Performance Evaluation: IMPROVING LIVELIHOODS AND GOVERNANCE THROUGH NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT...

This report was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). It was prepared under contract with Checchi and Company Consulting, Inc. for USAID/Afghanistan’s Services under Program and Project Offices for Results Tracking Phase II (SUPPORT II) Project.

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FINAL REPORT

IMPROVING LIVELIHOODS AND GOVERNANCE

THROUGH NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

(ILGNRM) PROJECT

AUGUST 2013

i

Activity Signature Page

This report was contracted under USAID Contract Number AID-306-C-12-00012, Services under Program and Project Offices for Results Tracking Phase II (SUPPORT II).

This Activity was initiated by Office of Project and Program Development through Mr. Sayed Aqa, COR/SUPPORT II.

Assignment Title: Performance Evaluation of Improving Livelihoods and Governance through Natural Resource Management

Team Leader: Abelardo Rodriguez

Lead Author: Lorene Flaming

Activity Start Date: April 22, 2013

Completion Date: August 12, 2013

Hoppy Mazier, Chief of Party

Waheed Ahmadi, Deputy Chief of Party

Checchi and Company Consulting, Inc.

Kabul, Afghanistan

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID, the Government of Afghanistan, or any other organization or person associated with this project.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................1

1. Project Background ...........................................................................................................1

2. Evaluation Questions, Design, Methods and Limitations .................................................1

3. Findings And Conclusions ................................................................................................3

4. Recommendations .............................................................................................................5

a. Short-Term Project Implementation Recommendations (Through End Of 2013) ............... 5 b. Mid-Term Project Implementation Recommendations (2014) ............................................. 6 c. Long-Term Recommendations (Post Project) ...................................................................... 7

II. Introduction ..............................................................................................................................9

1. Project Background ...........................................................................................................9

2. Evaluation Purpose ...........................................................................................................9

3. Evaluation Questions ......................................................................................................10

4. Methods and Limitations ................................................................................................10

a. Stakeholder Consultations and Field Trips ......................................................................... 10 b. Limitations.......................................................................................................................... 11 c. Modifications to SOW ........................................................................................................ 12 d. Guiding Principles .............................................................................................................. 12

III. Findings ..................................................................................................................................14

1. Technical Capacity building ...........................................................................................14

a. Evaluation of Progress ........................................................................................................ 14 b. Evaluation of Performance and Lessons Learned .............................................................. 15

2. Community Livelihoods Development I: Job Creation and Other Benefits ...................22


3. Community Livelihoods Development II: Fuel-Efficient Cook Stoves .........................29


4. Community Governance .................................................................................................35


5. Laws, Policies, and Institutions I: NRM .........................................................................42


6. Laws, Policies, and Institutions II: APWA .....................................................................44


7. Gender .............................................................................................................................48


8. Performance on Cross-cutting Indicators and Work Plan Progress ................................55

a. Progress Against Cross-Cutting Indicators ......................................................................... 55

iii

b. Progress Against Work Plan ............................................................................................... 56 IV. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................57

V. Recommendations ..................................................................................................................60

1. Short-Term Project Implementation Recommendations (through end of 2013) ............60

2. Mid-Term Project Implementation Recommendations (2014) .......................................61

3. Long-Term Recommendations (Post Project) .................................................................62

Annex I: Statement of Work ..........................................................................................................65

Annex II: Evaluation Methodology ...............................................................................................74

Annex III: Methodologies For Calculating Results .......................................................................78

Annex IV: Summary Notes On Meetings, Interviews, And Focus Groups ...................................80

Annex V: Links to Afghanistan’s National Priority Programs ......................................................89

Annex VI: Comments on the indicator reference sheets ...............................................................90

Annex VII: Contact List And Places Visited .................................................................................92

Annex VIII: Breakdown Of Interviews By Stakeholder Group, Gender, And Province ............100

Annex IX: Evaluation Tools ........................................................................................................101

Annex X: Bibliography ................................................................................................................130

Annex XI: Disclosure of any conflicts of interest .......................................................................136

iv

ACRONYMS

ACEP Afghan Clean Energy Program ACE Agricultural Credit Enhancement ADF Agriculture Development Fund AGRED Afghan Agriculture, Research and Extension Development AKDN Aga Khan Development Network AKF Aga Khan Foundation ANDS Afghanistan National Development Strategy APWA Afghanistan Parks and Wildlife Authority AREU Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit AWDP Afghanistan Workforce Development Program BACA Band-e-Amir Community Association BAPAC Band-e-Amir Protected Areas Committee CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CDC Community Development Council CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (of flora and fauna) CMA Central Management Authority COAM Conservation Organization for the Afghan Mountains CVDRL Central Veterinary Diagnostic and Research Laboratory in Kabul DAIL Directorate of Agriculture, Irrigation & Livestock DCA Dutch Committee for Afghanistan DFID Department for International Development DQA Data Quality Assessment EEP Environmental Education Program ETV Enterotoxaemia vaccine FAIDA Financial Access for Investing in the Development of Afghanistan FAO United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization FMD Foot and Mouth disease GEF Global Environment Facility GIRoA Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan GDAH General Directorate for Animal Health GIS Geographical Information System GPS Global Positioning System ICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development IDLG Independent Directorate of Local Governance ILGNRM Improving Livelihoods & Governance through Natural Resource Management ISAF International Security Assistance Force PIRS Performance Indicator Reference Sheet LOE Level of Effort MAIL Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation & Livestock MoE Ministry of Education MoF Ministry of Finance MoHE Ministry of Higher Education

v

MoJ Ministry of Justice M&E Monitoring and Evaluation NEPA National Environmental Protection Agency NGO Non-governmental organization (non-profit) NPP National Priority Program NPASP National Protected Areas System Plan NRVA National Risk and Vulnerability Assessment NRM Natural Resources Management NSP National Solidarity Program OAG Office of Agriculture (USAID) OPPD Office of Program and Project Development (USAID) OSSD Office of Social Sector Development (USAID) PMP Performance Management Plan PPP PowerPoint Presentation PPR Peste des petits ruminants (plague vaccine) PROMOTE Promoting Gender Equality in National Priority Programs SME Small and medium enterprise SOW Statement of Work STEP-UP Strengthening Tertiary Education Program - University Partnerships TMP Training Management Package TOR Terms of Reference UNDP United Nations Development Program UNEP United Nations Environment Program USAID United States Agency for International Development WCS Wildlife Conservation Society WFP World Food Program WPA Wakhan-Pamir Association WTP Willingness to pay

Band-e-Amir National Park Photo: Lorene Flaming

vi

MAPS

Band-e-Amir National Park, Bamyan Province, Afghanistan

The Wakhan Corridor, Badakhshan Province, Afghanistan

1

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. PROJECT BACKGROUND

The Improving Livelihoods and Governance through Natural Resource Management Project (“project”) is implemented by the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under Cooperative Agreement no. 306-A-00-10-00516-00. The project started in April 2010 and will run through December 2013. The project goals are:

1. To build Afghanistan’s capacity to conserve and sustainably manage its natural resources;

2. To improve the livelihoods of the rural poor in and near targeted protected areas; and

3. To strengthen subnational governance related to natural resources management, as well as linkages between communities, provincial and national government institutions.

The project works in Band-e-Amir National Park and the Northern Plateau in Bamyan Province, and in the Wakhan Corridor and Little and Big Pamirs (hereafter referred to collectively as “the Wakhan”) in Badakhshan Province. These areas are significant in terms of biodiversity conservation and watershed protection. The project also includes a national capacity building component.

The project supports and reports results under USAID/Afghanistan’s Assistance Objective AO 5: A Sustainable, Thriving Agricultural Economy, specifically Program Element 5.2: Improved Natural Resource Management as a Result of USG Assistance.

2. EVALUATION QUESTIONS, DESIGN, METHODS AND LIMITATIONS

This performance evaluation:

Examines whether the project is on track to achieve its intended goals and results (outputs and outcomes) in a sustainable manner;

Assesses the validity of the program design and logic; Identifies project strengths, weaknesses, successes, lessons learned, and opportunities

for improvement; and Recommends options for USAID and Afghan Government support for natural

resource management, protected areas management, and rural livelihoods, including the potential role of the pending Afghanistan Parks and Wildlife Authority (APWA).

The evaluation SOW specifies the following broad questions:

1. Capacity building: How has the project’s technical capacity building of MAIL and NEPA at the national and provincial levels performed to date (e.g., GIS training, legislative development, ranger programs, management of the health interface, etc.)?

2

2. Community livelihoods development I: To what extent has the project successfully facilitated livelihood development by securing sustainable sources of direct benefits to local communities, including job creation (directly and indirectly)?

3. Community livelihoods development II: How has the use of fuel-efficient stoves been accepted by and integrated into local communities, including demand?

4. Community governance: To what extent has the project strengthened community governance through organization participation, education, and revenue management in NRM planning and implementation?

5. Laws, Policies, and Institutions I: How has the project strengthened specific NRM-related laws, policies, and institutions, including public/stakeholder consultation?

6. Laws, Policies, Institutions II: How critical is the establishment of APWA to sustaining and building upon advances made through ILGNRM with regard to natural resource and protected areas management?

7. Gender: How has ILGNRM improved the welfare of women, girls, and youth, including their opportunities to participate in educational and community activities?

The Evaluation Team included two international consultants with experience in monitoring and evaluation, rangeland management, and natural resources policy and institutions, as well as two Aghan consultants with experience in evaluation, agriculture, and translation. The team interviewed 237 stakeholders in the cities of Kabul, Faizabad, and Bamyan, as well as several villages in Band-e-Amir National Park and the Wakhan. Refer to maps at the front of the document. In addition, the team interviewed 24 WCS staff.

Data collection methods consisted of key stakeholder interviews, focus group discussions, directly observing governance meetings, and a desk review of project documents. Detailed questions were developed upon approval of the evaluation team’s Work Plan, tested in the field, and revised as needed on an iterative basis. Photographs captured field conditions, project activities and outputs, and beneficiaries. In addition, the Team developed the following guiding principles: 1) going beyond information available in Progress Reports to capture lessons learned, and 2) documenting examples of how the support provided by the project cultivates a shared vision for protected areas management in Afghanistan and builds a foundation for ongoing collaboration between the government and local communities. The evaluation also documents examples and indicators of sustainability, replicability, stakeholder buy-in, evidence-based decision making, leverage, strategic roles, and gender sensitivity.

The following limitations to the evaluation exist: interviewees are not necessarily representative of all project stakeholders (a form of research bias); some interviewees struggled to answer quantitative questions that required numeracy skills; and some interviewees provided misleading or incomplete information. None of these limitations appeared prevalent enough to substantially skew the evaluation findings.

3

3. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Evaluation findings are based on evidence of progress from implementing partner Quarterly Reports and evidence of performance from the evaluation team’s field visits and interviews, specifically: progress against performance indicators (baselines, targets and results) and the annual project Work Plan (activities and outputs), the Implementing Partner’s perspectives on implementation challenges and progress, key stakeholder interviews, and observations on the quality of technical assistance. The most significant findings and conclusions are:

Governance achievements are substantial and worthy of a case study. The project has promoted meaningful and effective stakeholder engagement and achieved high levels of Government and community buy-in.

The project design is robust (see graphic). The Environmental Education Program raises awareness in local schools of environmental threats and solutions. Newly established governance institutions enable local communities to participate in decisions about how local resources are managed. Support for rural livelihoods generates direct and indirect economic benefits that help achieve buy-in for protected areas management objectives. Meaningful participation in management decisions further strengthens ownership, buy-in, and capacities. Project interactions occur in multiple directions, beyond those suggested by the arrows in the graphic.

Significant differences in challenges and opportunities exist between Bamyan and the Wakhan. Communities in Band-e-Amir National Park in Bamyan are already seeing tangible improvements in park infrastructure and demonstrating ingenuity in pursuing tourism-based income-earning opportunities. The number of tourists in Band-e-Amir (approximately 5,000-6,000/month in the summer season, mostly Afghans) far exceeds those in the Wakhan (estimated at 250 foreigners per year). The number of Afghan tourists that visit the Wakhan is not tracked, but is likely nominal given its remote location. Wakhi and Kyrgyz community representatives indicate that they support the newly established protected areas – despite substantial livestock losses from predators as a consequence of hunting prohibitions – because they trust the project’s claim that they will enjoy future benefits associated with tourism development. It is unclear when security conditions will improve sufficiently to allow for substantial growth in ecotourism, and how long community support for protected areas can be sustained in the meantime.

Balancing human, livestock, and habitat conservation trade-offs is critical to sustaining community buy-in: Conflicts appear most challenging in the Wakhan, where local communities rely heavily on livestock for their livelihoods. Reducing livestock losses through predator-proof corrals increases pressures on grazing lands. Degraded grazing lands

4

sustain smaller populations of wildlife prey species, which in turn drives predator attacks on livestock. The paravet program rightly focuses on enhancing the productivity of individual livestock - rather than increasing survival rates and herd sizes - to maximize economic potential and minimize environmental impacts. However, a more complete solution for balancing competing claims on natural resources requires greater diversification and expansion of livelihoods opportunities.

Work Plan flexibility allows the project to respond readily to emerging technical assistance priorities: The Government frequently asks the project to advise on legal and institutional reforms. The ability to respond quickly with strategic inputs has generated good will and garnered support from key Government decision makers for project objectives. It also allows the project to capitalize on its primary asset: WCS is valued for its expertise and experience in protected areas management.

The project consistently demonstrates characteristics of quality technical assistance: It identifies sustainable solutions, replicates successful approaches for greater impact, achieves stakeholder buy-in, promotes evidence-based decisions, leverages resources effectively, and promotes strategic public-private sector roles and partnerships. Specific examples are systematically documented in the Findings section.

Stakeholder critiques of project performance are few: When The Evaluation Team encouraged interviewees from local communities to provide frank feedback to WCS and USAID about the project, the most common response was a request for more of the same: for example, more cook stoves and predator-proof corrals. In addition, they often seized the opportunity to share “wish lists” of the kinds of subprojects found in Community Development Plans (roads, schools, bridges). Feedback from Government officials was mixed and levels of overall satisfaction correlated highly with proximity to project offices. Officials who accepted the project’s invitations to actively participate in training, planning, and field activities were the most positive; those who declined due to distance or per diem issues were less positive.

The project is often associated with snow leopard conservation in people’s minds. Some people question the importance of snow leopards relative to other priorities in Afghanistan. Investments in snow leopard conservation appear strategic with respect to livelihoods potential and raising public awareness. A small portion of project resources are used for focused snow leopard activities: only 4 of 71 project-funded rangers are engaged in setting camera traps and tracking snow leopard movements. Afghanistan’s snow leopards and the rugged landscape in which they live garner positive international press from high-profile media such as National Geographic, ABC News/Nightline, Washington Post, BBC, and Outside Magazine – free marketing that puts the Wakhan on the adventure tourism map. Snow leopards are critical for preserving the economic development and livelihoods potential of this region. They also help attract support within Afghanistan for protected areas management. The Afghanistan Parks and Wildlife Authority (APWA) Oversight Group benefits from the active participation of over a dozen Deputy Ministers from across the Government, many of whom have a photograph of a snow leopard hanging in their office.

5

This level of inter-ministerial support is uncommon. Snow leopards capture people’s imagination and are an effective icon for galvanizing environmental awareness in Afghanistan.

The project is largely on track with respect to Work Plan activities and Indicator Targets: The project has exceeded the cumulative Year 1-3 targets for the USAID/Afghanistan cross-cutting performance indicators in the project Performance Management Plan (PMP). These measure the number of beneficiaries associated with training activities, agricultural interventions, and economic benefits and the number of hectares under improved management. The only performance indicator that is not met is the establishment of APWA; however, this process is driven by the Government and is not under the management control of the project. When asked about APWA progress and the expected timeframe for establishment, the Deputy Ministers interviewed indicated that it is generally extremely difficult to estimate timeframes required to pass laws or establish institutions in Afghanistan given the unpredictable approval process. They believe that the APWA Oversight Group, formed in late 2012 for the purpose of establishing APWA, is making good progress.

Opportunities exist for improvement: Opportunities exist to enhance project results by modifying some existing approaches and expanding into complementary activities related to technical capacity building and livelihoods. Recommendations are provided in the following section.

4. RECOMMENDATIONS

The Evaluation Team vetted recommendations in a three-hour Final Stakeholder Meeting on June 15th in Kabul, attended by representatives from MAIL, NEPA, and the Project Team. The primary recommendation added by the group is the integration of climate change into the project design. Recommendations are briefly summarized below and divided by timeframe (short-term, mid-term, and long-term). More detailed recommendations are provided in the response to each question.

a. Short-Term Project Implementation Recommendations (Through End Of 2013)

Recommendations for the Project Team

Integrate paravets in the Field Team: Identify ways to integrate paravets more fully with the Field Team to give them a better understanding of how their efforts compliment the project’s other activities in the corridor, as well as the satisfaction of being part of a larger team.

Predator proof corrals: Assist the WPA in seeking additional resources to increase the number of predator-proof corrals in the Wakhan to minimize livestock losses. However, limit support to addressing critical constraints: the mesh wire for the roof and timber poles that cannot be sourced locally and require cash.

6

Distribute association bylaws: Assist community governance organizations in distributing organizational bylaws and document voter and member participation to enhance transparency.

National environmental curriculum: Consider integrating other learning objectives into the new national environmental curriculum; for example, using surveys to teach math skills and developing English lessons that focus on environmental topics.

Gender integration resource: Assess proposed Gender and Livelihoods activities using elements of the USAID Gender Analysis Framework.

Recommendations for USAID

No-cost extension: Consider a no-cost extension of the project to the end of 2014, consistent with the original proposed project timeframe.

Recommendations for the Government of Afghanistan (MAIL and NEPA)

Second provincial ministry staff to field office. Consider seconding a staff member of MAIL and NEPA’s Bamyan office to the project field office in Band-e-Amir.

APWA updates: Keep local communities updated on the status of the APWA Oversight Group’s efforts to establish legal mechanisms and institutional arrangements for revenue sharing. Signs of Government commitment and progress can help manage stakeholder expectations and preserve trust.

Revenue transparency: Ensure transparency in the amount of park revenues distributed to the municipality and establish a formal mechanism for community consultation on how revenues are spent.

b. Mid-Term Project Implementation Recommendations (2014)

The following recommendations are feasible if the project period is extended to the end of 2014.


Performance Management Plan: Revise the PMP to enhance its usefulness to project managers. Review project indicators; revise Indicator Reference Sheets as needed to clarify the methodology for calculating results and associated logic; report progress against a smaller set of Work Plan activities; and integrate gender more fully into the PMP by establishing specific targets for women, tracking and reporting gender-disaggregated data for performance indicators, and reviewing the methodologies for calculating results to ensure that women are not under-reported.

Draft Hunting Law reforms: Advise the Government on potential legal reforms related to problem animal control and trophy hunting permits, as noted in the following section.

Governance case study: Consider commissioning a more detailed case study to document approaches that could be replicated on other community governance initiatives in Afghanistan.

7

Recommendations for the Government of Afghanistan

Draft Hunting Law (NEPA, MAIL, and Ministry of Justice): Review the draft Hunting Law and approaches used in other countries to assess the feasibility of introducing provisions for problem animal control (PAC), particularly for wolves and other non-threatened predators. Assess under what conditions trophy hunting permits could be allowed in the Wakhan to provide an income stream for local communities without jeopardizing wildlife populations.

Band-e-Amir Hydrological Study (MAIL): As recommended in the Management Plan, conduct a hydrological study to better understand the groundwater source that feeds the lakes, as well as a monitoring program to detect changes in surface water quality.

Women’s inclusion (MAIL): Establish job creation targets for women for the Government-funded park jobs identified in the Band-e-Amir Facilities Development Plan and for local sourcing conducted in support of park activities, in consultation with BAPAC and BACA.

c. Long-Term Recommendations (Post Project)

The following funding recommendations comprise potential activities that support USAID’s strategic objectives related to livelihoods, governance, and natural resources management and the Government’s related National Priority Programs.

Recommendation for USAID on Follow-on Activities

Capacity Building and Legal Reforms: Continue to fund the project’s ongoing work with the Government to strengthen the enabling framework for protected areas management; including but not limited to helping establish APWA and associated co-management and revenue sharing arrangements, strengthening natural resource management laws and policies, and providing hands-on training and technical advice to ministry staff related to assessing biodiversity resources and enforcing restrictions against hunting and trade in endangered species.

Local Governance: Continue to fund the project’s ongoing work with local governance institutions, schools, businesses, households, and religious leaders to build awareness and strengthen capacities for community based natural resources management and livelihoods.

Paravet Services: Advocate for a consistent “one health” approach to paravet services in the Wakhan. Specifically, advocate against the distribution of enterotoxaemia vaccines and encourage paravet services that enhance the productivity of individual livestock. Ensure that USAID-funded paravet programs adopt rigorous quality control measures for vaccines to protect the market for paravet services.

Diversify Wakhan Livelihoods: Expand livelihoods development in the Wakhan on two potential fronts: agricultural diversification and tourism development. 1) Assess the feasibility of establishing fruit trees, fuel wood trees, greenhouse vegetable production, and cultivation of medicinal plants. 2) Recognizing that current security conditions in

8

Afghanistan are not conducive to attracting large numbers of foreign tourists, investments should be limited to relatively small-scale, low-cost interventions that help achieve conservation and livelihoods outcomes. Potential interventions would best be identified within the context of a Wakhan Tourism Promotion Strategy.

Climate Change Resilience: Afghanistan ranks among the top 20 countries most affected by climate change according to the Global Climate Risk Index (based on 1992-2011 data). In the event of a follow-on project to ILGNRM, expand the natural resource management objectives to address climate change, especially in the Afghan Pamirs where climate change vulnerability is greatest due to high elevations.

Transboundary Collaboration: Advocate for Afghanistan’s participation in the USAID-funded “Conservation and Adaptation in Asia’s High Mountain Landscapes and Communities Project,” which launched in 2013 and is building alliances across other countries with snow leopards (Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan, India, Nepal, Bhutan, and Mongolia).

Natural Resource Management Workforce Development: Help build the capacity of the newly established Environmental Science Faculty at Kabul University to develop the workforce for natural resources management in Afghanistan.

Develop the Market for Improved Stoves: Encourage business development and finance projects to support producers of cleaner, more fuel-efficient stoves for both space heating and cooking. Research household energy use and stove user preferences in target markets for fuel-efficient stoves. Research the demand and value chain for fuel-efficient stoves. Minimize use of subsidies to avoid market distortions. Brand the stove to differentiate it from other stoves in the bazaar, mark it with the producer’s contact information so that the stove can be easily found, and include a public awareness campaign.


Paravet Services: Advocate for a consistent “one health” approach to paravet services in the Wakhan. Specifically, discourage distribution of enterotoxaemia vaccines. (MAIL’s General Directorate for Animal Health)

9

II. INTRODUCTION

1. PROJECT BACKGROUND

The Improving Livelihoods and Governance through Natural Resource Management Project (“project”) is implemented by the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under Cooperative Agreement no. 306-A-00-10-00516-00. The project started in April 2010 and will run through December 2013. The project goals are:

to build Afghanistan’s capacity to conserve and sustainably manage its natural resources;

to improve the livelihoods of the rural poor in and near targeted protected areas; and to strengthen subnational governance related to natural resources management, as

well as linkages between communities, provincial and national government institutions.

The project supports USAID’s Strategic Objective SO 5: A Thriving Licit Economy Led by the Private Sector. Results are reported under Objective 5: A Sustainable, Thriving Agricultural Environment, and Program Element 5.2: Improved Natural Resource Management as a Result of USG Assistance. The project targets protected areas in Bamyan (Band-e-Amir and the Northern Plateau) and Badakhshan (Wakhan Corridor and Pamirs). These areas are significant in terms of biodiversity conservation and watershed protection. It also includes a national capacity building component. More detailed information is provided on project activities associated with each key evaluation question under Section III.

2. EVALUATION PURPOSE

This evaluation:

Examines whether the project is on track to achieve its intended goals and results (outputs and outcomes) in a sustainable manner;

Assesses the validity of the program design and logic; Identifies project strengths, weaknesses, successes, lessons learned, and opportunities

for improvement; and Recommends options for USAID and Afghan Government support for natural

resource management, protected areas management, and rural livelihoods, including the potential role of the pending Afghanistan Parks and Wildlife Authority (APWA).

This mid-term evaluation was initially scheduled for late fall 2012; however, the early onset of winter in the Wakhan prevented field visits before late April 2013. The primary audiences for this report are the ILGNRM Project Team, the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL), the National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA), USAID, and WCS. The Evaluation Team has aimed to make this a productive exercise for all participants -- one in which frank dialogue, curiosity, and feedback are valued elements of continuous

10

learning and improvement -- and in which participant stories are treated as “data with a soul”. This approach has allowed us to identify significant lessons about the factors that underlie project successes and to gain a better understanding of what matters most to project stakeholders.

3. EVALUATION QUESTIONS

The Evaluation Statement of Work (SOW) specifies the following broad questions:


2. Community livelihoods development I: To what extent has the project successfully facilitated livelihood development by securing sustainable sources of direct benefits to local communities, including job creation (directly and indirectly)?

3. Community livelihoods development II: How has the use of fuel-efficient stoves been accepted by and integrated into local communities, including demand?


5. Laws, policies, and institutions I: How has the project strengthened specific NRM-related laws, policies, and institutions, including public/stakeholder consultation?

6. Laws, policies, and institutions II: How critical is the establishment of APWA to sustaining and building upon advances made through ILGNRM with regard to natural resource and protected areas management?


4. METHODS AND LIMITATIONS

a. Stakeholder Consultations and Field Trips

The Evaluation Team conducted interviews with 237 stakeholders in the cities of Kabul, Faizabad, and Bamyan and villages in Band-e-Amir National Park (Yakawlang District, Bamyan Province) and the Wakhan (Wakhan District, Badakhshan Province). Stakeholder groups are listed below, along with the number of members interviewed in each:

1. Capacity building: MAIL and NEPA staff at central and provincial levels (14), MAIL rangers (15), and paravets (2).

2. Community livelihoods development I (job creation and direct benefits): community rangers (11), paravets (2), tourism-based business owners (4), and organizations involved in tourism promotion (7).

3. Community livelihoods development II (fuel-efficient cook stoves): Cook stove users (21), tinsmiths (5), and Kyrgyz livestock owners (6).

11

4. Community governance (governance institutions and schools): Band-e-Amir Protected Areas Committee (BAPAC), Band-e-Amir Community Association (BACA, 6), Wakhan-Pamir Association (WPA, 9), Community Development Councils (CDCs, 15), District and Provincial Governors (3), teachers (11), and students (105).

5. Laws, policies, and institutions I: MAIL and NEPA deputy-level leadership (2). 6. Laws, policies, and institutions II: APWA Oversight Group Members (4). 7. Gender: Female members of governance institutions and other project beneficiaries

(87 total, 37% of interviewees).

In addition, the team interviewed 24 project staff -- multiple times for all key staff. The duration of the evaluation (50 days in country) did not allow for statistically representative sampling. Interviews were loosely structured to facilitate a conversational style that put interviewees at ease and to allow the team to pursue lines of inquiry as new information emerged. This elicited a more open and in depth discussion than a tightly structured survey would allow. The Evaluation Team prepared nine interview guides for the seven questions listed above to help guide conversation and capture categories of responses. Detailed questions were developed upon approval of the Work Plan, tested in the field, and revised as needed on an iterative basis. Most interviews were conducted by teams consisting of one international consultant paired with one Afghan consultant. However, the entire team of four conducted the first interview with each interview guide in each location to facilitate a consistent approach to interviews between the two teams. Team members included Abelardo Rodriquez, a rangeland management specialist; Lorene Flaming, a natural resources policy and institutions specialist, Ghulam Rasul Samadi, an agriculture specialist, and Noorullah Shakir, a translator and administrative assistant. In addition, Fatema Roshan, an Education Assistant employed by the project, helped with translation in the Wakhan (replacing Prof. Samadi). With the exception of interviews with high-level ministry officials in Kabul, all interviews were conducted in Dari. When interviewing Kyrgyz stakeholders in the Wakhan, it was necessary to have additional translation between Dari and Kyrgyz.

Refer to Annex II for a description of the evaluation methodology, to Annex VII for the contact list, to Annex VIII for a breakdown of the number of interviews by stakeholder group, province, and gender; to Annex IX for interview forms, and to Annex X for a bibliography of documents reviewed. Photographs captured field conditions, project activities and outputs, and beneficiaries.

b. Limitations

The following limitations to the evaluation findings exist:

The interviewees are not necessarily representative of all project stakeholders because the number of interviewees for each stakeholder group is relatively small and the Evaluation Team spoke with stakeholders that are most readily accessible. The Evaluation Team mitigated this by targeting stakeholders whose mandate or standing

12

indicate that they should be aware of project activities and/or qualified to represent other members of their stakeholder group.

