Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 141 Annex Three: Stakeholder Perceptions Survey Final Evaluation of Orangutan Conservation Services Program (OCSP) Component 4: Improved Outreach that Builds Commitment and Support for Orangutan Conservation By Maureen Taylor, Ph.D. (Social Impact, Inc) Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 142 Executive Summary The USAID-funded Orangutan Conservation Services Program (OCSP) operated from 2007- 2010. It worked to help Indonesia preserve some of the world’s most highly valued biodiversity in Kalimantan (Borneo) and Sumatra. OCSP sought to reduce the rate of forest loss by working closely with the Government of Indonesia, the private sector, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to address the key threats of unsustainable and illegal logging, forest conversion, and fires. I. Component Four Activities OCSP was based on five components. This evaluation combines survey data collected in 2009 and 2010 to review the results of Component 4: Improved Outreach that Builds Commitment and Support for Orangutan Conservation. More specifically, it will compare results from 2009 to 2010 on the following: Activity 4.2 Percent of conservation organizations and relevant government offices in Kalimantan and Sumatra aware of OCSP; Activity 4.4 Percent of survey respondents from the target audience who are aware of campaign issues; Satisfaction Percent of survey respondents from the target audience who rate OCSP as good or excellent in its capacity building, information exchange and ability to serve as a liaison amongst groups in the conversation sector. Data were collected at two points-in-time: mid-term 2009 and at the end of project (2010). The two data points show progress of OCSP in its capacity to increase awareness about orangutan conservation issues. II. Component Four Objectives There are three broad program objectives in Component 4 that will be measured in this evaluation. First, OCSP seeks to build awareness and understanding amongst the target audience on the main threats of orangutans and their habitat. Second, it seeks to build awareness and understanding amongst the target audience on the importance of protecting orangutans and their habitat. Thirdly, OCSP works to build awareness and understanding amongst target audiences on the need for policy change and law enforcement that support conservation of orangutans and their habitat. To measure the success of OCSP on these three program objectives, the team included specific questions on the survey that address these areas. III. Evaluation Purpose and Methods OCSP did not collect baseline data when it opened in 2007. It is therefore difficult to know what levels of awareness existed on topics such as habitat conservation and identification of threats to orangutans before OSCP activities. The two data sets collected in 2009 and 2010 provide the best opportunity to examine OCSP progress. To determine the progress toward the targets, OCSP conducted a survey of NGOs, government authorities, private sector organizations, researchers and journalists. During July and August of 2010, the team sent out 200 surveys, Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 143 made repeated phone calls and emails requesting survey completion, and had 147 surveys returned. The 73% response rate is considered very good for survey research. The surveys included both closed and open questions. The evaluation of accomplishment of targets on 4.2, 4.4, and Stakeholder Satisfaction are based on these survey responses. IV. Findings Component 4 Overall Impact Activity 4.2 Activity 4.4 Improved outreach that builds commitment and support for orangutan conservation Percent of Indonesian stakeholders demonstrating support for orangutan conservation efforts Percent of conservation organizations and relevant government offices in Kalimantan and Sumatra aware of OCSP Percent of survey respondents from the target audience who are aware of campaign issues Life of Project Target 60% 90% Increase of 25% awareness Baseline Data Not collected Not collected Not collected 2008/9 Target 10% 65% 15% 2008/9 Actual 99% 76% 100% 2009/10 Target 60% 90% 60% 2009/10 Actual 97% 71% 99% OCSP has met and exceeded its 2010 targets for the Overall Impact Indicator and Activity 4.4. OCSP did not achieve the target for Activity 4.2. The most recent data (71% familiar with OCSP) is consistent with the 2009 result. However, over the last year OCSP was not able to increase its name recognition with different groups in the conservation sector. The nature of the 2010 sample, including researchers and journalists not included in the 2009 sample, may be partially responsible for this finding. OCSP is successful in communicating with conservation groups but it has not made great achievements in extending its reach to the media and researchers who are also involved in the conservation effort. The next survey questions or indicators measure stakeholder satisfaction with OCSP. Stakeholder Satisfaction Overall Impact Information Exchange Performance Indicator Percentage of partners in OCSP focus area that rate: A) OCSP in its capacity building as good to excellent B) OCSP support services as good to excellent Percentage of stakeholders that rate: A) OCSP information exchange as good to