the environmental education component, corresponds to the behavioral changes observed amongst various sectors of the beneficiary group and who received, for sure, training, technical assistance and educational material. For example, the Associations and Cooperative Societies, which participated in many of the training and technical assistance activities, especially related to the Rainforest Alliance y C.A.F.E. practices (Starbucks) certification and/or verification processes, stand out, because not only have they improved their sustainable management practices within their coffee plantations, but also because many of these organizations (including several of their members) continue to manage their crops through environmentally sustainable methods. The same can be said for agricultural producers’ associations (of fruits and vegetables) to which important know￾how in themes related to sustainable production were transferred and who are now undertaking agricultural practices that are contributing to reducing natural resource threats. The same applies to turtle egg gatherers, trained in managing incubation enclosures, now “nursery workers” or responsible for the care and protection of turtle eggs from the moment of their capture to their enclosure and liberation. Equally, Montecristo National Park staff (rangers, guides, watchmen, amongst others), should be mentioned, as well as residents from Majaditas and San José Ingenio, who have focused their efforts on the implementation of their know-how in terms of the technical and administrative management of the Park, including environmental conflict resolution, trail building and cave restoration and maintenance. The extent to which the environmental education activities, aimed at the Project’s target group, generated the expected changes in knowledge, attitudes and behavior with respect to environmental conservation, is hard to gauge. Indeed, the impact of these actions cannot be estimated through the KAP II methodology. On the one hand, by reducing the simple size to almost half of its original (with respect to KAP I, from 655 to 360 households), there are statistical weaknesses in measuring the Project’s effects to changes in these variables, in as much as the inference that might be obtained with respect to the same population is no longer significantly _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 34 representative, and anyhow, very little can be concluded with relation to changes to the target group in their knowledge, attitude and perception. Related to this, the KAP II study mentions that interviewing the same number of people as in KAP I would not have been feasible, for the following reasons: (i) difficulties in finding the same people in an unstable population; (ii) cost; (iii) bias (the first interview might affect results); and (iv) problems with pre-informed consensus (the KAP I sample was random). Notwithstanding this, these elements could have been resolved by selecting a random sample the same size as in KAP II, representative of the target group, with a view to being able to make inferences on comparative changes in knowledge/attitude/practices for the total beneficiary population and at both stages (KAP I and KAP II). Conversely, in accordance with KAP II’s method B, the scores obtained in 13 out of 14 indicators are considerably higher than those of KAP I, with a mean advance in all indicators of 27%. However, on revising the indicators selected from KAP I and evaluated in KAP II, it is clear that none of these indicators19 contribute toward measuring the extent to which the target group has put into practice the knowledge and attitudes promoted by the IMCCW Project or how the environmentally sustainable practices promoted represent an incentive toward biodiversity conservation. On the contrary, the indicators limit themselves to measuring such aspects as: Have you heard of coffee growing practices that do not harm the environment? Do you know that forests protect soils? Do you know that natural areas attract tourists? Do you share the opinion that those who use a resource should compensate those that protect them? These weaknesses are further exacerbated when it is taken into consideration the fact that there is no clear weighting given to how much credit the project should take in the percentage changes (with respect to KAP I), in the sense that parallel to the IMCCW Project, other programs and projects were implemented that also could have contributed to positive changes in the target population’s knowledge/attitude/perceptions. With respect to the above, clearly, the IMCCW Project undertook innumerable actions aimed at improving the target group’s knowledge/attitudes/practices. However, the methodology designed to measure its effectiveness was not the most adequate, given the reasons previously cited. As a result, it is hard to tell whether local stakeholders, at ground level, have taken up the environmental education and awareness process, once the action ended. Moreover, it is a known fact that learning processes generate impacts in knowledge/attitudes/practices in the medium and long term and require adaption, flexibility, dynamism and creativity according to local customs. Therefore, a pending task is the creation and strengthening of local governments as administrators of the educational process in tandem with (as a collective task) MINED and other organisms and institutions. 19 With the exception of indicator no. 13 about the application of soil conservation techniques. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 35 5.2.4 SUPPORTING AND CAPACITY BUILDING OF MARN MARN was created in 1997 with the mission to ensure effective environmental management through transparent and participatory policies and norms that would facilitate El Salvador’s sustainable development. This ministry as signatory of the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992) is responsible for: a) the identification of those biologically diverse components that are important for conservation and sustainable use, and b) the monitoring, via sampling and other techniques, of those biologically diverse components that have been identified according to the previous criteria, with special attention given to those that need urgent conservation measures and that show the greatest potential for sustainable use. Within this context, MARN has been greatly supported thanks to the biological inventories produced by the IMCCW Project which highlights the presence in the studied area of 13% of threatened species at national level and 1% of these at a global level and given their lack of financial and technical resources to comply with this Convention. These scientifically-based inventories will allow MARN to establish conservation strategies for those registered species. Additionally, the Law for Wildlife Conservation (1994) makes MARN responsible for the protection, restoration, conservation and sustainable use of wildlife; as well as supervising the compliance of international conventions ratified by El Salvador. The IMCCW Project, not only greatly supported and accompanied the protection of marine turtles, through a wide-ranging and integrated program which covered the Salvadorian coastline, on a scale never seen before, but being a CITES-listed species, it helped the country pass from its previous ranking of Category II to Category I20; in other words, to become a country that having adopted the necessary measures in compliance with its national laws, reinforced the application of the Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). The Law for Protected Natural Areas (2005) establishes that lands identified as potential protected natural areas and registered to the Salvadorian Institute for Agrarian Transformation, having been constituted as state-owned special heritage, by the rule of law are to be incorporated into the System. For many years, MARN was not able to comply with the natural area transference process, due to a lack of political will and resources. The Project was fundamental in supporting the transference of 57 protected areas to MARN. With this legal back-up, MARN as the entity responsible for such supervision, can now promote and develop actions that favor the protection, conservation, restoration and the sustainable management of natural resources, as well as the biodiversity and genetic wealth found within these areas. In terms of institutional strengthening, the training given to the Montecristo National Park staff has meant the more efficient management of the Park and its development as a pilot area within the System. Additionally, MARN and the Park received goods valued at US$29,324.31, consisting of: 1 pick-up, 5 laptops, 2 printers, 3 GPS, 2 solar panels, 1 electrical generator, 1 chainsaw and office equipment (ANNEX 10: Table 2). 5.2.5 POLICY CHANGES The Evaluation Team has not observed any kind of incidence or impact of the IMCCW Project on the policies implemented by the current MARN administration. 20 http://www.sica.int/busqueda/Noticias.aspx?IDItem=47698&IDCat=3&IdEnt=696&Idm=1&IdmStyle=1 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 36 5.2.6 CONSEQUENCES OF CHOSEN STRATEGY The Project strategy, based on increased income generation through the development of profitable and environmentally sustainable agricultural practices that were intended as an incentive to biodiversity conservation, has worked. No negative outcomes resulting from the application of this have been observed. Indeed, in Chapter 7.2 (Strategy and Policy), the evaluation team has presented recommendations for improving the operability of this strategy in the case of future interventions. The recommendations include the need to take into account the country’s foremost needs, as well as the political and legal framework established by El Salvador and the USA, and finally, to take into account the experiences and learned lessons from previous projects and intervention. 5.2.7 EFFECTIVENESS OF THE USE OF SEA TURTLES AS FLAGSHIP SPECIES IN EL SALVADOR The first sea turtle conservation initiatives were reported in 1975, when the Fisheries Service of the Ministry of Agriculture supported the building of sea turtle corrals on the beaches of Barra de Santiago y Punta Rancho Viejo (Bahía de Jiquilisco). During 1981-1985, the USAID Employment Generation Program promoted other sea turtle conservation projects in El Icacal (La Unión), Isla San Sebastián (Bahía de Jiquilisco), Barra de Santiago and Garita Palmera (Ahuachapán); and in 1989- 1996 was the first time that the sea turtle was used as flagship species in an environmental education initiative financed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 21 . Although more sea turtle conservation projects are reported (financed by FIAES, FONAES and the UNDP Small Grants Program), the sea turtle still is an endangered species, and statistics indicate that for every 1,000 turtles that are released, only one survives. The main threat is the removal of eggs in the nesting beaches to be sold in the markets due to their high demand. According to the study "The commercialization of sea turtle eggs in El Salvador", elaborated by the IMCCW Project, 72% of the national sea turtle egg production is consumed in the Metropolitan Area of San Salvador, passing through markets, merchants, bars and restaurants. For that reason, the IMCCW Project decided to design and execute in 2010 an awareness campaign with the objective to reduce the consumption of sea turtle eggs in order to promote their conservation. The campaign was directed to the metropolitan population of San Salvador and the coastal communities. It was pronounced through different media, which disseminated messages to adults about the prohibition of egg consumption and to children to persuade them to appeal to their parents not to eat turtle eggs. The main objective of the campaign was to influence the attitudes and behavior of the target audiences. The IMCCW Project carried out an impact assessment of the campaign and concluded that the campaign was positive as an increase in knowledge and attitudes towards the conservation of marine turtles was reported: ranging from agreement with the campaign and persuasion by the arguments to decision-making support for the conservation of sea turtles. The evaluation also recommended to give follow up to the campaign. With the purpose of determining whether the use of the turtle as a "flagship species" has contributed to a favorable change in attitudes towards the environment and whether the campaign implemented by the IMCCW Project really has been effective, a sampling method called “Snowball” was conducted by the evaluation team (ANNEX 11). This sampling method is used for studies of clandestine, minority and dispersed populations. It consisted of identifying some consumers of turtle 21 Source: “40 Años de conservación tortugas marinas en El Salvador”, pag. 20-23 de la Revista “Mejor Ambiente” de FIAES, Edición I, Diciembre 2010. __________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project eggs in seafood restaurants in San Salvador turtle eggs. So initially on the basis of a small number of individuals process with similar characteristics information was gathered and the sampling The results of the “Snowball sampling method” show that about the awareness campaign to reduce the consumption of sea turtle eggs (ANNEX Figure 1a. Persons who heard about the campaign Out of the 82% of persons who heard about the campaign, 31% stopped eating turtle eggs after the campaign Another revealing data is that 31% of consumers of turtle eggs began to perform environmental practices after the campaign (ANNEX 11: Table C and D). In conclusion, the effectiveness of the campaign was high turtle egg consumers in the Salvadoran capital stopped doing so after the awareness campaign. Figure 2. Persons who stopped eating sea turtle eggs and who have better environmental practices 22Taking into account the 5 people who went important to make a long term effort to raise 82% Heard about the campaign Not aware of the campaign 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Persons who perform enviromental practices and do not consume sea turtle eggs since a long time Persons who perform enviromental practices and do not consume sea turtle eggs after the campaign _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" San Salvador and asking them whether they know other persons who consume sea n the basis of a small number of individuals other persons are with similar characteristics. The sample completed 116 interviews by telephone till no information was gathered and the sampling became redundant. of the “Snowball sampling method” show that a high percentage of 82% of respondents about the awareness campaign to reduce the consumption of sea turtle eggs (ANNEX 11: Table C). who heard about the campaign Figure 1b. Persons who stopped eating sea turtle eggs after the campaign who heard about the campaign, 31% stopped eating turtle eggs after the campaign Another revealing data is that 31% of consumers of turtle eggs began to perform environmental practices after the campaign (ANNEX 11: Table C and D). In conclusion, the effectiveness of the campaign was high adoran capital stopped doing so after the awareness campaign. who stopped eating sea turtle eggs and who have better environmental practices went back to eating sea turtle eggs, the percentage would change to 27%, raise awareness. Heard about the campaign Not aware of the campaign 31% Changed before the campaign Changed after the campaign 31% Persons who perform enviromental practices and do not consume sea turtle eggs since a long time Persons who perform enviromental practices and do not consume sea turtle eggs after the campaign _______________________________________________________ IMCCW" 37 whether they know other persons who consume sea are spotted later on in the by telephone till no more new a high percentage of 82% of respondents had heard 11: Table C). who stopped eating sea turtle eggs who heard about the campaign, 31% stopped eating turtle eggs after the campaign22 . Another revealing data is that 31% of consumers of turtle eggs began to perform environmental practices after the campaign (ANNEX 11: Table C and D). In conclusion, the effectiveness of the campaign was high as 31% of the adoran capital stopped doing so after the awareness campaign. who stopped eating sea turtle eggs and who have better environmental practices 27%, therefore it is Changed before the campaign Persons who perform enviromental practices and do not consume sea turtle eggs Persons who perform enviromental practices and do not consume sea turtle eggs __________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project A surprising fact is that 92% of the E) although only 5% denounce the illegal sale of very much influenced by cultural factors (traditions, customs, taste and others). consumers as shown by the results of the “Snowball sampling method” are as follows and 42% are women; the men who consume more eggs are wage; women who consume more eggs are more than 50 years old, and receive between one and three minimum wages, followed by the women of 30 Figure 3. Persons In fact, the consumption of turtle eggs is a deeply rooted in the Salvadoran culture. that the campaign helped to position the turtle as a species in danger of extinction, resulting in positive but slight changes in the attitude of the population: (1) 31% of the consumers stopped eating eggs after the campaign, (2) the persons who stopped eating eggs a long time people who still are consuming turtle egg bags with its danger to sea turtles. The effectiveness of the campaign is relative as the campaign only lasted for a period of approximately four months. In this respect and according suggest that it might be possible to change the attitude of consumers of turtle eggs and environmental practice via a permanent campaign Nevertheless, in addition to the campaigns it is important to involve public institutions like MARN, Police (PNC) and General Attorney Office ( denouncements and the application of the Environmental Law to restrict the wholesalers preventive actions, such as the involvement of the population in general, children and young people in particular, in the releases of young turtles and in co sea turtles. 