Interviewees sometimes provided misleading information. This seemed to be motivated by: 1) dissatisfaction with their perceived share of project benefits or political influence, and/or 2) a strategy of under-reporting the level of support in the hope that it will increase the likelihood of receiving additional support. The former was largely limited to local leaders who had traditionally held power and ministry staff who desired more opportunities to travel and earn per diems. The latter was largely limited to provincial level elected officials who are located relatively far from the project’s field sites, do not have a mandate related to protected areas management, and are therefore less engaged with the project. When interviewers detected potential bias in an interviewee’s responses, additional questions were asked to obtain a more complete picture. In addition, the interviewers consistently triangulated by reviewing findings with other stakeholders to obtain a clearer picture of the context and to assess motivations and credibility.

Some interviewees struggled to answer questions related to cook stove fuel efficiency due to low numeracy skills or because they had not had the stove long enough to compare before and after fuel consumption across seasons. For this reason, and because beneficiaries have recommended several stove design changes that would affect fuel efficiency, no estimates are made of project-related fuel savings. Instead, this report identifies critical factors for designing a fuel efficiency study that could be used for future stove pilots and/or project impact evaluations.

None of these limitations appeared sufficiently pervasive or difficult to detect to significantly skew the evaluation findings. Moreover, the evaluation methodology does not rely on formal survey methods and statistical analysis, but rather structured interviews and an “all things considered” analysis of stakeholders’ reported experiences. Detected bias has therefore been accounted for in the analysis and conclusions.

c. Modifications to SOW

The only modifications made to the evaluation SOW are an extension of the evaluation period to reflect the approved level of effort (LOE) and an extension of the review period for the draft Final Report. Refer to Annex I for the SOW.

d. Guiding Principles The Evaluation Team developed the following guiding principles for this evaluation. Going Beyond Progress Reports: This evaluation focused on collecting and synthesizing information that goes beyond the Progress Reports and quantitative data to tell a richer story about the Project Team’s challenges, opportunities, and achievements.

Focus on Relationships: Successful technical assistance teams recognize that relationships matter. The evaluation team documented examples of how the support provided by the project cultivates a shared vision for protected areas management in Afghanistan and builds a

13

foundation for ongoing collaboration. Specifically, the evaluation examined the extent to which the collaboration is:

Sustainable: builds Afghan capacities, promotes appropriate technologies and solutions, and promotes cost-recovery;

Replicable: demonstrates approaches that can be scaled up to achieve greater coverage;

Achieves buy-in: engages key stakeholders in decision-making processes to build support for project goals, objectives and activities;

Evidence-based: enhances access to information on current conditions and best practices to promote informed decision-making;

Leverages additional resources: collaborates with other donors and projects; Promotes Strategic Roles: promotes understanding of appropriate public and private

sector roles in natural resource management; for example, government institutions (creating the enabling environment for protected areas management), private sector (investing in and developing eco-tourism enterprises), schools and universities (raising awareness and developing the workforce), and local communities (planning, monitoring, and implementing).

Gender-sensitive: understands how gender differences may influence decision making and the distribution of project benefits.

14

III. FINDINGS

This section answers the key questions on how the project has performed on seven fronts and summarizes supporting evidence, based on information in Quarterly Reports, field visits, and stakeholder interviews. For each question, the discussion leads with a brief assessment of progress to help orientate the reader to the relevant project Performance Indicators (targets and results) and the project Work Plan (activities and outputs). This is followed by the Evaluation Team’s answer to the question posed and a discussion of additional findings and lessons learned, including comments on the validity of the project design logic, strengths, and opportunities for improvement. Overarching conclusions that address project performance beyond the seven key questions are presented in Section VI. Recommendations on options for future USAID and Afghan Government support are provided in Section V. Refer to Annex III for a brief statement of how project results are calculated, as described in the Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRS), and to Annex IV for meeting notes.

1. TECHNICAL CAPACITY BUILDING

Question: How has the project’s technical capacity building of MAIL and NEPA at the national and provincial levels performed to date (e.g., GIS training, legislative development, ranger programs, management of the health interface, etc.)?

a. Evaluation of Progress

Progress against Performance Indicators (targets and results): Technical capacity building contributes to cross-cutting Indicator 5: Number of people receiving USG supported training in natural resources management and/or biodiversity conservation. There is no target specific for MAIL and NEPA technical capacity building activities.

Progress against Work Plan (activities and outputs): Under this component the project trains MAIL and NEPA staff at central, provincial and district levels, paravets, veterinary lab technicians, and park rangers. Training activities include:

Joint development of Training Management Packages (TMPs) with NEPA on the following topics: wildlife conservation, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), the National Ranger Program, biodiversity conservation in Afghanistan, fuel-efficient cook stoves, protected areas in Badakhshan and Bamyan, predator-proof corrals, and project goals and activities.

Geographic Information System (GIS) and Global Positioning System (GPS) training and subsequent technical assistance to apply skills on the job for project field staff, rangers, and MAIL and NEPA GIS lab teams.

English, basic computer and management courses for selected DAIL staff, members of protected areas committees, and rangers during the winter season, when weather conditions preclude field work (referred to as “winter training”).

15

Hands-on, field-based training related to biodiversity, livestock and agriculture surveys; protected areas demarcation, habitat restoration, and other field work.

Ranger training on the following topics: identifying mammals and birds, using ranger equipment such as binoculars and GPS, mapping and navigation, completing wildlife data sheets, data entry, first aid, protected areas zones, the Band-e-Amir Management Plan, and the importance of protected areas and Afghanistan’s natural resources. Some rangers have also been trained on setting camera traps and biodiversity surveys.

Study tours to other countries with protected areas systems (such as South Africa). Joint preparation of the National Protected Areas System Plan (NPASP) and related

Afghan Government annual budget planning. Paravet training on livestock vaccinations, disease diagnosis, and other livestock health

services and subsequent support for vaccination campaigns. Support to the Central Veterinary Diagnostic and Research Laboratory (CVDRL) in

Kabul for diagnosis of livestock and wildlife diseases and development of a Field Guide on Wildlife Disease Risk in Afghanistan.

Joint development of environmental education posters, booklets, and videos with NEPA.

Technical capacity building activities are generally on track.

b. Evaluation of Performance and Lessons Learned

Interviewees: The Evaluation Team interviewed:

5 NEPA senior leadership staff: Director General–Policy (Kabul); Provincial Director and Deputy Director, and National Heritage Protection Officer (Bamyan); and Provincial Head (Badakhshan).

9 MAIL senior leadership staff: Deputy Minister – Technical, Director of Protected Areas, Manager of Protected Areas, Forest Protection Officer, and Public Awareness Manager (Kabul); DAIL Director (Bamyan); and Provincial Head, DAIL Advisor, and Senior Provincial Management Specialist (Badakhshan). Note that at the provincial level, MAIL is referred to as DAIL: the Directorate of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock.

15 MAIL rangers in Bamyan and 17 community rangers in the Wakhan. 12 staff employed by WCS on the project: WCS Country Directors (former and current),

Education and Public Outreach Advisor, four members of the Training and Capacity Development team based in Kabul; the Technical Advisors based in the Band-e-Amir and Wakhan Field Offices, the Wildlife Health Project Officer (part-time in Afghanistan), and two paravets.

Answer to Question: The project is helping build MAIL and NEPA’s capacities to establish national priorities for protected areas implement elements of the National Protected Areas System Plan (NPASP), strengthen the legal framework for natural resources management, and facilitate community participation in protected areas planning and management. Building these capacities is a strategic intervention at this early stage in the creation of the country’s protected areas system. Afghanistan has the unique advantage of starting with a largely blank

16

slate, before critical landscapes have been developed for tourism or other purposes without planning or protections. With project support, the Government has identified several sites that have global conservation significance and are still worth saving. One of the biggest implementation challenges is the lack of ministry staff with expertise and experience in protected areas management.

To help address this, the project has designed and delivered a diverse mix of training activities, using classroom and field-based approaches followed by ongoing mentoring and close collaboration. The most striking features of the project’s capacity building support are the degree to which training activities are jointly implemented by the ministries and the project, and the emphasis on “learning by doing.” The parties jointly identify training topics, develop curriculum, draft plans, policies and laws; facilitate community participation, manage the livestock-wildlife interface, and conduct field work. A third striking feature is the project’s commitment to Government ownership and empowerment. The Project Team serves as advisors and facilitators and encourages ministry staff to make key decisions. This approach helps ensure that “best practices” are not applied without adapting them to fit local conditions. It also enhances the level of capacity development achieved. Examples are provided below.

Classroom training: At MAIL and NEPA’s request, the project has developed Training Management Packages (TMPs) on the topics listed earlier (refer to work plan summary). Joint preparation of TMPs has increased the ministries’ capacity to develop and deliver training materials. Once the project delivers the initial round of training for existing staff, the Ministry takes over subsequent training for new staff. TMPs are often modified as needed by the Ministry, indicating that they are “living documents”. The topics listed earlier largely focus on raising awareness. In addition, the project has developed GIS skills and offered a “winter training” course on Basic English and computer skills.

Field-based training: In general, adults learn better through interactive, hand-on training than in classroom settings. The project’s consistent efforts to include MAIL and NEPA staff in field activities are particularly valuable. Ministry staff based in Bamyan participate more frequently that those based in Kabul and Faizabad, due to close proximity and excellent road access to Band-e-Amir National Park (approximately two hours by car). To address this constraint, the project works with MAIL and NEPA to prioritize staff participation in field activities based on potential learning impact. For example, in June 2013 the project went to great lengths to enable MAIL and NEPA leaders to participate in demarcation activities for Teggermansu Wildlife Reserve in the far eastern tip of the Wakhan Corridor.

Ongoing consultation and collaboration: The central location of the project’s field office in Band-e-Amir, a short walk from the ranger station and park headquarters, enables the Field Team to interact with rangers and other MAIL park staff on a daily basis. A strong working relationship has developed between the two parties over time, with both making substantial contributions to park management and consulting closely with each other to coordinate activities, recruit and train park staff, and discuss approaches. This has been particularly

17

significant in minimizing the potential environmental impacts associated with facilities development, tree planting, and other park improvement efforts. Some mistakes have been made along the way, the most notable being the construction of the park headquarters in a location with no water. However, MAIL has learned from this experience and, as a result, is more diligent about taking preventative steps to minimize unintended impacts. MAIL is also now more aware of the importance of sourcing labor and materials locally whenever possible to maximize economic opportunities for communities in the park.

The significance of a process and a plan: The two achievements that have most empowered MAIL/DAIL and NEPA with respect to protected areas management are the establishment of effective processes and institutions for community engagement in park management decisions, and the plans that have been developed and vetted through these (the Protected Area Management Plans and Facilities Development Plan). Community governance achievements are discussed in detail in the response to Question 4 from the perspective of community empowerment. It is important to note here their significance to Ministry capacity building. When the Evaluation Team asked NEPA and MAIL’s provincial directors in Bamyan what achievement they are most proud of, we expected them to answer along the lines, “we now have Afghanistan’s first national park.” Instead, they responded:

I am so proud that communities are involved in making decisions about the park. Before the project, we faced a lot of unsolvable issues in Band-e-Amir. We would go to the park to talk with the communities, but we did not know how to proceed. Now we have the protected area committee and the community association and our problems are getting solved. (NEPA)

I’m most proud of the Management Plan. We would not have been able to do any of the things we have accomplished without it, because we did not know what to do. Now MAIL has constructed the Park Headquarters, started greening the park by planting tree seedlings, constructed a road, rehabilitated the shrine, and moved restaurants to the new bazaar area. (DAIL)

DAIL also noted that the project has helped foster inter-ministry collaboration. “Before, we didn’t have a good connection with NEPA. That was a big issue. The project has served as a bridge. Now we’ve worked together on the Management Plan and have a monthly coordination meeting.” At the national level, the NPASP and experience conducting biodiversity surveys with the project has enabled MAIL to take the lead on funding and conducting several other biodiversity surveys in areas identified as high priority. These findings are a reminder that capacity building is not just about training. Attention to a broader range of enabling factors is necessary. In this case, having an approved plan created focus, momentum, and direction. The opportunity to immediately apply what has been learned helped new capacities mature.

Ranger training and mentoring: Prior to the project, MAIL had only four rangers in Band-e-Amir and little understanding of what to do with them. As of May 2013, MAIL employed 19 rangers: five permanent staff and 14 contractors. In addition, MAIL has approved the hiring of four women rangers at BAPAC’s request, and has worked closely with the Field Team to recruit women from local communities. At the Government’s request, the project has also trained rangers for the Shah Foladi Conservation Area, where UNEP and the Conservation

18

Organization for the Afghan Mountains (COAM) are seeking to replicate the approach to protected areas management adopted in Band-e-Amir.

The project developed and delivered a ranger training course covering a mix of field skills, park management guidelines, and information on the importance of protected areas and Afghanistan’s natural resources (refer back to the work plan summary for additional details). Ranger recruits were tested after training to confirm skills and knowledge, and only those who earned a passing score were offered the position. Four rangers have had the opportunity to participate in the project’s “winter training” course in Kabul, along with three BACA members. Spaces for rangers were allocated on the basis of test scores, to ensure that those most likely to benefit from it would be given the opportunity. In general, the project promotes and models merit-based approaches and transparency in hiring and training decisions. This has been a positive influence within the ministry and has the backing of MAIL Directors.

The toughest job challenge most commonly cited by rangers was “having to confront powerful people, particularly outsiders,” yet they told many stories of confronting armed men and/or large groups engaged in banned activities. In general, rangers address offences by informing the offender(s) of the park rules and regulations and asking them to desist. Depending on the seriousness of the offence, they may require the offender to accompany them to the ranger station, where the offence will be recorded.

In addition to training, the following five resources help rangers perform their job: the Management Plan, uniforms, the support of local communities and other stakeholders, the ranger “task table”, and the escalation process. The most significant interview finding is that the ranger team refers to the Management Plan on a daily basis as issues arise. The document is not collecting on dust on the shelf -- it is instrumental in helping rangers make sound decisions. The combination of the Management Plan and professional ranger uniforms helps establish their authority to cite and enforce park rules and regulations in the eyes of local communities and park visitors. In general, rangers appear to have the respect and support of local communities. Communities frequently report hunting and bush collection offenses to rangers and may even assist with confronting offenders. The “task table” informs rangers of where to conduct patrols. The Head Ranger designed it on his own initiative and prepares it on a monthly basis, demonstrating effective leadership capacity. He rotates rangers through different areas of the park in teams and adjusts focal areas based on seasonal tourism and hunting pressures. Rangers report all offences to the Head Ranger, who in turn reports them up the chain of command as needed to the Park Warden, DAIL, and BAPAC. The local police are also reportedly willing to assist and have the advantage of being armed, though the offenders have often left the scene before the police respond.

In addition to rangers, camera traps have enhanced the capacity to monitor threatened species. In 2011, a camera trap in the Northern Plateau photographed a Persian leopard, thought to be extinct in Afghanistan for over 50 years. Camera traps in the Wakhan have captured compelling photos of several snow leopards. These photos have helped raise awareness within the Government and local communities of Afghanistan’s endangered

19

species. WCS has provided framed photos of leopards to MAIL, NEPA and other members of the APWA Oversight Group and they now hang in the office of several deputy ministers throughout the Government. This appears to be a particularly effective way to acknowledge project supporters, and in turn creates opportunities for them to discuss conservation efforts with others who see the photo in their office.

Building capacities to manage the livestock-wildlife health interface: The project has made unique and strategic contributions to capacity building by increasing understanding within the Government, development projects, and local communities of the “one health” concept, whereby livestock, wildlife, and grazing land health is addressed in a holistic and dynamic ecosystem approach rather than treated individually as isolated agriculture and natural resource subsectors. The project also implements specific interventions that mitigate threats to livestock, wildlife, and rangeland health.

Working under a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with MAIL’s General Directorate for Animal Health, the project has provided technical support and lab supplies to the Central Veterinary Diagnostic and Research Laboratory (CVDRL) in Kabul to strengthen its capacity to test for livestock and wildlife diseases. In addition the project has trained, equipped, and supported two paravets in the Wakhan to conduct livestock vaccination campaigns and collect blood samples for disease monitoring and diagnostic purposes. The paravet activities build on the success of the Dutch Committee for Afghanistan (DCA), which has established over 1,000 Veterinary Field Units throughout the country (except in the Wakhan), oversees importation of quality vaccines and medicines on an ongoing basis to address a critical market constraint, and promotes a sustainable business model whereby paravets are paid by livestock owners on a fee-for-service basis.

Although the paravets were trained in DCA’s standard 6-month training course, the project’s prioritization of paravet services differs from DCA’s in accordance with the “one health” concept: it identifies and vaccinates against diseases transmitted between livestock and wildlife; emphasizes livestock vaccines that enhance the productivity of individual livestock; and discourages vaccinating against enterotoxaemia (ETV) because the disease signals that over-grazing is taking place and offers a protection against unsustainable herd sizes. ETV occurs primarily when livestock graze on young grasses because they have been moved up to the summer grazing lands too early in the year. It is both a sign that the livestock populations have outstripped the capacity of the lower valleys and that the grass on the higher-elevation grazing lands is not being allowed to mature. This is a classic example of “the tragedy of the commons,” in which the short-term interests of individual livestock owners sacrifice the long-term interests of the community and the resource base on which they depend.

The “one health” approach is essential to protecting the sustainability of livestock-based livelihoods in Afghanistan. Its adoption by other projects is constrained because support for veterinary services and rangeland management is provided independently of each other (a common “silo” challenge). Livestock health specialists measure success by reductions in livestock mortality and other livestock-focused indicators, while rangeland managers measure improvements in range conditions, grazing potential, and net livestock output (metric tons of

20

meat and dairy products per region). It is extremely difficult for livestock owners and paravets to forego ET vaccines and to understand the reason why they should. The disease is common and livestock losses are a hard blow to poor rural households. Out of respect for the autonomy of the paravets as small business owners, the project does not prevent them from buying and selling ET vaccines on their own, but the project discourages it and repeatedly educates paravets and communities about the risk of eliminating ET’s natural protection against the collapse of grazing lands.

Two Afghan field veterinarians rotate between Kabul and the field and support the paravets on an ongoing basis. In addition, the international Wildlife Health Project Manager rotates between WCS’s projects in the region and oversees planning, quality control, and field activities. The paravets have been trained to conduct livestock disease surveys that involve collecting blood and/or feces samples from domestic livestock and wildlife; and to conduct vaccination campaigns for targeted diseases, such as foot-and-mouth and tuberculosis. WCS has worked with these paravets since 2006 and the paravets now carry out vaccination campaigns on their own. The project veterinarian’s follow-up by monitoring livestock health outcomes and community perceptions of vaccinations via questionnaires and direct examination of livestock to assess the effectiveness of campaigns and paravet training. In interviews with the Evaluation Team, paravets demonstrated understanding of proper sourcing of vaccines and cold chain storage to ensure adequate quality control.

Several examples exist of the project’s contributions to reducing disease transmission between livestock and wildlife. A 2012 assessment of urial and domestic sheep feces identified two shared parasites: coccidian and trichuris. The project is currently developing a database to track vaccinated yaks, because yaks roam the grazing lands unattended by their owners during the winter season and are the species most likely to transmit diseases between livestock and wildlife. Tracking will facilitate greater vaccination coverage and reduce duplications.

Additional Findings

Donor support: USAID is the single largest bilateral donor for biodiversity conservation and protected areas management in Afghanistan. Since 2006, USAID has contributed more than US$27 million for the following projects: Biodiversity Conservation and Natural Resources Management (2006-2010), Biodiversity and Community Forestry (2007-2009), Biodiversity Support Program (2007-2010), and Improving Governance and Livelihoods Through Natural Resources Management (2010-2013). Additional USAID support for natural resources management includes the Pastoral Engagement, Adaptation, and Capacity Enhancement (PEACE) project (2006-2012), Private Community Forestry for Natural Resource Management project (2006-2009), Provincial Reforestation and Integrated Environmental Protection project (2007-2009), and Village-Based Watershed Reforestation in Ghor Province project (2007-2009). ILGNRM appears to be the only current USAID-funded project in the NRM sector. The only other significant donors in this sector are the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), and the Global Environment Facility (GEF). Since Afghanistan joined the GEF, the country has

21

received US$13.1 million in GEF grants for national projects and participated in five regional and global GEF projects. The amount of funding provided by UNDP and UNEP is unknown.

Opportunities for Project Improvements

Seconding ministry staff to the Field Team: NEPA’s Provincial Director in Bamyan has requested the opportunity to post a staff member in Band-e-Amir to work with the Field Team on a daily basis. The Field Team welcomes this suggestion and recommends that the opportunity be offered to both NEPA and MAIL, provided that funding is available.

Integrating paravets in the Field Team: Both paravets noted that livestock health activities are largely isolated from other project activities in the Wakhan. During periods when the veterinarians are in Kabul, they have almost no interaction with the Field Team in Qala-e-Panja. This occurs partly because they are based in Kankhan and Abgach, a few hours’ drive from the Field Office. Identifying ways to integrate them more fully with the Field Team could give them a better understanding of how their efforts compliment the project’s other activities in the corridor, as well as the satisfaction of being part of a larger team.

Other Strategic Interventions

The need for a harmonized approach to paravet services in the Wakhan: The Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN) also provides paravet services in the Wakhan. According to the project’s veterinary team, AKDN does not provide adequate technical oversight to ensure that the vaccines they sell are effective. Sourcing from reliable suppliers, maintaining cold chain storage, proper disease diagnosis, and monitoring livestock health outcomes are critical for improving livestock health and building community trust in vaccines. If any of these measures are omitted, the vaccines are largely ineffective. Livestock owners will suffer unnecessary losses and the market for paravet services will be compromised, undermining the financial viability of Veterinary Field Units. The project has offered technical support to AKDN to address quality control issues, but AKDN has been unreceptive to date. In addition, AKDN’s paravets vaccinate against ETV. The Evaluation Team recommends that MAIL’s General Directorate for Animal Health and USAID lobby for a harmonized approach to veterinary services in the Wakhan and elsewhere; specifically, adoption of adequate quality control measures and the “one health” approach. This promotes sustainability by strengthening the market for paravet services and setting the stage for the project paravets to come under the umbrella of AKDN when the time comes for WCS to exit the region.

A longer term solution to workforce development: Both MAIL and NEPA have noted the importance of having staff with a university degree related to conservation and parks management. Although beneficial, on-the-job training cannot fully address existing gaps in expertise. The only sustainable workforce development solution is to ensure that Afghan universities offer quality courses in natural resources management. The Evaluation Team recommends that USAID fund efforts to build the capacity of the newly established Faculty of Environmental Science at Kabul University.

22

Further assessment of job sustainability for rangers and paravets is provided in the response to Question 2. Refer to the response to Question 5 related to natural resource management laws for the evaluation of legislative development.

2. COMMUNITY LIVELIHOODS DEVELOPMENT I: JOB CREATION AND OTHER

BENEFITS

Question: To what extent has the project successfully facilitated livelihood development by securing sustainable sources of direct benefits to local communities, including job creation (directly and indirectly)?


Progress against Performance Indicators (targets and results): Livelihoods activities discussed in this section are the primary drivers of the results reported in the following table. There are no indicators specific to job creation.

Indicator Number and Description

Cumulative Totals (2010-13)

Result Target Percentage 9. Number of people with increased economic benefits derived from sustainable NRM and conservation as a result of USG assistance. 7,467 2,500 299% 11. Number of livestock vaccinated (custom indicator) 17,927 7,000 256%

Progress against Work Plan (activities and outputs): Under this component, the project has facilitated livelihoods development in the following ways:

Created “green” jobs by directly hiring and training rangers, paravets, tinsmiths, and national project staff;

Promoted local sourcing of labor, materials, and transport for all protected areas management related activities carried out by the project and MAIL;

Strengthened the enabling environment for ecotourism-based livelihoods by building Afghan capacities to protect critical tourism assets (scenic landscapes and wildlife) and plan and manage park facilities development; and

Constructed predator-proof corrals, piloted a livestock insurance program, and supported paravets and vaccination campaigns to reduce or mitigate livestock losses associated with predation and disease.

Project activities for this component are generally on track.


Interviewees: The Evaluation Team interviewed 26 rangers, four tourism-based businesses, two paravets, five tinsmiths, six livestock owners, and the WCS Technical Advisors that lead the Bamyan and Badakhshan Field Teams. In addition, potential partners that promote tourism development were interviewed, including the Head of the newly established

23

Department of Tourism at Bamyan University (who also serves as the Executive Director of the Bamyan Tourism Board’s Public Private Partnership Program, established under the Department of Information and Culture) and six Aga Kahn Foundation (AKF) staff in Bamyan, Ishkashim, and Faizabad. Refer to detailed meeting notes in Annex IV.

Answer to Question: The project has created jobs directly by employing and contracting local community members, facilitated livelihoods development indirectly by strengthening the enabling environment for local ecotourism-based businesses, and delivered livestock-based livelihoods benefits to local communities by reducing livestock losses and helping protect grazing lands. The first two sources have injected cash into largely non-cash economies and created culturally acceptable income opportunities for women. Although the project’s support for local ecotourism-based businesses has been largely indirect, its achievements in building Afghan capacities to protect tourism assets through park planning and management are substantial. These capacities are critical for the viability of tourism-based businesses, both with respect to economic potential and long term sustainability.

A list of known livelihood sources supported by the project is provided in the following table, along with an assessment of sustainability. Sources are grouped by direct and indirect project benefits. MAIL’s direct employment and contracting of local communities for protected areas management activities is noted as an indirect project benefit, since the project has been instrumental in facilitating park planning.

Livelihood Sources and No. of Beneficiaries Nature of Livelihood and Assessment of Sustainability Direct Project Benefits Community Rangers: Northern Plateau (16 M) Wakhan (55 M)

Employment is part-time (6 days/month) and long term. Rangers are paid and trained by WCS and report to BAPAC and the WPA. Employment is limited to the project period. However, WCS will encourage MAIL to absorb community rangers, perhaps as part of MAIL’s forest ranger team, which is larger and better funded than park rangers. Once park revenue sharing mechanisms are in place, visitor fees could be used to fund ranger positions. In the meantime, the WPA is exploring the feasibility of investing in a community microhydropower project and charging user fees, then using the profits to fund the Wakhan community rangers.

Paravets in Wakhan (2 M) Paravets increasingly operate as a private business, in which services are provided on a fee-for-service basis. Initial project support included training (via DCA), provision of a portable ice box and solar refrigerator for safe “cold chain” storage, transport assistance (a horse), and help procuring quality vaccines from abroad. Initially, vaccine campaigns were conducted free of charge for livestock owners and paravets were paid per diems by the project for their services. Currently, both campaigns and day-to-day paravet services are offered on a fee-for-service basis. For campaigns, the project provides the paravets with free vaccines and allows them to keep any payment collected. For all other paravet services, the paravets purchase supplies from the project or in the bazaar. The paravets face several business constraints. Livestock owners are rarely able to pay cash and instead pay in kind. In addition, the vaccines are easily rendered ineffective through exposure to heat or expiration. The paravets often resort to deeply discounting them when this risk is imminent, even below

24

Livelihood Sources and No. of Beneficiaries Nature of Livelihood and Assessment of Sustainability

cost. Lack of cash severely limits their ability to procure additional vaccines. Although the paravets are now able to conduct vaccination campaigns on their own (without a supervisor in the field), ongoing procurement support, training, and monitoring is required to ensure the quality of vaccines and paravet services. In addition, ongoing community awareness campaigns are required to enhance livestock owners’ willingness to pay for vaccines and buy-in for the “one health” approach. Should WCS exit the Wakhan, the paravets could come under the umbrella of AKDN, which already supports other paravets in the region and is expected to remain active in the Wakhan indefinitely given its commitment to Ismaelis.

Tinsmiths (13 M) The tinsmiths were existing businesses contracted by the project on a short-term basis to produce 2,500 fuel-efficient cook stoves. The project trained them for three months on how to produce the new stove design, supplied materials, and paid 650-700 AFN per stove for labor. The contract has been completed and at least two tinsmiths now produce and sell fuel-efficient stoves on their own in Bamyan. The skills development and lessons learned have established a foundation for expanding improved cook stove-based business opportunities; however, further support is required to ensure sustainability. Refer to the response to Question 3 for a more detailed discussion.

WCS Afghan project staff (47 M and 10F as of January 2013)

The project employs full-time, long-term staff, some of which are recruited from local communities to work in the Field Offices. In June and July 2013, the project hired two female staff members for Band-e-Amir and Wakhan to facilitate community livelihoods, especially for women, and to support the Environmental Education Program in local schools. Employment duration is limited to the project period; however, staff will likely be highly employable in the natural resource management sector given the quality of on-the-job training and management opportunities provided by WCS and the gap between the demand and supply for people with natural resource management experience.

Local sourcing for project activities (number unknown)

The project directly sources the following from local communities to maximize the livelihood benefits that accrue locally: 1) transportation and food for surveys, demarcation, and other field work; and 2) labor, materials, and transport for fuel-efficient cook stoves and corrals. Although this benefit source is limited to the project period, the project’s advocacy for local sourcing has raised awareness within MAIL of procurement practices to avoid unintentionally exporting jobs outside of protected areas, ensured that local sourcing is noted as a priority in park management plans, and engaged BACA and WPA in facilitating local sourcing. In addition, WCS is building a list of qualified women-owned businesses from whom the project can procure goods and services and is aware that USAID is creating a central data base of women-owned businesses. Local sourcing enhances the scale and sustainability of livelihoods opportunities and the level of women’s participation.