excellent B) OCSP liaison as good to excellent Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 144 Overall Impact Information Exchange Baseline Not collected Not collected FY 2008/9 Target 90% 90% FY 2008/9 Actual1 45% 65% FY 2009/10 Target 90% 90% FY 2009/10 Actual A: 71% B: 73% A: 75% B: 79% The survey findings suggest that OCSP improved its ability to serve as a capacity builder and liaison to other organizations in the conservation sector. However, it did not achieve the overall Impact and Information exchange performance targets. V. Conclusions and Recommendations Overall, OCSP has been successful in communicating the urgency of orangutan conservation and gaining agreement of stakeholders on the threats to orangutans and their habitat. OCSP has indeed achieved its objectives related to Activity 4.2 and Activity 4.4. Stakeholder satisfaction with OCSP in its capacity building and support services is still lower than desired. OCSP has yet to meet its targets in this area in either the 2009 or 2010 evaluations. The target was quite high and may not have been realistic given the size and scope of the relationship building needs in the region. The recommendations below, based on the surveys and the open￾ended responses from participants, may provide guidance on enhanced outreach that builds commitment and support for future conservation efforts in Indonesia and the region. Recommendation 1: Enhanced Stakeholder Outreach Is Needed OCSP stakeholders are aware of the serious threats to orangutans and their habitat. However, OCSP has not yet emerged as a leader in the conservation movement. It has yet to fulfill its role in bringing different types of organizations together in habitat and orangutan protection. The work plan over the course of the project shows many roundtables, workshops, and meetings. This is a good start. However, relationship building needs to extend past meetings and workshops. Relationship building and capacity development of an entire sector of organizations dedicated to habitat and orangutan protection needs to be an ongoing activity. Future projects need to be able to create opportunities for collaboration and information sharing that go beyond meetings and face-to-face activities. Blogs, websites, local meetings of partners, and capacity training for NGOs in how to develop relationships with private sector organizations and government may help to create stronger, more independent linkages that will ultimately have a greater impact on local efforts to conserve orangutan habitat. Recommendation 2: Government Engagement Is Key to Future Programs The participants’ responses also showed that government (customary, district, provincial, and central) requires more capacity building to protect orangutans and their environment. Laws exist but there is too little enforcement. Future national development programs should include communication components that continue to reach out to different levels of law enforcement to 1 The indicator was combined in 2008/9, i.e., there was no A and B. Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 145 build their capacity in catching and prosecuting those who break the law and endanger orangutans and their habitat. Building commitment is a key component of this outreach. Concluding Remarks OCSP now has longitudinal data that measures the success of its communication and relationship building efforts. The data from the two studies show that OCSP has been maintaining and, in many cases, increasing the awareness of stakeholders on key conservation issues. Yet, more work is needed in communication outreach. Future programs should continue to build long￾term relationships with local partners, work more closely with the private sector and government, and help to build sustainable communities in areas where orangutans and humans now frequently interact. Greater economic, political, and conservation capacity will mean a better future for the biodiversity of Indonesia. Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 146 I. Program Background The USAID Orangutan Conservation Services Program (OCSP) was a three-and-a-half year (2007-2010) crisis-response program that worked for the long-term survival of viable orangutan populations in Sumatra and Kalimantan. OCSP sought to eliminate or reduce primary threats to orangutans in priority areas, especially loss of forest habitat, hunting and wildlife trade. OCSP was implemented by Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI) with sub-contracts to Orangutan Foundation International (OFI) and The Nature Conservancy (TNC). It worked in partnership with 25 international and local NGOs that implement activities in support of OCSP goals. OCSP approached its mission by focusing on selected sites in Sumatra and Kalimantan, while at the same time working on a broader scale to improve law enforcement, conservation finance, public information and support, and partnerships with the private sector. This shared ownership approach increased cooperation and engaged stakeholders. The program was designed so that development and conservation are sustainable for communities that embrace orangutan conservation. II. Program Components OCSP was based on five components: Component 1: Improved Management and Conservation of Strategic Wild Orangutan Populations and