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" the consumers knew that the sea turtle is an endangered species ( the illegal sale of sea turtle eggs (ANNEX 11: Table F): it is clear that influenced by cultural factors (traditions, customs, taste and others). The general as shown by the results of the “Snowball sampling method” are as follows: 58% of consumers are men men who consume more eggs are of an age between 18-30 years and receive a minimum e more eggs are more than 50 years old, and receive between one and three minimum of 30-40 years old with three times the minimum wage (ANNEX 11: T 3. Persons who knew about the endangered status of the sea turtle In fact, the consumption of turtle eggs is a deeply rooted in the Salvadoran culture. However that the campaign helped to position the turtle as a species in danger of extinction, resulting in positive but slight ges in the attitude of the population: (1) 31% of the consumers stopped eating eggs after the campaign, (2) the persons who stopped eating eggs a long time ago generally have better environmental practices than the people who still are consuming turtle eggs; and (3) consumers of turtle eggs do not associate the use of plastic The effectiveness of the campaign is relative as the campaign only lasted for a period of approximately four months. In this respect and according to the advertising agency that designed the campaign, the positive results suggest that it might be possible to change the attitude of consumers of turtle eggs and a permanent campaigns for 5 to 10 years (from June to September each year). n addition to the campaigns it is important to involve public institutions like MARN, General Attorney Office (FGR) to promote actions of control and pressure to the citizens by uncements and the application of the Environmental Law to restrict the wholesalers the involvement of the population in general, children and young people in particular, in the releases of young turtles and in competitions related to good environmental practices and conservation of 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 92% Persons who know about the endangered status of sea turtles Persons who do not know about the endangered status of sea turtles _______________________________________________________ IMCCW" 38 an endangered species (ANNEX 11: Table t is clear that the consumer is The general characteristics of the : 58% of consumers are men 30 years and receive a minimum e more eggs are more than 50 years old, and receive between one and three minimum ANNEX 11: Table A and B). of the sea turtle However, it can be admitted that the campaign helped to position the turtle as a species in danger of extinction, resulting in positive but slight ges in the attitude of the population: (1) 31% of the consumers stopped eating eggs after the campaign, (2) generally have better environmental practices than the s; and (3) consumers of turtle eggs do not associate the use of plastic The effectiveness of the campaign is relative as the campaign only lasted for a period of approximately four to the advertising agency that designed the campaign, the positive results suggest that it might be possible to change the attitude of consumers of turtle eggs and to promote best e to September each year). n addition to the campaigns it is important to involve public institutions like MARN, National Civil actions of control and pressure to the citizens by uncements and the application of the Environmental Law to restrict the wholesalers, and to promote the involvement of the population in general, children and young people in particular, mpetitions related to good environmental practices and conservation of _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 39 5.2.8 GENDER MAINSTREAMING The "Gender Plan" in the USAID/DAI work contract23, compromised the contractor DAI to promote gender equality through the implementation of strategies and instruments for gender mainstreaming in all aspects of natural resources management. In this context, gender mainstreaming means: "ensure equal access and control over resources, decision-making and benefits during the whole period of implementation of the Project". To facilitate the monitoring of the gender aspect, a baseline study was included in the project design, together with a midterm evaluation of the progress of the gender equality strategy. Both studies were executed by Social Impact. The Baseline Study (2007) describes in detail the strategic recommendations for the project team and the actions to take into account during the development of each of the subcomponents of the Project. Within the IMCCW Project a "gender working group" was created to give periodic follow-up to the gender mainstreaming actions. Gender awareness sessions of the project team were held and workshops were given with participation of members of coffee cooperatives, accompanied with the use of an educational toolkit especially designed for this purpose (with games and posters) 24 . The Baseline Study had identified special indicators and targets regarding women´s participation (table 2), which were used in the monitoring of the Project applying some small variations concerning the women´s participation in training events (3,500 women rather than 4,000), in coffee production (250 producers instead of 150) and additional income through the commercialization of fruits and vegetables (15% instead of 10%). The table below shows that most of the targets were exceeded by the end of the first phase of the Project. Table 2: Women´s participation in the IMCCW Project No. Indicator Sex Final target Achievement at FY 09 (acumulative) Percentage 16 Number of persons trained Men 7,500 11,208 149% Women 3,500 10,966 213% Total 11,000 22,174 202% 17 Number of certified coffee farmers Men 450 722 160% Women 250 265 106% Total 600 987 165% 20 Number of fruit and vegetable growers Men 850 916 108% Women 150 288 192% Total 1,000 1,204 120% 21 Additional income by sale of fruits and vegetable Men 4,250,000 4,559,253 107% Women 750,000 1,682,900 224% Total 5,000,000 6,242,153 125% Source: Annual Report FY 2009 IMCCW Project Nevertheless, it should be noted that data disaggregation by sex is important but not enough, and that the IMCCW Project measured its progress using quantitative data only without the incorporation of indicators about the quality of the women´s participation in the Project. Additionally, the Project has not been able to visualize any changes in the relationship between men and women. Although one of the contributions of the Project is that it managed to position the gender equity issue on the agenda of some of the communities, the evaluation team observes that the gender approach had disappeared completely in the second phase of the Project. Some other difficulties or limitations during the Project implementation have been the following25 : 23 Annex 2 to the USAID/DAI Contract No. EPP-I-00-04-00023-00, signed on November 16, 2006. 24 Included three modules: 1) Cómo incorporar la mujer en la producción de café; 2) Cómo integrar a la mujer en el área ambiental; 3) La mujer y el PSA. 25 Personnel communication with Violeta Muñoz, Social Impact. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 40 - The Project was not planned on the basis of an analysis of the particular positions and needs of its beneficiaries differentiated between men and women, nor did the project design contemplate a special budget for gender mainstreaming activities. - It was necessary to continue insisting with the team members of the Project in disaggregating data by sex, as they forgot it usually. - Officials of the MARN were not invited to participate in gender workshops. 6 LESSONS LEARNED The lessons learned of a project reflect what the experience has taught to those who have participated in it. It is important to "capitalize the experiences", to identify the lessons learned and to take them into account in order to improve future projects and activities. In general, the lessons learned arise by asking: "what would you repeat and what would you do different", in the case you might formulate, execute and/or participate in another project similar to the IMCCW Project. The most important lessons that have been identified with respect to the IMCCW Project are grouped into six main areas: 1) project design and monitoring; (2) relationship between conservation and generation of economic benefits; (3) participation and sustainability; (4) capacity-building; (5) communication and dissemination of information; and 6) coordination and partnerships. 6.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF AN ADEQUATE PROJECT DESIGN AND MONITORING SYSTEM The IMCCW Project did not have a strategy of transference and sustainability. At the end of the implementation period, most of the actions did not continue because of the lack of an institutional backing and capacity to continue with the actions initiated by the Project. The donor must make sure that the project design includes a clear strategy of transfer and sustainability, while it has to emphasize the importance of the strengthening of local capacities in order to assure the continuity of the processes fomented by the project. The requirements of the IMCCW Project was to meet quantitative indicators only as was established in the design of the Project, and did not give adequate attention to the strengthening of local capacities and its sustainability, leaving aside the rich experiences which would have improved the quality of the results. The design of a project should be aware of a balance between the quantitative goals and qualitative processes that produce substantial information that will result in more effectiveness and better achievement of the proposed objectives. Although the project design contemplated the importance of gender mainstreaming, no real and visible impact was achieved by the IMCCW Project with regard to women’s access and control of resources and their participation in decision-making. It is important to integrate gender issues into the project design which should include a gender diagnosis of the target population (baseline), an adequate methodology for monitoring (qualitative and quantitative) and a special budget for gender awareness and equity activities. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 41 6.2 THE IMPORTANCE OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND GENERATION OF ECONOMIC BENEFITS One of the most obvious lessons of the IMCCW Project is the success for having incorporated in its natural resources strategy the interrelation with income and employment generating activities. Normally, despite the fact that the communities who live in the protected areas and their buffer zones or the “tortugueros” in the coastal zone are aware of the problem of the indiscriminate use of natural resources and are convinced of the necessity to protect them, if they do not to have any other immediate alternative, the cycle of overexploitation will continue. It has been noted that local communities will support environmental projects only when those provide to them real benefits: the beneficiaries need to receive tangible remuneration in the short to medium term. The implementation of an economic approach in the intervention strategy in the biodiversity sector plays an important role in the sustainability of the conservation of the natural resources. Conversely, conservation promotes sustainable livelihoods. In order to ensure that the management of biodiversity conservation projects is sustainable, economically viable alternatives must be considered which should respond to immediate needs and the culture of the target population. 6.3 THE IMPORTANCE OF PARTICIPATION AND SUSTAINABILITY OF PROCESSES The implementation of the IMCCW Project was based on the conditions provided by a service contract between USAID and DAI only, without having clarified and assured the institutional arrangements necessary to guarantee the institutionalization of the national counterparts and their involvement and co-responsibility in the project implementation. For example, certain confusion always existed for the MAG regarding its relationship with the IMCCW Project due to the absence of a formal agreement of cooperation between the entity and the Project. The objectives of the IMCCW Project were never presented and discussed with the authorities of the MAG, so that the Ministry ignored what was expected of them, and much less what would be the benefit to them. At the end, the relationship was more "figurative" than real. The same happened to the MARN, which did not have a formal agreement signed with the USAID/El Salvador and the working relationship between both institutions was based on the general framework agreement only signed between the two Governments of the United States and El Salvador. The success of a project depends largely on the involvement of the counterparts in the entire cycle of the project, and the level and clarity of the co-responsibility formalized through various complementary mechanisms of cooperation (specific cooperative agreements, letters of understanding, service contract, and others), in which the project design, implementation methodology and monitoring mechanisms should be described into detail. The choice of the two partners SalvaNATURA and CLUSA was a factor of success in the implementation of the Project, because of the knowledge and experience of their staff with farmers from the project area who were interested in the protection of natural resources. However, those NGOs perceived their participation and relationship with the IMCCW Project and DAI being "subcontractors" and not as real "partners" in the Project. The design of the IMCCW Project was inadequate for not having incorporated a clear strategy of participation and the arrangements necessary to integrate them in the implementation of project activities, which resulted in an excess of “ownership” by DAI allowing the NGOs to lose the connection and control over their staff and their identity within the IMCCW Project. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 42 To rely on the knowledge and experience of the (national) local actors is a key strategy for success in the project implementation, but it is necessary to integrate in the project design a clear, effective and equitable participation strategy to ensure the involvement, commitment and strengthening of those local actors, in order to guarantee the sustainability of the processes after the project finishes. 6.4 THE IMPORTANCE OF CAPACITY BUILDING One of the most important contributions of the IMCCW Project, as mentioned by the coffee cooperatives, small farmers, small entrepreneurs of local tourism and local Governments, was its model of permanent education and technical assistance at different stages of the production chain, linked to the approach of using income generation as incentive for the conservation of natural resources. The systematic training of human capital, in the public as well as the private sector, under the logic of a social and entrepreneurial responsibility is one of the most important investments in biodiversity conservation efforts, which guarantees a broad and solid base in the processes of sustainable development. Most of the NGOs depend completely on international assistance for their sustainability and do not have the capacity to reduce such dependence. It is not enough to have technical experience when the organization does not have a financially sustainable and appropriate administrative structure. Financial support to an organization in order to make it efficient in its administration and to help it in its management of natural resources and biodiversity is not enough. It needs adequate mechanisms to become sustainable institutionally and economically, it has to have qualified staff and maintain a comprehensive vision and a clear idea about the raison d’être of the organization. 