Livestock owners in the Wakhan (number unknown)

The project facilitated the construction of 19 predator-proof corrals, piloted a livestock insurance program, and supported vaccination campaigns to reduce or mitigate livestock losses associated with predation and disease.

The predator-proof corrals are well built, long lasting, and easily replicable based on existing skills and abundance of rock. However, support for procuring beams and steel mesh is required since these materials are not available in the Wakhan.

The livestock insurance program was not sustainable because local communities were unaccustomed to insurance schemes and were unwilling to

25

Livelihood Sources and No. of Beneficiaries Nature of Livelihood and Assessment of Sustainability

pay the premiums once project support ended. The project made reasonable efforts to ensure sustainability by securing a contractual commitment from participants, but they broke the contract at the time their financing commitments kicked in.

The most significant factor in ensuring the long-term sustainability of livestock-based livelihoods is protecting rangelands from over-grazing. The project raises awareness among paravets and communities of the importance of not vaccinating against ETV because it offers a natural protection against unsustainable herd sizes (refer to the discussion under Question 1).

Climate change poses a clear and present threat to rangelands in the Wakhan, which are particularly vulnerable due to the high-altitude climate. The project has no specific mandate related to climate change adaptation and resilience. A pending GEF project will seek to address this in the Wakhan, Big Pamirs, and Teggermansu protected areas, should it be approved.

Park cleaners in Band-e-Amir (8 F)

Female park cleaners will be employed by MAIL on a long-term basis. The project has assisted MAIL and DAIL in the hiring process and recruitment was in the final stage as of late July 2013. The project will cover the initial cost until MAIL’s next budget cycle, at which point the cleaners will convert to a MAIL contract.

Indirect Project Benefits: MAIL’s Job Creation in Protected Areas MAIL Rangers in Band-e-Amir (19 M, 4 F)

Of the 19 MAIL rangers in Band-e-Amir, five are permanent staff positions and 14 are on annual employment contracts. As of late July 2013, recruitment of 4 female rangers was in the final stage. The ranger positions will be sustained by the ministry’s budget for the foreseeable future, until such time as APWA is established.

Local sourcing for MAIL’s protected areas management activities in Band-e-Amir (number unknown)

MAIL sources local labor through BACA for park boundary establishment, fencing, tree planting, and the pathway. This practice is expected to continue.

Facilities construction and management specified in the Band-e-Amir Development Plan (approximately 200 ST and 50 LT)

Upon approval and funding of the Band-e-Amir Development Plan, approximately 200 people will be employed or contracted for a period of two years during the facilities construction phase. Thereafter, approximately 50 permanent jobs will be created for ongoing facilities management and park services. The project helped fund the preparation of the plan. Funding for implementation will come from NEPA, MAIL, and other sources. The UNDP, GEF, Department for International Development (DFID), European Union, and Indian Embassy Small Grants Fund have expressed interest.

Indirect Project Livelihoods Benefits: Tourism-Based Businesses Band-e-Amir Tourism Livelihoods Hotels Restaurants in bazaar Bakery Rooms ($10-$25/night)

and meals in homes Guides Shops in bazaar Handicrafts Taxis from Bamyan city Gas station and mechanic

Opportunity: Significant potential exists in Band-e-Amir National Park for small and medium enterprise (SME) development given the large number of tourists in the summer season, estimated at 5,000-6,000/month. Local communities and the Provincial Governor see the park as an important economic asset for improving livelihoods in Bamyan. People are coming up with creative ideas for earning cash, as evident by the list presented here. The number of households that earn income from tourism is unknown but appears substantial. In addition, several opportunities are suitable for women, particularly those related to providing rooms and meals, selling meat and dairy products to restaurants and guesthouses, and selling medicinal plants, herbs, and handicrafts.

26

Livelihood Sources and No. of Beneficiaries Nature of Livelihood and Assessment of Sustainability Car wash ($5) Local medicinal plants

and herbs Photographer and photo

printing services Artist (painter) BBQ services Horse rides Swan boats

Local sourcing of meat, fish, bread and dairy from communities.

Project contributions: To date, the project’s most significant contribution to tourism development has been achieving consensus on the park management and facilities development plans to help ensure that development proceeds in a controlled manner. For example, the project helped identify the optimal location for the bazaar and facilitated the move of existing businesses outside of sensitive zones.

Sustainability: Livelihoods sustainability is highly dependent on environmental sustainability. The project’s contributions to planning have been particularly strategic at this early stage in the park’s development. Security conditions are another critical sustainability factor, both within Bamyan and along the main transportation routes to this region. To date, Bamyan has been among the most stable areas in Afghanistan. The park offers an uncommon recreation opportunity for Afghan families and attracts visitors from throughout the country. Provided that security conditions do not deteriorate, tourism-based livelihoods appear sustainable. Sustainability would be enhanced by access to business support services.

Wakhan Tourism Livelihoods Taxi service Other transport for

trekkers (yaks) Guesthouses Restaurants Guides Handicrafts Shops in Ishkashim

bazaar

Opportunity: In contrast to Band-e-Amir, the Wakhan is extremely remote and tourism is largely limited to foreign “adventure tourists”, estimated at 250 per year. The number of Afghan tourists is unknown but likely nominal given the remoteness of the region. Existing tourism-based livelihoods are largely limited to guesthouses, transportation, and guide services. The feasibility of attracting more tourists to the Wakhan is currently constrained by general security risks in Afghanistan.

Project contributions: The Field Team assisted the WPA in carrying out a tourist survey to gain a better understanding of preferences and concerns. The over-riding complaint was the cost of mafia-controlled taxi services in Ishkashim, the point of entry to the Wakhan from Tajikistan. In response, the project worked with the WPA and District Governor to establish an alternative taxi service that charges reasonable rates. The project has also facilitated establishment of the WPA Tourist Center in the Ishkashim bazaar, which provides information and sells handicrafts. A WCS Technical Advisor climbed Mt. Noshaq (24,580 feet) in 2011 as part of a four-member team funded by The North Face Adventure Grant. The expedition promoted the re-opening of Noshaq to the international climbing community and garnered exposure for the Wakhan. Additional project support includes trail, bridge, and campsite repairs.

Additional Findings

Sharper focus on livelihoods: In 2013 the project started to expand support for livelihoods development in general and outreach to women specifically. Refer to the discussion of work plan progress in the response to Question 7.

Equity: Fourteen villages are dispersed throughout Band-e-Amir (refer to the map at the front of the document). A few are fortunate to be near the central Jarubkashan area, which attracts the vast majority of tourists and related income-earning opportunities (basically all those listed in the table). Selling meat, dairy, and other agricultural products to restaurants and

27

guesthouses has likely been the primary opportunity for more remote households. In addition, people travel considerable distances on a daily basis during the summer months to work in the bazaar, some three hours or more by foot. To help increase opportunities for outlying villages, the Facilities Development Plan includes provisions for improving roads and establishing tourist accommodation and activities in these areas. In addition, BAPAC and BACA promote equity in park management decisions. For example, in May 2013 BAPAC passed a decision that all 14 communities have rights to operate three swan boats on the main lake, thereby breaking up the existing swan boat rental monopoly to facilitate more equitable access to park-related income-earning opportunities. At the same time, the committee specified “fair” rental rates to ensure that Afghan tourists can afford to rent the boats.

Balancing trade-offs in the Wakhan: Livestock-habitat-wildlife conflicts pose significant challenges for livelihoods in the Wakhan. Predator-proof corrals help mitigate threats to livestock, but are not a sufficient solution. It is critical that steps be taken to ensure that other livelihoods options are developed or community buy-in for hunting prohibitions and other protected areas measures could be jeopardized.

Other support for tourism livelihoods in the Wakhan: AKDN has provided support for improving the quality of local guesthouses and is the only other donor organization involved in tourism development in the corridor. In addition, the Wakhan benefits from a substantial amount of press coverage from Outside Magazine, National Geographic, and other high profile sources favored by adventure tourists, as well as quality content posted by enthusiastic visitors on the Internet (photos, videos, and journals). Given that Afghanistan is not otherwise thought of as a tourist destination because of security risks, this coverage is a significant factor in attracting adventure tourists to the Wakhan. Further support would be required to attract more tourists and enhance the overall quality of tourists’ experiences.

Regional differences: Livelihood opportunities and challenges vary significantly between Bamyan and the Wakhan due to differences in the number of tourists; access to markets, credit, and business support services; and diversity of rural livelihood options – all of which are more favorable in Bamyan. In this context, the Evaluation Team makes the following recommendations for the two regions.

Opportunities for Enhancing Livelihoods

Wakhan tourism promotion: WCS is well positioned to get more involved in helping WPA expand tourism-based livelihoods. Recognizing that current security conditions in Afghanistan are not conducive to attracting large numbers of foreign tourists, investments should be limited to relatively small-scale, low-cost interventions that help achieve conservation and livelihoods outcomes. Possible tourism support activities include promoting customer feedback forms for guesthouses, writing brief Lonely Planet style “trip guides” and posting them on the Internet in downloadable PDF format, working with the WPA to host a fund-raising climb of Mt. Noshaq, and training wildlife guides, among others. Specific interventions would best be identified within the context of a Wakhan Tourism Promotion

28

Strategy. A large part of the Wakhan Corridor’s appeal to foreign tourists is the fact that it is remote and few other tourists go there. Tourism development interventions should capitalize on this by identifying ways to capture the most economic benefit out of the tourists who come to the Wakhan. The following recommendation is made with this in mind.

Trophy hunting permits: The Evaluation Team recommends that the Government assess under what conditions trophy hunting permits could be allowed in the Wakhan to provide an income stream for local communities without jeopardizing wildlife populations. Key issues include enforcement capacities, transparent revenue tracking and sharing mechanisms, and other measures required to mitigate potential impacts on wildlife populations and local communities. Identify which ungulate species would be most suitable based on resilience and Afghanistan’s advantages compared to competing opportunities in other countries (such as wild ungulates in Tajikistan). Also assess the economic potential of a well-managed trophy hunting program based on the number of trophies allowed per year and the potential fees that trophy hunters would be willing pay to hunt in the Wakhan (not necessarily the same as in other countries).

Predator proof corrals: The Evaluation Team recommends that the project seek additional resources to increase the number of predator-proof corrals in the Wakhan to minimize livestock losses. However, limit support to addressing critical constraints: the mesh wire for the roof and timber poles that cannot be sourced locally and require cash.

Hunting Law: The Evaluation Team recommends that the Government reviewing the draft Hunting Law and approaches used in other countries to assess the feasibility of introducing provisions for problem animal control (PAC), particularly for wolves and other non-threatened predators.

Agricultural diversification: The Evaluation Team recommends that USAID assess opportunities for agricultural diversification in the Wakhan. There appears to be untapped potential for fruit and fuel wood trees and vegetable greenhouse production in the Wakhan. Extensive tree plantations on the Tajikistan side of the Wakhan Corridor (a stone’s throw from the project site), apricot trees in the Hunza Valley of Pakistan (Gilgit-Baltistan region), and an existing greenhouse in Qala-e-Panja suggest that conditions are suitable.

Minimizing Tourism Impacts in Band-e-Amir: At this early stage in Band-e-Amir’s development, securing funding to implement and monitor the Management Plan and Facilities Development Plan is critical for ensuring that development proceeds in a controlled manner and for minimizing the environmental impacts associated with the large number of tourists. Protecting water resources from contamination is a high priority. The Management Plan notes that a hydrological study is required to better understand the groundwater source that feed the lakes, as well as a monitoring program to detect changes in surface water quality. The Evaluation Team recommends that MAIL and donors identify adequate funding sources for these measures.

29

3. COMMUNITY LIVELIHOODS DEVELOPMENT II: FUEL-EFFICIENT COOK

STOVES

Question: How has the use of fuel-efficient stoves been accepted by and integrated into local communities, including demand?


Progress against Performance Indicators (targets and results): Distribution of fuel-efficient cook stoves (aka “project stove”) to households in protected areas and subsequent reduction in bush and fuel wood collection are the primary project results associated with the indicators in the following table.

Indicator Number and Description Cumulative Totals (2010-13)

Result Target Percentage 5b. Number of households benefited by agriculture and alternative development interventions in targeted areas 3,136 359 874% 6. Number of hectares in areas of biological significance showing improved biophysical conditions as a result of USG assistance 301,568

275,000 110%

There are no other targets specific to stoves; however, they likely contribute to “number of people with increased economic benefits” results reported in the previous livelihoods section and to cross-cutting Indicator 5.2.3b Number of USG-supported initiative/mechanisms designed to reduce the potential for violent conflict over the control, exploitation, trade or protection of natural resources (refer to Section III.7).

Progress against Work Plan (activities and outputs)

The project aimed to distribute 2,500 fuel-efficient cook stoves. In 2010-2011 the project trained 13 local tinsmiths in Bamyan and Wakhan to produce the stoves and selected three women in Bamyan to pilot the stove in their homes. The stoves were turned over to BACA and the WPA for distribution in target communities and the project trained women how to install and use the stove. The associations set the stove price and were allowed to keep the proceeds to fund other association activities. The project subsequently conducted a survey of 30 randomly chosen households in Band-e-Amir to assess adoption of the fuel-efficient stove. In 2012, all stoves produced for Band-e-Amir and the lower Wakhan had been distributed. Stove distribution among the Kyrgyz in the Pamirs is still underway due to transportation challenges during the long winter season.

The Work Plan indicated that the Project Team would conduct a formal evaluation of the stove program to assess fuel savings and technology adoption by the end of 2013. The Project Team had not assessed the stove program as of July 2013. Refer to the Evaluation Team’s recommendations on further assessment priorities.

30


Interviewees: The evaluation team interviewed 21 cook stove users and five tinsmiths in Bamyan and the Wakhan. Most interviews were conducted in users’ homes or tinsmiths’ workshops in the bazaar, allowing the Evaluation Team to make direct observations about stove adoption and production.

Answer to Question: The fuel-efficient cook stove has been readily adopted by local communities. All 2,500 stoves produced by the project-trained tinsmiths under contract have been sold, with the exception of those that await distribution in the Pamirs. Although the price was highly subsidized at 100 AFN in Bamyan and 500 AFN in Wakhan ($2 and $10) compared to a production cost of 1,700-1,900 AFN ($34-$38), it is a significant cost given the scarcity of cash in Bamyan and the Wakhan. It demonstrates that local households are willing to pay for fuel-efficient cook stoves.

Households continue to use traditional tandoors and bukharis as needed for cooking and space heating in the winter months, to bake naan (flat bread) and/or when there are a large number of people to cook for. This is inevitable because no single fuel-efficient stove can address all the cooking and space heating needs of Afghan households, particularly in colder climates. A trade-off exists between the size of the stove and fuel efficiency, with larger stoves being inherently less fuel-efficient for cooking purposes. All users interviewed reported that they now use less fuel for cooking with the project stove; most estimated at least 25 percent less fuel. This seems like a reasonable estimate.

Three challenges rendered the data collected on fuel use unreliable for calculating average savings or a range. First, stove users struggled to quantify fuel use due to low numeracy (particularly among women in the Wakhan). They visualized volumes as number of yak, donkey, or person loads or the amount of dung that would fill their kitchen. The Evaluation Team was unable to convert answers to a standard unit of measurement. Second, the number of variables made it complex to compare before and after scenarios for each fuel source (bush, fuel wood, and dung) across four seasons, with corresponding differences in the type of stove used (tandoor, bukhari, and fuel-efficient stove). Third, some users had used the stove for less than one year. Despite these shortcomings, the interviews were helpful in gaining a better understanding of the factors that drive household fuel consumption and stove use practices. These are listed in the following section to guide future fuel savings assessment efforts.

A difference in how the stove is used on a daily basis varies significantly between Bamyan and the Wakhan due to environmental and social differences. The stove appears most suitable for Bamyan, where household sizes are smaller, winters are shorter (five months), and the predominant fuel sources are bush and fuel wood. In contrast, in the Wakhan household sizes are larger, winters are longer (7 months), and the predominant fuel source is dung. In addition, Wakhi and Kyrgyz households have substantially larger fuel requirements during

31

winter because they must heat water for livestock to drink. This is done in large basins over tandoors.

All users interviewed reported that the stove has multiple advantages over the traditional tandoor. In addition to fuel efficiency, the most common advantages cited are the ability to cook multiple items at the same time on the double burner and less smoke as a result of the stove pipe. Other advantages include that the stove heats up quickly, results in less food loss from burning, and results in fewer burn injuries.

It appears that the market for the project stove in the targeted protected areas is largely saturated, since all households have reportedly had an opportunity to buy one at a subsidized price. That said, users and tinsmiths interviewed made a consistent set of recommendations for improving the stove design (described below). It is possible that some households may be willing to pay for a second stove that incorporates these design recommendations, and that the design modifications would result in greater fuel savings (particularly of bush and fuel wood). In addition, there appears to be unmet demand for fuel-efficient cook stoves in regional markets (Bamyan and Ishkashim) that have not been targeted by the project.

Additional Findings and Lessons Learned

Validity of program design and logic: The following elements of the project approach are sound: identifying a stove design used in similar regions (northern Pakistan), training local tinsmiths on production, piloting the stove prior to distribution, engaging school children in household fuel consumption surveys, engaging community associations in selling the stove, and subsidizing the price of the stove to drive adoption in protected areas. These approaches helped raise awareness of the link between fuel consumption and habitat destruction, achieve buy-in for taking action, develop capacity for ongoing production of fuel-efficient stoves in local markets, deliver tangible benefits to users and producers, and reduce bush and fuel wood collection pressures on local resources. The following discussion of lessons learned focuses on two key elements of the program design and logic, the stove design and the use of subsidies. It also discusses their role in building demand for fuel-efficient stoves and creating the conditions for a viable business model for producers and sellers.

Stove design: Should this activity be replicated in other areas in Afghanistan, the stove design should be reassessed. Despite the project’s efforts to identify a culturally appropriate stove design, early adopters and targeted beneficiaries did not communicate their preferences to the Project Team during the pilot and an opportunity was lost to produce a more suitable stove. When interviewed by the Evaluation Team, stove users consistently recommended raising the ground clearance of the stove, adding an ash collection tray, and increasing the ventilation so that it burns hotter and can better accommodate dung fuel in the colder months. Project-trained tinsmiths have already incorporated these design modifications on their own, along with a third compartment for heating and dispensing water. In addition, interviewees reported that the project stove is not suitable for cooking naan, the bread eaten daily in households throughout the target areas (it cooks chipatis, tortilla-style bread preferred in Pakistan where

32

the stove design originated). It seems unlikely that a simple design modification can address this, since the stove is made of sheet metal and naan gets its distinct qualities from being baked in a clay oven. It is highlighted as a limitation of the stove design.

The Evaluation Team believes that the Project Team made reasonable efforts to identify and pilot the stove. However, two implementation lessons are noted: First, Afghan and Pakistani cultural norms prevented the tinsmith trainer from accepting feedback from trainees about the stove design and stove users from openly critiquing the stove design (especially women). Second, the Project Team did not document the pilot findings. Doing so would have likely enhanced the rigor and usefulness of the pilot, particularly if it had incorporated a user preference survey and energy savings assessment.

Regarding the fuel efficiency assessment in the project Work Plan, the Evaluation Team questions the value of moving forward on this. At this time the value of the information would be limited to documenting impacts. However, there is no indicator in the project Performance Management Plan for fuel savings. Given that improvements to the stove design are suggested and that further research could identify additional improvements, efforts to quantify fuel savings or assess stove adoption would be better spent on future directions.

Efforts to promote improved stoves for conservation and health reasons should consider the following:

Understand the end users: Household energy use is fairly complex, varies by region, and can be expected to change as local economies begin to have more cash transactions. Field research is required to understand how new stove models would be accepted and integrated. Based on interviews, the Evaluation Team found that the following factors are significant with respect to adoption and potential fuel savings: seasonal differences, climate zones, available fuel sources, energy consumption by end-use (space heating, cooking, and water heating), family size, cultural food preferences (especially related to bread), number and type of existing stoves in the home, and household cash income. The Evaluation Team also found that interactions between factors render it difficult to isolate fuel savings associated with a specific stove or end use. All stoves are used for both space heating and cooking or heating water.

Focus on the objective(s): Reductions in dung use are beneficial for the environment only if it could be used for fertilizer for crops. In the Wakhan where livestock is the predominant livelihood and crop cultivation is nominal, the primary benefit of more efficient dung use would be largely limited to households being able to do more with available dung supplies. Fuel efficiency assessments, associated stove design decisions, performance indicators, and subsequent evaluations should focus on reducing fuel wood and bush use if conservation is a primary objective, and be based on a solid understand of fuel source(s) and associated environmental and human health benefits.

Start small: Addressing all the energy requirements of rural households is unlikely to be feasible. Interventions should therefore identify the most cost-effective and affordable solution to the problem(s) being addressed. Starting with a simple intervention that raises

33

awareness and delivers tangible benefits is a sound strategy for achieving early success and buy-in for future interventions. The project stove is a good example of this: it was low-cost (under $40 per household), produced locally, and delivered multiple and immediate benefits to many households. Despite its limitations, it delivered a lot for relatively little money.

Explore options: Further research on existing stove designs and alternative energy sources that are suitable for conditions in Afghanistan is warranted. For example, the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) has been promoting fuel-efficient stoves in Pakistan and Nepal that use bio-bricks made of compressed animal dung, in climatic conditions that are similar to those in the Wakhan and the Pamirs. In addition, farmers in Nepal are using fixed-dome digesters to produce biogas for cooking and heating at high altitudes (3,800 meters). A 2011 assessment of biomass resources in Afghanistan notes that 91 percent of households in Badkahshan province (over 132,000) have sufficient access to cattle manure to be served by biogas digesters.1 However, water availability and cost make the feasibility of biogas stoves uncertain, which speaks to the third point.

Investigate critical unknowns and test assumptions in pilot: Conduct a user preference survey and energy savings assessment during the pilot phase to assess acceptability and impact prior to distribution. Survey questions and approach need to be carefully designed and tested to address interviewees’ reluctance to speak frankly. The Evaluation Team found that across all project stakeholder groups, stakeholder responses to questions about overall satisfaction with project activities (such as ranking satisfaction on a scale of 1-5) were not credible on their own due to the cultural norms noted earlier. It is necessary to pose a series of specific questions about outcomes and potential areas for improvement to solicit useful and credible responses. The Evaluation Team also found it useful to include men, women, and school children in interviews since they all have roles related to fuel collection and use.

Subsidies and Demand: This section assesses stove subsidies and demand from the perspectives of both conservation and market development. Regarding buyer subsidies, a trade-off exists between achieving rapid adoption of fuel-efficient stoves and market development: the lower the price, the larger the demand for fuel-efficient stoves. Unfortunately, subsidies distort the market by undermining buyers’ willingness to pay (WTP) the full costs of production. This can have an unintended impact on local tinsmiths if awareness of the subsidy extends to buyers beyond the targeted beneficiaries. Potential 1 High altitude regions are particularly vulnerable to climate change-induced droughts and shrinking glaciers. The cost of a fixed-dome biogas plant is $400-$800, far beyond what most families can afford. The average biogas plant in Nepal serves a household of 6 or 7 people and generates the following benefits: saves 2,000-3,000 kg/year fuel wood, reduces work load by 1.5-3 hours per day, reduces greenhouse gas production by 5 tons CO2 equivalent per year, and produces very high quality organic fertilizer. Source: Milbrandt, Anelia and Ralph Overend, Assessment of Biomass Resources in Afghanistan, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), U.S Department of Energy, Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-49358, Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308, Oakridge, TN, January 2011.

34

buyers may hold off buying a fuel-efficient stove in the hope that they can eventually obtain a subsidy. Fuel-efficient cook stove subsidies may also impact the demand for other cook stoves that compete at similar price levels. Based on interviews with project-trained tinsmiths, attracting buyers who are willing to pay a price that covers their costs is an ongoing challenge for most products, particularly when lower-cost models exist. For fuel-efficient cook stoves, it is unclear if buyers’ WTP in regional markets has been affected by project subsidies. It is inevitably influenced by household income levels and level of awareness of the benefits of fuel-efficient stoves.

One Ishkashim-based tinsmith noted that irrespective of whether distortions have occurred, his business has grown as a result of being trained by WCS. He now enjoys a reputation as a quality tinsmith and is sought out for tinsmith jobs that extend beyond cook stoves. The Evaluation Team concludes that tinsmiths benefitted directly in the short term from their participation in the program by developing tinsmith skills and obtaining a production contract in which they were paid 650-700 AFN per stove for their labor.

The Evaluation Team concludes that the project’s approach to subsidies was reasonable given the project’s conservation objectives, the environmental and health benefits associated with improving indoor air quality (positive externalities that justify subsidies), and that targeting limited the subsidies to households in protected areas where conservation is a high priority. In addition, the timing of this activity was strategic. The stoves helped raise awareness and achieve buy-in by directly benefitting a large number of households during the early stages of community-based protected areas management efforts, when expected tourism benefits have not yet manifested (as in the Wakhan) or are starting to appear but are somewhat concentrated in communities located nearest the primary visitor areas (as in Band-e-Amir National Park).

Demand for fuel-efficient stoves in the regional markets of Bamyan and Ishkashim is unknown. Although the project stoves were produced there, they were sold only in the protected areas and it was not within the project mandate to promote fuel-efficient stoves beyond the target communities. Evidence suggests that there is untapped demand and that the tinsmiths could benefit from marketing assistance. Since the tinsmiths’ production contracts ended, both of the Bamyan-based tinsmiths interviewed have started producing an improved model on their own that incorporates the three design modifications mentioned earlier plus a third compartment for storing hot water. As of early May 2013, one tinsmith had sold 30 improved stoves at a price of 3,200 AFN. The other tinsmith had sold 120 improved stoves at an undisclosed price, over a period of six months. Stove users interviewed in Band-e-Amir report that awareness of the project fuel-efficient stove has spread word-of-mouth to friends and family who live outside of the park. One woman reported that when a family member travelled to Bamyan to buy a fuel-efficient stove in the bazaar, they were unable to find one. The Evaluation Team notes that neither the original nor improved stoves have been branded. Both tinsmiths in Bamyan reported that the stove is referred to as “the bread-making” stove. The Ishkashim tinsmiths had received inquiries about the “Pamiri,” “Pakistani,” and “robab”

35

stove (an Afghan instrument that is shaped like the stove). In addition, the stoves have no markings that indicate the producer’s name, address, or phone number.

Of the three Ishkashim tinsmiths interviewed, one reported that he receives on average three inquires per day about the fuel-efficient stove and the other estimated one to two per day. The third tinsmith was the only one to have sold any fuel-efficient stoves since his contract with WCS ended. He had sold three at a price of 2,500 AFN. Production of fuel-efficient stoves has halted for all three tinsmiths due to lack of access to quality materials that must be procured from Kabul, such has heavy 16-17 gauge sheet metal. The Evaluation Team concludes that additional market development support will be required to achieve ongoing production of fuel-efficient stoves and those tinsmith skills and project lessons provide a foundation for future sustainability.

Opportunities to Promote Market Development

Efforts to develop the market for improved stoves would benefit from the following:

The engagement of business development and microfinance projects. An assessment of the demand and value chain for fuel-efficient stoves, including stove

designs that meet user requirements, buyers’ willingness to pay (WTP); buyers’ access to markets, credit, and opportunities to earn cash; producers’ access to materials and other inputs, production costs, and tinsmith skills. These will vary by region.

Minimal use of subsidies to avoid market distortions. Ideally, subsidies would be evidence-based and designed to cover the gap between buyers’ WTP and fair market price (production costs plus a reasonable profit margin).

Branding to differentiate them from other stoves in the bazaar, marking with the producer’s contact information so that they can be easily found, and a public awareness campaign.

Collaboration with the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, a public-private partnership endorsed by the Government of Afghanistan, U.S. Department of State, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, among others. Collaboration could leverage additional resources, deliver more benefits to stove users, and avoid duplication of efforts or potential conflicts.

4. COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE

Question: To what extent has the project strengthened community governance through organization participation, education, and revenue management in NRM planning and implementation?


Progress against Performance Indicators (targets and results): The project has established the Band-e-Amir Community Association (BACA) and Wakhan Pamir Association (WPA). Both are registered with the Ministry of Justice.

36


Result Target Percentage

10. Creation of social organizations/NGOs (custom indicator) 2 2 100%

Community governance activities also contribute to cross-cutting Indicator 5.2b: Number of communities implementing improved natural resource management practices. Refer to Section III.8.

Progress against Work Plan (activities and outputs): Project activities include:

Preparation of Protected Areas Management Plans for Band-e-Amir National Park and Big Pamir Wildlife Reserve, and the Band-e-Amir National Park Visitor Facilities Zone Physical Development Plan (hereafter referred to as the “Facilities Development Plan”).

Establishment of the inter-ministerial Band-e-Amir Protected Areas Management Committee (BAPAC), comprised of representatives from district and provincial Government agencies and each of the 14 communities in the park and tasked with overseeing implementation of the Band-e-Amir Protected Areas Management Plan. A similar committee will be established for the Wakhan.