Their Habitats Component 2: Improved Enforcement of the Laws and Regulations that Combat Habitat Destruction and Other Threats to Wild Orangutan Populations Component 3: Partnerships that Improve Coordination and Liaison Among All Partners Engaged in Conservation of Wild Orangutan Populations Component 4: Improved Outreach that Builds Commitment and Support for Orangutan Conservation Component 5: Sustainable Financing (Private Sector Sustainability Facility) This final evaluation will provide longitudinal results of Component 4. More specifically, it will compare the results of the 2009 achievements with the 2010 final results on the following OCSP Activities: 4.2, 4.4, and Stakeholder Satisfaction. III. Program Objectives Three broad program objectives are measured in this evaluation. First, OCSP seeks to build awareness and understanding amongst the target audience on the main threats to orangutans and their habitat. Second, it seeks to build awareness and understanding among target audiences on the importance of protecting orangutans and their habitat. Thirdly, OCSP works to Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 147 build awareness and understanding among target audiences on the need for policy change and law enforcement that support conservation of orangutans and their habitat. OCSP accomplished these program objectives through a two-pronged effort that encompassed both a media and a relationship-building strategy. To build general public and stakeholder awareness, OCSP engaged the media to increase local, regional, and national media coverage on conservation of orangutans and their habitat. For instance, OCSP supported the formation of a national orangutan multi-stakeholder forum (FORINA). It facilitated the development of regional and national workshops focused on implementation of the National Orangutan Conservation Strategy and Action Plan 2007-2017. Its team developed a plan for an Orangutan Action Plan Working Group meeting. This meeting involved key actors from Indonesia and the region. OSCP also worked to implement strategic communications campaigns at both national and regional levels. The 2009-2010 workplan focused on increased engagement with the media via campaigns with clear messages about orangutan threats. OCSP sought a relationship with Ogilvy International PR Company for a pro-bono campaign in support of orangutan conservation. Additional tactics for increased information exchange included supporting church sermons on conservation issues and holding meetings with religious leaders to develop a conservation ethic within religious teachings. IV. Evaluation Purpose and Methods This end-of-project (EOP) report provides an assessment of OSCP’s progress toward accomplishing the 2010 targets for Activity 4.2 (Relevant Stakeholder Awareness of OCSP) and Activity 4.4 (Awareness of Campaign Issues Among Target Audiences). Additionally, this report will analyze the results on Stakeholder Satisfaction with OCSP in its role in capacity building and information exchange. The OCSP Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP) provided the indicators, performance measures, data collection methods, baselines and targets for OCSP. The Revised PMP, dated April 2010, provides the basis for this evaluation. Some targets had been revised in this PMP based on feedback. The program did not collect baseline data when it opened in 2007. It is therefore difficult to know levels of awareness that existed on topics such as habitat conservation and identification of threats to orangutans before OSCP activities. The two data sets collected in 2009 and 2010 provide the best opportunity to examine OCSP progress. To determine the progress toward the targets, OCSP conducted a survey of NGOs, government authorities, private sector organizations, researchers and journalists in July and August 2010. OCSP sought a broad sample and used multiple methods to ensure that different stakeholders could provide input. These steps included: 1. Distribution of over 150 questionnaires during the International Workshop on Orangutan Conservation in Bali on July 15, 2010 to all workshop participants. 2. Email reminder sent on July 30, 2010 to all workshop participants. Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 148 3. Email reminder sent on August 6, 2010 to all who had been sent a survey. 4. Distribution of 50 questionnaires at an OCSP seminar attended by partners and potential partners from the private sector. 5. Personal phone calls to stakeholders, especially private sector organizations, asking them to complete the survey. The 73% response rate is considered very good for assessing stakeholder and partner perceptions in monitoring and evaluation research. The 2010 survey results are based on 147 completed questionnaires. The respondents included 25 questionnaires from government, 54 questionnaires from NGOs, 18 questionnaires from organizations in the private sector, 34 questionnaires from university personnel and researchers, and 13 questionnaires from journalists. This number of survey participants was 60% higher than for the 2009 survey. OCSP should be commended for its perseverance in gaining feedback from diverse stakeholders for its end-of-project evaluation. This year’s sample was especially wide￾ranging, with the addition of