6.5 THE IMPORTANCE OF COMMUNICATION AND DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION When the IMCCW Project initiated, it did not introduce itself explaining to the target population its objectives and strategies. The majority of beneficiaries acknowledge that, as they were not told about how their actions would contribute to the achievement of the objectives of protection and as they never heard about the rest of the other components of the IMCCW Project, they did not feel themselves really integrated in the Project, which reduced the possibilities to exchange knowledge and experiences. When a project starts operating, it has to program during the first months events and materials to inform all stakeholders and beneficiaries in the project intervention area about the project and its planned activities, in order to assure that all are clear about the scope of the project. At the same time, opportunities must be created so that the community can express its ideas and be heard, in order to promote an integrated vision of the project, to ensure best results and to promote the sustainability of actions. The IMCCW Project gave a strong support to the generation and updating of information of good quality through studies and research; but in a lot of cases, the information was obtained just when the project was finishing and/or lacked feedback and transfer of the documents and information to the stakeholders and beneficiaries of the Project, limiting use and application26 . Timely and reasonably disclosed information ensures its use, and in particular ensures its implementation by the stakeholders and beneficiaries who are the most interested to make use out of it. 26 “Too much time of the most qualified people and consultants in many projects goes into producing voluminous documents that are never used”, from “What really works in watershed management: Some lessons from Guatemala”, October 2001. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 43 6.6 THE IMPORTANCE OF COORDINATION AND PARTNERSHIPS Through the integration of training activities with incentives for biodiversity conservation, important impact was achieved in the successful inclusion in areas such as marketing and commercialization. However, after the Project finished, the members of the private sector are challenged to continue a process without many linkages and with a weak support from local governments and the governmental institutions. The IMCCW Project did not enhance sufficiently the interrelationships of the municipalities with other stakeholders, limiting in this way the continuity of the actions of natural resources protection. The improvement of local capacities for environmental management and the active involvement of local governments with management capacity – so that they will be able to create opportunities and mechanisms for fluent communication and coordination with the local private sector – makes cooperation and joint action by the local public and private sectors possible, which represent the basic principles leading to an effective environmental management. The conservation activities of the marine turtle supported by the IMCWW Project has been an effort of different sectors involved, which includes “tortugueros”, local NGOs, municipalities and private companies. The same goes for the MARN, who considers the program as the integration of efforts of various actors, like MAG, CITES, CENDEPESCA, municipalities, Naval Force, communities and research institutes; all of them being conscious about the importance of working together in an integrated manner. To ensure the protection of the natural resources in a sustainable way, coordinated efforts and union of all sectors is crucial in order to achieve the best results and the highest impact. 7 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE PROGRAMMING AND STRATEGIES 7.1 ACTIONS TO BE CONTINUED In relation to the protected areas it is important, as a first step, to continue with the legalization of the remaining natural areas of the System of Protected National Areas, together with the elaboration of their management plans and their integration with the local communal development processes benefitting the local population in the buffer zones. On the other hand, with regard to the expansion of the agricultural frontier and the investments in canals and dams necessary to assure sufficient water supply, those efforts can be lost due to poor protection of the catchment areas. It is therefore important to emphasize the protection of the natural areas of the most important aquifers through strategic alliances with the communal water board. With respect to the conservation of marine turtles, it is clear that the reproduction of these species with use of the egg incubation corrals has been effective. Nevertheless, these efforts are diminished when the species are decimated because of water pollution caused by domestic and industrial waste and because of incidental fishing. That is why it is necessary to implement an adequate strategy and an integral action plan to protect the sea turtle. It is important to empower the tortuguero communities so that they will benefit directly from turtle conservation improving in this way their living standards, being crucial to introduce economical alternatives for the tortuguero families so as to ensure their sustainable wellbeing which will result in a reduction of the pressure of trading turtle eggs. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 44 The formation of a solid sector of coffee farmers and fruit and vegetable growers, oriented to environmental sustainability and competitiveness, requires improvements of their production systems, investments in new technologies allowing a production volume to respond to the market demand, and implies an adequate infrastructure for the production, harvest and post-harvest activities, agro-industry and marketing. This all demands efficiency and access to financial resources, which is normally restricted to this sector of small farmers, and which forms a barrier to any effort of future projects that try to promote technical and environmentally friendly programs. It corresponds to the public policies to create conditions to strengthen the competitiveness of this sector which has a lot of potential, but requires a major support from the government to develop and to consolidate the innovations necessary to upgrade their production systems. A new strategy to support the biodiversity sector through economic incentives in the agricultural production should include the promotion of sound coordination with the municipalities and governmental institutions to improve the road infrastructure facilitating the access to the markets and reducing the cost of transportation. This is an aspect that new projects should consider with more attention, because until this moment there has been little interaction with the local governments, who play an important role in the development of the competitive production chains. The productive reforestation, as was designed and implemented in the IMCCW Project, must be a constant and integral aspect in the future strategies, which not only is allowing the improvement of the quality of rural areas, but also responding to the need to stimulate the local development through the generation of new sources of employment, diversification of income and the opportunity to enter in the national and internal economy. The difference with the current situation compared to the former one is that the actors related to the productive chains are now more conscious about the contribution of sustainable agriculture to the equilibrium in the ecosystems. USAID should take in account that the accumulation of social capital depends on the capacity of the local agents to integrate and to consolidate a socio-institutional network, as well as the capacity to create synergies between the local efforts and the initiatives at national territorial level. Social capital refers to the formation of all types of organizations, their institutional structure, being formal and informal, including the legal and regulatory frameworks, their links and networks of all kinds, allowing concrete action and concerted decision making. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 45 7.2 STRATEGICS AND POLITICS The new USAID strategy and its politics in the biodiversity sector should continue to be governed by the identified priorities, the national politics and the established legal frameworks of El Salvador and the United States, and the experiences and lessons learned of the previous projects. The report on “Biodiversity and the tropical forest in El Salvador” 27 highlights the issues of the biodiversity of El Salvador, considering this country as one of the most vulnerable countries in the world because of its small national territory with only very few and small areas of primary forest28. The small amount of forests leads to mayor risks to disasters and inundations, and the little genetic diversity implies a greater vulnerability to the effects of climate change and more plagues and diseases. The overexploitation, the contamination of the natural resources and the future effects of climate change are considered as the principal threats to biodiversity. Based on the evaluation of the current situation of the biodiversity sector, the consultants have identified three areas of global actions/strategies: 1. Coordination of activities in the conservation area regarding to the identification, design, financing, implementation and evaluation of the actions in this area. The Governments/ Entities/ Organizations involved will be the GOES and its institutions (MARN, MAG, Ministry of Tourism, Municipalities), Universities, NGOs, other US Agencies (Millenium Challenge Corporation – MCC) and donors (EU, UNDP, OAS, SAIDC, GIZ, World bank, etc.). 2. Permanent strengthening of the capacity of the MARN (both at institutional and technical level, as well as the capability to integrate and coordinate politics and actions with the other Ministries) to identify, evaluate, prevent, mitigate or compensate the potential negative effects of development on biodiversity and forestry. 3. Finance priority conservation actions and assure that the activities financed by the USAID are well designed and implemented in an effective way. It is important that the actions take into account the lessons learned of the previous projects, that criteria of technical high quality are applied, that they will be based in a correct and detailed identification of the specific objective, and that a permanent evaluation and monitoring system is implemented. Still a wide range of options remains that include actions within29 as well as outside30 the protected areas; support to the definition of politics, strategies, laws and regulations; investigation; environmental education; conflict resolution and land use planning; public support to conservation; economic incentives and the creation of special funds to finance conservation activities. However, the prioritization must be guided in the first place by the national politics of the Salvadorian Government and in particular, by the politics and strategies of the MARN. The new policy of the current GOES puts a lot of emphasis on the reduction of risks and shared responsibilities, to transparent and accessible information, and to the promotion of synergy with the new national economic and social policies. The four themes which receive special attention under the present administration are: (i) Socio￾environmental risks; (ii) Contamination: (iii) Energy; and (iv) Territorial governance. 27 “Report on Biodiversity and Tropical Forest in El Salvador”, by Bruce Kernan and Francisco Serrano, March 2010. 28 21,000 Has of primary forests which correspond to only 1% of the total territory. 29 The legalization of the 89 pending NPA and those of the municipalities; Strengthening of the management of the eight main protection areas (Montecristo, San Diego-La Barra, El Imposible, Los Volcanes, Isla San Sebastián, Nancuchiname, Barra de Santiago, Zanjón de Chino-Santa Rita); The inclusion of the northwestern part of El Salvador. 30 Evaluation of the biological corridors and the buffer zones; Evaluation of previous conservation activities. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 46 Recently the Law of Land Use Planning and Development (ODT) was approved that involves land use planning which is based on sustainable development and the strengthening of the existing legal institutional framework. The Law (ODT) stresses the importance of the institutional coordination with respect to soil management, the need for active participation of the civil society and the development of technical and institutional capacities, which will start at the national level but will continue downwards with concrete actions at departmental, municipal and local levels. Within this context MARN´s strategy consists of the integration of the protected areas in the local and regional communal structures, trying to avoid an isolated kind of conservation management in the protected areas. It also promotes the social aspects of the ecosystems, in order to internalize the benefits derived from the ecosystem services by recognizing their contribution to the quality of life in the local communities and the Salvadoran society. Climate change affects in the first place the most ecologically vulnerable countries, and the adaptation to this phenomenon requires a high level of coordination, alignment and harmonization between the national and international authorities and donor agencies. This conjuncture as described above offers USAID a great opportunity to support and join these processes and to help to concretize actions which contribute to the implementation of a relevant strategic approach, starting at global and national level (strengthening the institutional and technical capacities) and descending to the local level, paying special attention to the geographical priority areas and promoting the involvement of the local governments and the civil society towards a sustainable social-economical and environmental impact. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 47 Appendices ANNEX 1 Terms of Reference of the Evaluation Mission ANNEX 2 Time Table of Activities ANNEX 3 Chronology of the Evaluation Mission ANNEX 4 List of Contacts ANNEX 5 General interview guide ANNEX 6 Interview guide for the Vice-Minister MARN ANNEX 7 Questionnaire for the ex-directors of the Project and the International Consultancy Companies of the Project Implementation Team ANNEX 8 Questionnaire for the national NGOs of the Project Implementation Team ANNEX 9 Methodology of the Workshops “Sistematization of Project Experiences” ANNEX 10 Participation of key stakeholders ANNEX 11 “Snowball” sampling method ANNEX 12 Methodology of the “Retroalimentación” workshop ANNEX 13 Database of the IMCCW-Project ANNEX 14 Bibliography ANNEX 1 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 48 ANNEX 1: Term of Reference of the Evaluation Mission Statement of Work for the Final Evaluation of the Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds Project and Future Sector Strategy I. Purpose The purpose of this evaluation is to analyze the effectiveness of the Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds (IMCCW) Project implemented by Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI), compile lessons learned, and determine a strategy for continuing work in the sector. The evaluation will generate information that can be used to improve the design and implementation of future activities managed by USAID. This evaluation will provide constructive guidance for future USAID-managed activities by: o Determining the effectiveness of a number of project aspects, such as the use of sea turtles as a flagship species for improving environmental conscience; o Identifying lessons learned to improve future projects; and o Developing a strategy for future work in the biodiversity sector. II. Summary of Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds Project The IMCCW Project supports USAID El Salvador's Strategic Objective, “Economic Freedom: Open, Diversified, Expanding Economies.” The project provides technical services for the effective management of selected areas of high biodiversity importance while promoting responsible economic growth in El Salvador. The activity is the cornerstone of USAID efforts to promote improved management of natural resources, improve the lives of local residents, and conserve biodiversity. The project used funds designated for biodiversity and complies with associated funding requirements. The project has two principal components: Component 1: Conservation of Biodiversity in Critical Watersheds has the objective of conserving biodiversity in the two major watersheds. Subcomponents of Component 1 cover a) studies and analysis, b) support to the legalization process for protected areas, c) expansion of areas under improved biodiversity management, d) increasing residents’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices of biodiversity and conservation, e) sustainable management of the Montecristo National Park and f) species based conservation on lower watersheds. Subcomponents e and f were added in late March 2009 when USAID signed Modification 5 to the contract. Component 2: Increased Income from Environmentally Sustainable Activities and Services has the objective of developing income generating opportunities that will reinforce long-term conservation within the activity areas. The project is charged to a) develop profitable and environmentally sustainable farming practices, b) promote new and