Establishing BACA and WPA, including facilitating elections and drafting bylaws; Facilitating ongoing stakeholder engagement in protected areas management

decisions, including but not limited to drafting management and development plans; Developing environmental curriculum for public schools in protected areas and

providing ongoing support to teachers for delivering environmental lessons; Refining and further developing the environmental curriculum for the purpose of

nation-wide dissemination, in collaboration with the Ministry of Education (MoE); Establishing school committees that engage students in conducting livestock and

household fuel consumption surveys; Developing environmental awareness messages based on Islamic teachings for

dissemination through local mullahs (“Edicts of the Prophet Mohammed”); Hosting public awareness events at local schools, such as Parent’s Day; and Implementing a Community Conservation Outreach Program through Community

Extension Agents.

Community governance activities are generally on track.


Interviewees: The Evaluation Team interviewed nine WPA members, six BACA members, 25 Community Development Council (CDC) members, three District and Provincial Governors, 11 teachers, and 105 students. In addition, the team observed a BAPAC meeting and interviewed the Provincial Governor of Bamyan, who chairs BAPAC. BACA leadership changed suddenly and unexpectedly just as the Evaluation Team arrived in Bamyan. The situation appeared politically sensitive and it was not clear if the election result would hold.

37

Upon the advice of the Field Team, the Evaluation Team opted to forego interviews with BACA leadership out of concern that it could be viewed as a premature endorsement. However, the CDC members interviewed included six female BACA members who serve on both; their views are reflected in this evaluation.

Answer to Question:

Community participation in NRM planning

Government support: When the project first started work in Bamyan, natural resources management and community conflicts were a challenge for MAIL and NEPA. Now systems are in place for co-management and joint problem-solving on an ongoing basis through BAPAC. Some officials were skeptical or antagonistic at first, but early achievements have earned support. In addition, the project has helped establish a bottom-up process for engaging protected areas associations in developing management plans and involving relevant sub-national and national Government agencies in review and approval (refer to text box). This process will likely be approved as the standard procedure for future protected areas management plans. NEPA and MAIL have asked WCS to help facilitate plans for Ajar Wildlife Preserve, Big Pamir Wildlife Preserve, and Teggarmansu (WCS), and asked UNEP to do the same in the Shah Foladi Conservation Area in the Koh-e-Baba Mountains.

Community ownership and capacity building: The community organizations established with project support are actively engaged in creating protected areas management plans and making decisions about park management and tourism-based livelihoods development on an ongoing basis. Numerous participant statements indicate that these organizations matter to local communities. Communities increasingly understand the economic importance of wildlife and protected areas and value the opportunity to participate in making decisions. The project approach to stakeholder engagement in planning is to provide a framework that identifies the kinds of issues the plans should address based on international best practices, and then facilitate a process whereby the protected areas associations shape the content. In general, Field Teams seed ideas and respond to requests for technical advice, but leave key decisions to local organizations. This empowers participants, who see their ideas in the approved documents. In reference to the Big Pamir Wildlife Reserve Management Plan, a female WPA member interviewed stated, “In the past, the plan would have been written by the Government in Kabul and handed down to us. Things are different now. We wrote the

Bottom-up NRM Planning Process Plan development: The protected area association

is the lead author, with input from CDCs. The draft plan is reviewed and revised as follows:

District review: District Development Council and Governor comment;

Provincial review: NEPA, MAIL, Ministry of Culture’s Culture and Information Department, Ministry of Economy, Provincial Development Council, and Governor comment;

Local revision: Plan goes back to the protected area association to address comments;

Final review: A 3-day workshop is held in the province to walk stakeholders through the final plan point-by-point.

Sub-national government approval: Revised plan goes back to District and Provincial Governors for approval; and

National government approval: plan is reviewed simultaneously by the Independent Directorate of Local Governance (IDLG), MAIL, and NEPA in Kabul for final approval.

38

plan and have sent it up to Kabul. It’s our plan.” The project also helps empower association members through training on meeting facilitation, stakeholder consultations, tourism promotion, and other skills. In addition, they link associations to other resources (such as the World Food Program) and trained them to write their own grant proposals.

The Evaluation Team found no indications that local residents in Band-e-Amir view recent park infrastructure improvements or planning activities as a WCS, IGLNRM, or USAID project. They recognize that the project provides assistance, but they attribute infrastructure improvements and restoration activities to the Government (specifically MAIL). This is remarkable and speaks to the Field Team’s ability to facilitate a sense of community and Government ownership of park management activities and decisions.

Transparency, acceptance and accountability: NEPA’s Bamyan Director reported that local communities accept BAPAC decisions because matters are discussed openly and the 14 communities in the park are represented on the committee. For example, as part of shrine restoration and zoning efforts, BAPAC required all the shops and restaurants located in an environmentally sensitive area next to the shrine to move to the newly designated bazaar area. When interviewed by the evaluation team, one effected owner said that he accepted the decision because he could see that ongoing improvements in the park would benefit everyone, including him. Communities are also holding elected leaders accountable. The former WPA Chair resigned over the issue of not being paid enough per diems. Community members openly confronted him, accusing him of doing very little on behalf of stakeholders and showing interest only in personal financial benefit. Bamyan communities recently voted in new BACA leadership. A democratic redistribution of power is emerging through these new institutions. Substantial voter turn-outs for local elections demonstrate that stakeholders find these institutions relevant. More than 50 people reportedly showed up for WPA Chair elections in spring 2013, along with the District Governor, District MAIL, AKDN, and local Shah’s family. Similarly, approximately 300 people reportedly showed up for the BACA elections in May 2013.

Links to Community Development Councils (CDCs): BACA and WPA build on the local governance achievements of the National Solidarity Program (NSP). Communities participated in their first local elections under NSP and many people elected to CDCs have gone on to serve in the associations established under the project. In addition, District and Provincial Development Councils are engaged in reviewing protected areas management plans, as described in the text box. Several rangers, paravets, and association members interviewed indicate that they report back to CDCs on project related-activities. In turn, many examples exist of CDCs directly supporting project activities and objectives by reporting illegal hunting and bush collection to rangers, helping confront offenders to explain new laws, donating food or transport to paravets to support vaccination campaigns, coordinating local sourcing of labor, transport, and food for the project’s field activities, and establishing fines for fishing and bush collection in sensitive areas. These examples of initiative and collaboration align with the Government’s stated priority to have CDCs mature and establish links to other sub-national government institutions.

39

Women’s participation: BAPAC is chaired by Afghanistan’s first female Provincial Governor. Committee members invited her to serve in this position, recognizing that she would enhance the credibility and effectiveness of the committee. She demonstrates strong leadership, motivated by the belief that Bamyan’s unique landscapes and cultural heritage are its most important economic assets, and that they must be managed sustainably for the benefit of current and future generations. With regards to the protected areas associations, both BACA and WPA have women’s subcommittees, comprised of four and two women respectively. Refer to the response to Question 7 for additional comments on gender.

Environmental Education Program (EEP)

Curriculum development: The EEP has made substantial contributions to environmental curriculum and continues to innovate on this front. These efforts address a critical gap given the low level of awareness of environmental threats and sound practices at the community level. The Evaluation Team is not aware of other similar support of a substantial scale. The project’s ongoing efforts to work with NEPA, the Ministry of Education (MoE), and spiritual leaders to create and pilot national environmental curriculum and environmental messages from Islamic scriptures are strategic interventions that have high potential impact on environmental awareness and values. MoE has committed to piloting the enhanced environmental curriculum in Kabul, in parallel with the project’s pilots in Bamyan and Badakhshan. Community leaders, MOE provincial and district Education Departments, and NEPA provincial office have reportedly thanked the Field Team for helping expand the curriculum available to teachers.

School committee surveys: In the Wakhan, the EEP originally focused on establishing school committees to oversee surveys. Engaging students and teachers in surveys on their own household’s fuel consumption and livestock populations was a creative approach to raising awareness within the broader community, developing student’s research skills, and obtaining baseline information for project design and monitoring purposes. When project staff evaluated the data, they encountered a common and difficult survey challenge: the data was unreliable because households were reluctant to provide accurate estimates of fuel consumption and livestock numbers. For this reason, they did not report back to the students on findings. Engaging students in data assessment and providing periodic feedback would have enhanced the learning potential of the surveys and allowed for earlier corrections to the approach. The Field Teams promoted the monthly surveys for a long period of time (more than two years), resulting in diminishing returns related to learning value. Students and teachers eventually lost interest in the surveys and asked for something new. The project responded by developing the environmental curriculum. The project has not discarded the concept of school committees and surveys; however, any future surveys will focus on less sensitive topics.

Implementation performance: At the local level, project support to teachers for integrating the curriculum in their classes has varied significantly between the two field offices. The Band-e-Amir Field Office has dedicated a full-time female staff member to the environmental

40

education program (EEP). In contrast, the staff member responsible for EEP in the Wakhan Field Office has been assigned multiple responsibilities, resulting in intermittent support to the schools. Teachers and students in both sites have benefitted, but those in Bamyan more than the Wakhan. Though areas for improvement have been noted, interview responses indicate that the EEP has been effective in raising awareness of environmental issues in communities that are located in critical landscapes and habitats and that would not otherwise be exposed to this information. Approximately 1,100 students were involved in the program (717 boys and 379 girls), across seven schools in Bamyan and fourteen schools in the Wakhan. They learned about interesting topics and have greater awareness of Afghanistan’s unique wildlife and plants, the environmental threats posed by littering and excessive collection of shrubs and fuel wood, and the role of fuel-efficient cook stoves in reducing pressures on local resources. This new awareness facilitated the adoption of the project’s fuel-efficient stove. Almost all students interviewed stated that they had a fuel-efficient stove in their home. In addition, a participating teacher who also serves in his CDC indicated that the stove program motivated his CDC to take action to reduce shrub collection in sensitive areas by setting fines.

Additional activities: The project’s Community Outreach Program reached 488 people (233 F, 255 M) in local communities and summer grazing pastures of the Northern Plateau, using posters, slide presentations, videos, and films (such as David Attenborough’s “Life on Earth” films). The content is both educational and entertaining to communities that otherwise has very little access to media. In addition, the project occasionally provides math and English classes for schools and Government staff. Though it may not appear directly related to project objectives, these skills are important for strengthening governance capacities and access to tourism-based livelihoods opportunities. Additional English training was one of the most common requests made by the students, Government staff members, and rangers interviewed.

Sustainability: The investment in developing environmental curriculum that can be used nation-wide, the achievement of buy-in from the Ministry of Education, the engagement of mullahs, and teacher training are strategic approaches that enhance replicability and ownership within the Afghan Government, influential community spiritual leaders, and schools. These achievements have laid a strong foundation for future sustainability and expanding access to environmental education throughout Afghanistan. Within individual schools, ongoing project support is required to ensure sustainability for two reasons: teacher turn-over and the low level of teacher education in Afghanistan. The level of project support may be reduced over time, but not completely withdrawn or reductions in the quality of teaching will result.

Community participation in revenue management

The project has helped BACA and WPA draft association bylaws that contain clauses on “source of funds and its control”, helped the associations open bank accounts, and assisted MAIL in drafting benefit sharing contracts for use in Band-e-Amir. Beyond this, the project has not worked with communities on revenue management because the Government has not

41

yet established the legal and institutional arrangements for revenue sharing. The project is working closely with the Government to achieve progress on this issue, as discussed in response to Question 6. To date, some park revenues are distributed to Yakawlang municipality and in turn spent on projects that benefit local communities (for example, the newly constructed bridge between Qala-e-Jafar and Sabel). It appears that the amount received and spent is not reported to communities and there is no formal mechanism for community consultation on how revenues are spent. This warrants confirmation and if true, BAPAC and BACA should consider advocating for greater transparency and stakeholder consultation.


In addition to the points made earlier, the Evaluation Team attributes the achievements in governance to the following factors:

Motivation: The governance institutions established at local and national levels address issues that matter to participants. Local communities now understand that the landscapes in which they live offer substantial tourism potential, and that the Government is committed to engaging communities in decisions about protected areas management and eventually sharing park revenues through formal co-management arrangements. In the meantime, they see increased economic benefits flowing to tourism-based businesses. This is particularly evident in Band-e-Amir, where communities are showing visible signs of an increasing influx of cash, allowing them to enter the cash economy. Poverty, land degradation, and conflicts pose significant challenges, but they also motivate communities to participate in protected areas management activities.

Access to information: The project provides decision-makers with information needed to make evidence-based decisions. Examples include the current status of natural resources, priority landscapes, trends and threats, natural resource-based livelihoods opportunities, and best practices from other countries combined with an analysis of pros and cons and relevance to local conditions. Information enhances confidence in decisions and facilitates efficient use of time spent in meetings.

Consensus: Elected community representatives in the WPA spoke of the importance of everyone agreeing, suggesting that they seek to get consensus, not just a majority decision, to enhance the likelihood that decisions are accepted by the community and sustainable.

Constancy: Project Field Teams live and work in local communities, without impenetrable compound walls and security guards. Project offices have an open door policy and staff members are deeply engaged in community activities. This is rare in Afghanistan. Proximity and accessibility allows Field Teams to mentor project participants on an on-going basis and earns the respect and trust of stakeholders. It also results in the Field Teams serving as a primary conduit for channelling other donor support toward local priorities. Longevity is another unique advantage: almost all key project staff have worked for WCS in Afghanistan

42

for four years or more, including the two Technical Advisors and Ranger Mentor based in the protected areas and the former WCS Country Director, Wildlife Health Manager, Country Manager, and Finance Manager based in Kabul.

Constituency: An individual village-level institution does not carry enough weight to decide matters at a landscape scale. A cluster of communities is needed to achieve a stronger constituency and voice.

The Evaluation Team found that stakeholder critiques of the leadership or performance of protected areas associations were largely limited to traditional elites who have lost power as a consequence of democratic processes. Critics tended to lodge complaints that were not factually accurate, did clarify the core cause of their dissatisfaction, or otherwise obscured underlying motivations. Transparency in decision making processes offers the best form of protection against spurious complaints.

In conclusion, the Evaluation Team commends the project, Government, and participants on substantial achievements in community governance.

Opportunities for Improvements

WCS or USAID should consider commissioning a more detailed case study to document approaches that could be replicated on other community governance initiatives in Afghanistan.

Community governance organizations should ensure that organizational bylaws are widely distributed and accurately document voter and member participation to enhance transparency.

The project Training and Capacity Development Team should consider integrating other learning objectives into the new national environmental curriculum; for example, using surveys to teach math skills and developing English lessons that focus on environmental topics.

MAIL and NEPA should keep local communities updated on the status of the Government’s efforts to establish mechanisms for revenue sharing. Signs of progress can help manage expectations and preserve trust.

5. LAWS, POLICIES, AND INSTITUTIONS I: NRM

Question: How has the project strengthened specific NRM-related laws, policies, and institutions, including public/stakeholder consultation?


Progress against Performance Indicators (targets and results): The project has met or exceeded targets for the number of policies, laws, agreements, or regulations that have been drafted, reviewed, and implemented.

43


Result Target Percentage 7. Number of Policies, Laws, Agreements or Regulations Promoting Sustainable Natural Resource Management that are drafted and presented for Public/Stakeholder consultation as Result of USG Assistance 9 10 90% 8. Number of Policies, Laws, Agreements or Regulations Promoting Sustainable Natural Resource Management that are Implemented as a Result of USG Assistance 10 10 100%

Progress against Work Plan (activities and outputs): Under this component, the project’s Afghan Legal Advisor and Field Teams work closely with NEPA, MAIL, the Ministry of Justice, and/or sub-national government to:

strengthen regulations and legislation that promote natural resources management; facilitate Government compliance with international environmental conventions, such as

those governing trade in endangered species and conservation of biological diversity; and Facilitate community consultation on new laws and regulations and engage communities

and district and provincial officials in creating and reviewing protected areas management plans.

The project activities under this component appear generally on track.


Interviewees: The Evaluation Team interviewed the Deputy Director-General of Policy and International Affairs for NEPA, Deputy Minister of Technical Affairs for MAIL, the WCS Legal Advisor, the WCS Country Directors (outgoing and incoming), and the WCS Technical Advisors based in Bamyan and Badakhshan (Field Team).

Answer to Question: The project has strengthened natural resource management laws, policies and institutions by conducting research on laws in other countries, providing expert legal advice on Afghan law, and working closely with NEPA, MAIL and the Ministry of Justice to identify appropriate solutions and strategies and to achieve political support for proposed reforms. Specifically, the project has provided inputs and/or expert legal review for the following:

Draft Hunting Law, Forestry Law (aka “Jungle Law”), Environment Law, Rangeland Law, Protected Areas Management Policy, Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) regulations, Protected Species Lists, and Draft regulations on protected areas penalties.

44

With respect to conventions, the project has trained Customs officials, Border Police, and ISAF personnel on CITES to raise awareness of endangered species -- several of which find their way into local markets, such as snow leopard pelts. This activity was implemented after CITES issued Afghanistan a warning letter stating that they were not sufficiently active.

The Field Teams in Band-e-Amir and the Wakhan have worked closely with NEPA and MAIL to facilitate community consultation on new natural resource management laws and regulations. In addition, they have helped establish a formal bottom-up process to engage communities and district and provincial officials in creating and reviewing protected areas management plans (refer to Question 4 for a detailed description).


The close collaboration between the project Legal Advisor and the Deputy Minister of Justice appears to be a significant factor in legal reform achievements. According to the Legal Advisor, he meets frequently with the Deputy Minister of Justice to discuss how to adapt international best practices to local conditions and advocate for specific legal reforms. The Deputy Minister is committed to addressing gaps in Afghan laws and interested in understanding legislation in other countries. Together, they explore options and identify workable solutions before vetting reforms. Considered to be the “encyclopedia of Afghan law,” the Deputy Minister’s opinion and endorsement carries substantial weight in the legislative review and approval process. Before the Legal Advisor joined the project in late 2012, the Ministry of Justice had rejected several legislative reforms proposed by NEPA due to a perceived lack of expert legal opinion backing the recommendations. Examples include the Hunting Law and CITES. This situation has turned around.

The NEPA Deputy Director-General confirms that the project has provided substantial assistance for legislative reforms. He further notes that the project’s ability to respond to NEPA’s ad hoc requests for technical and legal advice as new needs are identified and priorities shift has been particularly helpful. The Government is driving the legislative reform process and appears to use project consultants strategically to help assess priorities and strengthen the content of proposed reforms. The level of Afghan ownership in reform activities is commendable and suggests that capacity and awareness within the Government is steadily being developed. The Evaluation Team believes that continued support for further legal and policy reforms would be a strategic investment.

6. LAWS, POLICIES, AND INSTITUTIONS II: APWA

Question: How critical is the establishment of APWA to sustaining and building upon advances made through ILGNRM with regard to natural resource and protected areas management?

45


Progress against Performance Indicators (targets and results): The project has not met targets related to establishing the Afghanistan Parks and Wildlife Authority (APWA). The Evaluation Team questions whether it is appropriate to include APWA milestones in the project performance indicators. Government buy-in for APWA is best achieved by garnering high-level support from the ministries who will ultimately decide the fate of APWA and the best way forward. Progress navigating the legislative reform process is not reasonably under the management control of the project. What is under the project’s management control is the quality of technical advice provided as inputs to the legislative reform and institution building process.


Result Target Percentage

12. APWA office established in Kabul, Bamyan province, and in the Wakhan District of Badakhshan Province. 0 2 0% 13. Number of Policies, Laws, Agreements, and Regulations drafted and presented for public/stakeholder consultation as required to establish the Afghan Parks and Wildlife Authority 0 4 0%

Progress against Work Plan (activities and outputs): Under this component the project has employed an Afghan legal expert who has worked closely with NEPA, MAIL, and the Ministry of Justice to help establish APWA. Key activities include establishing the APWA Oversight Group in late 2012, providing secretariat support for the first two meetings on February 11th and April 27th, 2013, and responding to Government requests for technical advice. Examples include helping draft terms of reference (TOR) for the APWA Oversight Group and subsequent APWA, reviewing institutional models for protected areas management in other countries and assessing pros and cons, and advising on the legal arrangements for creating APWA and contracting with local communities to facilitate revenue sharing.

Although the project will not meet the 2013 deadlines for the APWA milestones listed above, the active engagement of high level officials in the APWA Oversight Group is remarkable. The group is making good process toward identifying sustainable legal and institutional solutions that will work within the context of existing laws, and is well positioned to lobby effectively for support from key decision-makers who are outside of the group.

Similar to earlier comments, the Evaluation Team questions the feasibility of the 2013 deadlines. Legal reforms require a complex Government review and approval process and the timing of decisions is difficult to predict. Moreover, the original project proposal anticipated an implementation period that went to 2014. When the project was approved for a shorter period, the APWA deadlines were pushed back one year for reasons unrelated to implementation feasibility.

46


Interviewees: The Evaluation Team interviewed the Deputy Director-General of Policy and International Affairs for NEPA, Deputy Minister of Technical Affairs for MAIL, Deputy Minister of Policy for the Ministry of Finance, Director of the Afghanistan National Development Strategy (ANDS), the WCS Legal Advisor, and both WCS Country Directors (outgoing and incoming). All are active in the APWA Oversight Group. In addition, the Evaluation Team observed the Oversight Group’s second meeting on April 27th.

Answer to Question: The establishment of APWA is critical to sustaining and building upon the Government’s and project’s natural resource and protected areas management achievements. The National Priority Program 1 (NPP1) under the Agriculture and Rural Development Cluster proposes the establishment of APWA and states that rangeland, protected areas, and forest management interventions should be “designed and implemented on the basis of CBNRM and benefit-sharing approaches, utilizing community-based governance institutions and management committees.” As discussed under Section 4, the project has made considerable progress on engaging local communities in and near the protected areas in co-management activities. These stakeholders are expecting to eventually receive a share of park revenues. The primary rationale for APWA is to establish the legal and institutional arrangements that will make this possible. Achieving tangible progress is critical for sustaining local stakeholder support.

The Deputy Ministers of Finance and Justice and the WCS Legal Advisor have confirmed that existing laws and institutions do not allow the Government to enter into co-management contracts nor share park revenues with local communities. A tasadi (parastatal) is the only institution that can under Afghan law. Equally important, it must have non-profit status or it will be required to remit 75 percent of net profits to the Afghan Treasury. If legal reforms alone could create the necessary conditions for co-management and revenue sharing, it would not be necessary to establish a new institution. Since this is not the case, establishing APWA in the manner proposed by the Deputy Ministers of Finance and Justice is the only viable solution.


Strengths: The APWA Oversight Group has three key strengths that speak to the quality of the stakeholder engagement: focus, active participation of knowledgeable and influential Government officials, and a practice of evidence-based decision making.

Focus: The establishment of the inter-ministerial APWA Oversight Group replicates the “cluster process” adopted for drafting the National Priority Programs (NPPs) in follow up to the Afghanistan National Development Strategy (ANDS). Cluster groups comprised of deputy ministers and other high-level officials were formed to promote inter-ministerial coordination on sector strategies – a new approach in Afghanistan. What is unique to APWA is its sharp focus on a specific issue: protected areas management. This focus has

47

advantages, allowing members to readily make key decisions that represent tangible, steady process. According to the ANDS National Director, progress toward the establishment of APWA is one of the first concrete examples of an NPP activity being implemented.

Buy-in from key officials: The active participation in the APWA Oversight Group of Deputy Ministers from a broad range of Ministries is remarkable given that most have no mandates specific to natural resources management. In the April 2013 Oversight Group meeting, the Deputy Ministers of Finance and Justice advised on legal and institutional options and are prepared to advocate within the Government for solutions. This level of political support and technical expertise at the highest levels is a “best-case scenario”. The project has been instrumental in identifying, recruiting, and supporting the group members.

Evidence-based Decision Making: Recommendations on legislative reforms and the institutional arrangements for APWA are based on reviews of international best practices by the WCS Legal Advisor and Country Director, and expert legal opinion from the Deputy Ministers of Justice and Finance to ensure compliance with existing Afghan law. The Government is driving the process and uses project experts strategically to help research and assess options. For example, in the April 2013 Oversight Group meeting the WCS Legal Advisor presented a “legal options” paper. Current institutional responsibilities for protected areas management are specified in an Interim Joint Tarzulamal signed by NEPA and MAIL. Translated as ‘procedures’, a tarzulamal is an insufficiently strong form of legislation to support effective protected area management. A leheya or “regulation” would be more suitable, but is not allowed under the Environment Law. The Deputy Minister of Justice and the project are working together to identify a solution. In general, several key group members and project advisors spend considerable time outside of formal group meetings, conducting background research, engaging in brainstorming sessions, and preparing briefs and presentations for the group. This information allows for efficient use of group members’ time during meetings and helps minimize the time it takes to achieve consensus.

Group members interviewed by the Evaluation Team highlighted three qualities that they value in the technical support provided by the project. 1) Ownership: the project puts the Government in the driver’s seat, consistently encouraging members to make all key decisions. 2) Competence: the project’s legal and protected areas management specialists are a reliable source of information and expertise. 3) Responsiveness: flexibility in the project Work Plan allows the Project Team to respond to Government requests for technical assistance as needs are identified. In addition, one Deputy Minister indicated that the information and technical expertise provided by the project allows him to learn about something that he finds personally interesting. This benefit is a strong motivator for his active participation in APWA Oversight Group.

The Future of the Oversight Group and APWA: WCS served as the secretariat for the Oversight Group during the launch phase and first two meetings. In the April 2013 meeting, the members confirmed that secretariat responsibilities will alternative between MAIL and

48

NEPA for the following six months, and that WCS (the project) will continue to provide technical support to the secretariat and APWA Oversight Group. All members interviewed believe that ongoing technical support is critical for establishing APWA and subsequently developing institutional capacities, particularly since few Afghans hold degrees in academic disciplines directly related to protected areas management.

Aside from USAID, the Evaluation Team is aware of only two other donors who are considering making significant contributions for protected areas management in Afghanistan: the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the Global Environment Facility (GEF). In March 2012, UNDP, NEPA and MAIL submitted a Project Identification Form (PIF) to the GEF Trust Fund entitled, “Establishing Integrated Models for Protected Areas and their Co-Management in Afghanistan.” Potential project activities included support for APWA establishment and capacity building and support for protected areas management and climate resilient sustainable land management practices in four protected areas: Band-e-Amir National Park, Big Pamir Wildlife Reserve, Teggermansu Wildlife Reserve, and the Wakhan Conservation Area. Subsequent development of the proposal was underway while the Evaluation Team was in country. As of early June 2013, the proposed budget for GEF financing was $7.3 million. Ongoing coordination between USAID, UNDP, and NEPA will be important for identifying funding gaps and avoiding duplication of efforts.

The Evaluation Team believes that lack of significant numbers of Afghans with relevant expertise is a priority constraint to APWA being able to fulfill its mandate on a sustainable basis, once established. Short-term on-the-job training, though helpful, cannot substitute for the expertise gained in a formal academic degree program. Building the capacity of the newly established Environmental Science Faculty at Kabul University offers a sustainable means for ongoing workforce development in the natural resources sectors. This strategy is cited in the Government’s National Priority Program 1. It is unknown if any donors have earmarked funds for this purpose.

7. GENDER

Question: How has ILGNRM improved the welfare of women, girls, and youth, including their opportunities to participate in educational and community activities?


Progress against Performance Indicators (targets and results): To date, the project has disaggregated results by gender only for the two indicators listed below. Indicator 9 is disaggregated only for Year 3. Almost half of all training beneficiaries are women. In contrast, the project reports that only four percent of people who received economic benefits in Year 3 are women. This result appears to substantially under-report the number of female beneficiaries because the definition, “wages, per diems, or payments for locally sourced food and materials” does not account for women who work behind the scenes to prepare or supply food for project field activities.

49

Indicator Number and Description %

Female

Cumulative Totals (Years 1-3)

Result Target % 5. Number of people receiving USG supported training in natural resources management and/or biodiversity conservation

46% (Total) 20,361 18,329 111%

9. Number of people with increased economic benefits derived from sustainable NRM and conservation as a result of USG assistance.

4% (Year 3) 7,467 2,500 299%

Although most performance indicator data is not reported on a gender-disaggregated basis, results related to Work Plan progress frequently are. Examples are provided in the following beneficiary table.

Progress against Work Plan (activities and outputs): The Work Plan cites three activities that largely target women: fuel-efficient cook stoves, business planning and enterprise development workshops, and a feasibility assessment for women’s livelihoods in the Wakhan. Gender is otherwise treated as a cross-cutting issue in the Work Plan. The project’s primary youth-focused activity is the Environmental Education Program.