journalists and university researchers. Males accounted for 75% of the returned surveys. A total of 30 respondents in the 2010 survey also participated in the 2009 survey. The purpose of the survey research was to build on the 2009 survey findings. While many survey questions remained the same for easy mathematical comparisons, the OCSP team solicited feedback from USAID and other experts to refine the survey. The current survey reflects that expert and donor feedback. The 2010 survey questions can be found in Appendix A. The survey consisted of Likert type questions asking the respondents to rate their level of agreement to questions that directly measure the indicators for 4.2 and 4.4 and the Stakeholder Satisfaction performance indicators. The OCSP team was also interested in qualitative data about the impact of the program. The survey contained eight open-ended questions that asked respondents for their perceptions that would inform lessons learned, examples of OCSP impact, and areas for improvement in future conservation projects. V. Findings OCSP component 4 objectives sought to build awareness and understanding among target audiences on (1) the main threats to orangutans and their habitat; (2) the importance of protecting orangutans and their habitat; and (3) the need for policy change and law enforcement that support conservation of orangutans and their habitat. Survey questions addressed each of these areas. Objective 1: Threat Awareness OCSP actively communicated to stakeholders the different threats to orangutans and their habitat. The survey results suggest that the target audiences (NGOs, government, private sector organizations, researchers, and journalists) are very aware of the threats to orangutans. The 2009 survey asked respondents to agree to a statement that orangutans and their habitat are Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 149 under heavy threat in Indonesia. The 2010 survey, in a desire to be more precise in detecting any difference in threat awareness levels, separated that question into two different questions. The 2009 data that were used for that question are used for reference. 2009 2010 Orangutans are under heavy threat in Indonesia. 98% 97% Orangutan habitats are under heavy threat in Indonesia. 98% 96% I am aware of the main threats to orangutans and their habitat. 100% 97% Respondents on both surveys were asked to identify the main threat to orangutans and their habitat. 2009 2010 Deforestation (illegal logging) is the main threat to orangutans and their habitat. 31 % 35% Oil palm plantations is the main threat to orangutans and their habitat. 29 % 36% Lack of law enforcement is the main threat to orangutans and their habitat. 24 % 24% Trading and poaching is the main threat to orangutans and their habitat. 7 % 4% Forest fire is the main threat to orangutans and their habitat. 4 % 6% Mining is the main threat to orangutans and their habitat. 4 % 2% Human encroachment is the main threat to orangutans and their habitat. 2 % 8% The 2010 data show that two specific forms of human economic activity – deforestation (illegal logging) and oil palm plantations – are perceived to be the primary threats to orangutan conservation. Both logging and palm oil production are economic activities for many of the people who live in or near orangutan habitat. On the open-ended questions, respondents made very forceful observations about the economic tensions: “Oil palm plantations have become the reason for the national economy.” “A primary driving force behind reduction in orangutan distribution and population is the absence of consensus between national and provincial spatial plans and development aspirations. This results in suboptimal planning at the regional level, and the perception by many regional parties that orangutans present a constraint to development.” Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 150 “There is a habit to play off human development against help to orangutans, but this is short-sighted and we need simple & convincing communication strategies to make more evident how conservation & sustainable development hang together.” There are many additional threats to orangutans and their habitat. After asking respondents to identify the main threat, the survey then asked them to identify additional threats. Respondents could identify as many threats as they wanted. 2009 2010 Forest fire is an additional threat to orangutans and their habitat. 60 % 57% Trading and poaching is an additional threat to orangutans and their habitat. 57% 69% The lack of law enforcement is an additional threat to orangutans and their habitat. 48 % 64% The conversion of forest for oil palm plantations is an additional threat to orangutans and their habitat. 48% 53% Deforestation is an additional threat to orangutans and their habitat. 49 % 57% Mining is an additional threat to orangutans and their habitat. 40 % 51% Human encroachment is an additional threat to orangutans and their habitat. 