emerging non-agricultural income sources, and c) develop new incentives for conservation through “payment for environmental services” (PES) mechanisms. Although USAID anticipated the selection of six targeted watersheds (sub-watersheds) from within the two major watersheds (Watershed C: Cara Sucia-San Pedro Belen and Watershed D Rio Grande de Sonsonate-Banderas), early analysis indicated that the protected areas that are the object of the project are disbursed throughout these two watersheds. Therefore, the project area is comprised of these two major watersheds. ANNEX 1 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 49 Selected activities were implemented with funding of CAFTA-DR (Subcomponent 1b to delineate protected natural areas and support training and communications activities). The project implementation team is led by Development Alternatives, Inc. working in association with SalvaNATURA, CLUSA–El Salvador, Academy for Educational Development, EplerWood International, Social Impact and, most recently, FUNZEL. The project is scheduled to end in March 2011. III. Background documents Interested prospective contractors will be provided applicable studies and reports produced under the IMCCW project upon written request to ssegbilateral@usaid.gov. The selected contractor will be expected to conduct a thorough assessment; hence the review must include, but not be limited to, the documents mentioned above. IV. Personnel A three to four person team with logistical/administrative support is envisioned that would include knowledge of the management and conservation of watersheds in El Salvador; knowledge of species based conservation; experience with environmentally sustainable farming and tourism; experience with institutional strategic planning; experience in financial mechanisms; and expertise in environmental law and compliance in El Salvador. To the maximum extent possible the team will include local expertise, but one of the team members could be an international consultant if necessary. Proven technical expertise in Salvadoran environmental issues and fluency in Spanish (level IV) are essential for all team members. Fluency in English (level IV) is required for at least one team member. The desired number of years experience in similar tasks should be no less than 10 years. V. Evaluation Tasks The team will carry out the following tasks: 1. Finalize a detailed work plan and schedule for carrying out this scope of work. The work plan will include a list of key contacts to be interviewed, including USG officials, host country counterparts, implementing partners and other key stakeholders. 2. Review the implementation experience of all elements of the IMCCW Project. For each element: • Highlight efforts that led to capacity building of local, national, and regional partners and efforts that contribute to sustainability; and • Identify critical opportunities and constraints to successful implementation. 3. The evaluator shall provide quantified and qualified answers to the following questions: Design / Implementation: a) Regarding design and implementation, what worked and what did not? Describe strengths and weaknesses of the activity. b) Describe the effectiveness of the participation of NGOs, environmental funds, public sector, private sector, and communities in the program. How could this aspect be improved? c) Describe the effectiveness of the implementing mechanisms (contract vs. cooperative agreement). Impacts / Results ANNEX 1 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 50 a) To what extent have the institutional, technical, physical infrastructure and administrative improvements or products delivered by the Activity been sustained? What is the likelihood the Activity’s components will be sustained by other partners beyond one year, three years, five years? What has been lost or has deteriorated? What, if anything, is worth rescuing? b) What impact has the Activity had in the Salvadoran public and private environmental sector? What has the impact been on the capacity of local NGOs? Who were the major beneficiaries and how did they benefit from the Activity? c) Describe the community-level impacts of the projects and any behavior or attitude changes against available baseline data. d) Describe any ways that the project supported the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (MARN) and built capacity. e) What policy changes, if any, led to positive change? f) Have any negative consequences resulted from the chosen approach? g) Determine if the use of sea turtles as a flagship species in El Salvador is effective. Has the use of sea turtles as a flagship species changed perceptions and attitudes towards the environment in general and coastal habitats in specific? A scientific method should be used to assess this topic. Future Activities a) What aspects of the project should be continued and how, including protected area management and sea turtle conservation? b) In general, what relevant lessons were learned and how might USAID/El Salvador (and other Missions) best use these lessons in future activities? c) Identify recommendations for top policy issues that remain. 4. The evaluator shall describe a strategy for future work in the sector based on results from the tasks above, considering improving citizen security and livelihoods. VI. Evaluation Methodology The methodology to perform the assignment will be proposed by the offeror for acceptance by USAID/El Salvador. The proposal shall describe how to meet the purpose of this particular evaluation and respond thoroughly to the specific questions formulated in this SOW. At a minimum, the evaluator is expected to review relevant activity design and implementation documents, interview current and former officers and technicians that played a key role in activity design and implementation, survey relevant stakeholders and beneficiaries, carry out field inspection of any infrastructure built with USAID funds, and undertake all other activities required to comply thoroughly with the assignment. The evaluator is expected to use an analytical approach to answer the questions outlined above. VII. Expected Deliverables The evaluator will be expected to submit the following reports or deliverables for USAID/El Salvador review and approval: • A preliminary work plan, presented 10 calendar days after signing the purchase order with USAID/El Salvador and before the evaluator begins the field assessment. USAID will provide comments, if any, within three work days. • A final work plan, presented within three work days of receiving comments. ANNEX 1 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 51 • A debrief at USAID/El Salvador and a draft evaluation report written in English and Spanish containing the evaluator’s responses to the evaluation tasks outlined above, presented 60 calendar days after signing the purchase order. USAID will provide comments, if any, within one week. • A final evaluation report, written in English and Spanish and incorporating USAID comments, to be submitted one week after comments have been received. USAID will approve the final evaluation report within six calendar days. Ten copies in English and ten in Spanish of the final approved report should be delivered to COTR. Electronic versions of the final approved report in English and Spanish should be provided to the COTR as well. The Contractor will also provide copies of all key background documents collected to the COTR. The evaluation report should include the following sections: • Executive Summary • Project Identification Data Sheet • Table of Contents • List of Acronyms • Background • Evaluation Purpose and Specific Objectives • Methods and Procedures • Presentation of Findings (based on empirical and scientific evidence) of Project Evaluation • Presentation of Conclusions (interpretations and judgments based on findings) • Lessons Learned • Recommendations for Future Programming/Strategies • Appendices, as appropriate The main body of the final evaluation report should be limited to not more than 50 pages in length. Detailed technical analyses may be appended to the report, as required. In addition, the evaluator will submit one electronic copy of the final report to the Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC) at the following address: Online (preferred): http://dec.usaid.gov or By mail (for pouch delivery): DEXS Document Submissions M/CIO/KM/DEC RRB M.01-010 Washington, DC 20523-6100 For questions on DEC submissions, contact M/CIO/KM/DEC Telephone: +1 202-712-0579 E-mail: DocSubmit@usaid.gov ANNEX 1 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 52 VIII. Timeframe for Performance It is expected that the effective period of the purchase order will be approximately 80 calendar days. IX. Logistics The selected contractor will be responsible for all logistics (travel arrangements, hotel reservations, contracting local support, local transportation, etc.) required to perform the assignment in a timely and effective manner. If applicable, the selected contractor will provide USAID/El Salvador with at least two weeks advance notice of their travel schedule to/from El Salvador in order to process the corresponding country clearances. X. Payment Two fixed payments will be made as follows: A first payment will be made within 30 days after receipt of an invoice and acceptance by USAID/El Salvador of the final work plan. A second and final payment will be made within 30 days after receipt of an invoice and acceptance by USAID/El Salvador of the final evaluation report described in this SOW. XI. Proposal Evaluation Criteria Technical proposals will be evaluated in terms of merits as follows: Criteria Weight 1. Technical proposal and methodology that are feasible and demonstrate an understanding of the sector 60% 2. Offeror/Staff qualifications and past experience* 40% *Offerors must briefly discuss past institutional experience in dealing with similar activities and provide contact information (names/phone numbers/email addresses) for past performance reference checks. Price has not been assigned a numerical rating but it will be examined and in the event of close technical ratings will become a determining factor for award. Technical and cost proposals must be submitted independently from each other and the proposed cost must be supported by a detailed budget. ANNEX 2 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 53 ANNEX 2: Timetable of Activities Project Activities Resp. Calendar Days May June July 9 19 20 31 1 10 11 20 21 30 1 10 11 20 21 31 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 A. Inception Phase 1.1 Briefing at USAID/El Salvador JV, AD, RC 1.2 Reception and review of background documents JV, AD, RC 1.3 Introduction of evaluation experts to key contacts and realization of exploratory interviews (semi-structured interviews) JV, AD, RC - CLUSA, SalvaNATURA, FUNZEL, MARN, FUNDARRRECIFE, Ex- coordinators IMCCW Project, EcoExperiencias, Cooperative ATAISI, Cooperative Las Lajas. 1.4 Realization of one exploring field visit JV, AD, RC 1.4.1 Visit to Los Cóbanos and Cerro Verde 1.4.2 Visit to coffee farmers 1.5 Presentation of preliminary work plan and schedule, which includes a list of key contacts to be interviewed (USG officials, host country counterparts, implementing partners and other key stakeholders). JV 1.6 Presentation of final work plan (including comments of USAID/El Salvador) JV B. Field assessment and data collection 2.1 Preparation of interviews, questionnaires and workshops JV, AD, RC 2.2 Programming of interviews and field visits AD, RC 2.3 Data collection (field visits, interviews, workshops, etc.) JV, AD, RC - 4 Workshops of Systematization of Experiences AD, RC C. Data processing and Analysis of evaluation findings 3.1 Data processing AD, RC 3.2 Data analysis JV, AD, RC 3.3 Additional data recollection AD, RC 3.4 Workshop of Retroalimentation: Presentation and discussion of preliminary results of evaluation process (with beneficiaries, ONG´s, communal organizations, responsible of project implementation, and national counterparts) JV D. Elaboration and Presentation of evaluation report 4.1 Elaboration of first draft of evaluation report JV, AD, RC 4.2 Debriefing at USAID/El Salvador and presentation of draft evaluation report (power point presentation) JV, AD, RC ANNEX 2 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 54 Project Activities Resp. Calendar Days May June July 9 19 20 31 1 10 11 20 21 30 1 10 11 20 21 31 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 4.3 Revision of draft report by USAID 4.4 Incorporation of USAID comments JV 4.5 Submission of final evaluation report JV 4.6 Approval of final evaluation report by USAID Visits of the Coordinator of the Evaluation Team to El Salvador Deliverables JV: Joke Vuurmans AD: Alicia Díaz RC: Ricardo Calles ANNEX 3 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 55 ANNEX 3: Chronology of the Evaluation Mission Day Date Place Activity 1 09/05/2011 ADEPRO Office Arrival of the international consultant; Meeting of the Evaluation Team 2 10/05/2011 USAID Office Introduction meeting of Evaluation Team with USAID Officials CLUSA Office Interview with the President and Treasurer of CLUSA 3 11/05/2011 Home of interviewee Interview with the ex-coordinator Component 2, IMCCW Project Salvadorean Tours Office Interview with the representative of EcoExperiencias SalvaNATURA Office Interview with the Director and responsible of Project Department of SalvaNATURA 4 12/05/2011 FUNZEL Office Interview with the Director and Technical of FUNZEL USAID Office Interview with USAID Official MARN Interview with MARN Public Officials 5 13/05/2011 Sonsonate/ Los Cóbanos Field visits to Sonsonate and Los Cóbanos: Coffee Cooperatives ATAISI and Las Lajas, and FUNDARRECIFE 6 14/05/2011 ADEPRO Office Meeting Evaluation Team 7 15/05/2011 REST 8 16/05/2011 San Salvador Preparation of interviews and revision of files on hard disk 9 17/05/2011 MARN Interview with MARN Sea Turtle Specialist and IMCCW Sea Turtle Specialist 10 18/05/2011 San Salvador Preparation of interview with Coffee Cooperatives; Document reading 11 19/05/2011 Home of interviewee Interview with the President of Montecarlos Farm FUNZEL Office Interview with IMCCW Project Consultant, FUNZEL’s former Vice-President 12 20/05/2011 FIAES Office Interview with General Manager of FIAES Home of interviewee Interview with independent Consultant, Francisco Serrano Home of interviewee Interview with Responsible for Coffee Certification, IMCCW Project 13 21/05/2011 San Salvador Document reading 14 22/05/2011 REST 15 23/05/2011 San Salvador Interview with the Ex-Director Marine Turtle Program, IMCCW Project Home of interviewee Interview with Ex-Coordinator, IMCCW Project 16 24/03/2011 Cooperative Office Interview with Gerente Cooperativa Los Pinos Cooperative Office Interview with Manager Coffee Cooperative La Majada 17 25/05/2011 Cooperative Office Interview with representative of Coffee Cooperative Los Ausoles de R.L. Cooperative Office Interview with representative of Cooperative Cuzcachapa Cooperative Office Interview with UNEX, S.A de C.V (Montealegre) San Salvador Interview with President of FUNDARRECIFE 18 26/05/2011 MARN Interview with Vice Minister MARN Parque Nacional Montecristo Interview with personnel of MNP y community representatives 19 27/05/2011 El Zonte, San Blas and San Diego beaches Interview with breeders from sea turtles incubation/esting corrals 20 28/05/2011 Skype conference: Follow-up and planning activities Evaluation Team 21 29/05/2011 REST 22 30/05/2011 ADEPRO Office Report writing, preparation of interviews, logistics workshops of systematization of project experiences. 