In June 2012 Checchi and Company Consulting, Inc. completed a Gender Analysis of the project under the USAID/Afghanistan SUPPORT II contract. The evaluator concluded that the project had demonstrated minimal focus on women’s participation outside of the cook stove and environmental education activities. It also concluded that the project had not engaged women in decision-making, developed their decision-making capacity, or increased their potential for income generation at a meaningful level. In the year since this report, the project’s Gender and Livelihoods team has substantially ramped up staff resources with the fielding of an international Gender and Livelihoods Advisor in early 2013, recruitment of two local women to assist with livelihoods outreach in Band-e-Amir and the Wakhan, recruitment of a national Gender Specialist in Kabul, and participation of another Kabul-based Education Assistant in livelihoods activities (all five women). In June 2013 the team successfully piloted a Community Market Chain workshop in the Wakhan involving both men and women and designed for semi- and preliterate audiences, and conducted Gender and Livelihoods Feasibility Assessments in the Wakhan and Band-e-Amir. This included an assessment of the local supply and demand for cash and credit, especially for women. Going forward, the project will help male and female entrepreneurs access a new credit product for SMEs from the Agriculture Development Fund (ADF) and credit training from the Financial Access for Investing in the Development of Afghanistan (FAIDA) project, encourage AKDN to establish social savings groups in Band-e-Amir and the Wakhan, develop market linkages between local producers and regional and national traders, and help the WPA create a business plan for its Tourism Center. Since the ability to earn cash is critical for qualifying for credit and business sustainability, the project will identify and promote livelihoods that have the potential to increase cash income.

50


Interviewees: The Evaluation Team interviewed 55 girls and 32 women: 11 community governance participants (elected members of WPA, BACA, BAPAC, and CDCs); 17 stove users, 1 teacher, 55 students, and three project staff (Gender and Livelihoods Advisor and her assistant in Kabul, and the Assistant Environmental Education Officer in Band-e-Amir). In addition, the project interviewed the following male project staff: two WCS Country Directors and two Technical Advisors based in the project’s field offices. Thirty-seven percent of all interviewees were women.

Answer to Question: To date, the project has improved the welfare of women and girls by providing low-cost stoves and corrals that provide multiple benefits and by ensuring that park management and facilities development plans integrate provisions that specifically benefit women. Examples include the proposed women’s bathing pavilions and the creation of 14 park jobs (rangers and cleaners) for women in Band-e-Amir. The project has also taken steps to help women move beyond “beneficiary status” to be active participants in shaping and implementing community governance and livelihoods activities. Examples of support for women’s capacity development include the establishment of women’s subcommittees in WPA and BACA; targeted funding for women’s activities; and training in English, business skills, and community market chains to help women participate meaningfully in decision-making.

When interviewed, female members of the BACA women’s subcommittee in Band-e-Amir reported that they feel their ideas are accepted by the broader membership. For example, they requested and received English training. They also asked that some of the shops in the bazaar be reserved for women, and subsequently interviewed female CDC members from communities in the park to assess interest. When BAPAC approved six shops, the women interested (22 total) met and held a lottery to determine how the shops would be allocated. Female members of both BACA and WPA indicated that the way community decisions are made has changed significantly since CDCs were established: “Before, only the male elders made decisions. Now decisions are made by men and women together.”

The project has targeted youth primarily through the EEP; however, youth have benefitted from other project activities that increase household welfare. Refer to the following table for an assessment of welfare improvements for women and youth.

Activities that Benefit Women and Youth Description of Benefits (Welfare Improvements) Fuel-efficient cook stoves (over 2,000 households)

The most common benefits cited by female interviewees are: Labor savings and convenience: Women and children spend less time collecting fuel and

cooking. The stove cooks multiple items at the same time on the double burner and heats up quickly. The average amount of time saved is unknown because interviewees were unable to provide estimates.

Reduced health risks: Household members are exposed to less smoke and incur fewer burn

51

Activities that Benefit Women and Youth Description of Benefits (Welfare Improvements)

injuries, less eye irritation, and fewer respiratory infections. Health benefits appear to be concentrated in the warmer seasons, when households are less reliant on the tandoor (the predominant source of smoke). Further research would be required to quantify project health benefits. Refer to “further findings.”

Less food loss: The project stove burns less food than a tandoor because the heat is easier to control. Sustainability: Community members benefit from fuel efficiency and more sustainable resource use through reduced competition (demand) for bush, fuel wood, and dung resources in the short term, and increased availability of soil nutrients and biomass fuel in the long term (supply). Beneficiaries include current and future generations.

Capacity development: The project trained women from the community to teach their peers how to install and use the stoves.

Predator-proof corrals (19 corrals for communities in the Wakhan)

Fewer livestock losses. The corrals are very effective in protecting livestock from predator attacks while in the corrals. No successful attacks have been reported. In turn, this enhances household food security and income.

Labor savings: Women and children spend less time collecting dung for household fuel use.

Paravet services (17,927 livestock vaccinated in Wakhan)

Fewer livestock losses and increased productivity of vaccinated livestock. In turn, this enhances household food security and income. Women and children are the primary caretakers of livestock in Afghanistan.

Livelihoods development: job creation (15 women)

The project has helped create jobs for at least 15 women from Band-e-Amir: 4 MAIL ranger jobs, 8 park cleaner jobs, and 3 Field Team positions that support the project’s environmental education, gender, and livelihoods activities. Although not all the positions were filled as of June 2013, the jobs were approved and funded and recruitment was well underway. The primary job benefits are: Increased income: Park related jobs offer a secure, year-round income earning opportunity

in an economy that is largely non-cash and in which income opportunities are largely limited to the summer tourist season. The amount of income associated with park jobs is unknown.

Capacity development: Jobs provide an opportunity to gain skills, knowledge, and experience through training and learning-by-doing.

Greater buy-in for women’s jobs: Increased household income is a compelling motivator for women to work outside the home. The primary constraint is fear that their reputations will be at risk. The project has earned the trust of local communities and demonstrated that women can safely work outside the home, provided that specific measures are taken. Refer to “additional findings”.

Income brings greater influence: Women who contribute income to their household generally have more influence in decision-making at home. In turn, this sets the stage for them to become more involved in decision-making in their community.

Other: Litter control by the park cleaners is a benefit to local communities by improving the cleanliness and attractiveness of public spaces.

Livelihoods development: other income-earning

Skills development: To date, project support for women’s livelihoods development has largely focused on training in basic skills required to participate successfully in tourism-related opportunities, such as hygienic food preparation and business skills. In addition, the project has provided English training for 24 female shopkeepers and first aid training for 9

52

Activities that Benefit Women and Youth Description of Benefits (Welfare Improvements) opportunities women in Band-e-Amir, and recently conducted a Community Market Chain workshop for

men and women in the Wakhan. Identifying market opportunities: The project conducted Gender and Livelihoods

Feasibility Assessments in the Wakhan and Band-e-Amir. This included an assessment of the supply and demand for cash and credit, especially for women.

Community governance (7 women)

Direct participation of women: BAPAC is chaired by Afghanistan’s first female Provincial Governor and BACA and WPA have seven female members (four and three, respectively) who participate in association meetings and decisions and serve on women’s subcommittees. Based on the Evaluation Team’s group interview with the WPA, it appears that the three women do not hesitate to voice their opinions. Twice a guesthouse manager ushered the women to another room, stating that they would be “more comfortable” being interviewed and eating lunch separately from the men. Both times the women came back into the main meeting area on their own initiative and stated that they preferred to have the meeting and lunch conducted with everyone together. No objection was raised and the women subsequently spoke openly and often during the meeting on a range of issues beyond gender.

Representation of women: WPA and BACA members are elected by their community. Female members speak on behalf of women who are not present, soliciting input through local CDCs and other community members. Refer to example presented before the table.

Community governance (continued)

Association support: The women’s subcommittees identify and facilitate activities that address women’s priorities. For example, the WPA subcommittee requested the establishment of a Tourism Center in Ishkashim and support for women's participation in tourism-based livelihoods. Similarly, the BACA subcommittee requested training on hygienic food preparation and business skills, a market survey of tourist interests beyond handicrafts, business start-up grants, and mechanisms for women to control and manage revenues. Significant progress has been made toward both WPA requests and the first two BACA requests.

Environmental Education Program Curriculum and school committees (379 girls and one female teacher in 21 schools) Community Outreach (233 women)

Enhanced education: The EEP was not intended to increase the number of youth (girls and boys) who have access to education (as the evaluation question suggests); rather, it has increased the quality of education for participating high school students (grades 10-12). Students and teachers have learned about interesting topics and have greater awareness of Afghanistan’s unique wildlife and plants, the environmental threats posed by littering and excessive collection of shrubs and fuel wood, and the role of fuel-efficient cook stoves in reducing pressures on local resources. In addition, students participated in school committees, conducted household surveys, and were trained to draw local wildlife.

Greater community awareness: Students have shared what they learned in class with their families, particularly those who participated in household surveys. In turn, community awareness facilitated the adoption of the project’s fuel-efficient stove and motivated CDCs to take action to reduce shrub collection in sensitive areas. The project’s Community Outreach Program also raises awareness in remote communities on the Northern Plateau using posters, slide presentations, videos, and films. The content is both educational and entertaining to communities that otherwise have very little access to media. Recently, a small group from Deh Behbud village told the Band-e-Amir Field Team, “The things we have learned from your project are more valuable than anything else you have given us, even money” (November 2012).

Cross-cutting benefits

Demonstration effects: Girls and women benefit from having female role models in non-traditional roles, such as rangers and elected members of community associations, particularly if they see these advancements accepted by the broader community.

53

Activities that Benefit Women and Youth Description of Benefits (Welfare Improvements)

Household welfare: Activities that increase household food security and income -- such as the fuel-efficient cook stoves, predator-proof corrals, and livelihoods opportunities -- generally enhance the welfare of youth, women, and men in the household, even if the benefits are not distributed equally.

Sustainability: The project, local communities, and the Government are together establishing a foundation for more sustainable natural resource management practices. Beneficiaries include current and future generations.


Health benefits of fuel-efficient cook stoves: Reducing smoke exposure is a high priority in the Wakhan, where families spend much of their time in smoke-filled kitchens during the long harsh winters, over 30 percent of children do not make it to the age of five, and respiratory infections are a leading cause of death.2 Substantial improvements in indoor air quality as a result of the project stove are likely concentrated in the warmer seasons, because households continue to rely on the tandoor in winter for space heating and warming water for livestock. Indoor air quality improvements for several months of the year are noteworthy, even though the health impacts have not been quantified. The Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves reports that smoke exposure affects over 6 million households in Afghanistan and results in 54,000 Afghan deaths per year from smoke-induced emphysema, cancer, heart disease, and other diseases. It also causes cataracts. In addition to directly benefitting over 2,200 households, the project’s cook stove activity has helped raise awareness within Afghanistan and has been influential in NEPA joining the Clean Cookstoves Alliance on behalf of the Afghan Government.

Gender and tourism-based livelihoods: Women play a significant role in preparing meals and renting rooms for tourists in their homes. Women typically work behind the scenes, whereas men deal directly with tourists and collect payments. This arrangement is culturally acceptable and provides opportunities for both men and women. It is more difficult for women to run shops in the bazaar -- an opportunity requested by the BAPAC women’s subcommittee, endorsed in the 2012 Gender Analysis of the project, and approved by the BAPAC Chair. While the Evaluation Team and project Gender and Livelihoods Team support these decisions, both teams note that a substantial amount of business occurs outside of the bazaar. The number of household-based income opportunities likely dwarfs the number

2 The under-five mortality rate in Badakhshan is 323 per 1,000 live births, compared to 257 for the Afghan national average and 100 in Tajikistan. Source: Bartlett et al. 2005 study cited in Walraven G, Maneseki-Holland S, Hussain A, Tomarao JB (2009), Improving Maternal and Child Health in Difficult Environments. PLos Med 6(1):e1000005.

54

of opportunities to own a shop or restaurant in the bazaar, regardless of gender. In addition, household-based tourism services entail lower overhead costs and risks because the family does not have the expense of travel or constructing, maintaining, or renting bazaar space. To ensure that viable, less visible opportunities are not overlooked and to avoid concentrating support in the park center, the Gender and Livelihoods Team has indicated that they will support livelihoods both within and outside the bazaar and will facilitate market linkages between remote communities and those centrally located.

Moving beyond handicrafts: The Evaluation Team commends the BACA subcommittee’s request for an assessment of women’s livelihoods opportunities that go “beyond handicrafts and yogurt.” This demonstrates an astute sense of priorities. Most if not all women’s livelihood activities in Afghanistan start with handicrafts, despite the fact that very few offer significant income-earning potential (with the exception of carpets). The overwhelming emphasis on traditional handicrafts has likely further marginalized women economically, by diverting attention away from a search for more viable and innovative opportunities. As indicated earlier, the project has responded to this request by conducting initial Gender and Livelihoods Feasibility Assessments in Bamyan and the Wakhan. The emphasis on linking local communities to credit and other business support services is well placed.

Earning trust: In Band-e-Amir, the trust earned by the Field Team has been instrumental in enabling them to employ three local women. Local communities see that team members are respectful and sensitive to the need to protect the reputations of female staff. The project has successfully demonstrated that women can safely work outside the home, provided that specific measures are taken to ensure this. BAPAC and BACA have also been instrumental in securing community acceptance of job creation for women, by providing a forum for raising and addressing community concerns. When the project first started in Band-e-Amir, the notion of women rangers would have been unthinkable for most. Now it’s possible for several reasons. Bamyan has elected Afghanistan’s first woman Governor and local communities have benefitted significantly from her active engagement in BAPAC. They have also observed women police officers in Bamyan. In addition, at least half of all park visitors are women, who in turn need women rangers they can comfortably approach for information.

Based on the solid foundation for stakeholder engagement established by the project, the recent expansion in the Gender and Livelihoods team; and progress conducting market research, developing livelihoods-focused training, and establishing linkages with other business support projects -- the project appears well positioned to significantly expand its contributions to the welfare of girls and women. The Evaluation Team identifies the following opportunities for improvements for the project team.

Opportunities for Improvements

Integrate gender more fully into the Performance Management Plan: Establish specific targets for women for staffing the park jobs identified in the Band-e-Amir Facilities Development Plan and for local sourcing conducted in support of project activities. Track

55

and report gender-disaggregated data for performance indicators. Review the methodologies for calculating results to ensure that women are not under-reported.

Assess proposed project activities using the USAID Gender Analysis Framework, starting with the new Gender and Livelihoods activities. For example, discuss the following questions with project stakeholders: 1) “How will the different roles and status of women and men within the community, political sphere, workplace, and household affect the work to be undertaken?” 2) “How will the anticipated results of the work affect women and men differently?”

8. PERFORMANCE ON CROSS-CUTTING INDICATORS AND WORK PLAN

PROGRESS

The performance evaluation SOW includes examining whether the project is on track to achieve its intended goals and results (outputs and outcomes) in a sustainable manner. Performance indicators that closely align with one of the seven evaluation questions are discussed in the corresponding response. This section summarizes project progress to date for cross-cutting indicators, defined as indicators that consolidate results from multiple project activities.

a. Progress Against Cross-Cutting Indicators

The following table presents cumulative results and targets for cross-cutting indicators.

Indicator Number and Description

Cumulative Totals (Years 1-3)

Result Target % 5.2b Number of communities implementing improved natural resource management practices 218 78 279% 5.2.3a Number of hectares in areas of biological significance under improved management and/or biodiversity conservation 1,342,122 1,183,000 113% 5.2.3b Number of USG-supported initiatives/ mechanisms designed to reduce the potential for violent conflict over the control, exploitation, trade or protection of natural resources 5 5 100% 5. Number of people receiving USG supported training in natural resources management and/or biodiversity conservation 20,361 18,329 111%

The project has exceeded targets for the four cross-cutting indicators listed in the table above. These measure the number of beneficiaries associated with training activities, agricultural interventions, and economic benefits and the number of hectares under improved management. Disaggregated data is not available with respect to gender, age, and geographic location with the exception of the data reported in the previous section.

The Evaluation Team reviewed the methodology WCS employed to calculate reported results to ensure compliance with Performance Indicator Reference Sheets and to review the attribution logic (refer to Annex III). No review was conducted of data used in their calculations, as this is not within the Performance Evaluation SOW. A Data Quality Assessment (DQA) was conducted by Checchi Consulting in October 2012 for reported

56

training results (Indicator 5). The assessor concluded that “data quality is acceptable and meets basic standards.”

b. Progress Against Work Plan

In May and June the WCS Country Director performed a thorough review of the detailed 2012-2013 Work Plan in consultation with Field Teams in Bamyan and Badakhshan and staff in the Kabul office. In general, project activities are on track with the possible exceptions of the ranger station in Teggarmansu, the Ishkashim Tourism Center, and the community ranger base on the Northern Plateau. Given the short summer season in which construction activities can occur, these structures may not be finished in 2013. In addition, the project had planned to start working with communities in Ajar Valley (adjacent to the Northern Plateau), but security issues have prevented it. None of these expected delays will have an impact on the project’s ability to meet its performance indicator targets.

57

IV. CONCLUSIONS

The most significant conclusions drawn by the Evaluation Team based on this exercise are:

Governance achievements are substantial and worthy of a case study. The project has promoted meaningful and effective stakeholder engagement and achieved high levels of Government and community buy-in.

The project design is robust (see graphic). The Environmental Education Program raises awareness in local schools of environmental threats and solutions. Newly established governance institutions enable local communities to participate in decisions about how local resources are managed. Support for rural livelihoods generates direct and indirect economic benefits that help achieve buy-in for protected areas management objectives. Meaningful participation in management decisions further strengthens ownership, buy-in, and capacities. Project interactions occur in multiple directions, beyond those suggested by the arrows in the graphic.

Significant differences in challenges and opportunities exist between Bamyan and the Wakhan. Communities in Band-e-Amir National Park in Bamyan are already seeing tangible improvements in park infrastructure and demonstrating ingenuity in pursuing tourism-based income-earning opportunities. The number of tourists in Band-e-Amir (approximately 5,000-6,000/month in the summer season, mostly Afghans) far exceeds those in the Wakhan (estimated at 250 foreigners per year). The number of Afghan tourists that visit the Wakhan is not tracked, but is likely nominal given its remote location. Wakhi and Kyrgyz community representatives indicate that they support the newly established protected areas – despite substantial livestock losses from predators as a consequence of hunting prohibitions – because they trust the project’s claim that they will enjoy future benefits associated with tourism development. It is unclear when security conditions will improve sufficiently to allow for substantial growth in ecotourism, and how long community support for protected areas can be sustained in the meantime.

Balancing human, livestock, and habitat conservation trade-offs is critical to sustaining community buy-in: Conflicts appear most challenging in the Wakhan, where local communities rely heavily on livestock for their livelihoods. Reducing livestock losses through predator-proof corrals increases pressures on grazing lands. Degraded grazing lands sustain smaller populations of wildlife prey species, which in turn drives predator attacks on livestock. The paravet program rightly focuses on enhancing the productivity of individual livestock - rather than increasing survival rates and herd sizes - to maximize economic potential and minimize environmental impacts. However, a more complete solution for

58

balancing competing claims on natural resources requires greater diversification and expansion of livelihoods opportunities.

Work Plan flexibility allows the project to respond readily to emerging technical assistance priorities: The Government frequently asks the project to advise on legal and institutional reforms. The ability to respond quickly with strategic inputs has generated good will and garnered support from key Government decision makers for project objectives. It also allows the project to capitalize on its primary asset: WCS is valued for its expertise and experience in protected areas management.

The project consistently demonstrates characteristics of quality technical assistance: It identifies sustainable solutions, replicates successful approaches for greater impact, achieves stakeholder buy-in, promotes evidence-based decisions, leverages resources effectively, and promotes strategic public-private sector roles and partnerships. Specific examples are systematically documented in the Findings section.

Stakeholder critiques of project performance are few: When The Evaluation Team encouraged interviewees from local communities to provide frank feedback to WCS and USAID about the project, the most common response was a request for more of the same: for example, more cook stoves and predator-proof corrals. In addition, they often seized the opportunity to share “wish lists” of the kinds of subprojects found in Community Development Plans (roads, schools, bridges). Feedback from Government officials was mixed and levels of overall satisfaction correlated highly with proximity to project offices. Officials who accepted the project’s invitations to actively participate in training, planning, and field activities were the most positive; those who declined due to distance or per diem issues were less positive.

The project is often associated with snow leopard conservation in people’s minds. Some people question the importance of snow leopards relative to other priorities in Afghanistan. Investments in snow leopard conservation appear strategic with respect to livelihoods potential and raising public awareness. A small portion of project resources are used for focused snow leopard activities: only 4 of 71 project-funded rangers are engaged in setting camera traps and tracking snow leopard movements. Afghanistan’s snow leopards and the rugged landscape in which they live garner positive international press from high-profile media such as National Geographic, ABC News/Nightline, Washington Post, BBC, and Outside Magazine – free marketing that puts the Wakhan on the adventure tourism map. Snow leopards are critical for preserving the economic development and livelihoods potential of this region. They also help attract support within Afghanistan for protected areas management. The Afghanistan Parks and Wildlife Authority (APWA) Oversight Group benefits from the active participation of over a dozen Deputy Ministers from across the Government, many of whom have a photograph of a snow leopard hanging in their office. This level of inter-ministerial support is uncommon. Snow leopards capture people’s imagination and are an effective icon for galvanizing environmental awareness in Afghanistan.

59

The project is largely on track with respect to Work Plan activities and Indicator Targets: The project has exceeded the cumulative Year 1-3 targets for the USAID/Afghanistan cross-cutting performance indicators in the project Performance Management Plan (PMP). These measure the number of beneficiaries associated with training activities, agricultural interventions, and economic benefits and the number of hectares under improved management. The only performance indicator that is not met is the establishment of APWA; however, this process is driven by the Government and is not under the management control of the project. When asked about APWA progress and the expected timeframe for establishment, the Deputy Ministers interviewed indicated that it is generally extremely difficult to estimate timeframes required to pass laws or establish institutions in Afghanistan given the unpredictable approval process. They believe that the APWA Oversight Group, formed in late 2012 for the purpose of establishing APWA, is making good progress.

Opportunities exist for improvement: Opportunities exist to enhance project results by modifying some existing approaches and expanding into complementary activities related to technical capacity building and livelihoods. Recommendations are provided in the following section.

60

V. RECOMMENDATIONS

The Evaluation Team vetted recommendations in a three-hour Final Stakeholder Meeting on June 15th in Kabul, attended by representatives from MAIL, NEPA, and the Project Team. The primary recommendation added by the group is the integration of climate change into the project design.

Recommendations are briefly summarized below and divided by timeframe (short-term, mid-term, and long-term). More detailed recommendations are provided in the response to each question.

1. SHORT-TERM PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS (THROUGH

END OF 2013)


Integrate paravets in the Field Team: Identify ways to integrate paravets more fully with the Field Team to give them a better understanding of how their efforts compliment the project’s other activities in the corridor, as well as the satisfaction of being part of a larger team.

Predator proof corrals: Assist the WPA in seeking additional resources to increase the number of predator-proof corrals in the Wakhan to minimize livestock losses. However, limit support to addressing critical constraints: the mesh wire for the roof and timber poles that cannot be sourced locally and require cash.

Distribute association bylaws: Assist community governance organizations in distributing organizational bylaws and document voter and member participation to enhance transparency.

National environmental curriculum: Consider integrating other learning objectives into the new national environmental curriculum; for example, using surveys to teach math skills and developing English lessons that focus on environmental topics.

Gender integration resource: Assess proposed Gender and Livelihoods activities using elements of the USAID Gender Analysis Framework.

Recommendations for USAID

No-cost extension: Consider a no-cost extension of the project to the end of 2014, consistent with the original proposed project timeframe.

Recommendations for the Government of Afghanistan (MAIL and NEPA)

Second provincial ministry staff to field office. Consider seconding a staff member of MAIL and NEPA’s Bamyan office to the project field office in Band-e-Amir.

APWA updates: Keep local communities updated on the status of the APWA Oversight Group’s efforts to establish legal mechanisms and institutional arrangements for revenue

61

sharing. Signs of Government commitment and progress can help manage stakeholder expectations and preserve trust.

Revenue transparency: Ensure transparency in the amount of park revenues distributed to the municipality and establish a formal mechanism for community consultation on how revenues are spent.

2. MID-TERM PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS (2014)

The following recommendations are feasible if the project period is extended to the end of 2014.


Performance Management Plan: revise the PMP to enhance its usefulness to project managers, specifically: Review project indicators: 1) remove indicators that are not under the management

control of the Project Team, and 2) identify indicators that help the Project Team assess if objectives are being achieved.

Revise Indicator Reference Sheets as needed to clarify the methodology for calculating results and associated logic (the causal link between project activities and reported results). Refer to Annex VI for suggestions.

Report progress against a smaller set of Work Plan activities to focus efforts on “managing for results”. A detailed Work Plan used for internal purposes only can be a useful management tool; however, if every line item represents a contractual commitment it undermines the flexibility required for adaptive management and creates an unnecessary administrative burden for those tasked with contract management and reporting responsibilities.

Integrate gender more fully into the PMP: Establish specific targets for women. Track and report gender-disaggregated data for performance indicators. Review the methodologies for calculating results to ensure that women are not under-reported.

Draft Hunting Law reforms: Advice the Government on potential legal reforms related to problem animal control and trophy hunting permits, as noted in the following section.

Governance case study: Consider commissioning a more detailed case study to document approaches that could be replicated on other community governance initiatives in Afghanistan.


Draft Hunting Law (NEPA, MAIL, and Ministry of Justice): Review the draft Hunting Law and approaches used in other countries to assess the

feasibility of introducing provisions for problem animal control (PAC), particularly for wolves and other non-threatened predators.

62

Assess under what conditions trophy hunting permits could be allowed in the Wakhan to provide an income stream for local communities without jeopardizing wildlife populations.

Band-e-Amir Hydrological Study (MAIL): As recommended in the Management Plan, conduct a hydrological study to better understand the groundwater source that feeds the lakes, as well as a monitoring program to detect changes in surface water quality.

Women’s inclusion (MAIL): Establish job creation targets for women for the Government-funded park jobs identified in the Band-e-Amir Facilities Development Plan and for local sourcing conducted in support of park activities, in consultation with BAPAC and BACA.

3. LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS (POST PROJECT)

The following funding recommendations comprise potential activities that support USAID’s strategic objectives related to livelihoods, governance, and natural resources management and the Government’s related National Priority Programs. Recommendations target USAID and the Government and include potential opportunities to collaborate across USAID-funded projects and sectors, with various Government ministries, with other donors, and with regional and global initiatives.

Recommendation for USAID on Follow-on Activities

Capacity Building and Legal Reforms: Continue to fund the project’s ongoing work with the Government to strengthen the enabling framework for protected areas management; including but not limited to helping establish APWA and associated co-management and revenue sharing arrangements, strengthening natural resource management laws and policies, and providing hands-on training and technical advice to ministry staff related to assessing biodiversity resources and enforcing restrictions against hunting and trade in endangered species.

Local Governance: Continue to fund the project’s ongoing work with local governance institutions, schools, businesses, households, and religious leaders to build awareness and strengthen capacities for community based natural resources management and livelihoods.

Paravet Services: Advocate for a consistent “one health” approach to paravet services in the Wakhan. Specifically, advocate against the distribution of enterotoxaemia vaccines and encourage paravet services that enhance the productivity of individual livestock. Ensure that USAID-funded paravet programs adopt rigorous quality control measures for vaccines to protect the market for paravet services.

Diversify Wakhan Livelihoods: Expand livelihoods development in the Wakhan on two potential fronts: Agricultural diversification: Assess the feasibility of establishing fruit trees, fuel

wood trees, greenhouse vegetable production, and cultivation of medicinal plants. Initially, these activities would likely focus on improving household welfare over commercial objectives, given the long distances to regional markets in Ishkashim and Faizabad and the limited use of cash in the local economy. For this reason, it is

63

unclear if USAID’s commercial agriculture projects would be suitable potential partners (such as the Agriculture Development Fund (ADF) and Agricultural Credit Enhancement (ACE) projects (2010-2014).

Tourism development: Recognizing that current security conditions in Afghanistan are not conducive to attracting large numbers of foreign tourists, investments should be limited to relatively small-scale, low-cost interventions that help achieve conservation and livelihoods outcomes. Potential interventions are listed in the response to Question 2; however, they would best be identified within the context of a Wakhan Tourism Promotion Strategy.

Climate Change Resilience: Afghanistan ranks among the top 20 countries most affected by climate change according to the Global Climate Risk Index (based on 1992-2011 data). In the event of a follow-on project to ILGNRM, expand the natural resource management objectives to address climate change, especially in the Afghan Pamirs where climate change vulnerability is greatest due to high elevations. Potential impacts include greater severity and increased incidence of drought, floods, water scarcity, and zoonotic diseases. Possible actions include working directly with the Government and local communities to: 1) model climate change impacts and build scenarios, and 2) identify, implement, and monitor mitigation measures to enhance resilience and minimize resource conflicts. Coordinate with UNDP, GEF, and NEPA to assess funding gaps and priorities.

Transboundary Collaboration: Advocate for Afghanistan’s participation in the USAID-funded “Conservation and Adaptation in Asia’s High Mountain Landscapes and Communities Project,” which launched in 2013 and is building alliances across other countries with snow leopards (Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan, India, Nepal, Bhutan, and Mongolia). The project is linking snow leopard conservation with local livelihoods, water and food security, and climate change adaptation.