26 % 55% It appears that recognition of the additional threats to orangutans and their habitat has increased for six of the seven categories. Respondents are more aware of the diverse threats to orangutans and their habitat. All threats on this list garnered at least 50% selection rates by participants. This finding means that the target population is aware of both primary and secondary threats to orangutan survival. Objective 2: Recognition of the Importance of Protecting Orangutans and their Habitat The survey results suggest that the target audiences (NGOs, government, journalists, researchers, and private sector organizations) are very aware of the need for conservation. The 2009 survey inquired about “Protecting orangutans and their habitat is an urgent matter.” Based on USAID input, the 2010 survey split that question into two parts. Interestingly, the answers to both questions on this current survey scored 97 percent, suggesting that the needs for protecting orangutans and their environment are equally urgent. The two are obviously closely linked and one respondent actually wrote on the open-ended part, “Orangutan conservation cannot be separated from its [the orangutan’s] habitat.” 2009 2010 Protecting orangutan habitat is an urgent matter. 99% 97% Protecting orangutans is an urgent matter. 99% 97% Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 151 It is clear that OCSP, as part of a broader conservation movement in Indonesia, has been successful in communicating the urgency of protecting orangutans and their habitat. Now that there is general awareness among NGOs, government, researchers, journalists and private sector organizations, it is important to identify the next steps for conservation. It is especially important to know which organizations need to take on a greater role. Objective 3: Recognition of the Need for Advocacy and Law Enforcement The third broad objective of OSCP’s fourth component was to build awareness for policy change and law enforcement that support orangutans and their habitat conservation. Key messages in the campaign included the need to increase community participation in the process and the need for regulation and policy enforcement. The survey inquired if these messages were successfully communicated. The findings suggest that the key messages are indeed accepted by the target audience. The question “The public can play a role in combating illegal logging and forest conversion” was split into two questions on the 2010 survey to better detect agreement on the role of the public in conservation. 2009 2010 Policy changes need to occur to protect orangutans and their habitat. 90 % 96% It is important for law enforcement to support orangutans and their habitat. 99 % 99% The public can play a role in combating illegal logging. 92 % 95% The public can play a role in combating forest conversion. 92 % 86% Those who illegally convert orangutan habitat should be punished. 93% 94% Additional questions were added to the 2010 survey to better measure the roles of other institutions in Indonesia in orangutan conservation. There was no baseline to compare these scores with, but the data are clear in showing that both the private sector and financial institutions have a role to play in orangutan conservation. 2010 Financial institutions must play a role in protecting orangutans and their habitat. 91% Private sector concessionaires (such as mining, palm oil, pulp & paper, and logging companies) must play an important role in protecting orangutans and 96% their habitat. Media campaigns are an effective tool in protecting orangutans and their habitat. 88% Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 152 The respondent’s open-ended answers provide additional insight into the possible solutions and, more importantly, identified the groups that have to act differently to prevent habitat destruction. The high response supporting media campaigns suggests that future conservation efforts will need to engage in a two-pronged approach: relationship building and information dissemination. “Middle class public in Indonesia appears well aware of the threats to orangutan and habitat, and has become increasingly engaged in voicing opinion on these issues. Yet this does not translate democratically into policy decision by Government, because of (1) relative weakness of public lobby compared to business/development interest groups, (2) disjunct between public opinion in urban centers and the public involved in front-line development occurring in the provinces.” “There is severe apathy among key implementing agencies, stakeholders and the general public relative to orangutan conservation.” “If the law enforcement is enforced then other threats will be reduced.” “Threats can be minimized if developers follow the law on environmental. This can also be minimized if enforcement agencies fully enforce the law and take effective action on offenders.” “Until enforcement is taken seriously by the government and people prosecuted for violating orangutan laws, orangutan threats in illegal trade will continue.” There appears to be common agreement about some of the underlying issues facing conservation in Indonesia. Respondents’ answers pointed to the fact that Indonesia has weak public participation in government decision-making. Other respondents pointed to the dominance of the private sector, which benefits from exploiting natural resources. Many respondents identified weak law enforcement at the local, state and national levels, and the reality that people subsist by working in the very industries that threaten habitat. These are the realities of conservation in