23 31/05/2011 Montecristo National Park Workshop Systematization of Experiences “Sustainable Management of the Montecristo National Park” 24 01/06/2011 Sol Bohemio- San Blas Beach Workshop Systematization of Experiences “Sustainable Management of Sea Turtles” 25 02/06/2011 Hotel Ágape, Sonsonate Workshop Systematization of Experiences “Profitable and environmentally sustainable farming practices” 26 03/06/2011 MAG Interview with Coordinator Investment Management Unit, MAG 27 04/06/2011 REST 28 05/06/2011 29 06/06/2011 San Salvador Revision of Snowball Survey 30 07/06/2011 Hotel Ágape, Sonsonate Workshop of Systematization of Experiences “Ecotourism” ANNEX 3 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 56 Day Date Place Activity 31 08/06/2011 Office of Advertising Agency Interview with La Clínica /TBWA Advertising Agency Resumes workshops systematization experiencias 32 09/06/2011 San Salvador Corrections to Snowball Survey, consultations with publicist and technician from MARN, database processing. Report writing Resume Workshops on Systematization of Experiences 33 10/06/2011 San Salvador Corrections of Snowball Survey, consultations with publicist and technician from MARN, database processing; Interviews by telephone on sea turtles as flagship species and attitude change 34 11/06/2011 Skype conference: Follow-up and planning activities 35 12/06/2011 REST 36 13/01/2011 San Salvador Interviews by telephone on sea turtles as flagship species and attitude change Submission of resume workshops on Systematization of Experiences Processing of survey results 37 14/06/2011 San Salvador Interviews by telephone on sea turtles as flagship species and attitude change Interview with representative of Izalco Processing of survey results Feedback of Systematization of Experiences Report 38 15/06/2011 Consultores Interview with General Manager Coffee Cooperative San José de La Majada de R.L. Interview with Manager EcoExperiencias Elaboration of Progress Report Evaluation Mission 39 16/06/2011 MARN Interview with person in charge of delimitation of protected areas (MARN) Submission of resume workshops on Systematization of Experiences 40 17/06/2011 ADEPRO Office Progress Report Evaluation Mission 41 18/06/2011 Skype conference: Follow-up and planning activities 42 19/06/2011 REST 43 20/06/2011 San Salvador Sending questionnaire to three ex-Directors IMCCW Project; representatives of AED, EplerWood International, Social Impact; Preparation of Final Report Structure; Preparation of Workshop of “Retroalimentación” to be presented to USAID Feedback from Workshop Systematization of Project Experiences 44 21/06/2011 ADEPRO Office Analysis of evaluation results; Final Report writing; Preparation of list of participants of the Workshop Retroalimentación 45 22/06/2011 ADEPRO Office Mailing Progress Report to USAID; Analysis of evaluation results 46 23/06/2011 San Salvador Analysis of results and elaboration of Final Report 47 24/06/2011 San Salvador Analysis of results and elaboration of Final Report 48 25/06/2011 Skype conference: Follow-up and planning activities 49 26/06/2011 REST 50 27/06/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 51 28/06/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report Elaboration of Final Report 52 29/06/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 53 30/06/2011 San Salvador Introduction of corrections on basis of comments 54 01/07/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 55 02/07/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 56 03/07/2011 Hotel Mediterráneo Meeting Evaluation Team;, Elaboration Final Report; Preparation of Workshop “Retroalimentación” 57 04/07/2011 San Salvador Interview with Patricia Muñoz (Social Impact) and Ana Celia Dominguez (AED); Phone calls to participants of the Workshop “Retroalimentación”; Elaboration of Final Report 58 05/07/2011 San Salvador Interview with independent consultant (Francisco Serrano); Elaboration of Final Report; , Meeting Evaluation Team 59 06/07/2011 USAID Office Meeting with USAID Officials; Elaboration of Final Report 60 07/07/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report ANNEX 3 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 57 Day Date Place Activity 61 08/07/2011 Hotel Mediterráneo Workshop “Retroalimentación”; Analysis results of the workshop; planning pending activities 62 09/07/2011 San Salvador Meeting Evaluation Team 63 10/07/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 64 11/07/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 65 12/07/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 66 13/07/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 67 14/07/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 68 15/07/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 69 16/07/2011 San Salvador Skype conference: Follow-up and planning activities 70 17/07/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 71 18/07/2011 San Salvador Skype conference: Follow-up and planning activities 72 19/07/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 73 20/07/2011 San Salvador Elaboration of Final Report 74 21/07/2011 San Salvador Meeting Evaluation Team; Submission of the Draft Report Evaluation IMCCW Project to USAID (Spanish version) 75 22/07/2011 USAID Office Presentation of Draft Report Evaluation Mission to USAID Officials 76 23/07/2011 San Salvador Meeting Evaluation Team 77 25/07/2011 Revision Draft Report (Spanish version) 78 28/07/2011 Reception of USAID comments to the Draft Report (Spanish version) 79 29/07/2011 hasta 07/08/2011 Incorporation of the USAID comments into Draft Report (Spanish version) Translation of the Evaluation Report into English 80 08/08/2011 Submission of Draft Report Evaluation Mission to USAID (English version) 81 15/08/2011 Reception of USAID comments to the Draft Report (English version) 82 16/08/2011 hasta 21/08/2011 Incorporation of the USAID comments into Draft Report (English version) Revision Final Report (Spanish version) 83 22/08/2011 Submission of Final Reports Evaluation Mission to USAID (English and Spanish version) ANNEX 4 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 58 ANNEX 4: List of contacts INSTITUTION NAME FUNCTION ADDRESS PHONE E- MAIL ADDRESS U. S. Agency for International Development (USAID/El Salvador) Carlos Roberto Hasbún Regional Biodiversity Specialist Santa Elena, Antiguo Cuscatlán, El Salvador 2501-2456; 7736-9256 chasbun@usaid.gov Mary Latino de Rodríguez Economic Growth Office – Project Manager Santa Elena, Antiguo Cuscatlán, El Salvador 2501-3364; 2501-3747 marodriguez@usaid.gov Paul Schmidtke Environment and Natural Resources Regional Adviser for Central America/Mexico Santa Elena, Antiguo Cuscatlán, El Salvador 2501-3335 pschmidtke@usaid.gov Sophie Taintor Economic Growth Office - Engineer Santa Elena, Antiguo Cuscatlán, El Salvador 2501-3312 staintor@usaid.gov Carlos Milla Financial Analyst 2501-2999 Officials of the Government of El Salvador: Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (MARN) Herman Rosa Chávez Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources - Minister Kilómetro 5 ½ Carretera a Santa Tecla, Calle y Colonia Las Mercedes, (anexo al edificio ISTA) No. 2, San Salvador 2132-9407 hrosa@marn.gob.sv Lina Pohl Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources Vice￾Minister Kilómetro 5 ½ Carretera a Santa Tecla, Calle y Colonia Las Mercedes, (anexo al edificio ISTA) No. 2, San Salvador 2132-9407 lpohl@marn.gob.sv Jorge Quezada Responsible of Project Department Kilómetro 5 ½ Carretera a Santa Tecla, Calle y Colonia Las Mercedes, (anexo al edificio ISTA) No. 2, San Salvador 2132-9407; 7850-8278 jquezada@marn.gob.sv Marina Sandoval Office Adviser Kilómetro 5 ½ Carretera a Santa Tecla, Calle y Colonia Las Mercedes, (anexo al edificio ISTA) No. 2, San Salvador 2132-9407 msandoval@marn.gob.sv Carlos Figueroa Protected Natural Areas Delimitation Kilómetro 5 ½ Carretera a Santa Tecla, Calle y Colonia Las Mercedes, (anexo al edificio ISTA) No. 2, San Salvador 2420-5306 7850-4398 cfiguero@marn.gob.sv Celina Dueñas Wildlife Technician Kilómetro 5 ½ Carretera a Santa Tecla, Calle y Colonia Las Mercedes, (anexo al edificio ISTA) No. 2, San Salvador 7856-1420 cduenas@marn.gob.sv Ana Velásquez Forester at Environment and Natural Resources – MARN Playa Los Cóbanos 2420-5306; 7228-5369 Karen Cáceres Forester at Environment and Natural Resources – MARN Playa Los Cóbanos 2420-5306 Nelson Alfaro Forester at Environment and Natural Resources – MARN Playa Los Cóbanos 2420-5306 William Morán Forester at Environment and Natural Resources – MARN Playa Los Cóbanos 2420-5306 ANNEX 4 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 59 INSTITUTION NAME FUNCTION ADDRESS PHONE E- MAIL ADDRESS Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería (MAG) Siguifredo Caballero Public Investment Management – Coordinator Final 1ª Avenida Norte, 13 Calle Poniente y Avenida Manuel Gallardo, Santa Tecla, Depto. La Libertad 2241-1750; 2241-1700; 2210-1903 (directo) Siguifredo.caballero@mag.gob.sv Centro Nacional de Registro (CNR) Elizabeth de Cobar International Relations, Cooperation and Conventions Unit - Director 2261-8410 7039-3091 elizabeth.cobar@cnr.gov.sv Contractor IMCCW Project: Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI) Michelle Marie Gibboney 301-771- 7940 (US) michelle_gibboney@dai.com Steve Romanoff First Project Director 301-771- 7600 (US) Steve_Romanoff@dai.org Marvin Dreyer Second Project Director 2211-9575; 7737-4038 marvindreyer@hotmail.com Christopher Kernan Third Project Director ckernan@hughes.net Project Implementación Team: CLUSA El Salvador José León Bonilla Chief Executive Calle la Ceiba, 3ª Calle Poniente #5010, Colonia Escalón, San Salvador 2264-7046; 2264-7105 leonbo@integra.com.sv direccionclusa@clusa.org José Gil Magaña Treasurer Calle la Ceiba, 3ª Calle Poniente #5010, Colonia Escalón, San Salvador 7839-8366 gilmagaña@hotmail.com Fundación SALVANATURA Álvaro Moisés Chief Executive 33 Av. Sur #640, Colonia Flor Blanca, San Salvador 2279-1515; 2279-0212 alvaro.moisis@salvanatura.org Marta Lilian Quezada Los Pericos Urban Ecological Park – General Manager Gender Issues 33 Av. Sur #640, Colonia Flor Blanca, San Salvador 2279-1515 marta.quezada@salvanatura.org Fundación Zoológica de El Salvador (FUNZEL) Alex Hasbún Chief Executive Av. Las Palmas #192, Colonia San Benito, San Salvador 2211-8044; 7934- 7873 direccion@funzelsv.org Carmen Soriano Sea Turtle National Program – Coordinator Av. Las Palmas #192, Colonia San Benito, San Salvador 2211-8044; 7905-0343 csoreiano@funzelsv.org Academy for Educational Development (AED) Ana Celia Dominguez AED IMCW Project Coordinator 7985-7066; 2223-0534 adominguez@aed.org. acdominguez@chemonics.com Social Impact Douglas Kerr 703.465.18 84 info@socialimpact.com Danielle de Garcia ddgarcia@socialimpact.com Violeta Muñoz violeta@integra.com.sv Patricia Muñoz patti@deanpatti.com EplerWood Megan Epler Wood 802.999.99 20 (US) info@EplerWood.com Holly Jones hollyjones.eplerwood@yahoo.co m; servicelearning.ea@gmail.com Experts contrated by the IMCCW Project: IMCCW Project Edgardo Molina IMCCW Project Component 1 Coordinatoor Monte Sion ,4ª Av. Norte, Calle Las Sabanas. Senda El Volcán #23. 7883-8920 jmolina70@hotmail.com Ricardo Mejía Quality Coffee Certification Coordinator rama1959@hotmail.com ANNEX 4 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 60 INSTITUTION NAME FUNCTION ADDRESS PHONE E- MAIL ADDRESS Ernesto Cerrito Board of Water - Coordinator 7723-2473 cerritosmoises@yahoo.com José Roberto Duarte Water Balance - Consultant Carretera Panamericana Resd. El Carmen #3, cerca del Country Club duartesal@yahoo.com Consultant Enriqueta Ramírez VIVAZUL – Director 7450-4278 eenriqueta@yahoo.com Víctor Moran Sea Turtle –sea turtlebreeder Playa Los Cóbanos Beneficiaries of the IMCCW Project: Fundación para la Protección del Arrecife de Los Cóbanos (FUNDARRECIFE) María Elena Sol Chief Executive 3a. Calle Pte. y 99 Av. Nte. # 5020 Zona: Colonia Escalón 2223-6767; 7880-0354 maelsol@integra.com.sv Salvadorean Tours (EcoExperiencias) Rodrigo Moreno General Manager Centro Comercial Feria Rosa, #B-118, San Salvador 2243-6113; 7468-0911 rodrigo@experienciaselsalvador.c om Cooperativa Las Lajas Germán Javier Chávez General Manager Cantón Las Lajas, Izalco, Sonsonate 2483-4393; 2483-4662 germanjavierchavez@yahoo.com Cooperativa ATAISI Joaquín Alfredo Galdámez Chief Executive Beneficio San Isidro, ATAISI. Carretera a Sonsonate, desvío Cerro Verde km. 45 2483-4713; 2483-4617 Cooperativa Los Pinos Sigfredo Benítez General Manager Cantón Los Pinos, Municipio de El Congo, departamento de Santa Ana 2434-0038; 2273-4642; 7703-4134 cooplospinos_sv@yahoo.es Sociedad Cooperativa de Cafetaleros Los Ausoles de R.L. Atilio Magaña Chief Executive Ahuachapán 2403-0028; 7899-3633 presidencia@cooperativalosausol es.com Cooperativa de Cafetaleros de San José de La Majada de R.L. Nelson Stanley Sigüenza Responsible of the Coffee Mill Cantón San José La Majada, Juayúa, Sonsonate 2484-1400; 7850-2280 ingbeneficio@cafemajadaoro.co m.sv nelsonsiguenza@hotmail.com Cofinanzas, S.A. de C.V Marco Batres Chief Executive Cantón El Barro, Ahuachapán 2264-3441; 7736-2348 mbatres@cofinanzas.com UNEX, S.A. de C.V. Oscar Flores General Manager Chalchuapa, Santa Ana 2298-8609 oflores@unexelsalvador.com Montecarlos Carlos Batres Chief Executive Cantón Suntecumat, Ahuachapán 2263-4044 montecarlos@integra.com.sv Others: Bioproductores Dr. Francisco Serrano Independent Consultant General Manager 1a Calle poniente No. 3126, Col .Escalón entre 59 y 61 Av. Norte. San salvador. 2260-5158; 7396-5763 bioproductores-us@usa.net Fondo Iniciativas para las Américas (FIAES) Jorge Alberto Oviedo Machuca General Manager 65a. Avenida Sur No. 132, Colonia Escalón. San Salvador. 2223-6498 (Ext.102) jorge.oviedo@fiaes.org.svgerenci a.general@fiaes.org.sv ANNEX 5 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 61 ANNEX 5: General interview guide NAME OF ORGANIZATION/ INSTITUTION: Date of Foundation: Name of the interviewee: Function: 1. Main activities: 2. Relationship with IMCCW: a. For what reason? b. When and for how long? c. What was your relationship with the Project and under which conditions? d. What was its objective? e. What kind of activities? 3. What is your opinion about the IMCCW Project? a. Strengths b. Weaknesses 4. What have been the main achievements? (mention the most important five achievements) a. of your own activities related to IMCW b. of IMCCW in general terms 5. What are the most important problems you have found? (mention 3 problems) 6. What are the most important results? (5 most important) 7. Gender approach (participation, decision making, benefits, effects, etc.) 8. Cost of activities? 9. In what sense was your organization strengthened or weakened? 10. What would you have done without USAID? 11. What would you repeat? 12. What would you do different? 13. Lessons learned 14. Success stories 15. Suggestions for future projects ANNEX 6 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 62 ANNEX 6: Interview guide for the Vice-Minister MARN 1. What is your opinion about the IMCCW Project intervention strategy? a. Concerning integration/complement to conservation aspects/ protection with economic aspects/ productive (income sources) by means of environmentally sustainable projects (agricultural and non￾agricultural). For example: Shade-grown coffee as biological corridor to connect protected natural areas. b. Do you think the Project has visualized and promoted this connection/interrelationship? i. For example in the case of Montecristo National Park? In what sense YES, in what sense NO? Please, explain why? ii. In the case of Sea Turtle Project? In what sense YES, in what sense NO? Please, explain why? iii. In the case of certified coffee or organic horticultural production? In what sense YES, in what sense NO? Please, explain why? iv. In the case of ecotourism? In what sense YES, in what sense NO? Please, explain why? 2. Apart from USAID, is there any other donor from whom MARN receives support? a. Who are they and are there any differences in strategies/policies between various donors? What are the differences, advantages and disadvantages? b. And as for biodiversity specifically, apart from USAID, is there any other donor from whom MARN receives support? Who are they? What are the differences in strategies/policies? 3. What changes in policies or environmental strategies were supported by the IMCCW Project? 4. What behavior and attitude changes have been promoted by the Project at the institutional level and with its beneficiaries? 5. To what extent do you consider the Project strengthened the institutional capacities of the Ministry? 6. What were the main strengths and weaknesses of the Project? 7. To what extent has the Project promoted the equality of opportunities and women’s rights (gender mainstreaming)? 8. If a similar project would be started, what would you do the same and what different, and why? 9. What are the lessons learned that can be identified by the experience with the IMCCW Project? 10. What do you suggest as key strategies and policies for the near future in the biodiversity sector? ANNEX 7 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 63 ANNEX 7: Questionnaire for the ex-directors of the Project and the International Consultancy Companies of the Project Implementation Team NAME: Terms of Direction of IMCCW Project: from [date] to [date] 1. What is your opinion about the IMCCW Project intervention strategy? a. Concerning integration/complement to conservation aspects/ protection with economic aspects/ productives (income sources) by means of environmentally sustainable projects (agricultural and non-agricultural)? b. Do you think the Project has visualized and promoted this connection/interrelationship? c. For example in the case of Montecristo National Park? In what sense YES, when NO? Please, explain why? d. In the case of Sea Turtle Project? In what sense YES, when NO? Please, explain why? e. In the case of certified coffee or organic horticultural production? In what sense YES, when NO? Please, explain why? f. In the case of ecotourism? In what sense YES, when NO? Please, explain why? 2. What changes in policies or environmental strategies were supported by the IMCCW Project? 3. What do you consider the strengths of IMCCW Project? And what are the weaknesses? 4. What were the main achievements (5 in order of importance, the most significant first)? a) b) c) d) e) 5. What behavior and attitude changes have been promoted by the Project at institutional level and with its beneficiaries? 6. To what extent do you consider the Project strengthened/weakened the institutional/organizational capacity, and why? a. The Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (MARN)? b. NGOs: i. SalvaNatura ii. CLUSA-El Salvador iii. FUNZEL c. Other (please mention) 7. To what extent the Project has promoted the equality of opportunities and women’s rights (gender mainstreaming)? 