Natural Resource Management Workforce Development: Help build the capacity of the newly established Environmental Science Faculty at Kabul University to develop the workforce for natural resources management in Afghanistan, in collaboration with OSSD/Education, the Ministry of Education (MoE), and the Ministry of Higher Education (MoHE). Lack of significant numbers of Afghans with relevant expertise is a priority constraint to APWA being able to fulfill its mandate on a sustainable basis, once established. Short-term on-the-job training, though helpful, cannot substitute for the expertise gained in a formal academic degree program. This strategy is cited in the Government’s National Priority Program 1. Potential USAID project partners include the Strengthening Tertiary Education Program - University Partnerships (STEP-UP, 2013-2018), Afghanistan Workforce Development Program (AWDP, 2012-2015), Promoting Gender Equality in National Priority Programs (PROMOTE, 2013-2018), and the Afghan Agriculture, Research and Extension Development Program (AGRED, 2012-2017).

Develop the Market for Improved Stoves: Encourage business development and finance projects to support producers of cleaner, more fuel-efficient stoves for both space heating and cooking. Potential partners include the Afghan Growth Finance (AGF) project (2010-2015), Assistance in Building Afghanistan by Developing Enterprises (ABADE) project (2012-2016), and the Global Alliance for Clean Cook Stoves, a public-private partnership

64

endorsed by the Government of Afghanistan, U.S. Department of State, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, among others. Research household energy use and stove user preferences in target markets for fuel-

efficient stoves, taking into account the following factors and interactions: seasons, climate zones, fuel sources, energy uses (heating and cooking), family size, technologies (stove designs currently in use), and food preferences (especially related to bread).

Research the demand and value chain for fuel-efficient stoves: stove designs that meet user requirements, access to production inputs, production costs, tinsmith skills, buyers’ willingness to pay (WTP); and buyers’ access to markets, credit, and opportunities to earn cash. These will vary by region.

Minimize use of subsidies to avoid market distortions. Ideally, subsidies would be evidence-based and designed to cover the gap between buyers’ WTP and fair market price (production costs plus a reasonable profit margin).

Brand the stove to differentiate it from other stoves in the bazaar, mark it with the producer’s contact information so that the stove can be easily found, and include a public awareness campaign.


Paravet Services: Advocate for a consistent “one health” approach to paravet services in the Wakhan. Specifically, discourage distribution of enterotoxaemia vaccines. (MAIL’s General Directorate for Animal Health)

65

ANNEX I: STATEMENT OF WORK

OFFICE OF AGRICULTURE (OAG) AND OFFICE OF PROGRAM AND PROJECT DEVELOPMENT (OPPD)

STATEMENT OF WORK:

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF

IMPROVING LIVELIHOODS & GOVERNANCE THROUGH NATURAL

RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. 306-A-00-10-00516-00 I. INTRODUCTION USAID/Afghanistan’s Office of Agriculture (OAG) intends to conduct a performance evaluation (as defined by USAID’s Evaluation Policy3) of the Improving Livelihoods and Governance through Natural Resource Management (ILGNRM) project implemented by The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS). With a total budget of $14 million, the project started in April 2010, and is scheduled to end on December 30, 2013. The purpose of this performance evaluation is to advance USAID’s technical leadership and learning with respect to support for interventions in Afghanistan in natural resource management, natural resource governance, and sustainable economic growth. The evaluation will review aspects of the ILGNRM project to help identify to what extent the project has improved natural resource management while improving livelihoods and governance, including progress towards the establishment of the Afghanistan Parks and Wildlife Authority (APWA). It will also provide recommendations on any technical interventions that should be discontinued, continued, or improved. Results of the evaluation will also be used by USAID/Afghanistan to inform government entities and funding decisions for future initiatives to improve protected area management and establishment of the APWA. The objectives of the evaluation are to: 3USAID Evaluation Policy, January 2011. The evaluation team will reference USAID´s definition of “Performance Evaluation” contained in the Evaluation Policy (http://www.usaid.gov/evaluation) to ensure a common understanding of USAID’s expectations. The evaluation team will be familiar with and follow the Evaluation Policy to conduct an objective performance evaluation.

http://www.usaid.gov/evaluation

66

Evaluate the effectiveness of ILGNRM in achieving its stated goals and expected results, outputs, and any outcomes to date.

Assess the degree to which there is an increased capacity of the Afghan government’s Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation, and Livestock (MAIL) and National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA) to manage their activities with community participation.

Identify lessons learned and recommend options for future USAID support to APWA and protected areas management.

II. BACKGROUND CONTEXT Eighty percent of Afghans live in rural areas where they depend economically on the country’s natural resource base4. Afghanistan needs programs that can support economic growth while preventing degradation, if not improving, this resource base in order to secure long-term sustainable development. Such programs will accrue economic returns while safeguarding Afghanistan’s environmental heritage. The ILGNRM project seeks to build systems to ensure community tenure over natural resources and involvement in and around protected areas in such a way that real tangible benefits flow directly to the communities. This is being accomplished by concentrating program activities in two provinces, Badakhshan and Bamyan. The examples of approaches undertaken in these two provinces are intended to be duplicated in other areas of the country. Examples of program activities include community capacity building and trainings in sustainable management of natural resources, and a corresponding building of technical and management capacity within provincial and national government entities [principally the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL) and the National Environment Protection Authority (NEPA)]. The capacity building and educational training are leading to immediate benefits in the short term as jobs are created and critical management skills are built; in the medium term as Afghans at all levels develop the ability to sustainably manage their country’s natural resource base for economic gains; and in the long term as a management system is being built that can be expanded across the country to provide benefits to Afghanistan and its people. At the same time, this project helps to connect distant rural communities with both provincial and central government agencies, therefore helping to both extend and strengthen the reach and rule of law across the country.

4World Food Programme report of Afghanistan Central Statistics Organization National Risk and Vulnerability Assessment 2007-08. Retrieved online from http://foodsecurityatlas.org/afg/country/socioeconomic-profile/introduction

http://foodsecurityatlas.org/afg/country/socioeconomic-profile/introduction

67

III. ILGNRM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Throughout the past three years, USAID has provided assistance to ILGNRM/WCS in Bamyan province and the Wakhan district of Badakhshan province. The ILGNRM’s overall goals are to build Afghanistan’s capacity to conserve and sustainably manage its own natural resources; to improve the livelihoods of the rural poor in northeast and central Afghanistan; and to strengthen linkages between local communities with regional and national government institutions. More specific objectives to accomplish these goals include:

1. Build technical capacity for natural resource management at all levels; 2. Facilitate community livelihood development by securing sustainable sources of

direct benefits to local communities; 3. Create and strengthen community governance institutions; 4. Strengthen laws, policies and institutions; and 5. Build capacity to manage the health interface between livestock, wildlife and people.

IV. PURPOSE AND USE OF THIS EVALUATION The purpose of this evaluation is to examine to what extent that ILGNRM has achieved its intended goals and expected results, outputs, and any outcomes, and whether it has done so in a sustainable manner. The team will provide recommendations to USAID on the specific technical interventions that have been successful, including those that have not, while also identifying opportunities and recommendations for improvement or future program support. Such recommendations will be useful for both USAID and the Afghan government in future programmatic decisions in natural resource and protected areas management, including their linkages to economic growth and improved natural resource governance. In particular, the evaluation will also address the potential role of APWA in sustaining advances in these programmatic areas. This evaluation should:

Examine whether ILGNRM is on track to achieve its intended goals and objectives in a sustainable manner, as focused in the evaluation questions below. The evaluation will identify the strengths and weaknesses of the project to date.

Identify lessons learned and recommend options for future support in natural resource

and protected areas management, including the APWA. V. KEY EVALUATION QUESTIONS

68


9. Community livelihood development I: To what extent has the project successfully facilitated livelihood development by securing sustainable sources of direct benefits to local communities, including job creation (directly and indirectly)?

10. Community livelihood development II: How has the use of fuel-efficient stoves been accepted by and integrated into local communities, including demand?


12. Laws, Policies, and Institutions I: How has the project strengthened specific NRM-related laws, policies, and institutions, including public/stakeholder consultation?

13. Laws, Policies, Institutions II: How critical is the establishment of APWA to sustaining and building upon advances made through ILGNRM with regard to natural resource and protected areas management?


VI. METHODOLOGY The evaluation team will be responsible for developing an evaluation methodology that includes a mix of qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis. The methodology should comply with the USAID Evaluation Policy, and its strengths and limitations should be described. The data should be disaggregated by age, gender, and geographic locations. Data collection should be systematic, and findings and conclusions should clearly be evidence-based. Within data limitations, the evaluation team will be expected to present strong quantitative and qualitative analysis in response to the research questions. The methodology will be presented as part of the evaluation team’s draft work plan and final report, as outlined in the deliverables section of this document (XI). The proposed methodology should include primary and secondary data, at a minimum: 1. Desk review of secondary data-

a) Basic program documents such as the ILGNRM Cooperative Agreement, the revised program description, Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP), annual work plans, annual and quarterly reports, list of deliverables, project-generated assessments or evaluations, and any relevant training materials (e.g. plans, curriculum, pre/post test results, workshop reports) b) Documentation related to the establishment of APWA, including but not limited to the National Priority Plan, Afghanistan National Development Strategy, and Afghan government performance data (if available)

2. Key informant interviews with USAID/Afghanistan Office of Agriculture staff; 3. Interviews with the ILGNRM/WCS staff in Kabul, and in the two provinces;

69

4. Interviews with key ILGNRM MAIL, DAIL, APWA, and provincial NEPA staff; 5. Interviews with Provincial Governors, District Governors and Mayors; 6. Interviews with Rangers; 7. Focus groups or surveys with selected school teachers, students, and parents in Yakawlang district of Bamyan, and Wakhan district of Badakhshan; 8. Surveys with fuel-efficient stove beneficiaries; 9. Consultation with other donors.

The evaluation team is required to visit the project’s target areas, and meet with an appropriate sample of the stakeholders listed. The evaluation team will develop and present to USAID a methodology of their sampling approach prior to implementation to ensure an adequate cross-section of data collected for analysis. All tools developed for interviews, focus groups, or surveys should ensure consistency in data collection, and be presented prior to USAID prior to any piloting. After data collection, the team should evidence rigorous quantitative and qualitative data analysis to ensure that key evaluation questions are addressed. VII. TEAM COMPOSITION The evaluation team shall consist of two international evaluation and technical experts (with one serving as the primary team lead and coordinator with USAID), and two high-level Afghan technical experts, one of whom can also serve as an interpreter. The international experts should be senior-level evaluation analysts that are external to USAID and specialized in areas such as Natural Resource or Biodiversity, with expertise and knowledge of Afghanistan’s Natural resources, biodiversity conservation, and protected area development context. The Afghan experts should have experience with biodiversity programming in Afghanistan, as well as with monitoring and evaluation. They should also be fluent in English, Dari, and Pashto. Strong writing skills are also preferred, though not all evaluators are required to have this. USAID requires that team members provide a written disclosure of any possible (or lack thereof) conflicts of interest. VIII. EVALUATION SCHEDULE This evaluation should begin o/a May 2013 and be completed by the end of May 2013. The estimated Level of Effort (LOE) is 60 days for the entire evaluation, of which at least 30 days

70

LOE should be spent in Afghanistan.5* The evaluation team is authorized to work six days per week while in Afghanistan. The team is required to travel both Bamyan and Wakhan district of Badakhshan where program activities are being implemented. At least 50% of the consultants’ time will be spent outside Kabul to conduct interviews with ILGNRM stakeholders, government officials and the public. A presentation of the findings will be delivered to USAID staff before the consultants depart Afghanistan; and a draft report will be submitted to USAID the day of the presentation. USAID shall have ten days to provide comments to the consultants, who will incorporate responses into the final report. Example of Level of Effort (LOE) in Days:

Activity

LOE for Expat Team Leader

LOE for Expat Evaluation Specialist

LOE for Afghan Evaluation Specialist 1

LOE for Afghan Evaluation Specialist 2

Document review, work plan, draft questions, data analysis plan, suggested list of interviewees, finalized questions and any tools

5 5 5 5

Travel to/from Afghanistan 4 4 0 0

In-country travel 10 10 10 10

In-briefing with USAID 1 1 1 1

Kabul-based interviews 3 3 3 3

Interviews/focus groups/surveys in 2 provinces;

12 12 12 12

Mid-term briefing and interim meetings with USAID

2 2 2 2

5 Due to potential weather complications during this timeframe, LOE may be altered during the evaluation period based on approval from the AOR and Office of Acquisitions and Assistance.

71

Data analysis, preliminary report and presentation preparation

10 10 8 8

Draft final report and exit presentation powerpoint

8 8 3 3

Final evaluation report 3 3 0 0

Final exit presentation to USAID (with PowerPoint presentation and draft evaluation report)

1 1 1 1

One-page briefer preparation and translation

1 1 1 1

Totals 60 60 46 46

*The justification for the LOE is due to the extensive in-country travel requirements. For example, a Wakhan district (Badakhshan) trip will require 6 days of travel for the round trip and Bamyan trip will require 4 days of round trip travel. IX. MANAGEMENT The evaluation team will officially report to the Office of Program and Project Development (OPPD). From a technical management perspective, the evaluation team will also work closely with Mia Abdul Saboor, the Agreement Officer Representative (AOR) for the ILGNRM program, and Ryan Knight the NRM Team Leader and the Alternate AOR for ILGNRM. X. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS AND DELIVERABLES

1. In-briefing: Within 48 hours arrival to Afghanistan, the Evaluation Team shall meet with staff of the Office of Program and Project Development (OPPD) as well as the USAID/Afghanistan Office of Agriculture (OAG) Team for introductions; presentation of the Team’s understanding of the assignments, initial assumptions, evaluation questions, and provinces to be visited, discussion of initial work plan; and revisions to the SOW, if necessary.

2. Evaluation Work Plan: Prior to their arrival in country, the international consultants shall provide OPPD with an initial work plan, a list of potential interviewees, and draft questions. A revised work plan will be submitted within three days after their in-briefing. The work plan will include the overall design strategy for the evaluation; the methodology and data collection and analysis plan; a list of the team members

72

indicating primary contact (an e-mail and phone contact for the team leader should be provided); and the team’s schedule for the evaluation. The revised work plan shall include the list of sites to be visited.

3. Mid-term Briefing and Interim Meetings: The Team Leader will schedule a mid-term briefing with USAID OPPD and OAG/NRM on the status of the evaluation, including potential challenges and emerging opportunities. The team will also provide the COR for SUPPORT II, as well as the AOR and Alternate AOR for ILGNRM, with periodic briefings and feedback on the team’s findings, through at least a weekly phone call. The Team Leader, in consultation with the COR for SUPPORT II and the AOR for ILGNRM will identify and schedule these briefings in the revised work plan. If USAID deems it relevant and necessary, the evaluation team may be required to provide a briefing to Afghan stakeholders prior to departure.

4. PowerPoint and Final Exit Presentation to present key findings and recommendations to USAID. To be scheduled as agreed upon during the in-briefing, and five days prior to the evaluation team’s departure from Kabul. A copy of the PowerPoint file will be provided to the OPPD M&E unit prior to the final exit presentation.

5. Draft Evaluation Report: The preliminary report will be submitted 24 hours in advance of the exit briefing mentioned above to the SUPPORT II COR, and USAID will have five 10 days to provide comments to the team. The evaluation team will then have 10 days to submit the draft final report, which will be structured according to the guidance provided in Section XI below. The length of the report is not to exceed 35 pages in English, excluding annexes, in Times New Roman 12 point, single space, consistent with USAID branding policy. The report will address each of the issues identified in the SOW and questions, and any other factors the team considers to have a bearing on the objectives of the evaluation. Any such factors can be included in the report only after consultation with USAID. After submission of the draft final report, USAID will have 10 business days to provide comments.

6. Final Evaluation Report: Final comments from the COR for SUPPORT II, which will compile comments from the AOR of ILGNRM and other relevant OAG/NRM team members will be incorporated into the final report by the team within three days of receiving them and the final report will be submitted to OPPD within this timeframe. All data from the evaluation are to be housed with SUPPORT II so they can be provided to the SUPPORT II COR upon request (i.e. survey responses and interview transcripts). One-page briefer on key qualitative and quantitative findings for each municipality is included in the evaluation’s scope—to be given to the appropriate municipal government, provincial government, and/or GIRoA representative(s), so that they have the opportunity to review evaluation findings and share them with the larger community. Each briefer shall be translated in Dari and/or Pashto. Each briefer will be reviewed by the OPPD M&E unit and OAG prior to distribution.

IX. FINAL REPORT FORMAT

73

The evaluation report will be structured as follows:

1. Title Page 2. Table of Contents 3. List of any acronyms, tables, or charts (if needed) 4. Acknowledgements or Preface (optional) 5. Executive Summary (2-3 pages) 6. Introduction

a. A description of the project evaluated, including goal and expected results. b. Brief statement on purpose of the evaluation, including a list of the main

evaluation questions. c. Brief statement on the method used in the evaluation such as desk review,

interviews, site visits, surveys, etc. 7. Findings: This section should describe findings, focusing on each of the evaluation

questions. Findings need to be clearly supported with quantitative and qualitative evidence from the evaluation team’s research.

8. Conclusions: This section should include value statements drawn from the data gathered during the evaluation process.

9. Recommendations: This section should include actionable statements for existing programming, and recommendations for the design and performance of future programming. It should also include recommended future objectives and types of activities based on lessons learned.

10. Annex a. Evaluation Statement of Work b. Places visited by province, including a contact list of all organizations and

stakeholders interviewed c. Evaluation methodology description d. Copies of all final tools used, including any survey instruments,

questionnaires, and discussion guides e. Bibliography of all key documents, including any websites, reviewed and used

for analysis f. Summary notes of all key meetings, interviews, and focus group discussions g. Statement of differences

REPORTING GUIDELINES The evaluation report should represent a thoughtful, well-researched and well- organized effort to objectively evaluate the validity of the project’s hypothesis and the effectiveness of the project. Evaluation reports shall address all evaluation questions included in the scope of work. The evaluation report should include the scope of work as an annex. All modifications to the scope of work, whether in technical requirements, evaluation questions, evaluation team composition, methodology, or timeline need to be agreed upon in writing by the C/AOR.

74

Evaluation methodology shall be explained in detail and all tools used in conducting the evaluation such as questionnaires, checklists and discussion guides will be included in an Annex in the final report.

Evaluation findings will assess how results affected men and women.

Limitations to the evaluation shall be disclosed in the report, with particular attention to the limitations associated with the evaluation methodology (selection bias, recall bias, unobservable differences between comparator groups, etc.).

Evaluation findings should be presented as analyzed facts, evidence, and data and not

based on anecdotes, hearsay or the compilation of people’s opinions. Findings should be specific, concise and supported by strong quantitative or qualitative evidence.

Sources of information need to be properly identified and listed in an annex.

Recommendations need to be supported by a specific set of findings.

Recommendations should be action-oriented, practical, and specific, with defined

responsibility for the action.

ANNEX II: EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

Methods and Limitations

Stakeholder Consultations and Field Trips

The Evaluation Team conducted stakeholder consultations in the cities of Kabul, Faizabad, and Bamyan, as well as several villages in Band-e-Amir National Park (Yakawlang District, Bamyan Province) and near the Big Pamir Wildlife Reserve (Wakhan District, Badakhshan Province). Photographs captured field conditions, project activities and outputs, and beneficiaries. Data collection methods and stakeholder groups are listed in the following table for the seven evaluation questions (refer to Annex D for a breakdown of the number of people interviewed by group, province, and gender). Detailed questions were developed upon approval of the Work Plan, tested in the field, and revised as needed on an iterative basis to capture credible information on project activities, challenges, and benefits (refer to Annex E for interview forms). Mini-surveys refer to interviews conducted with the larger stakeholder groups; however, the sample sizes were relatively small and the surveys were not intended to produce statistically significant results.

Table 1: Data Collection Methods

75

Key Questions Information Collection Methods Stakeholder Groups Consulted

1. Technical Capacity Building

Interviews MAIL/DAIL & NEPA Staff at central and provincial levels

Mini-Survey Rangers and Paravets 2. Community Livelihoods

Development I Mini-Survey Rangers, Paravets, and tourism-based

businesses 3. Community Livelihoods

Development II

Mini-Survey Women using fuel-efficient stoves Interviews WCS-trained tinsmiths

Mini-Survey Livestock owners using predator-proof corrals and/or receiving vaccinations

4. Community Governance

Focus Groups and Observing a Meeting

Community Associations and Councils: BAPAC, WPA, and CDCs

Interviews Teachers Focus Groups Students

5. Laws, Policies, and Institutions I - NRM

Interviews

MAIL and NEPA Central and Provincial staff members, Provincial and District Governors

6. Laws, Policies, and Institutions II - APWA

Interviews and Observing a Meeting

APWA Oversight Group members: Ministries of Environment, Agriculture, Justice, and Finance.

7. Gender Review of 2012 Gender Analysis and focus groups

Female members of BACA, WPA, CDCs, and other project beneficiaries

The Evaluation Team interviewed WCS Project Team members and discussed preliminary findings on an iterative basis to facilitate ongoing dialogue and fact-checking. This was done at three stages for each location (Kabul, Bamyan, and Badakhshan):

Prior to conducting stakeholder interviews to obtain current information on Project activities,

Following stakeholder interviews to discuss preliminary findings and obtain additional background information that could shed light on the significance and credibility of stakeholder feedback; and

Prior to departing each location to systematically and jointly assess: 1) the quality of technical assistance provided by WCS against the seven characteristics identified in the methodology (under section d), and 2) Project challenges and opportunities.

During the two 7-8 day field trips, the Evaluation Team stayed at the Project guesthouses in Band-e-Amir and Qala-e-Panja with the WCS Field Teams. This offered two important advantages: it allowed the Evaluation Team to observe how Field Teams and local stakeholders interact on a daily basis, and it allowed more extensive discussion of Project performance with those directly involved in implementation than would have been possible in a few formal meetings. Open, in-depth dialogue and the “quality technical assistance” analytical framework greatly enhanced the quality of learning for evaluation participants on project strengths and weaknesses. It also helped identify success stories.

76

Limitations

The following limitations to the evaluation findings exist: Given the number of stakeholder groups identified and the timeframe for the

evaluation, the sample size for each group is small. In addition, the Evaluation Team targeted stakeholders that are most readily accessible. For these reasons, the interviewees are not necessarily representative of all Project stakeholders.

Some interviewees struggled to answer some of the questions. For example, due to low levels of numeracy in the Wakhan Corridor, many women could not provide estimates on changes in household fuel consumption associated with the fuel-efficient cook stove.

Interviewees sometimes provided misleading information. This seemed to be motivated by: 1) dissatisfaction with their perceived share of project benefits or political influence, and/or 2) a strategy of under-reporting the level of support in the hope that it will increase the likelihood of receiving additional support.

Household beneficiaries were generally hesitant to say anything critical about a project activity due to cultural norms; however, they readily offered suggestions for improvement. Modifications to SOW

The following modifications were made to the SOW: The SOW cites a one-month evaluation period (May 2013) that does not reflect the

actual start date nor the international consultants’ 60 days level of effort (LOE). The approved dates are April 15-July 7.

The SOW contains conflicting information regarding the number of days allowed for USAID to review the Draft Report (5-10) and for the Evaluation Team to finalize the Report (3-10). The approved periods are 10 days for each.

The following modifications were made to the approved Work Plan during the implementation phase:

Replaced Survey Monkey with face-to-face interviews because the latter was deemed more effective.

Did not interview the BACA Chairperson or other members due to political sensitivity during elections and subsequent change of leadership, which occurred during our field visit to Band-e-Amir.

Did not visit Chaqmatin in the Little Pamir because Pactec flights were not available during the field visit timeframe. Instead, the team made arrangements to interview several Kyrgyz in Qala-e-Panja. Guiding Principles

In addition to the methodology described above, the Evaluation Team developed the following guiding principles for this evaluation. Going Beyond Progress Reports: To date, the project performance information presented in Progress Reports has largely focused on the activities, outputs, and deadlines committed to in

77

the Work Plan (deliverables) and the results numbers that flow from the Performance Management Plan indicator tables. The Progress Report templates do not adequately capture information about implementation effectiveness; for example, the quality of partnerships, stakeholder buy-in, and institutional capacity building and the approaches used. This evaluation will therefore focus on collecting and synthesizing information that goes beyond the Progress Reports to tell a richer story about the WCS Project Team’s challenges, opportunities, and achievements. The evaluation team is particularly interested in documenting sustainable approaches that can be replicated in similar programs. Per USAID’s recommendations in the in-brief meeting held with the Evaluation Team on April 24, 2013, the team will use both qualitative and quantitative methods. Focus on Relationships: Successful technical assistance teams recognize that relationships matter and determine outcomes. The quality of collaboration between the Project Team and stakeholders, and between and within different stakeholder groups, is central to achieving sustainable outcomes and to overall project performance. The evaluation team will document examples of how the support provided by WCS cultivates a shared vision for protected areas management in Afghanistan and builds a foundation for ongoing collaboration. Specifically, the evaluation will examine the extent to which the collaboration is: Sustainable: builds Afghan capacities, promotes appropriate technologies and solutions,

and promotes cost-recovery; Replicable: demonstrates approaches that can be scaled up to achieve greater coverage; Buy-in: engages key stakeholders in decision-making processes to build support for

project goals, objectives and activities; Evidence-based: enhances access to information on current conditions and best practices

to promote informed decision-making; Leverage: collaborates with other donors and projects to pull additional resources; Strategic Roles: promotes understanding of appropriate public and private sector roles in

natural resource management; for example, government institutions (creating the enabling environment for protected areas management), private sector (investing in and developing eco-tourism enterprises), schools and universities (raising awareness and developing the workforce), and local communities (planning, monitoring, and implementing).

Gender-sensitive: understands how gender differences influence decision making and the distribution of project benefits.

78

ANNEX III: METHODOLOGIES FOR CALCULATING RESULTS

Indicators Comments on Calculations

5b. Number of households benefited by agriculture and alternative development interventions in targeted areas.

Ranger households were included as beneficiaries up to June 2011; afterwards the households that received FES were included under this indicator. The number of FES distributed in Year II was 598 and 428 in Wakhan and Band-e-Amir, respectively, and in Year III the number of distributed FES was 1093 in Wakhan and 378 in Band-e-Amir. While the numerical entries are in agreement with the IRS precise definition, the numbers need to be segregated to fully appreciate the Project’s achievements (stoves vs. rangers)

5.2b Number of communities implementing improved natural resource management practices.

Communities are defined as people living in villages and known clusters of people who move at least once in a year (Kyrgyz communities).

5.2.3a Number of hectares in areas of biological significance under improved management and/or biodiversity conservation.

This refers to hectares inside the demarcated protected areas.

5.2.3b Number of USG-supported initiative/mechanisms designed to reduce the potential for violent conflict over the control, exploitation, trade or protection of natural resources.

No comment.

5. Number of people receiving USG supported training in natural resources management and/or biodiversity conservation.

Number of individuals participating in training.

6. Number of hectares in areas of biological significance showing improved biophysical conditions as a result of USG assistance.

The sum of areas of the villages where stoves were distributed is used to estimate this indicator, which is a subset of indicator 5.2.3.a. Assumptions: all recipient households in the community use the stoves throughout the year, density of people different villages is the same (impact in Kyrgyz communities is large than sedentary communities, if their assigned area is large, or vice versa, low impact if assigned area is small).

7. Number of Policies, Laws, Agreements or Regulations Promoting Sustainable Natural Resource Management that are drafted and presented for Public/Stakeholder consultation as Result of USG Assistance.

The indicator name focuses on outputs "presented for public/stakeholder consultation." In contrast, the precise definition focuses on those "formally endorsed". These are vastly different. Clarify definition with USAID.

79

8. Number of Policies, Laws, Agreements or Regulations Promoting Sustainable Natural Resource Management that are Implemented as a Result of USG Assistance.

The precise definition covers many different factors: "adequate institutional structure, capacity, and investment necessary to carry out changes." The indicator implies that there's no need for further donor assistance, which is a highly unlikely scenario, particularly given the broad mandate for any given law, agreement, or regulation. A revised "SMART" indicator should be in place in accordance with the project design.

9. Number of people with increased economic benefits derived from Sustainable Natural Resources Management and Conservation as a result of USG assistance.

Number of people receiving direct payment for their work to implement NRM activities or payment for goods and services provided to the Project. No need to use FTEs since the indicator calls for number of beneficiaries and not number of jobs. Individuals receiving economic benefits belong to households with family member who are also benefited but they are ignored. Beneficiaries under this indicator are not necessarily all beneficiaries under indicator 5b.

10. Custom indicator: Creation of social organizations/NGOs.

No comment.

11. Custom indicator: Number of livestock vaccinated.

The precise definition should be "number of domestic animals vaccinated against contagious diseases with an effective vaccine (not yet expired, adequate cold-chain maintained, and administered at appropriate time of year).” Lots of animals are vaccinated in Afghanistan with expired, fake, and/or ruined vaccines.

12. APWA office established in Kabul, Bamyan province, and in the Wakhan District of Badakhshan Province.

The APWA schedule in the PMP is not realistic. The WCS Work Plan was originally designed to go to 2014. All deadlines got pushed back a full year possibly for bureaucratic/political reasons.

13. Number of Policies, Laws, Agreements, and Regulations drafted and presented for public/stakeholder consultation as required to establish the Afghan Parks and Wildlife Authority.

No comment.