Indonesia. In spite of these challenges, the survey results show that OCSP’s objectives have been achieved. The table below provides a summary of the baseline, targets and actual accomplishments of component 4 and the two activities of interest for this evaluation. Component 4 Baseline and Targets Component 4 Overall Impact Activity 4.2 Activity 4.4 Improved outreach that builds commitment and support for orangutan conservation Percent of Indonesian stakeholders demonstrating support for orangutan conservation efforts Percent of conservation organizations and relevant government offices in Kalimantan and Sumatra aware of OCSP Percent of survey respondents from the target audience who are aware of campaign issues Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 153 Component 4 Overall Impact Activity 4.2 Activity 4.4 Target 60% 90% Increase of 25% awareness Baseline Data Not collected Not collected Not collected 2008/9 Target 10% 65% 15% 2008/9 Actual 99% 76% 100% 2009/10 Target 60% 90% 60% 2009/10 Actual 97% 71% 99% OCSP has met and exceeded its 2010 targets for the Overall Impact Indicator and Activity 4.4. Given the nature of the 2010 sample, with the addition of researchers, private companies and journalists, it is reasonable to assume that not all organizations surveyed would be aware of OCSP. Indeed, when the data for Activity 4.2 are examined by group, it appears that there were more “neither agree nor disagree” answers from this group, which dropped the overall score for OCSP on this indicator. The data provide important information for future conservation efforts. Additional efforts will need to be made to collaborate with researchers and journalists to maximize the reach of a given program’s messages. Stakeholder Satisfaction with OCSP OCSP also worked to build strong partnerships with other organizations in the conservation movement. The 2009 results demonstrated that OCSP had not achieved its targeted impact on information exchange. Many organizations did not know very much about OCSP and several noted that OCSP was not effective in building relationships, creating information exchanges, or building up the capacity of partners to engage in enhanced conservation efforts. The 2009-2010 workplan identified meeting these targets as a priority. In the last year of the project, OCSP focused on increased engagement with the media through campaigns with clear messages about orangutan threats. OCSP sought a relationship with Ogilvy International PR Company for a pro-bono campaign in support of orangutan conservation. Additional tactics for increased information exchange included the support of church sermons on conservation issues, and meetings with religious leaders to develop a conservation ethic within religious teachings. These tactics were intended to make OCSP more of a leader in the conservation movement and thus increase stakeholder satisfaction with OCSP. Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 154 Stakeholder Satisfaction Overall Impact Information Exchange Performance Indicator2 Percentage of partners in OCSP focus area that rate: A) OCSP in its capacity building as good to excellent B) OCSP support services as good to excellent Percentage of stakeholders that rate: A) OCSP information exchange as good to excellent B) OCSP liaison as good to excellent Target 90% 90% Baseline Not collected Not collected FY 2008/9 Target 90% 90% FY 2008/9 Actual 45% 65% FY 2009/10 Target 90% 90% FY 2009/10 Actual A: 71% B: 73% A: 75% B: 79% OCSP’s enhanced efforts over the last year of the project appear to have been successful. The table above shows a clear improvement in the satisfaction levels of OCSP partners. There was a 50% increase in partner perceptions that OCSP was good to excellent in capacity building and in support services. There were also improvements in partner perceptions of OCSP as being a good to excellent liaison, and in approval of its ability to provide information. While this measure showed a less dramatic increase, it is clear that partners’ satisfaction with OCSP increased over the final year of the project. Many respondents noted OCSP’s effectiveness: A major result was the “Accomplishment of International Workshop on Orangutan Conservation.” Eleven organizations noted that OCSP “improved collaboration among stakeholders.” Five organizations noted that the establishment of FORINA was good. Five organizations acknowledged that OCSP “laid an important foundation in the conservation of orangutan.” 2 The PMP had combined two different parts to each indicator. The 2009 data set used one question to measure the indicators. Upon further review from experts and USAID, OCSP decided to separate the two parts of each indicator for 2010. The target would remain the same, but the actual achievement of the indicator would be reported in two parts to reflect this change. Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 155 Despite the marked improvement, the survey findings suggest that OCSP still has not yet achieved its overall targets in providing capacity building and support services. Some of the respondents’ answers to the open-ended questions may provide insight into some of the reasons behind this score. OCSP showed “poor in capacity building for the government.” OCSP’s activities in “capacity building services in the effort to protect orangutans” have not worked well. Sixteen organizations noted that OCSP did not “build awareness” well. Eleven organizations did not really know much about OCSP. Eight organizations noted that OCSP did not build “the capacity to improve collaboration in the effort to protect orangutans and their habitat” very well. Others noted that OCSP started too late to build networks, its communication strategy was poor, and had poor follow-up after meetings. These comments are included not to criticize OCSP but rather to show areas that need to be improved in future projects. Additional efforts will need to be made to develop partnerships, engage partners, and maximize project efforts. VI. Conclusions and Recommendations Overall, OCSP has been successful in communicating the urgency of orangutan conservation and gaining agreement among stakeholders on the threats to orangutans and their habitat. OCSP has achieved its objectives related to Activity 4.2 and Activity 4.4. Stakeholder satisfaction with OCSP in its capacity building and support services is still lower than desired. OCSP did not meet its targets in this area in either the 2009 or 2010 evaluations. The recommendations below, based on the surveys and the open-ended comments by participants, may provide guidance for future USAID conservation efforts in Indonesia and the region. OCSP now has longitudinal data that illustrates the success of its communication and relationship building efforts. The program did not collect baseline data when it opened in 2007. We cannot ascertain the levels of awareness that already existed on topics such as habitat conservation and identification of threats to orangutans. Without that baseline, it is difficult to know how far the program progressed in its outreach objectives. The two points in time data do show that OCSP has been successful in increasing awareness of stakeholders over the last two years. It has worked to inform the private sector about conservation. Its workshops have been well received and it has tried to build relationships among different members of the conservation sector. OCSP has created the foundation for future conservation projects. As a USAID implementer, OCSP provided support to different groups so that they could pursue localized conservation efforts. More work is needed in this area. Future programs should continue to build long-term relationships with local partners, work more closely with the private sector and government, and help to build sustainable communities in areas where orangutans and humans now frequently interact. Greater economic, political, and conservation capacity will mean a better future for the Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 156 biodiversity of Indonesia. The next section provides two suggestions for future conservation efforts. Recommendation 1: Outreach Efforts Need to Address the Reality that Economic Development and Conservation are Inextricably Linked The participants’ answers showed very clearly that economic development, an imperative in a developing nation, is a major threat to orangutan conservation. Future projects should link the two areas more closely and develop communication messages that address this topic. Additional outreach and education campaigns about the economic potential gained by saving the orangutan may be necessary parts of future programs. Sustainability is also an issue. Several participants were concerned that the programs funded by OCSP are not sustainable and thus will not continue after the end of the project. NGOs and grass roots groups in developing nations need to have clear sustainability strategies. Recommendation 2: Government Engagement Is Key to Future Programs The participants’ answers also showed that government (customary, district, provincial, and central) requires more capacity building to protect orangutans and their environments. Laws exist, but there is too little enforcement. Future national programs should include components that continue to reach out to different levels of law enforcement to build their capacity in catching and prosecuting those who break the law and endanger both the orangutan and its habitat. Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 157 Stakeholder Perceptions - Cover Letter and Survey ORANGUTAN CONSERVATION SERVICES PROGRAM SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE Dear Partner, OCSP will close at the end of September 2010 and is currently gathering information for the final evaluation of the impact of the communications program as well as general views on program successes, weaknesses, and lessoned learned. We would therefore be very grateful if you would provide your valuable input by kindly completing the survey questionnaire below. Some of you will have completed a similar questionnaire last year, in which case we would like to express our thanks and hope that you will again provide your comments. In case this is your first survey, we would also like to thank you for participating. Please fill in the personal data below and then answer the questionnaire. Email the completed form to OCSP at OCSP@dai.com or fax it to our Jakarta office 021-72792837 no later than July 30, 2010. Thank you. Name: Gender: [ M / F ] Organization: Position: Office Address: City / Town: Office Phone / Mobile: Email Address: For each question below, please tick the answer that is closest to your own opinion, and write your response in the box provided when requested. Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements: Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 158 Section One: Threats to Orangutans 1. 1 Orangutans are under heavy threat in Indonesia. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 2. 2 Orangutan habitat is under heavy threat in Indonesia. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 3. 3 I am aware of the main threats to Orangutans and their habitat. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 4. 4 What do you think is the main threat to Orangutans and their habitat? Provide only one answer. 1. Oil palm plantation 2. Forest fire 3. Trading and poaching 4. Deforestation 5. Mining 6. Lack of law enforcement 7. Human encroachment 5. 5 What do you think are other threats to Orangutans and their habitat? Please tick as many as you think apply. 1. Oil palm plantation 2. Forest fire 3. Trading and poaching 4. Deforestation 5. Mining 6. Lack of law enforcement 7. Human encroachment 8. Others 6. 6 What other comments would you like to add on threats to Orangutans and their conservation? Please feel free to elaborate on any of your responses above. Section Two: Importance of Protecting Orangutans and their Habitat 7. 7 Protecting Orangutans is an urgent matter. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 8. 8 Protecting Orangutan habitat is an urgent matter. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 9. 9 Private Sector Concessionaires (such as mining, palm oil, pulp & paper, and logging companies) must play an important role in 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 159 protecting orangutans and their habitat. 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 10 Financial Institutions must play a role in protecting Orangutans and their habitat. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 10. 11 Media campaigns are an effective tool in protecting orangutans and their habitat. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 11. 12 The public can play a role in combating illegal logging. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 12. 13 The public can play a role in combating forest conversion. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 13. 14 What other comments would you like to add on the importance of protecting orangutans and their habitat? Please feel free to elaborate on any of your responses above. Section Three: Policy Change and Law Enforcement 14. Policy changes need to occur to protect Orangutans and their habitat. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 15. Laws should be enforced to protect Orangutans and their habitat. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 16. Individuals who illegally convert Orangutan habitat should be punished by the government. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 17. What other comments would you like to add on policy change and law enforcement? Please feel free to elaborate on any of your responses above. Section Four: OCSP Performance and Lessons Learned 18. The Orangutan Conservation Services Program (OCSP) provides important services to protect Orangutans. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 160 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 19. The Orangutan Conservation Services Program (OCSP) provides important services to protect Orangutan habitat. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neutral 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 20. Please rate the OCSP as a liaison for information exchange in the effort to protect Orangutans and their habitat. 1. Very Good 2. Good 3. Neutral 4. Poor 5. Very Poor 21. Please rate the OCSP in its capacity building services in the effort to protect Orangutans. 1. Very Good 2. Good 3. Neutral 4. Poor 5. Very Poor 22. Please rate the OCSP in its support services in the effort to protect Orangutans and their habitat. 1. Very Good 2. Good 3. Neutral 4. Poor 5. Very Poor 23. Please rate the OCSP in its capacity to improve collaboration in the effort to protect Orangutans and their habitat. 1. Very Good 2. Good 3. Neutral 4. Poor 5. Very Poor 24. Overall, OCSP has made an important contribution to Orangutan conservation 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Neither Agree or Disagree 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 6. Don’t Know 25. Please give an example or examples where OCSP activities have had a positive/ real/substantial impact on protection of Orangutans and their habitat. 26. What were the most successful OCSP activities from your viewpoint? How did you measure their success? 27. Which OCSP activities have not worked so well in your view? Why have they not worked so well? 28. What are the major results of the OCSP activities? Are these results sustainable without further donor support? Orangutan Conservation Services Program Final Report – Annexes 161 29. For the benefit of future conservation programs, what are the major lessons learned from the implementation of OCSP? Your input is very important to us! Thanks for taking time to share your opinions, experiences and thoughts. Orangutan Conservation Services Program (OCSP)