8. If a similar project would be started, what would you do the same and different and why? 9. What are the lessons learned that can be identified by your experience with the IMCCW Project? (please, describe) 10. What do you suggest as key strategies and policies for the near future in the biodiversity sector? ANNEX 8 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 64 ANNEX 8: Questionnaire for the national NGOs of the Project Implementation Team Name of the Organization: Year of Foundation: Objectives of the Organization: Mission: Criteria BEFORE their involvement in the IMCCW Project AFTER their involvement in the IMCCW Project Institutional building (between 1-5; 1 very good and 5 bad): Total number of personnel on payroll (specify men and women) Total number of technicians on payroll (specify men and women) % of women on Board of Directors Office (property or rented) Total number of vehicles Total number of computers Total number of producers in CLUSA network Total number of partnerships (please mention name of partner) Technical Capacity (between 1-5; 1 very good and 5 bad) Total number of technicians “borrowed” to IMCCW Project (specify men and women) Total number of technicians who returned to the organization after Project closure (specify men and women) Did the organization receive training from the IMCCW Project? In what subjects? Has the organization received information, data, and documents from the IMCCW Project? ANNEX 8 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 65 Criteria BEFORE their involvement in the IMCCW Project AFTER their involvement in the IMCCW Project Financial Capacity (between 1-5; 1 very good and 5 bad): Source of income through fund raising (name of donor + total amount) Source of income through sale of services (type of service + total amount): Participation of the NGO in the IMCCW Project: - Project’s design (Yes/No) - Execution of the Project (Yes/No) - Project closure procedure and transfer of the Project (Yes/No) - Evaluation of the Project (Yes/No) FINAL QUESTION: What did the NGO gain with the IMCCW Project? What did the NGO loose with the IMCCW Project? ANNEX 9 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 66 ANNEX 9: Methodology of the Workshops “Sistematization of Project Experiences” 1. Objetivos: General: To promote the interactive reflection among the key actors to recover and capitalize their experiences; and to identify the lessons learned to improve future practices. Specific: 1. To develop 4 workshops of systematization of experiences related to the following environmental issues: Sea Turtle Project; Sustainable Management of the Montecristo National Park; Environmentally Sustainable Production; and Eco-Tourism. 2. To identify and reconstruct the experience, taking into account the main actions developed and to describe: the initial situation and the current situation for each of the initiatives. 3. To identify the lessons learned through the experience developed in each of the topics identified. 4. To describe the processes and emphasizing the key actions, those who participated and their relationship with the biodiversity, the organizational/institutional strengthening and gender approach 2. Methodology For the systematization of experiences, it is important to create the most adequate conditions for the participants, being stakeholders who have been involved in the development of the experiences, to make a retrospective reading of the processes, participatory and reflective reading whose purpose is the recovery of the processes and the capitalization of experiences, identifying lessons learned to improve the future practices. This will allow counting with a qualitative interpretation of the experiences of the participants; and identifying the learning and the generation of new knowledge to improve daily practice. In addition, the methodology to be applied to the systematization of experiences is based on a theoretical and practical scheme developed in 1994 by Alforja31 for popular education sector, which has gained much recognition in Latin America. The subjects to systematize have already been identified, which are four: Sea Turtle Project, Montecristo National Park, environmentally sustainable production and eco-tourism. Of each one of the experiences will be obtained: (i) a recovery of the developed process, identifying (ii) the key moments, (iii) the participants, (iv) the main achievements obtained, and (v) the relationship with the biodiversity sector, strengthening organizational / institutional and gender focus. It is a valuation on those actions which according to the vision and experience of the participants would do the same or differently and why. This will allow arriving to the main lessons learned, to have a vision for future actions and with a view to the sustainability of the processes. 31 “Para sistematizar experiencias”, Oscar Jara (1994). ANNEX 9 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 67 Materials: Attendance register Big sheets for the workshop Permanent markers Masking tape Rolls Coloured paper cards Badges and stickers. Anlasys, synthesis and data processing Lessons learned Future actions Sustainability of the process Conclusions Reconstruction of the processes Organization of the information and key moments, classification of the gathered information and identification of the main phases ANNEX 10 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 68 ANNEX 10: Participation of key stakeholders Table 1: Key stakeholders and its participation in the IMCCW Project Stakeholder Participation MARN Design and Implementation (Counterpart contribution of about U.S. $3 million, receiving training, passive and partial participation) Governmental institution, main counterpart which participated in the design of the subcomponent of settlement and legalization of protected areas, the Montecristo National Park and the Sea Turtles Conservation Program. Its participation consisted of the revision and approval of key documents belonging to the other subcomponents. Specific training was provided for the technicians who work at Montecristo National Park. MAG Implementation (Counterpart contribution of funds, receiving training) Government institution, which basically was involved in two instances in the Project: CENDEPESCA y PREMODER: • Joined the Project to give support to update small production methods and the conservation of natural resources. • AVES and FOCAGRO/MAG granted US$10,400 for the facilities to produce Bocashi fertilizer by using a variety of waste. • The project personnel provided technical support to communities and to MAG representatives to help in the production by using irrigation and conservation projects. • Beneficiaries of the Project were supported to apply conservation measures with the incentives vegetables production and measures for water conservation. • Coordinated the development of a business plan for the ecologic tourism centre “Casa de Cristal”, located in the Cooperative ATAISI, who granted US$50,000 to finance the project. • Participated in the design of the master plan for the tourist development of the Cooperative Los Pinos. On behalf of CENDEPESCA in particular, this counterpart institution participated in the process of delimitation and demarcation of the natural area Los Cóbanos and organized with MARN and USAID a public celebration of the natural area Los Cóbanos declaration. It was also presented the results of the sea turtle egg commercialization, to obtain approval and thereafter be presented at the international conference on Hawksbill turtle. CNR Implementation (main subject) Governmental institution in charge of providing the cadastral information of the protected natural areas that would be delimited and legalized. Its participation was to provide information only. ISTA Implementation (main subject) Governmental institution in charge of transferring land to peasants. Its participation consisted of providing information and the delimitation and legalization of the protected areas. FIAES Implementation (provision of financial resources, information and contacts) Financial agency that supports projects of environment protection and recovery; has a long history of sea turtle projects. Its participation consisted in providing information and contacts on protected areas and coastal -marine communities. ANNEX 10 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 69 Stakeholder Participation Local Governments Implementation (provision of information and financial resources, available facilities, support technicians) • Provided the facilities of the municipalities for workshops and training to take place. • Committed to promote the sustainability for the infrastructure created by the project. • Coordinated and actively participated in the best management of natural resources of the municipality. • In some cases new rule were issued to protect and preserve the environment. • They showed willingness to join the technicians to help, coordinate and supervise the activities for common benefit and provided by the project. • Complemented compensation funds to develop the Project. Provided key information needed in the Project to run some environmental issues and activities. SalvaNATURA Implementation (contribution of knowledge and experience) Co-performer conservation organization, participated in the preparation of studies and analysis (baselines, biodiversity inventories, monitoring of indicator species, etc.) in the project area. It also supported the farmers interested in implementing on-farm best practice in sustainable production and biodiversity-friendly, promoted the Sustainable Agriculture Standard and efficiently achieved Rainforest Alliance certification. Their participation was of consultation in relation to the main threats facing biodiversity in the sub-project. CLUSA Implementation (contribution of knowledge and experience) Co-performing institution that provides knowledge and expertise in activities related to developing profitable and environmentally sustainable farming practices (component 2A). Specifically speaking, CLUSA contributed with technical knowledge related to: • Organic farming practices; • Certification of organic farming exploitations; • Profitable crops for small agricultural producers; • Processing, packaging and marketing of crops produced by small producers; and • Agreements with national food producers and international distributors. FUNZEL Implementation (contribution of knowledge and experience) Conservative Co-performing Organization participated in the design and implementation of sea turtle conservation, providing technical assistance in the management of hatcheries for the Project and other private initiatives. It is the organization that received the most support from the project (institutional restructuring, technical and financial support, donation of office equipment and transport). FUNDARRECIFE Design and Implementation (receiver training, guidance, technical and financial support) Governmental organization co-management of Los Cóbanos natural area. Its participation consisted of providing biological information including the first management plan drawn by the Sea Science Institute of El Salvador University. The project supported FUNDARRECIFE with the delimitation and declaration of the Los Cóbanos Marine Protected Area, environmental education in the area, revising and updating the area management plan and donating office equipment. Cooperatives Implementation (co-management in specific subject and geographical location) Cooperative Associations (governed by the General Law of Cooperative Associations and had its origin and development during the Agrarian Reform) and Cooperative Societies (or private cooperatives governed by the Commercial Code) that: • Guaranteed the participation of all members in applying constant improvements in their farms. • Gave information on their farm (location and size) with conditions for the certification. • Allocated personnel to support the training activities and technical assistance to farms, producers and exporters benefited by the project. • Provided data of their production and sales of certified coffee required by the Project for report purposes. ANNEX 10 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 70 Stakeholder Participation Individual farmers Implementation (provision of information and personnel) Beneficiaries ready to accept technological changes, follow recommendations for cultivation management and activities to protect land/water suggested by technicians in the project. • Participated appropriately in the Project activities orientated to clean production and the development of land and water conservation activities. • Participated in the environmental/educational processes. • Implemented agricultural diversification with sustainable and profitable investments with the advice of technicians. • Shared and discussed the knowledge and experience with other producers in the area. • Provided information on their farms for the project report purposes. • Agreed to give the piece of land, labor, agricultural inputs and some other items available in the area, as compensation. • After receiving the support from the project, the producers were committed to continue the practices to preserve and maintain land, applying clean agriculture technology. Tortuguero communities Implementation (beneficiary, receiving training and TA, with provision of information, labor, plot, supplies and materials) The Project provided technical assistance to 31 coastal co-operatives in the management of sea turtles incubation farmyards; but made more effort by providing specific support to find economic alternatives in Barra de Santiago beach (breeding mollusk), San Diego (ecotourism guest house), Jiquilisco Bay (artificial reef), and Amatecampo-La Zunganera (Vocational Centre) Los Cóbanos Tours Implementation (Beneficiary, receiving financial support and AT) Group of tour guides in Los Cóbanos Marine Protected Area (it has no legal status). The support provided by the Project focused on strengthening group organization through training in the field of ecotourism and use of equipment Tourism guides MNP Implementation (beneficiary, receiving training) Group of young tourism workers of the Montecristo NP, benefited by the project in the following areas: • Training in the biodiversity of the park • First aid training • Legal advisory • Equipment Asociación Cooperativa de Artesanos de Bambú de Montecristo Implementation (beneficiary, receiving training, acquisition support pers. legal) Group of artisans of Montecristo NP. The Project supported them with training in the development of Bamboo furniture and also in the organization and acquisition of legal status. ANNEX 10 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 71 Table 2: Transfer of goods by the IMCCW Project at the end of its implementation Organization Present value Goods FUNZEL US$ 91,962.08 4 vehicles, 20 computers, 3 GPS, photocopier, scanner, telephone equipment, office equipment , others SalvaNATURA US$ 39,407.97 2 vehicles, 7 computers, office equipment Chemonics32 US$ 36,793.38 2 vehicles, 2 computers, 1 scanner, others MARN US$ 29,324.31 1 vehicle, 5 computers, 3 GPS, 2 solar panel, 1 electric generator, 1 chainsaw, office equipment, others CLUSA US$ 18,915.30 1 vehicles , 3 computers, 3 GPS, office equipment FIAES US$ 17,866.57 1 vehicles, 3 computers, 3 GPS, office equipment, others 32 Proyecto Regional MAREA “Manejo de Recursos Acuáticos y Alternativas Económicas” ANNEX 11 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 72 ANNEX 11: “Snowball” sampling method “Snowball” sampling method This sampling method is suitable for studies of clandestine minorities or widely dispersed populations. It consists of identifying the persons to be included in the sample by the interviewees themselves. The sampling starts on the basis of a small number of individuals who meet the necessary requirements, where after these serve to detect others with similar characteristics to be included in the sample. No criteria or established rules exist with regard to the size of the sample, which is determined on the basis of the information needed. One of the sampling principles is the saturation of data; in other words, the sample size grows steadily till no longer new information is obtained and it begins to be redundant. The sampling process evolves as follows: 1. The investigator begins with a general notion of where and with whom to start. For this purpose procedures of convenience or avalanche are often used. 2. The sample is selected in a serial manner, i.e., successive members of the sample are chosen based on the already selected members and the kind of information provided by them. 3. Frequently informants are used to facilitate the selection of the most appropriate persons with new information. 4. The sample is adjusted on the fly. The new conceptualizations help to focus the sampling process. 5. The sampling continues until no new information is recollected anymore, reaching a level of saturation of information. Ana Belén Salamanca Castro, Cristina Martín-Crespo Blanco, “El muestreo en la investigación cualitativa” Nure Investigación, nº 27, Marzo-Abril 07 http://www.nureinvestigacion.es/FICHEROS_ADMINISTRADOR/FMETODOLOGICA/FMetodologica27.pdf ANNEX 11 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 73 Place and Date of Survey I. SOCIAL/DEMOGRAPHIC DATA 1. Sex 1. Man 2. Woman 2. Age 1. 