Evaluation Team, June 10, 2013

80

ANNEX IV: SUMMARY NOTES ON MEETINGS, INTERVIEWS, AND FOCUS

GROUPS

Component MAIL Capacity Building Author of Notes Abelardo Rodriguez and GR Samadi Interviewee Mr. Sayed Aminullah “Fakhari”, Forest Protection Officer, Forest

Development Directorate/MAIL. Email: [email protected], Tel: 0799107362

Mr. Sayed Rahman Ziarmal, Acting Director of Protected Areas Department/MAIL Email: NA, Tel: 0799576722

Mr. Sayed Hunayoon Jalal, Manager of the Protected Areas, Protected Areas Department/MAIL. Email: [email protected], Tel: 0799356144

Mr. Zia Mirzada, Public Awareness Manager, Protected Areas Department/MAIL. Email: [email protected] , Tel: 0788950611

Interview date May 1, 2013 Location Kabul Gender 4 males Objective of the visit: To discuss the interaction of WCS with MAIL (Protected Areas Department Staff) in terms of capacity building in protected areas management under the Improving Livelihood and Governance in Natural Resource Manager (ILGNRM). MAIL staffers differentiate between short-term and long-term training. STT is for only one or two days and LTT is for pursuing a MS degree or refresher course abroad. STT provided by WCS has been very short and only happened in the first and second years of the project. MAIL has received only STT from WCS. It was mentioned that 2 hours training was not enough to understand how to use the GPS; practical applications are desirable. There was GIS training provided by WCS for 3 days. WCS, however, has organized and financed a two-week training in India in wildlife for 4 MAIL/ Protected Areas Department staffers. The training was good but very intense--daily from 6 AM to 10PM. A longer and less intense training schedule would be desirable. MAIL staffers have problems to understand the indicators used in the Training Material Packages (TMP). It is not clear what is that the modules are supposed to accomplish. The WCS does not coordinate the training activities with MAIL/Protected Areas Department and WCS emphasizes rangeland management. In MAIL’s opinion WCS should consider all issues involved in natural resource management such as soil, rangeland and watershed management, among others. MAIL’s staffers understand that capacity building is the main purpose of the project but this priority has been ignored.

mailto:[email protected]



81

There is a “disconnect between WCS and MAIL/NRM” outside of the domain of protected areas. The Evaluation Team (ET) noted that it is unreasonable to expect WCS to extend their service to MAIL outside of their scope of work. “WCS focuses on the training for park rangers in Bamyan and Badakhshan. WCS should train the people from the protected areas in MAIL/Kabul. There is need to strengthen the faculty of Environmental Science. In January 2013 the Faculty of Environmental Science, University of Kabul, was established. Students are required to take courses during four years prior to graduation. This opens the window for provision of training in protected areas in both the University and MAIL/DAIL. At the moment the technical capacity of protected areas staff is low. If this technical capacity is not enhanced the Protected Areas there is a risk that when the ILGNRM project comes to an end the Protected Areas staffers will not able to cope with NRM issues. The level of the training material is not in accordance with the low level of literacy of the trainees. The level should be adjusted to be adequate. A better identification of the literacy level of trainees would be helpful. Although, the training material is of good quality it would be better if they were simple manuals for each TMPs in local language. The WCS provided a lot of posters of wildlife to the MAIL with no background evidence. There are a total of 30 park rangers in protected areas in Bamyan and Badakhshan Provinces, 19 and 11, respectively. Rangers are financially supported by MAIL. The training they received during the first and second year of the project was very good but no training was provided in the third year. (Note: there is a figure of 59 rangers in the readings, possibly, referred to 59 people benefiting from WCS training, double counting, check against Quarterly reports). MAIL staffers raised a question. Is training sustainable? What would happen if the WCS leave the country? As the project did not train ‘master trainers’ from the Protected Areas Department/MAIL, training is not likely to be sustainable. The Band-e-Amir Park has 14 contracted rangers (temporary employment), 5 permanent, one technical staff is the Park Manager (Ali Yawar), and 1 supervisor of rangers. The responsible person for Protected Areas in Bamyan is Mr. Mohammad (Bamyan City). Mr. Ibrahim is based in Wakhan and Mr. Majubulrahman is based in Fayzabad City. “Generally, WCS does not coordinate with us”, we do not know what they are doing. WCS reports to USAID; some reports shared with them are lengthy and not easy for MAIL staffers to read. They would like to receive brief documents reporting WCS activities and project outcomes. This has been requested to WCS. MAIL /Kabul would like to know the results of scat and wool sampling in PAs. They know that the samples are sent abroad for analyses but they do not know the preliminary results or possible implications. They would like to be involved. (MAIL paused the meeting and open a new section) Positive issues Thanks to WCS support:

The Band-e-Amir is now a National Park well-coordinated and managed. There are management plans for both the Band-e-Amir and the Wakhan The National Protected Areas Systems Plan (NPASP) has been approved. BACA and WPA are functional

82

There is a list of endangered species Successful distribution and usage of fuel-efficient stoves in Badakhshan and Bamyan Predator proof corrals have had very good results Amenity Management Plans Establishment of APWA (2 staffers present in the meeting attended the APWA Oversight

Group on April 28, 2013 in Kabul) Spontaneously the MAIL staffers gave a rating of 80% performance to WCS. Evaluation Team comments: most of the time of the meeting was dedicated was to download issues perceived as negative. This is perhaps to make sure that the negative issues are heard at length. Most, if not all, negative issues above can be resolved with better communication between WCS and MAIL either face-to-face or through improved dissemination of information. MAIL/Kabul does not appreciate financial constraints of WSC in its capacity as advisor/support to MAIL. MAIL/Kabul agreed to provide a detailed log of training events that could be very useful to the Evaluation Team to cross check with WCS.

Component GOVA, PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT Author of Notes Abelardo Rodriguez Interviewee Dr Habiba Sarabi, Governor of Bamyan Interview date May 15, 2013 Location Bamyan City

Gender Female How did you get involved in Protected Areas? She was in Peshawar for some years as an immigrant and suffered a lot due to pollution. She is motivated to improve the environment. As a Governor, she did not like the littering in the Band-e-Amir National Park and she decided that it was a good place to start. She does not really know about APWA. However, she knows some about it through her daughter who is in the Head of ANDS. Governor—democracy in the west cannot operate in Afghanistan. Removal of shops in the shore of the lake in the park was a good move and WCS was supportive for this move. It is difficult to talk without anger but we have to accommodate in the best possible way (talking about some lightly heated discussions in BAPAC). The ILGNRM project supports poor peoples’ livelihoods. Ownership of the people is a must. BAPAC has given an ownership feeling to the community. There needs to be ownership and management of institutions. There should be more plans for promoting ecotourism. The Silk Road Festival is an example but there is need for more events where women can actively participate. USAID has provided some business training through a small grants program from the U.S. Embassy (managed by the Ambassador’s’ wife).

83

The CDC has been extremely useful to enhance both BACA and BAPAC. Could you tell us about quality of WCS assistance and quality of advice? Institution building takes a long time. Organizations like WCS have a long-term effect. They established their office in Band-e-Amir and not outside; this gives them credibility with the communities they serve. She is very pleased with the service WCS has provided. She cannot say the same thing about AKF. Can WCS do better? If they can get financial support for more years this would be excellent. Ecotourism can bring sustainable income for communities, and Bamyan is an endangered cultural site. She was asked to prepare a document for UNESCO to present the justification for declaring Bamyan as a human patrimony.

84

Component National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA), Fayzabad—CAPM

(numbers below refer to the questions in the corresponding questionnaire)

Author of Notes Abelardo Rodriguez and Noorallah Shakir Interviewee Eng. Ghulam Nabi, Head of NEPA Badakhshan Interview date June 5, 2013 Location Fayzabad City, Badakhshan

Gender Male CAPM (numbers below refer to the questions in the corresponding questionnaire)

1. Collaboration with WCS. As you know, transportation to Wakhan is a limiting factor. Starting in 2010 there was good communication and sharing knowledge, staff went to Wakhan and Pamir areas for two weeks training in Protected Areas Management. They had the opportunity to interact with mullahs and CDCs, participate in Wildlife Day, and talk to people in general. In 2010 WCS visited Keran wa Menjan, Yamgan, and Zibak Districts where there is abundant wildlife such as Ibex, Marco Polo Sheep and Uriel. They wanted to start a plan but it did not happen.

2. Training in the Wakhan offered that increased awareness of environmental issues: Wildlife conservation day, National Ranger Program, Fuel-efficient Stoves, WCS Project (ILGNRM), Winter Training, and Field Trips/ Study tours.

3. NEPA trainers have tried to use the TMPs but because they do not offer per diem and transportation people did not attend. They have expressed this concern to WCS and other NGOs.

4. During the first two years of the project Mr. A. Simms came to talk to us about the progress achieve by the project but starting in 2012 Mr. Naqiv visits them frequently.

5. WCS has coordinated with them for the Selection of the PA, PA Management Plan and Boundary demarcation. WCS requests their participation but they cannot attend because budget limitations.

6. NEPA has directly participated with WCS in the PA Management Plan, Ranger Program, Boundary demarcation, and Environmental Education. WCS started head counting wildlife in other districts without knowledge of NEPA, this caused a small friction in 2012, which was resolved through conversations.

7. The Head of NEPA does not really know about the decisions made by WPA. He cannot comment on current WPA activities. Before WPA Chairman was a very respectful person. He does not know the new Chairman. There is need to strengthen the information flow of what WPA is doing so NEPA can be support WPA.

8. No other donor but USAID has provided funds for protected areas. 9. It is not possible to compare support from other donors. Though, quality of technical

advice of WCS has been slightly below average considering the budget available

85

and equipment provided. There has not been technical support in Fayzabad—rating on collaboration and stakeholder engagement would be at 60% satisfaction. To improve the rating there should be more financial support, add 3 districts, more communication with elders, and strengthening traditional management. (ET comment: similar to MAIL in Kabul and MAIL in Bamyan, the central office feels neglected but the local office is satisfied. MAIL—Kabul – and Bamyan +, NEPA Fayzabad <60% and Wakhan NEPA >60%; recall that Bamyan City and Band-e-Amir is 1.5 hrs. driving time and Qala-e-Panja and Fayzabad is 18 hrs. driving time. Distance / driving time affects the perceptions of efficacy of capacity building. Distance and security factors affect the strength of the WCA-NEPA relationship in Badakhshan).

10. NEPA is most proud that people know that for four years they are the authority in Protected Areas Management.

11. NEPA would like to continue working with WCS; WCS is the only option they have to work in PA.

12. NEPA would like to have 2 rangers per district in 10 or 12 key districts for wildlife. This would be including 24 NEPA rangers.

Component

CAPM

Author of Notes

Abelardo Rodriguez and Noorallah Shakir

Interviewee

Eng. Alim Alimi Head of Agriculture MAIL - Badakhshan

Mr. Abdul Wadud DAIL Advisor MAIL - Badakhshan

Mr. Abdul Mujib Sr. Provincial Management Specialist

MAIL - Badakhshan

Interview

date

June 4, 2013

Location Fayzabad, Badakhshan Gender 3 males The numbers correspond to the questions in CAPM

1. The Director of Agriculture has not visited the Pamir. Tomorrow he will fly to Kret but he could send a replacement as he just came back from 2 weeks trip to Malaysia.

2. MAIL officers have seen presentations in National Ranger program, Winter Training and Field trips. No training for DAIL staff in Fayzabad. WCS invited his staff for training in Kabul. Mr. Abdul Mujib attended a three-month training in Wakhan.

3. They have not seen the TMPs from WCS. No training for trainers provided by WCS. 4. The implementation plan of WCS was discussed at the beginning. However, there has

not been follow up. Only 50% coordination with DAIL.

86

5. There is some coordination in PA management Plan, PA Development Plan, and Paravet program. Has not heard of CITES

6. DAIL is not clear on how they directly participate. How can you say that when you have rangers paid by DAIL? They are temporary staff; they may not be there the next year. MAIL pays 10 Park Rangers and one Ranger supervisor.

7. DAIL Director is not familiar with WPA. Mr. Mujib arrived to the meeting and he is aware of WPA because he spent 3 months in Wakhan. WCS works with WPA in the dissemination of information. WCS supports WPA in planning and implementation of PA management. It was clear that there is not good communication between WCS and DAIL, and within DAIL

8. Only WCS works in PA in the Wakhan 9. No technical advice provided, 0% rating. Any activity in the Wakhan has an impact.

They would rate collaboration and stakeholder engagement facilitated by WCS as below average. How to improve score? They should build up capacity with permanent staff in the area. What is your opinion about TA to 10 Park Rangers and Park Supervisor? This has been good but they are not permanent employees

10. "Only" environmental awareness for people and the establishment of the National Park. Luke warm answer, they do not give credit to themselves as collaborator with WCS.

11. Maybe want to continue working with WCS. They (WCS) should have a good Management Plan to share with MAIL. There should be clear Terms of Reference for each institution involved (NEPA, MAIL and WCS)

12. WCS should have a focal point or office here in Fayzabad. Maybe WCS has done a good job but MAIL does not know due to less than effective communication.

Component Partnerships Author of Notes Abelardo Rodriguez and Noorallah Shakir Interviewee Lokule Ladowani, Head of Program, WFP Fayzabad

Quadratullah Lamih, Sr. Program Assistant, WFP Fayzabad Interview date June 4, 2013 Location Fayzabad, Badakhshan

Gender 2 M Badakhshan Province is one of the most food insecure provinces in Afghanistan and the Wakhan District, owing to its remote location, is the one with the most difficult access for the World Food Program (WFP). The Program has relied on WCS for food distribution and for organizing food distribution to construct predator-proof corrals (not as a form of salary but a contribution to their local economy). Twelve corrals were built in 2012 and there are two ranger stations under construction in Wakhan protected areas. The WFP considers WCS a very reliable and fair partner to help WFP in food distribution. However, WFP typically distributes food packages to communities under the threat of starvation. Food for work pays

87

in food rations when the work is directly related to food insecurity. Only in very unique cases, they would be willing to embrace infrastructure projects, like corrals and ranger stations. The WPA with the support of WCS submitted such proposal in 2011 and submitted another proposal in 2012, which is in the pipeline for building 15 corrals and bridges. Last year the WFP fielded a mission to determine how the food for asset creation resolved food insecurity in the Wakhan. They are scheduling another mission for this year.

“We are very interested in WCS submitting high quality proposals to us” “WFP depends on WCS as an organization in the Wakhan that can be trusted” “There is room for collaboration between UNODC, WFP and WCS” to prepare

projects related to food security as long as there is asset creation, for example, watershed management, or others.

The rapport between WCS and WFP is very good. Mr. Quadratullah (WFP Senior Program Assistant) and Mr. Naqiv (WCS Project Manager) have met in Fayzabad several times and had telephone conversations and email exchanges with Mr. A. Simms (WCS Technical Advisor). Mr. Lokule Ladowani, WFP Head of Program, Faizabad Area Office ([email protected], 07797 662 282) will depart by mid-July to his new post. Component Najmuddin Najm, Regional Director, AKF Fayzabad

Hashim Khan, Area Manager, AKF Ishkashim Author of Notes Abelardo Rodriguez and Noorallah Shakir Interviewee Insert name, title, organization Interview date June 4, 2013 Location State town, province, district: Kabul, Bamiyan, Badakhshan, Wakhan,

Faizabad, Qala-e-Panja (not sure of village in Band-e-Amir). Gender 2 M Mr. Mahmood Nisar DFW Consultant introduced us to Dr. Majmuddin Najm, Regional Director, Agha Khan Foundation, and Mr. Hashim Khan, Market Development Program, AKF (he was previously the Area Manager for AKF in Ishkashim, unfortunately, we could not interviewed him on 25 May when we were there). The new area manager for Ishkashim, starting 5 June 2013, will be Ali Mohammad. They clarified that Mr. Gul Nazaar, with whom we met in Ishkashim on 25 May, was not a “representative” but an AKDN staff. Gul Nazaar statement about budget uncertainty was completely unsubstantiated. The AKDN has a five-year program fully defined and funded in which Wakhan District is included. Mr. Hashim Khan stated that there is no interaction with WCS. However, they realize that there could be opportunities to collaborate in ecotourism if both parties meet either in Ishkashim or in Fayzabad. We were referred to the AKF Annual Reports in their website.


88

They have nine paravets operating in the Wakhan, mostly working to prevent animal diseases and increase their productivity. While paravets from WCS and AKDN may have shared training by DCA they are not necessarily pursuing the same objectives. The Evaluation Team needs to talk to Stephan Osterowski from WCS to be a clear idea of what the WCS paravet service is trying to achieve. Questions to be answered are: is there an overlap in the tourism shops in Ishkashim? What is the possible cooperation between WCS and AKF in training for guesthouses, food services, trekking and hot springs development? There should be a meeting in Ishkashim or in Khundud to identify possible cooperation and minimization of redundancies. Component GOVA Author of Notes Abelardo Rodriguez and Noorallah Shakir Interviewee Dr. Gul Mohammad Bidar, Deputy Provincial Governor, Badakhshan

and Ahmad Shah, Governor’s Secretary Interview date June 4, 2013 Location State town, province, district: Kabul, Bamiyan, Badakhshan, Wakhan,

Faizabad, Qala-e-Panja (not sure of village in Band-e-Amir). Gender 2 M Could not talk to the Governor, but we spoke to the Deputy Governor Dr. Gul Mohammad “Bidar”, and the Provincial Governor Secretary, Mr. Abdul Ahmad Shah Sami They know that WCS is working in the most remote areas in the Wakhan Pamir where there is a protected area and they have built predator-proof corrals. The Governor would like to visit this area twice a year but ground transportation is too long and insecure, and they do not have a budget to fly. They have informants who come to Fayzabad and bring the news that WCS has achieved progress. When asked about formal ways of communicating they said that they do not receive written reports from WCS but once a year WCS visits them and briefs them of the progress achieved (Mr. Naqiv, WCS Project Manager). They would like to believe that MAIL and NEPA receive progress reports. How do you feel about the technical capacity provided by WCS? Provincial/District Governor has heard of the good quality EEP awareness program provided by WCS. The Governor’s Office is pleased to know that the population in Wakhan is now sensitized about environmental issues and this should be good for the tourist visiting the region. “It is good to know that WCS is involved in the Wakhan but we do not know exactly what they have done”, more information, through small briefs or visits, would be desirable. WCS could improve its communication with the Provincial Governor visiting twice a year and providing executive summaries of their annual and semi-annual reports.

89

The Provincial Governor’s Office would like to see the airport in Kret and Chaq Maqtin paved to promote more visitors to the region. Communication with the current District Governor should be continued. The previous District Governor did not know about the existence of WCS. ANNEX V: LINKS TO AFGHANISTAN’S NATIONAL PRIORITY PROGRAMS

Following are a series of excerpts from the relevant National Priority Program (NPP) under the Agriculture and Rural Development Cluster: Water and Natural Resources Development (ARD NPP1).

Component 2, Sub-Component 1 Objectives include:

to design and implement practical environmental conservation and management interventions on the basis of Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) approaches; and

to strengthen governance mechanisms for environmental conservation and management.

NPP1 Outcomes include:

Substantial increase in the Protected Area network, with at least eight new Protected Areas established and fully operational (with management structures in place and biodiversity conservation interventions initiated); and

Revitalisation of the rural economy through increased employment generation and stimulation of rural markets through the sustainable management of rural environmental resources.

Component 2: Environmental Management and Rural Energy, is described as follows:

Component 2 promotes a holistic and integrated approach at the landscape/watershed level. In light of the huge international interest in climate change and the environment, the Component examines the funding potential of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), including the Global Environment Fund, as well as available opportunities through carbon offsetting. This Component delivers through two Sub-Components.

The first Sub-Component [Biodiversity and Land Management], promotes the development and implementation of national management plans for rangelands, Protected Areas and forests, firstly by compiling, developing and analysing environmental data to guide implementation; secondly, by ensuring that interventions are designed and implemented on the basis of Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) and benefit-sharing approaches, utilising community-based governance institutions and management committees; and thirdly, by strengthening governance mechanisms for environmental conservation and management, supporting the involvement of all relevant stakeholders in establishing workable policy, legal and regulatory frameworks for rangelands, forests and Protected Areas, including to address the critical twin issues of uncertain land tenure and conflict resolution. In doing so, the Afghan Land Authority (ALA) will be an important partner. In developing the capacity to enforce new regulations, especially with regards to Protected Areas, an Afghanistan Parks and Wildlife Authority (APWA) is proposed as a new institution.

90

This Sub-Component is expected to expand over time to encompass a range of issues of importance both to the delivery of the Sub-Component’s Objectives, but also contributing to the success of Objectives to be achieved by other Sub-Components, and to wider growth in the rural economy, such as the NPP National Comprehensive Agricultural Production and Market Development. These issues will include: identifying measures to promote clean air and water conservation; to retain and expand biodiversity; to restore watersheds, rangelands and forests so as to contain, or reverse, soil erosion, degradation and deforestation; and to promote sustainable and equitable economic use in a managed way.

Gender, anti-corruption, capacity development, and regional cooperation are cited as cross-cutting issues.

One of the implementation strategies is to “integrate and promote applied research to support evidence-based environmental management” (section 4.3.8). “Strengthening environmental science faculties within Afghan educational institutions” is listed as a supporting activity. Section 5.7.3 references “incorporating climate change adaptation was planning” into Protected Areas management.

ANNEX VI: COMMENTS ON THE INDICATOR REFERENCE SHEETS

Following are a few comments based on a quick review of WCS' Indicator Reference Sheets:

Indicator IR 5.2(b): How are communities defined? Definitions should be based on the approach established by the National Risk and Vulnerability Assessment (NRVA), managed by the Statistics Office, or the National Solidarity Programe (NSP), managed by the Ministry for Rural Reconstruction and Development.

Indicator Sub IR 5.2.3(a): No reference to wildlife. The IRS should be modified to include this.

Indicator Sub IR 5.2.3(b): Wildlife, water, rangeland (grazing vegetation), and land are all potential "conflict resources".

WCS Indicator 6: It doesn't seem feasible for the project to monitor changes in biophysical conditions.

WCS Indicator 7: The indicator name focuses on outputs "presented for public/stakeholder consultation." In contrast, the precise definition focuses on those "formally endorsed". These are vastly different.

WCS Indicator 8: The precise definition covers many different factors: "adequate institutional structure, capacity, and investment necessary to carry out changes." This is not good practice in indicator design. Moreover, it implies that there's no need for further donor assistance, which is a highly unlikely scenario, particularly given the broad mandate for any given law, agreement, or regulation. This indicator should be revised to comply with "SMART" indicator design criteria.

WCS Indicator 9: The reference to FTE (full time equivalent) is unnecessary. There is need to measure hours worked if the unit of measurement is people benefited and not jobs.

91

WCS Indicator 11: Is it feasible to also have an indicator of health outcomes to track whether the vaccines are effective? This seems important given the fairly complex conditions required to ensure that vaccines are beneficial (not yet expired, adequate cold-chain maintained, and administered at appropriate time of year).

WCS Indicator 12: The APWA schedule in the PMP is not realistic. The WCS Work Plan was originally designed to go to 2014. All deadlines got pushed back a full year for bureaucratic/political reasons.

WCS Indicator 13: this is a subset of Indicators 7 and 8.

92

ANNEX VII: CONTACT LIST AND PLACES VISITED

Contact Name Title Organization Phone No. Email Date Time No. of People

USAID

Mr. Ryan Knight Natural Resources Management Team Leader

USAID - OCG, Kabul

0702 626 240 [email protected] 24-Apr 11:00 1

Mr. Carlos Lamadrid M&E Officer USAID - OPPD, Kabul


Ms. Browne Gmakahn Performance Management & Field Coordinator Advisor

USAID - OAG, Kabul


Ms. Gene Davis M&E Agriculture and Social Sector

USAID - OAG, Kabul

24-Apr 11:00 1

Mr. Aga Sayed COR USAID - OPPD, Kabul

[email protected] 24-Apr 11:00 1

Mr. Mia Abdul Saboor

Agreement Officer Representative (AOR)

USAID – OAG, Kabul

[email protected] 18-May 10:00 1

Wildlife Conservation Society (management and administration staff, technical staff listed in other sections)

Dr. David Lawson Country Director (through April 2013)

WCS - Kabul 0798 981 967 [email protected] 25-Apr 9:00 1

Dr. Richard Paley Country Director (since May 2013)

WCS - Kabul 0794 444 382 [email protected] 25-Apr 9:00 1

Mr. Qais Sahar Country Manager WCS - Kabul 0700 021 755 [email protected] 25-Apr 9:00 1 Mr. Mohammad Arif Rahimi

Bamyan Project Leader WCS - Kabul 0782 378 810 [email protected]

25-Apr 9:00 1

Mr. Tahmina Ahmadi Reporting Assistant WCS - Kabul 0792 223 152 [email protected]

25-Apr 9:00 1












93


Dr. Ali Madad Rajibi Research Assistant WCS - Kabul 0700 894 083 [email protected]

25-Apr 9:00 1

Ms.Sweeta Qaderi Media Library Controller WCS - Kabul 0773 361 567 [email protected]

25-Apr 13:00

1

Dr. Stephane Ostrowski

Wildlife Health Project Manager,

WCS - Kabul 0796 357 493

[email protected]

13-Jun 14:00

1

STAKEHOLDERS Technical Capacity Building: National and Provincial Mr. Sorosh Poya - Faryabi

Education and Public Outreach Advisor

WCS - Kabul 0791 647 689 [email protected] [email protected]

25-Apr 9:00 1

Mr. Hafizullah Rahmani

Training and Capacity Development Officer

WCS - Kabul 0799 445 209 [email protected]

25-Apr 9:00 1

Ms. Shogufa Popal Training and Capacity Development Assistant


25-Apr 9:00 1

Ms. Sadaf Arif Training and Capacity Development Assistant


25-Apr 9:00 1

Ms. Fatema Roshan Education Assistant WCS - Kabul 0783 203 848 [email protected]

25-Apr 9:00 1

Mr. Sayed Aminullah Fakhri

Forest Protection Officer MAIL - Kabul 0799 107 362

1-May 9:30 1

Mr. Sayed Rahman Ziarmal

Director of Protected Areas MAIL - Kabul 0799 576 722

1-May 9:30 1

Mr. Sayed Hamayoon Jalal

Manager of Protected Areas MAIL - Kabul 0799 356 144 [email protected]

1-May 9:30 1

Mr. Zia Mirzada Public Awareness Manager MAIL - Kabul 0788 950 611 [email protected] 1-May 9:30 1

















94


m

Eng. Mohammad Sharif Kazimi

Head of NEPA NEPA - Bamyan 0799 707 679

14-May 9:00 1

Eng. Mohammad Sharif Poya

National Heritage Protection Officer

NEPA - Bamyan

14-May 9:00 1

Mr. Mohammad Tahir Atayee

Director DAIL Bamyan 0799 354 059 [email protected]

14-May 11:30 1

Mr. Ghulam Nabi Head of NEPA NEPA - Badakhshan

0796 065 503

4-Jun 9:00 1

Eng. Alim Alimi Head of Agriculture MAIL - Badakhshan

799272961 [email protected]

4-Jun 11:00 1

Mr. Abdul Wadud DAIL Advisor MAIL - Badakhshan

4-Jun 11:00 1

Mr. Abdul Mujib Sr. Provincial Management Specialist

MAIL - Badakhshan

4-Jun 11:00 1

Community Livelihood Development I and II Mr. Anthony Simms Badakhshan Technical Advisor WSC 0794 443 989 [email protected] 25-Apr 9:00 1

Mr. David Bradfield Bamyan Technical Advisor WSC 078 1311 082 [email protected]

9-May 11:00 1

MAIL Rangers interviewed

MAIL Rangers MAIL - Bamyan

10-May 9:00 15

Mr. Sayed Mahmoodi Director of School, Qala-e-Jafar village

Ed. Dept. - Bamyan

11-May 9:00 1

Mr. Sayed Mahdi, Mr. Sayed Navid and Mr.