18-30 year-old 2. 30-40 year-old 3. 40-50 year-old 4. 50 onwards. 3. Income 1. One minimum wage 2. Two minimum wages 3. Three minimum wages 4. Higher than three minimum wages. 4. Education 1. None 2. Basic 3. Standard 4. Higher. II. ENVIRONMENTAL PRACTICES 5. Do you recycle trash at home? 1. Yes 2. No 6. Do you use plastic bags at home? 1. Yes 2. No 7. Do you know what climate change means? 1. Yes 2. No 8. Is environmental awareness improving in your country? 1. Yes 2. No 3. Do not know 9. Do you use environmentally friendly products? 1. Yes 2. No 3. Do not know ANNEX 11 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 74 III. SEA TURTLES 10. Do you help keep the beach clean? 1. Yes 2. No 11. Did you know that sea turtles are threatened to extinction? 1. Yes 2. No 12. When did you eat sea turtle eggs for the last time? 1. This year 2. Last year 3. Long time ago 4. Never (Go to question 15) 13. Would you agree to eat other sea food rather than sea turtle eggs? 1 Yes 2. No 14. Did your environmental awareness improve when you stopped eating sea turtle eggs? 1. Yes 2. No 15. Did your attitude towards the sea turtles change before or after the campaign? 1. Before 2. After 3. Never heard about the campaign 16. Have you achieved other changes in your attitude towards the environment in general? 1. Yes 2. No 17. Are you more proactive with environmental sustainability? 1. Save power 2. Save water 3. Throw away less rubbish 4. None 18. Have you ever informed the authorities about sea turtle eggs sellers? 1. Yes 2. No 3. If you answered 4 in question 12 go to question 20 19. Do your kids protest when you buy or eat turtles eggs? 1. Yes 2. No 20. Did you know that E. S. is the country with the highest production of turtle eggs in the Pacific Ocean? 1. Yes 2. No ANNEX 11 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 75 Table A. Distribution of men who consume turtle eggs by age and income level SALARY Men/Age Total % 18 - 30 % 31 - 40 % 41 - 50 % Más de 50 % Total 15 57.7 5 19.2 5 19.2 2 7.7 3 11.5 A minimum salary 7 26.9 4 15.4 3 11.5 0 0 0 0 Two minimum salaries 3 11.5 0 0 0 0 2 7.7 1 3.8 Three minimum salaries 1 3.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3.8 More than three minimum salaries 4 15.4 1 3.8 2 7.7 0 0 1 3.8 Table B. Distribution of women who consume turtle eggs by age and income level SALARY Women/Age Total % 18 - 30 % 31 - 40 % 41 - 50 % More than 50 % Total 11 42.3 1 3.8 2 7.7 1 3.8 7 26.9 A minimum salary 3 11.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11.5 Two minimum salaries 1 3.8 1 3.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 Three minimum salaries 3 11.5 0 0 2 7.7 0 0 1 3.8 More than three minimum salaries 4 15.4 0 0 0 0 1 3.8 3 11.5 Table C. Distribution of people by knowledge of campaign and conducting environmental practices Change of attitudes Total % Before the campaign % After the campaign % Never heard about the campaign % Total 116 100 59 50.9 36 31.0 21 18.1 Table D. Distribution of persons consuming turtle eggs campaign awareness When did you eat sea turtle eggs Change of attitudes Total % Before the campaign % After the campaign % Never heard about the campaign % Total 116 100.0 59 51 36 31.0 21 18.1 This year 7 6.0 1 0.9 2 1.7 4 3.4 Last year 19 16.4 1 0.9 13 11.2 5 4.3 A long time ago 90 77.6 57 49.1 21 18.1 12 10.3 Table E. Distribution of consumers of turtle eggs for knowledge endangered status of sea turtles Know about the endangered status of sea turtles Consumers Total % Recent consumer % Former consumer % Total 116 100.0 26 22.4 90 77.6 Yes 107 92.2 24 20.7 83 71.6 No 9 7.8 2 1.7 7 6.0 Table F. Distribution of persons reported to the authorities the illegal sale of sea turtle eggs Consumers Denouncement of sellers of sea turtle eggs Total % Yes % No % Total 116 100.0 6 5.1 110 94.8 Resent consumer 26 22.4 - - 26 22.4 Former consumer 90 77.6 6 5.1 84 72.4 ANNEX 12 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 76 ANNEX 12: Methodology of the “Retroalimentación” workshop 1. Objectives: General: To conduct a participatory feedback session about the preliminary findings of the Final Evaluation of the IMCCW Project "Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds" with its key stakeholders Specific: 1. To inform the participants of the workshop about the applied methodological design and instruments used for the Final Evaluation. 2. To present the preliminary findings on the design and implementation of the IMCCW Project, its impact and results, and lessons learned. 3. Further joint analysis and reasoning. 4. To formulate recommendations on key issues. 5. To define future strategies for the biodiversity sector. 2. Methodology of the workshop: For the feedback of the preliminary conclusions of the Final Evaluation, a methodology and special techniques will be used allowing dynamic interaction between the Evaluation Team and key stakeholders who have been involved in the implementation of the IMCCW Project. Through a Power Point presentation the participants will be informed about the methodological design and data collection instruments used by the Evaluation Team where after the preliminary findings will be presented according to the evaluation criteria with respect to the Project´s design and implementation and its impacts and results. Subsequently, some of the most important lessons learned will be discussed with the participants. 1. Design and Implementation a. Strengths and Weaknesses of the Action (what worked and what did not work?) b. Participation of the key stakeholders (what was its effectiveness?) c. Implementation Mechanisms 2. Impacts and Results a. Continuity and Sustainability b. Benefits and Capacity Building c. Changes in attitudes d. Changes of policy e. Project strategy f. The sea turtle as flagship species 3. Lessons learned The Power Point presentation by the Evaluation Team offers an important input to the participants to its analysis and reasoning of the various evaluation subjects and to make observations and to draw recommendations on specific topics. Working in subgroups will facilitate active involvement of the participants of the workshop. After the plenary presentation by each subgroup of their results, recommendations for the biodiversity sector will be formulated with regard to its comprehensive concept, specific actions, as well as politics and strategies for the future. ANNEX 12 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 77 Materials: Attendance register Big sheets for the workshop Permanent markers Masking tape Rolls Colour sugar paper cards Badges and stickers. Future strategies for biodiversity sector Preliminar conclusions of the evaluation: -Design/Implementation - Impact/Results - Lessons learned Methodological design of the evaluation & Information Recollection Instruments Analysis and reasoning Recomendations ANNEX 13 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 78 ANNEX 13: Database of the IMCCW-Project Table 1: Baseline Studies BASELINE STUDIES Year (to be finished according to plan) Year (effectively finished) 1 Baseline Study 1: Quick evaluation to determine the main threatens to biological resources in southwestern El Salvador January 15, 2007 March 2007 2 Baseline Study 2: Preliminary Inventory in eleven watersheds located in southwest El Salvador: State of the flora and fauna according to an inventory made in 2006 January 15, 2007 November 2008 3 Baseline Study 3: Initial allocation of land use and land owning pattern within the six prioritized watersheds at the southeast El Salvador January 15, 2007 January 2009 4 Baseline Study 4: The supply and demand for water within the six prioritized watersheds March 15, 2007 June 2007 5 Baseline Study 5: Detailed inventories of some of the biological resources within the watersheds and ecological corridors at the southwest of El Salvador (32 inventories completed) November 15, 2007 July 2009 6 Baseline Study 6: Land use and tenency November 15, 2007 June 2007 7 Baseline Study 7: Analysis of shade-grown coffee as a component of the biological corridors. a) Shade-grown coffee in the biological corridors: possible landscaping results in El Salvador. b) Geographical analysis of the coverage of shade-grown coffee within the biological corridors in the Project area. November 15, 2007 October 2008 September 2009 8 Baseline Study 8: Evaluation of the gender needs February 15, 2007 June 2007 9 Baseline Study 9: Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices. Febrero 15, 2007 September 2007 10 Monitoring report of indicators in the biological corridors Second and third year July 2009 11 Report of gender evaluation at medium term November 15, 2007 November 2008 ANNEX 13 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 79 Table 2: Protected areas delimited and legalized by the IMCCW Project 2008-2009 NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS AREA (Has) 1. Los Cóbanos (área terrestre y marina ) 21,280.48 2. Complejo San Marcelino (La Presa, Los Pinos, Las Lajas- 4 porciones, San Isidro) 2,128.74 3. Volcán de Izalco 1,526.41 4. Manglares fuera de Los Cóbanos (Barra de Santiago, Bocana San Juan, Bola de Monte, Garita Palmera, Metalio, 3,266.57 5. Parque Nacional El Imposible (El Balsamero, hacienda El Imposible, Hoja de Sal, Las Colinas, San Benito I y II, FANTEL- 8 porciones) 3,725.96 6. Buenos Aires 77.49 7. Cara Sucia 38.97 8. El Cacao 16.10 9. El Chino 24.36 10. El Salto 39.13 11. Laguna Las Ninfas 18.26 12. Laguna Verde 14.87 13. Las Trincheras 100.68 14. Las Victorias 186.65 15. Los Lagartos 117.96 16. San Francisco El Triunfo II 23.42 17. San Rafael Los Naranjos 33.31 18. Santa Rita 237.71 19. Palmar de El Chino 70.16 20. Porción 1 del Chino 301.48 TOTAL 33,228,75 Table 3: Documents and studies belonging to the subcomponent of Sustainable Management of Montecristo National Park STUDIES YEAR 1 MNP Decentralization Plan: (Domínguez 2010) 2010 2 MNP Business Plan: (Hasfura & Domínguez 2010b) 2010 3 MNP Concessions Plan: (Hasfura & Domínguez 2010a) 2010 4 MNP Zoning Plan: (MacFarland & Domínguez 2010) 2010 5 MNP Carrying Capacity Plan: (MacFarland & Domínguez 2010) 2010 6 MNP community census (Quezada 2010a) 2010 7 MNP communities socio-economic study (Romanoff et al. 2009) 2009 8 Cypress Harvesting Plan 2010 9 Research MOU (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report 2010 10 Research Stewardship Strategy (English) (Komar 2010a) 2010 11 Research Stewardship Strategy (Spanish) (Komar 2010b) 2010 12 Signed community agreements (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 13 PES Proposal: (Duarte 2010b) 2010 14 Study of regeneration after cypress harvesting in MNP (Komar & Linares 2010) 2010 15 MNP community conflict resolution evaluation (Quezada & Mejia 2010b) 2010 16 MNP visitor itineraries (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 17 MNP solid waste management infrastructure evaluation (Quezada 2010b) 2010 18 Solid Waste Management Plan: (Erazo, Escamilla & Domínguez 2010) 2010 19 MNP Community Census: (Quezada 2010a) 2010 20 MNP KAP Survey: (Quezada & Mejía 2010c) 2010 21 Best Practices for Park Concessions (Epler Wood 2010) 2010 22 MNP Visitor Guide (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 23 MNP Mammal Guide (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 24 MNP Bird Guide (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 ANNEX 13 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 80 STUDIES YEAR 25 MNP Orchid Guide (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 26 MNP Reptile and Amphibian Guide (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 27 MNP Flowers and Fruits Guide (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 28 Architectural plans (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 29 Cárcava #1 Engineering Analysis (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 30 Coffee rehabilitation study (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report/) 2010 31 Exotic species of Montecristo (Linares & Komar 2010) 2010 32 MNP GIS (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 33 Tourism Value Chain (Castillo 2010) 2010 34 MNP Marketing Plan (Del Cid & Domínguez 2010) 2010 35 MNP Website (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 36 MNP Visitor Profile Report (Baca et al. 2009) 2010 37 Hydrological Study (Duarte 2010a) 2010 38 PES scheme (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 39 MNP Institutional Analysis (Quezada 2010c) 2010 Table 4: Studies and documents belonging to the subcomponent Conservation of Sea Turtles STUDIES YEAR 1. Study of sea turtle mortality (Liles, Thomas & Muñoz 2010) 2010 2. Study of critical sea turtle foraging areas (Liles, Thomas & Muñoz 2010) 2010 3. Beach conditions baseline survey (Liles 2010) 2010 4. Community-based management plans for 34 beaches 2010 5. MARN sea turtle hatchery manual (Dueñas 2010) 2010 6. Sea turtle stranding protocol (Martínez 2010) 2010 7. Final report of sea turtle stranding network activities (Martinez 2011) 2011 8. Socio-economic characterization of coastal communities (Mejia & Quezada 2010) 2010 9. FUNZEL Institutional Analysis (Rochi 2009) 2010 10. FUNZEL Institutional Development Plan (Rochi 2010a) 2010 11. FUNZEL Business Plan (Rochi 2010b) 2010 12. 3 municipal ordinances that support sea turtle protection 2010 13. Los Cóbanos Management Plan (IMCCW 2010) 2010 14. Report on Los Cóbanos fishing sites (Escamilla & Quezada 2010) 2010 15. Revised National Strategy (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 16. Revised Plan de Acción (IMCCW:/IMCCW Final Report) 2010 17. Study of sea turtle egg commercialization I (Romanoff, Benítez & Chanchan 2008) 2008 18. Study of sea turtle egg commercialization II (Romanoff & Chanchan 2010) 2010 19. Final report on sea turtle stranding network in 2010 2010 20. Analysis of impact of sea turtle conservation publicity campaign (Chanchan 2010) 2010 21. Red de tortugueros report (Quezada & Mejía 2010a) 2010 22. Biophysical characterization of Maculís (Domínguez 2011) 2011 23. Legal analysis of existing legislation providing protection to sea turtles (Manzano 2010) 2010 ANNEX 13 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 81 Table 5: Subjects treated in Project´s training activities Population No. of Persons Subject Rural communities in the Ahuachapán y Sonsonate departaments 4,132 1. Threats to biodiversity and critical ecosystems 2. Analysis of water resources: the perceptions of communities 3. Conservation and recovery of forests to ensure the water supply 4. Conservation, biodiversity, environment and the goods and services 5. Importance of riparian forests and nurseries to grow plants for reforestation 6. Conservation of the importance of mangroves, the sustainable use of white￾winged duck and nest building 7. Local causes and consequences of climate change 8. Natural Protected Areas and Biodiversity 9. The biodiversity and the environmental goods and services. 10. Importance of biodiversity and water supply 11. Watersheds management. 12. The biological corridors: the links among natural areas 13. Management of natural resources and watersheds: National Park El Imposible is part of one of the system’s watershed. 14. Ecosystem approach to management of natural areas: Agreement on Biological Diversity and Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). 15. Situation of water resources in El Salvador, and what happens in San Pedro de Cuencas. 16. Knowing flora and fauna of our community. Solid waste management: learning to separate, recycle and compost solid waste. 17. National Park El Imposible ecosystems. 18. The relationship between ecosystems and biodiversity Rural communities in the buffer zones 9,359 1. Benefits of forests in coastal areas 2. Benefits of forests and the consequences of deforestation 3. Biodiversity and the importance of our natural areas. 4. Biodiversity in the Natural Protected Area Los Cóbanos and its importance 5. Biodiversity, environmental goods and services. 6. Climate changes and it repercussion on the environment. 7. Forest conservation and reforestation of guaranteed water. 8. Conservation of water resources. 9. Ecology and the environmental legislation 10. The environmental interpretation as a tool for environmental education in public areas. 11. Good agricultural practices and the conservation of land. 12. Good agricultural practices and soil conservation works 13. Good agricultural practices to preserve biodiversity 14. Environmental goods and services at the watershed and the PES. 15. Environmental goods and services, the species diversity, and the ecosystems and MIDES. 16. Importance of shade coffee to preserve biodiversity and water 17. Importance of forests for water security and the consequences of deforestation. 18. Integrated solid waste management. 19. Integrated weed management and ecological management of the soil. 20. Integrated pest management. 21. Let’s go to know and protect the birds at national parks. 22. Mangroves and estuarine ecosystems, a bet for the future. 23. Monitoring in protected areas, solid waste management, risk management and SIG. 24. Natural Areas, a bet for the future. 25. Coastal sea wilderness, a bet for the future. ANNEX 13 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 82 Population No. of Persons Subject 26. Preservation of the environment for our benefit. 27. Natural protected areas and the planning for public use. 28. Natural protected areas and the solid waste management. 29. Public use of the Natural Protected Areas. 30. Rainforest Alliance certification procedure. 31. Risk management through Works and agricultural practices that help to reduce the threats and vulnerability of the environment. 32. Conservation of land in natural areas. 33. Sustainable water management. 34. Coffee plantations: Habitat biodiversity and water producers. 35. Natural areas are part of a watershed, the patrols of ANP and conflict resolution. 36. Domestic liquid waste treatment. 37. Treatment of drinking water. 38. Workshop to train community facilitators to spread the knowledge of environmental services in watersheds. MNP personnel, Majaditas and San José Ingenio communities 152 • Training on natural resources management and conservation of biodiversity Schools of Majaditas and San José Ingenio 122 • Environmental awareness training MNP personnel 20 • Solid waste management training MNP personnel 30 • Training methods and financial management rules Majaditas y San José Ingenio comminities 26 • Conflict resolution training MNP personnel and communities 329 • Training course to resource-keepers, guides, guards, and others in Montecristo National Park. • Workshop on zoning, load capacity and acceptable limits of change in Montecristo National Park. • Finding missing people. MNP personnel and communities 184 • Solid waste management training. Local volunteers as tour guides 27 • Training and guidance to visitors about park resources, activities and opportunities. Coastal communities 696 • Training in biological and legal aspects of sea turtle conservation and the national ban on sale of sea turtle eggs. Members of security agencies with jurisdiction over sea turtles 218 • Training in biological and legal aspects of sea turtle conservation and the national ban on sale of turtles with a focus on the application. Coastal communities 147 • Special training in conservation of the leatherback. ANNEX 13 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 83 List A: Topics covered in KAP I 1. Natural areas and biodiversity 2. Importance of wild animals and plants 3. Importance of forests 4. Mangroves and their importance 5. Perceived problems in the coastal zone 6. Clean agriculture production 7. Increased revenue generation by conserving natural resources 8. Water resources 9. Payment for Environmental Services 10. Spatial Planning (biological corridor) 11. Perceived potential for tourism 12. Community organization 13. Communication List B: Indicators of Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices of Conservation and Biodiversity TABLE OF INDICATORS ABOUT KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES AND PRACTICES KNOWLEDGE Do you know what a “natural area” is Do you know the name of a nearby natural area Have you heard about coffee plantations which promote environmentally friendly practices Do you know or did you hear about mangrove forests Forests are important because they protect the soil Do you know that throwing sewage in the rivers affects their water quality Do you know that natural areas attract tourism ATTITUDES Do you think that mangroves are important for shrimps, fishes, fish, crabs, etc. Do you recommend land use planning as a measure to direct better use of natural resources Do you recognize deforestation being the main environmental problem in your territory Do you consider that all activities that make use of natural resources have to pay or compensate the protection of these resources Producers are willing to share their knowledge on soil conservation PRACTICES Do you apply soil conservation practices Do you participate in any environmental organization and / or community development ANNEX 13 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 84 List C: Topics addressed in the survey KAP III Knowledge: 1. Protected Natural Areas 2. Property of the Park 3. Park management 4. Benefits received from the Park 5. Problems of the Park 6. Legal framework Attitudes: 1. The protection and conservation of the Park 2. Environmental legislation 3. Park authorities 4. Waste management Practices: 1. Waste management 2. Environmentally friendly agriculture 3. Organization for environmental action ANNEX 13 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 85 Table 6: Educational materials distributed by the Project (year 2007) TITLE AMOUNT DISTRIBUTED Abanico de áreas naturales 3,235 Afiche El Balsamar – Riqueza Natural y Cultural en la Cordillera del Bálsamo 860 Aprendiendo a preparar fertilizante orgánico Bocashi 712 Aprendiendo sobre la riqueza natural de Ahuachapán y Sonsonate 4,404 Banner Conservando el Área Natural Protegida Complejo Los Cóbanos 1 Banner Nuestro Suelo se está terminando. Rescatémoslo! 4 Banner Riqueza natural y cultural en la Cordillera del Bálsamo 1 Brochure Conservar las Áreas Naturales Costeras es invertir en nuestro futuro 979 Brochure Una Visión Responsable de la pesca 961 Brochure ¡Nuestro Suelo se está terminando! Nuestras vidas dependen de él 199 Brochure Conservando nuestros suelos se gana más 1,480 Brochure Conservando nuestros suelos se gana más 60 Brochure Mi comunidad limpia es más bonita y saludable 2,640 Brochure Proyecto IMCCW 1,075 Brochure San Pedrito, yo te quiero… pero limpio 500 Carteles San Pedrito yo te quiero… pero limpio (manejo desechos sólidos 2 Carteles Hagamos Brillar a nuestro Centro Escolar (manejo desechos sólidos) 5 Conozcamos y protejamos lo nuestro 7,795 Descubriendo nuestra Biodiversidad 5,620 Folleto ¿Qué es la certificación Rainforest Alliance y la Verificación C.A.F.E. Practices? 2,087 Folleto Las tortugas marinas son las joyas del mar 2,691 Fotocopias páginas librito Descubramos nuestras áreas naturales 726 Juego educativo La Cuenca que tenemos, la cuenca que queremos 2 Juego educativo Seamos claros como el agua 1 Librito para escolares Descubramos nuestras áreas naturales 2,700 Librito para escolares Mi comunidad limpia es más bonita y saludable 3,281 Poster Aprendiendo sobre la riqueza natural y cultural de Izalco 200 Poster Cómo usar el anzuelo 579 Poster Eco-Experiencias en Sonsonate y Ahuachapan 300 Poster Festival del Cacao de Nahulingo 200 Poster Áreas Naturales 718 Poster: EcoExperiencias en El Salvador 20 Roll up Eco sistemas del Área Natural Protegida Los Cóbanos 2 T O T AL 44,040 ANNEX 13 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 86 Table 7: Results of KAP III relative to the level of knowledge of respondents KNOWLEDGE ACTUAL IDEAL MNP is a protected natural area 27.9% 100 % MNP is owned by all Salvadorans 27.9% 100 % MARN is responsible for managing the MNP 68.6% 100 % There are laws that protect the MNP 46.5% 100 % There are environmental problems in MNP 71.5% 100 % MNP is important 94.8% 100 % PNA is a place to protect the flora and fauna and water 37.2% 100 % Forests are important 53.8% 100 % Deforestation is the cause of the decline in river channel 40.4% 100 % Chemicals contaminate soil and water 89.7% 100 % Chemicals that are harmful to health 95.5% 100 % ATTITUDES ACTUAL IDEAL Identify benefits from the MNP 86.90% 100 % Identify solutions to environmental problems of the MNP 93.10% 100 % Identify and communities are responsible for solving environmental problems and take care of the MNP 28.80% 100 % Identify the community itself is responsible to resolve community environmental problems 61.00% 100 % They have participated in environmental training 64.20% 100 % They put into practice the knowledge received in training on environment 24.00% 100 % They are interested in learning more about caring for the MNP and the environment in your community 93.0% 100 % They would like to engage in environmental protection in the community 78.2% 100 % Perform an activity to help the environment 79.90% 100 % They have not visited MNP but have no negative attitude towards the natural area (do not like or do not care) 27.60% 100 % Have visited the MNP with positive aims (recreation, education, firefighting) 56.10% 100 % SOURCE: Survey on Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices of Internal and Adjacent Communities Montecristo National Park, El Salvador, USAID - Watershed Management Project, April-May 2010. Table 8: Montecristo National Park visitors (data provided by the MARN) YEAR TOTAL NATIONAL VISITORS TOTAL FOREIGNERS VISITORS TOTAL STUDENTS VISITORS TOTAL GENERAL 2006 10,596 208 4273 15,077 2007 10,700 227 2562 13,489 2008 8,416 263 2638 11,317 2009 9,100 132 2789 12,021 2010 11,235 68 2347 13,650 Jan-Apr 2011 5,095 83 810 5,988 Fuente: MARN ANNEX 13 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 87 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 THOUNSANDS OF PEOPLE YEAR MONTECRISTO NATIONAL PARK ENTRANCE TOTAL NATIONAL VISITORS TOTAL FOREIGNERS VISITORS TOTAL STUDENTS VISITORS ANNEX 14 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 88 ANNEX 14: Bibliography ARD Inc. Informe final de la evaluación de la Acción Acceso, Gestión y Uso Racional del Agua, Proyecto AGUA/USAID, Octubre de 2002. Artiga, Raúl The case of the Trifinio Plan in the upper Lempa: Opportunities and challenges for the shared management of Central American transnational basins, 2003. Catterson, Thomas M.; Hasbún, Carlos Roberto & Dreikorn, Carolina El Salvador: Biodiversity, Tropical Forestry and Water Resources Assessment, Report prepared for USAID/El Salvador by Chemonics International Inc; Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, January 2004. Chanchan, Reinaldo Evaluación del impacto de la campaña de publicidad para disminuir el consume de huevos de tortugas marinas como un medio para su conservación, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, 2010. Delaney, P. & Hidalgo N. (Social Impact) Baseline Study 8: Gender needs assessment (GNA), IMCCW/USAID Project, June 2007. Delaney, P. & Muñoz, V. (Social Impact) Mid Term Gender Assessment Report, IMCCW/USAID Project, November 2008. DevTech Systems, Inc. Report on Gender Integration Consultancy, USAID/El Salvador, April 2006. Dominguez Pantoja, Ana Celia CAP I: Informe Investigación Conocimientos, Actitudes y Prácticas sobre Conservación y Biodiversidad en suroeste El Salvador, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, Junio 2007. KAP I: Research Report Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices of Conservation and Biodiversity in Southwest El Salvador, IMCCW/USAID Project, June 2007. Domínguez, Juan Pablo Plan de descentralización: Parque Nacional Montecristo, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, 2010. Domínguez, Juan Pablo & Hasfura, Claudia Plan de Negocios Parque Nacional Montecristo Análisis de la Situación Actual y Posible Generación de Ingresos, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, 2010. Domínguez, Juan Pablo & Hasfura, Claudia Plan de Autorizaciones Parque Nacional Montecristo con una prefactibilidad de plan de negocios del casco Colonia, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID. Duarte, José Roberto Estudio de Balance Hídrico de las subcuencas circundantes al Parque Nacional Montecristo, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, 2010. Eisenstadt, Keegan Carbon market feasibility study: Potential of Sonsonate and Ahuachapán watersheds, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, June 2008. FIAES “Mejor Ambiente”, Revista Edición I, artículo sobre “40 Años de conservación de tortugas marinas en El Salvador” (pág. 20-23); y artículo sobre “Los Cóbanos; un atractivo turístico natural” (pág. 24-25), Diciembre 2010. Gobierno de El Salvador Plan Quinquenal de Desarrollo 2010-2014 del Gobierno de El Salvador, 2010. Gobierno de El Salvador Plan de Gobierno 2004 – 2009. Gutiérrez, Juan Felipe & Quezada, Marta Lilian Análisis de la cobertura de café bajo sombra de los corredores biológicos en el suroeste de El Salvador, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, septiembre 2009. IMCCW Project Best practices for tourism concessions en protected areas, August 2010. ANNEX 14 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 89 Kernan, Christopher Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds Project: Quaterly and Annual Report (October 1, 2009 – September 30, 2010), USAID/San Salvador, 2010. Kernan, Christopher Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds Project: Annual Workplan FY 2011 (October 1, 2010 – March 31, 2011), USAID/San Salvador, 2010. Kernan, Christopher Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds Project: Final Technical Report (November 1, 2006 – March 30, 2011), USAID/San Salvador, 2011. Komar, Oliver Are rainforest alliance certified coffee plantations bird-friendly?, IMCCW/USAID Project, September 2010. Komar, Oliver (editor) Comprehensive inventories of selected biological resources within targeted watersheds and ecological corridors of southwestern El Salvador, IMCCW/USAID Project, September 2009. Komar, Oliver (editor) Serie Inventarios de Biodiversidad 1-23, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, 2008. Komar, Omar, del Carmen, Juárez, Galán & Wolfe, Karla Monitoring key biodiversity indicator species in southwestern El Salvador: Changes in bird populations during five years in the Apaneca Biological Corridor, May 2009. MARN Estrategia nacional de gestión de áreas naturales protegidas y corredor biológico, 2005. MARN Informe Nacional Estado Actual de las Áreas Naturales Protegidas El Salvador. I Congreso Mesoamericano de Areas Protegidas, 2003. MARN II Informe Nacional del Sistema de Áreas Protegidas de El Salvador, Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, 2006. MARN Visiona estratégica 2009-2014 y acciones iniciales: Documento para consulta pública en cumplimiento a la Ley del Medio Ambiente, Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, El Salvador. MARN, GEF/UNDP Estrategia Nacional de Diversidad Biológica, El Salvador, Centroamérica (ENB), Abril 2000. Mejia, Walter G. & Quezada, Marta Lilian Estudio sobre conocimientos, actitudes y prácticas de las comunidades internas y adyacentes al Parque Nacional Montecristo, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, 2010. Mejia, Walter G. & Quezada, Marta Lilian Evaluación y monitoreo de avances en el cumplimiento de acuerdos firmados entre MARN y las comunidades internas del Parque Nacional Montecristo, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, 2010. Mejia, Walter G. & Quezada, Marta Lilian Caracterización económica y social de 22 comunidades ubicadas en las playas donde anida la tortuga marina en El Salvador, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, 2010. Rochi, José Rubén Informe final de evaluación institucional: Fundación Zoológico de El Salvador (FUNZEL), Rochi Marketing Consulting + Destination Management, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, 2009. Rochi, José Rubén Plan estratégico final 2010-2014: Fundación Zoológico de El Salvador (FUNZEL), Rochi Marketing Consulting + Destination Management, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, 2010. ANNEX 14 _________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluation of the “Improved Management and Conservation of the Critical Watershed Project – IMCCW" 90 Rochi, José Rubén Propuesta final de negocio para la generación de flujos financieros: Fundación Zoológico de El Salvador FUNZEL), Rochi Marketing Consulting + Destination Management, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, 2010. Romanoff, Steven Shade coffee in biological corridors: potential results at the landscape level in El Salvador, Culture & Agriculture Vol. 32, Issue 1 pp. 27–41, 2010. Romanoff, Steven Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds Project, Annual Work Plans FY 2007/FY 2008/ FY 2009, USAID/San Salvador, 2006, 2007, 2008. Romanoff, Steven Improved Management and Conservation of Critical Watersheds Project, Quarterly and Annual Reports, USAID/San Salvador, September 2007, 2008, 2009. Romanoff, Steven & Chanchan, Reinaldo Second report on commercialization of sea turtle eggs in El Salvador, IMCCW/USAID Project, 2010. Romanoff, Steven & Martinez, Raul El crecimiento del turismo de pequeña y mediana escala en la zona del proyecto Mejor Manejo de Cuencas en El Salvador, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, 2009. Romanoff, Steven; Benítez, Manuel & Chanchan, Reinaldo La comercialización de huevos de Tortuga en El Salvador, Proyecto IMCCW/USAID, Octubre 2008. The commercialization of marine turtle eggs in El Salvador, IMCCW/USAID Project, October 2008. Romanoff, Steven; Quezada, Marta Lilian & Chanchan, Reinaldo KAP II: Research Report Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices of Conservation and Biodiversity in Southwest El Salvador: Results achieved, Proyecto IMCCW, September 2009. Tschinkel, Henry What really works in watershed management?: Some lessons for Guatemala, Report prepared for USAID/G-CAP by Chemonics International Inc, October 2001. USAID El Salvador Country Plan FY 2003-2008, July 2004. USAID Request for Applications (RFA) Number: 519-11-000001, RFA Title: Sea Turtle Conservation and Improvement of Coastal Communities Livelihoods Program, March 2011.