Teachers of School in Qala-e-Jafar village

Ed. Dept. - Bamyan

11-May 10:00 3






95


Shahar Baow

Students Students in Band-e-Amir Ed. Dept. - Bamyan 11-May 11:00 68

Ms. Amina Hassanpoor

Regional Advisor, Gender AKF- Bamyan 0799 292 421 [email protected] [email protected]

14-May 9:30

1

Mr. Ghulam Reza Mohammadi

Ecotourism Photographer and Designer

AKF - Bamyan 0799 108 583 Reza.mohammadi@akd

n.org 14-May 1

Mr. Mohammad Reza Ibrahim

Executive Manager, Bamyan Tourism Development Board & Department Head

Tourism Dept., Bamyan University

0770 004 321 [email protected] 14-May 1

Tinsmiths interviewed Manufacturers Private - Bamyan

14-May 15:00

2

Women interviewed/FG

Users of fuel-efficient stoves Band e Amir - Bamyan

15-May 16:00 12

Ms. Anne Williams Gender Advisor WCS 0794 714 897 [email protected] 18-May 11:00 1

Ms. Saeeda Gouhari Gender and Livelihoods Officer

WCS 0794 970 940

18-May 11:00 1

Mr. Sayed Naqibullah Badakhshan Project Manager WCS 0798 727 350 [email protected]

19-May 14:00 1

Mr. Hussain Ali Ranger Mentor WSC - Wakhan 0798 853 350 19-May 14:00 1 Mr. Sayed Salahudin Ranger Program Officer WSC - Wakhan 0797 759 236 19-May 14:00 1 Kyrgyz men interviewed

Kyzgyz households, fuel-efficient stoves

Kyrgyz Comm., Pamir

20-May 8:00 4




96


Kyrgyz men interviewed for corrals

Predator-proof corral owner Kyrgyz

Kyrgyz Comm., Pamir

20-May 8:00 2

CDC leaders interviewed

Community Development Council

Qala e Panja Wakhan

20-May 8:00 4

Community Rangers interviewed

Community Rangers - Wakhan WSC - Wakhan

21-May 9:00 11

Mr. Mohammad Gul and Mr. Sarwar

Paravets - Wakhan WPA

22-May 8:00 2

Tinshmiths interviewed

Manufacturers Private- Ishkashim

25-May 8:00 3

Students Students in Qala-e-Panja Ed. Dept. - Wakhan 26-May 8:00 37 Mr. Zalmi + 3 more teachers interviewed

Teachers in Qala-e-Panja Ed. Dept. - Wakhan

26-May 8:00 4

Women interviewed Users of fuel-efficient stoves Panja village - Wakhan

26-May 8:00 5

Community Governance: Communities, teachers and students

Mrs. Sediqa Hussaini District Education Officer, Bamyan

WSC 0782 377 148

9-May 14:00 1

Mr. Mohammad Nasim

Conservation Officers WCS

9-May 14:00 1

Mr. Hameedullah Sahibi

District Education Officer, Bamyan

WSC 0786 162 780

9-May 14:00 1

Female CDC leaders interviewed


Band e Amir

12-May 9:00 8

97


Male CDC leaders interviewed


Band e Amir

12-May 14:00 2

Mrs. Habiba Sarabi Provincial Governor Bamyan Gov. 0799 842 952

14-May 14:00 1

Mr. Salauddin District Education Officer, Badakhshan

WSC 0797 759 236

19-May 14:00 1

Mr. Shah Ismaeel Community Spiritual Leader Qala-e-Panja Comm.

+992 934 500 743

19-May 16:00 1

Mr. Wali Jon Chairman WPA 0796 240 385 22-May 9:00 1

Mr. Momin Boy Deputy of Chairman WPA +992 938 406 206

22-May 9:00 1

Mr. Amir Mohammad Secretary WPA +992 938 251 588

22-May 9:00 1

Members WPA WPA WPA 22-May 9:00 9 Mr. Gul Mohammad Balooch

District Governor of Wakhan Badakhshan Gov. +992 937 407 885

23-May 9:00 1

Mr. Juma Khan Deputy Manager Dist. Ed. Dept. - Wakhan

+992 934 426 022

23-May 10:00 1

CDC leaders interviewed

CDC Loc. Gov. - Wakhan

24-May 8:00 5

Mr. Ahmad Meer Jawad

District Governor of Ishkashim Gov. Badakhshan 0799 212 054

25-May 11:00 1

Dr. Gul Mohammad Bidar

Deputy Provincial Governor Badakhshan Gov. 0796 764 444 [email protected] 5-Jun 8:00 1

Mr. Ahmad Shah Governor Secretary Badakhshan Gov. 5-Jun 8:00 1


98


Laws, Policies, and Institutions I: NRM Prof. Wali Mohammad Naseh

Legal Advisor WCS - Kabul 0700 292 665 [email protected] 27-Apr 20:00 1

H.E. Wali Modaqiq Director General – Policy & International Affairs

NEPA - Kabul 0799 131 618 [email protected] 4-May 10:00 1

Laws, Policies, and Institutions II: APWA Oversight Group H.E. Ghulam Malikyar

Director General - Technical NEPA - Kabul 0700 202 719 [email protected] [email protected]

27-Apr 20:00 1

Ms. Naheed Sarabi Director of ANDS ANDS - Kabul 0786 220 812 [email protected]

2-Jun 14:00 1

H.E. Ghani Ghuriani MAIL Deputy Minister MAIL - Kabul 0707 959 786 [email protected]

3-Jun 11:00 1

H.E. Shafeeq Qarizada

Deputy Minister - Policy MoF - Kabul 0700 016 121 [email protected]

3-Jun 15:00 1

Partnerships Mr. Renaud Meyer Sr. Deputy Country Director UNDP 0202 101 685 [email protected] 27-Apr 20:00 1

Ms. Tomoko Watanabe

Deputy Chief, Economic Cooperation Section First Secretary

Embassy of Japan 0796 010 080 [email protected]

27-Apr 20:00 1

Mr. Raymond Briscoe Country Director DCA [email protected]

7-May 9:30 1

Mr. Abdul Azim Doosti

ICIMOD Country Representative

ICIMOD 0787 102 162 [email protected] 7-May 10:00

1

Mr. Ghulam Reza Mohammadi

Ecotourism Program Officer AKF- Bamyan 0799 108 583 [email protected]

16-May 9:30 1



















99


Mr. Gul Nazaar Staff AKF - Ishkashim 0799 670 270 25-May 12:00 1 Mr. Hashim Khan Area Manager AKF - Ishkashim 4-Jun 13:00 1

Mr. Najmuddin Najm Regional Director AKF- Faizabad 0796 889 177 [email protected]

4-Jun 13:00 1

Mr. Lokule Ladowani Head of Program WFP Faizabad 0797 662 289 [email protected]

4-Jun 14:00 1

Mr. Qudratullah Lamih

Sr. Program Assistant WFP Faizabad 0797 662 296 [email protected]

4-Jun 14:00 1

TOTAL 267







100

ANNEX VIII: BREAKDOWN OF INTERVIEWS BY STAKEHOLDER GROUP, GENDER, AND PROVINCE

Form name Target group

CAPM MAIL / NEPA / GovernorCAPR RangersGOVA CDC GOVE TeachersGOVE Students

LIVE1T Tourism-based bussinessesLIVE2S TinsmithsLIVE2W Women using FE stoves

CAPM MAIL / NEPA / Governor

CAPR RangersGOVA CDC and WPA

GOVE Teachers

GOVE StudentsLIVE1P ParavetsLIVE2L Livestock owners/corral

users/paravet servicesLIVE2S TinsmithsLIVE2W Women using FE stoves

LIVE2W Women using FE stovesPARTNERs* WFP/AKF

CAPM and free format

MAIL/NEPA, other Ministries and organizations in Kabul

F=female(s), M=male(s), FG=focus group* does not have a form/questionnaire

TOTAL Bamyan

TOTAL Badakhshan

Total in both provinces

Evaluation Team, 16 June 2013

Survey type Date Location # qstnnrs Male Fem % Fem Comments

Interview 14/5/2013 Bamyan City 3 3 1 25 NEPA (2 M) /MAIL (1 M) / Prov. Gov. (1 F)Interview 10/5/13 Band-e-Amir 15 15 0 0 all malesInt & Focus Group 11 & 12 May Band-e-Amir 3 4 7 64 1 FG (7 F)Interview 5/11/13 Band-e-Amir 4 3 1 25Focus group 5/11/13 Band-e-Amir 4 28 40 59 4 FGs (15 girls; 14 boys; 7 boys/12 girls; 7

boys/13 girls)Interview 12-May Band-e-Amir 4 4 0 0Interview 5/14/13 Bamyan City 2 2 0 0 2 MInt & Focus Group 12 & 15 May Band-e-Amir 6 0 12 100 5 F, FG (7 F)

41 59 61 51

Interview 4 & 5 June Fayzabad 3 6 0 0 NEPA(1) / MAIL (3) on 4 June; Prov. Governor (2) 5 June, all males

Interview 20-21 May Qela-Panja 17 17 0 0 1 Kyrgyz ranger includedInt & Focus Group 22 & 24 May Qela-Panja 5 10 4 29 WPA FG (6 M, 3 F), one interview with

husband and wife, plus 3 MInt & Focus group 5/26/13 Qela-Panja 2 7 0 0 2 FGs (4 M; 3 M), one form used for both int.

and FGFocus group 5/5/13 Qela-Panja 2 22 15 41 2 FGs (7 boys/13 girls; 15 boys/2 girls)Focus group 5/22/13 Qela-Panja 1 2 0 0 FG (2 M)Interview 20 & 24 May Qela-Panja 6 6 0 0 2 M Kyrgyz and 4 CDCs 4 M

Interview 5/25/13 Ishkashim City 3 3 0 0Interview 5/20/13 Qela-Panja 4 4 0 0 4 Kyrgyz males interviewed (women could

not afford the 5-day journey each way), an additional male did not have stove but was interviewed for livestock

Interview 5/22/13 Qela-Panja 5 0 5 100Interview 6/4/13 Fayzabad 2 4 0 0

50 81 24 23

Interview 1st-4th May, 1-13 June

Kabul 2 10 2 17 10 M and 2 F

93 150 87 37

F=female(s), M=male(s), FG=focus group* does not have a form/questionnaire

TOTAL Bamyan

TOTAL Badakhshan

Total in both provinces

Evaluation Team, 16 June 2013

101

ANNEX IX: EVALUATION TOOLS

Date: May 2013 Form #: CAPG- Performance Evaluation: Wildlife Conservation Society – Improving Livelihoods and Governance Through Natural Resources Management Project Component Capacity Building – Technical Capacity and Awareness Target Group MAIL GIS Staff DAIL GIS Staff Other Survey Type Interview Focus Group Interviewer Abelardo Lorene Samadi Noorullah Province & Dist. Kabul Bamyan Badakhshan, Bamyan Yakawlang

Wakhan Village & GPS Interviewees Name and Title Age Photo No.

M F M F M F M F

Questions 1. What WCS training courses have you completed? GIS GPS

Were you tested after training to assess your level of understanding? Yes No.

2. What new skills or knowledge have you learned through WCS training? Mapping, Digitizing, Computations, GPS readings, Data Management.

Give examples of how you’ve used them on your job:

3. Do you receive requests to produce maps? Yes No. Can you show me some examples?

4. Could you produce maps before your training from WCS? Yes No.

102

5. Has the quality of your maps improved since you were trained by WCS? Yes No Can you show examples of maps you produced before training and after training?

6. Do you receive requests to take GPS measurements? Yes No. Can you show me some examples of how they are recorded and used?

7. Could you use a GPS before your training from WCS? Yes No.

8. Do you receive ongoing mentoring or refresher courses? Yes No. On what

topics? From who? 9. Have any MAIL trainers used WCS’ training materials to train you? Yes No 10. What WCS presentations have you seen that increased your awareness of environmental

issues?** Wildlife Conservation Day, CITES, National Ranger Program, Biodiversity

and Conservation in Afghanistan, Fuel-efficient Stoves, Badakhshan, Bamyan, WCS Project (ILGNRM), Other (specify):

Overflow:

103

END

104

Date: May 2013 Form #: CAPM- Performance Evaluation: Wildlife Conservation Society – Improving Livelihoods and Governance Through Natural Resources Management Project Component Capacity Building – Technical Capacity and Awareness Target Group MAIL Staff DAIL Staff NEPA Staff Other Survey Type Interview Focus Group Interviewer Abelardo Lorene Samadi Noorullah Province & Dist. Kabul Bamyan Badakhshan, Bamyan Yakawlang

Wakhan Village & GPS Interviewees Name and Title Age Photo No.

M F M F M F M F

Questions 1. What WCS presentations have you seen that increased your awareness of environmental

issues?** Wildlife Conservation Day, CITES, National Ranger Program, Biodiversity

and Conservation in Afghanistan, Fuel-efficient Stoves, Badakhshan, Bamyan, WCS Project (ILGNRM), Other (specify):

2. Have any MAIL/NEPA trainers used WCS training packets to train you? Yes No 3. How does WCS inform you of activities and progress of the ILGNRM Project?

Progress Report, Presentations, Meetings.

4. What kinds of activities does WCS coordinate with you on? paravet program, ranger program, protected areas demarcation, environmental

education, biodiversity surveys, other research, training for customs officials/border police on CITES enforcement, other.

5. What kinds of activities do you directly participate in with WCS? paravet training, ranger training, protected areas demarcation, environmental

education, biodiversity surveys, other research, CITES enforcement, other.

6. Compared to other organizations you have worked with, how would you rate the quality

105

of technical advice and collaboration provided by WCS to MAIL/NEPA? Excellent, Above average, Average, Below average, Poor.

Why?

7. Do you have any success stories that involve your agency and WCS?

8. Any final comments or feedback you’d like to make?

Overflow:

106

Date: May 2013 Form #: CAPM- Performance Evaluation: Wildlife Conservation Society – Improving Livelihoods and Governance Through Natural Resources Management Project Component Capacity Building – Technical Capacity and Awareness Target Group MAIL Staff DAIL Staff NEPA Staff Other Survey Type Interview Focus Group Interviewer Abelardo Lorene Fatima Noorullah Province & Dist. Badakhshan, Wakhan, Faizabad Village & GPS Interviewees Name and Title Age Photo No.

M F M F M F

Questions 9. It would be helpful for us if you could briefly describe your collaboration with WCS. 10. What WCS presentations and trainings have you seen that increased your awareness of

environmental issues?** Wildlife Conservation Day, CITES, National Ranger Program, Biodiversity

and Conservation in Afghanistan, Fuel-efficient Stoves, Badakhshan, Bamyan, WCS Project (ILGNRM), Winter Training (English and computers), Field Trips/Study Tours, Other (specify):

11. Have any MAIL/NEPA trainers used WCS training packets to train you? Yes No 12. How does WCS inform you of activities and progress of the ILGNRM Project?

Progress Report, Presentations, Meetings. How often?

13. What kinds of activities does WCS coordinate with you? (PA= protected area)

107

PA Management Plan, PA Development Plan (facilities), PA Management Committee, PA Community Association, paravet program, ranger program, boundary demarcation, environmental education, biodiversity surveys, other research, training for customs officials/border police on CITES enforcement, other.

14. What kinds of activities do you directly participate in with WCS? PA Management Man, PA Development Plan (facilities), PA Management

Committee, PA Community Association, paravet program, ranger program, boundary demarcation, environmental education, biodiversity surveys, other research, training for customs officials/border police on CITES enforcement, other.

15. Are you happy with the decisions made by the WPA? Why or why not?

What kind of support does WCS provide to the WPA?

16. What other NGOs, projects, or donors have provided assistance to your department? Name:

17. a) Compared to other organizations you have worked with, how would you rate the quality of technical advice provided by WCS?

Excellent, Above average, Average, Below average, Poor.

b) Compared to other organizations you have worked with, how would you rate the quality of collaboration and stakeholder engagement facilitated by WCS?

Excellent, Above average, Average, Below average, Poor.

Why? What could they do differently to improve their score?

108

18. Of your recent achievements in protected areas management, what are you most proud of?

19. Do you want WCS to continue working with you? Yes No. How important is their support?

20. Any final comments or feedback you’d like to make? Any questions we should have asked but didn’t?

END

109

Date: May 2013 Form #: CAPR- Performance Evaluation: Wildlife Conservation Society – Improving Livelihoods and Governance Through Natural Resources Management Project Components Capacity Building – Technical Capacity and Awareness

Community Livelihoods Development I Target Group MAIL Ranger Community Ranger Survey Type Interview Focus Group Interviewer Abelardo Lorene Samadi Noorullah Province & Dist. Kabul Bamyan Badakhshan, Bamyan Jakawlang Wakhan Village & GPS # in Household Interviewee Name and Title Age Photo No.

M F Questions – Technical Capacity When did you start working as a Ranger (Afghan date)? How were you selected for your Ranger job? Describe a typical day for you when you’re on a patrol: What are the top three topics or skills you have learned from WCS training that you use

most on your job? Identifying Mammals and Birds Ranger Equipment Map Reading Data Entry Importance of Protected Areas Afghanistan’s Natural Resources GPS Wildlife Data Sheet Mapping and Navigation Protected Areas Zones

110

Other (specify):

What are your biggest job-related challenges and concerns? Give some examples of how you have helped your community: What additional support or training could help you better perform your Ranger duties? What do you like most about being a Ranger? What do you like least about being a Ranger? Overall, how happy are you with being a Ranger? Extremely happy, Somewhat

happy, Neutral, Somewhat unhappy, Extremely unhappy.

Questions – Livelihoods

11. What is your monthly Ranger income? Salary:___ AFN/Mo, Overtime:___ AFN/Mo.

12. What was your monthly income before you became a Ranger? ____ AFN.

Overflow:

111

END

112

Date: May 2013 Form #: GOVA- Performance Evaluation: Wildlife Conservation Society – Improving Livelihoods and Governance Through Natural Resources Management Project Components Community Governance Target Group BACA WPA CDC Municipality Provincial Governor

District Governor Survey Type Interview Focus Group Interviewer Abelardo Lorene Samadi Noorullah Province & Dist. Kabul Bamyan Badakhshan, Bamyan Yakawlang Wakhan Village & GPS # in Household Interviewee Name and Title Age Photo No.

M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F

Questions CBNRM

1. How many members are in your association? M F (number)

2. Do you have association bylaws? Yes No.

3. What NRM laws, policies, strategies, institutions and projects have you been asked to comment on?

APWA, Hunting Law, National Protected Areas System Plan (NPASP), National Priority Program (NPP), ANDS, Other (specify): ________.

4. Do you have enough information to make recommendations/decisions on protected areas management and CBNRM? Yes No Don’t Know.

113

5. How often are your association’s recommendations adopted by government authorities? All of the time, Most of the time, Sometimes, Rarely, Never, Don’t Know.

6. Give examples of CBNRM requests and recommendations you have made that have been implemented. For example: revenue sharing, association membership, women’s inclusion, other: (specify):

7. Is there anyone who is not currently involved in your association/CDC whose support is critical? Yes No. Who?

8. Do you have a role in monitoring protected areas or CBNRM activities? Yes No. What do you monitor?

Revenue-Sharing 9. Are any park revenues shared with local communities or spent on projects identified by

local communities? Yes, No, Don’t Know. (If no, skip to Gender section).

10. How much from park revenues is spent on projects identified by the communities? 1391: _____( AFN), 1390: _____( AFN), Don’t Know.

11. How do you decide how to use your share of park revenues (or how do you decide which community projects should be funded?) Explain:

12. What local government authority manages the park revenues that are shared with local communities? Municipality, Other:_____________________________________

13. How do you know if the revenues are spent as agreed?

14. In general, do committee members have equal say in committee decisions? Yes No Don’t Know.

114

15. Does anyone outside your committee influence committee decisions? Please explain: Yes No. Don’t Know.

Gender 16. What mechanisms exist to ensure that women have a say in how shared revenues are spent?

17. Have shared revenues been used to increase livelihoods for women? Give examples: Yes No Don’t Know.

1. The BACA Subcommittee for Women proposed several measures to support women’s livelihoods. Has there been any follow-up on the following recommendations?

Y N Don’t Know Market survey of tourist interests beyond yoghurt and handicrafts;

Y N Don’t Know Training on hygienic food preparation and packing;

Y N Don’t Know Business training;

Y N Don’t Know Provide start-up grants for women to develop non-traditional businesses (such as tea gardens, premier attraction zones, day visitor zone, and women’s bath pavilion, among others).

Y N Don’t Know Mechanisms for women to control and manage revenues.

Comments:

2. The WPA made the following recommendations on women’s livelihoods. What is the status of follow-up?

Y N Don’t Know Tourism and Handicraft Center in Ishkashim (proposal prepared/submitted by WCA to GIZ)

Y N Don’t Know WPA to facilitate women's access to tourism-based livelihood opportunities such as food preparation, guides, guesthouses, trekking, and horse or yak-supported trips to the Big Pamir Wildlife Reserve and Buffer Zone.

Comments:

115

Overflow:

116

Date: May 2013 Form #: GOVE- Performance Evaluation: Wildlife Conservation Society – Improving Livelihoods and Governance Through Natural Resources Management Project Components Community Governance Target Group Students Teachers Survey Type Interview Focus Group Interviewer Abelardo Lorene Samadi Noorullah Province & Dist. Kabul Bamyan Badakhshan, Bamyan Yakawlang Wakhan Village & GPS # in Class Interviewee Name and Title Age Photo No.

M F Questions For Teacher 1. Have you used the WCS Environmental Education Program (EEP) in your classes?

Yes No.

2. Does your school have a School Environment Committees? Yes No. Who are the members and what kinds of things does the committee do?

3. How many lessons have you taught based on the WCS curriculum? (number). Which grades/classes? to (numbers)

4. Did you test the students afterward to assess how much they understood? Yes No.

5. Have students expressed interest in more environmental lessons? Yes No.

6. Did your class participate in the WCS shrub survey? Yes No.

7. Was the shrub survey a worthwhile learning experience for your students? Yes No.

8. Do you have any additional feedback to give WCS on involving students in surveys? Yes No. Explain:

117

9. Did WCS give you feedback on your survey activities? Yes No.

10. What suggestions do you have for future curriculum development or field activities?

For Students 1. What was most interesting to you in the lessons on environment and wildlife? Give

examples.

2. Did anything surprise you about what you learned? Yes No. Give examples.

3. What is your favorite wild animal? What is your favorite plant?

4. Did you participate in collecting information on changes in the amount of shrubs for the WCS survey? Yes No (if no skip to 8).

5. How did you measure changes in the amount of shrubs?

6. What did you find? More shrubs, No change, Less shrubs. Mixed opinions.

7. Why is the amount of shrub vegetation important?

8. Did you talk with your family members about the survey or what you learned in your environmental lessons? Yes No. Give examples.

9. What did your family members think about what you shared (discussed)?

10. What environmental topics would you like to learn more about?

11. How many of you would like to participate in future surveys or other field activities? Please raise your hand. Yes (number)

118

Overflow: END

119

Date: May 2013 Form #: LIVE1P- Performance Evaluation: Wildlife Conservation Society – Improving Livelihoods and Governance Through Natural Resources Management Project Components Capacity Building – Technical Capacity and Awareness

Community Livelihoods Development I Target Group Paravets Survey Type Interview Focus Group Interviewer Abelardo Lorene Samadi Noorullah Province & Dist. Kabul Bamyan Badakhshan, Bamyan Yakawlang

Wakhan Village & GPS # in Household Interviewee Name and Title Age Photo No.

M F Questions – Technical Capacity 1. When did you start working as a Paravet (Afghan date)? 2. How were you selected for your Paravet role? 3. What livestock vaccinations and treatments do you provide?**

FMD, Anthrax, ETV, PPR, Sheep Pox, Deworming, Other

4. Do you collect information on the occurrence of livestock diseases in your community? Yes No.

What diseases are common?** FMD, Anthrax, ETV, PPR, Sheep Pox, Worms, Other.

5. What skills have you learned from WCS or DCA training that you use on your job? administering vaccinations, proper cold chain storage, business management, marketing paravet services, other.

6. What measures do you take to ensure adequate cold chain storage of vaccines?

120

7. What measures do you take to ensure that vaccines are authentic and not expired? 8. What are your biggest job-related challenges and concerns? 9. What additional support could improve your ability to perform your Paravet duties? 10. What do you like most about being a Paravet? 11. What do you like least about being a Paravet? 12. Overall, how happy are you with being a Paravet? Extremely happy, Somewhat

happy, Neutral, Somewhat unhappy, Extremely unhappy.

Questions – Livelihoods

13. What is your average monthly Paravet income ( AFN)?___Spring, ___Fall, ___Summer, ___Winter.

14. What was your average monthly income before you became a Paravet? ______ AFN.

13. How much do you charge per vaccination ( AFN)? **____FMD, ____Anthrax, _____ETV, _____PPR, _____Sheep Pox, _____Deworming, _____Other Treatments (specify):__________.

121

15. What limits the types of vaccinations and treatments you offer?** What limits the number of livestock that you treat in your community?**

People unwilling to pay, People unaware of diseases, People don’t trust vaccines, Lack of access to vaccines, Remote/Difficult Terrain, Other.

Overflow: Date: May 2013 Form #: LIVE1T- Performance Evaluation: Wildlife Conservation Society – Improving Livelihoods and Governance Through Natural Resources Management Project Components Community Livelihoods Development I Target Group Tourism-based businesses: Lodging Restaurant Handicrafts

Guide Transport Other. Survey Type Interview Focus Group Interviewer Abelardo Lorene Samadi Noorullah Province & Dist. Kabul Bamyan Badakhshan, Bamyan Jakawlang Wakhan Village & GPS # in Household Interviewee Name and Title Age Photo No.

M F Questions

1. When did you start your business/activity? ________ (date in Afghan calendar)

2. What was your average monthly income from your business for each of the four seasons in 1391 (this past year)? ____Spring; ____Summer, ____Fall, ______Winter ( AFN).

3. What was your average monthly income from your business for each of the four seasons in 1390 (previous year)? ____Spring; ____Summer, ____Fall, ______Winter ( AFN).

4. Have you received advice or training to improve your business skills? Yes No. What kind? loan, accounting, business plan, marketing, customer service, local history and culture, local environment, other (specify):_____________.

5. Have you received information on how to access business support services? Yes No. What kind? loan, accounting, business plan, marketing, customer

122

service, local history and culture, local environment, other_____________________.

Overflow:

123

Date: May 2013 Form #: LIVE2L- Performance Evaluation: Wildlife Conservation Society – Improving Livelihoods and Governance Through Natural Resources Management Project Components Community Livelihoods Development II Target Group Livestock owners: using WCS/WFP predator- proof corrals and/or

receiving paravet services Survey Type Interview Focus Group Interviewer Abelardo Lorene Fatima Noorullah Province & Dist. Badakhshan, Wakhan Village & GPS # in Household Interviewee Name and Title Age Photo No.

M F M F M F

Questions Predator-Proof Corrals (Badakhshan only) 3. When was the first predator-proof corral built in your village based on the WCS design?

Date (Afghan month/year):_________.

4. When was your predator-proof corral built? Date (Afghan month/year):_________.

5. Who helped you build your predator-proof corral? WCS, WFP, I built it without donor/NGO assistance.

6. Is your corral used by only your family? Yes No.

7. If by more than one family, how many families? (number). Note: Fill out HH gender breakdown above for each family.

8. Which animals do you keep in your corral and how many of each type?(number) Sheep, Goats, Cows, Yaks, Camels, Horse, Donkeys.

124

9. Have any predators gotten inside your corral? Yes No. If yes, what kinds? Wolf, Bear, Leopard, other (specify):

10. Have you had fewer predator losses since you built your corral? Yes No. Describe:

11. Overall, how happy are you with your predator-proof corral? Extremely happy, Somewhat happy, Neutral, Somewhat unhappy, Extremely unhappy.

12. Do you have any concerns about predators that the corrals do not address? Yes No. Explain:

13. Do you have any suggestions for improving the predator-proof corral? Yes No.

Livestock Vaccinations and Treatments 14. Have some of your livestock been vaccinated by a WCS paravet? Yes No.

15. Does anyone else provide veterinary (animal health) services in your community? Yes No.

16. What types of animals were vaccinated by the WCS paravet? Sheep; Cows; Yaks, Goats; Camels; Horse; other (specify):

17. What livestock vaccinations and treatments did you buy from the WCS paravet?** How much did you pay for each ( AFN)? **

FMD______, Anthrax______, ETV______, PPR______, Sheep Pox______, Deworming______, Other Treatments (specify):______________________________.

18. Do you collect information on livestock diseases in your community? Yes No. What diseases are common? FMD, Anthrax, ETV, PPR, Sheep Pox, Worms,

Other. 19. Have fewer animals died from the diseases that you vaccinated against? Yes No.

20. What diseases are most common? FMD, Anthrax, ETV, PPR, Sheep Pox, Worms, Other:___________.

Other 21. What other types of assistance has WCS provided your household or community?

125

22. What other types of assistance would you like? For example, livestock health, rangeland management, wildlife management, ecotourism management, other (specify):

Overflow: END

126

Date: May 2013 Form #: LIVE2S- Performance Evaluation: Wildlife Conservation Society – Improving Livelihoods and Governance Through Natural Resources Management Project Components Community Livelihoods Development II Target Group Manufacturers (tinsmiths) and sellers of fuel-efficient stoves Survey Type Interview Focus Group Interviewer Abelardo Lorene Fatima Noorullah Province & Dist. Badakhshan Wakhan Village & GPS # in Household Interviewee Name and Title Age Photo No.

M F M F

Questions For Manufacturers 1. When did you start manufacturing the fuel-efficient stoves introduced by WCS? (Afghan

date):

2. Please describe the training you received from WCS:

3. Have you produced any additional fuel-efficient stoves since you completed your initial order with WCS? Yes No

4. Have buyers requested any changes in the stove design? Yes No Don’t Know. Please describe:

5. Which changes in the stove design have you made? How much more did it cost you to make these changes?

6. Are there any changes in the stove design that buyers have requested that you have not made? Yes No. If no, why not?

127

7. Is your business community-owned, privately owned by you. How many employees do you have engaged in stove production?

For Sellers 8. What do you call your stove? fuel-efficient stove, WCS stove, other (specify):

9. How may fuel-efficient stoves did you sell to WCS? . How many fuel-efficient stoves have you sold since your order with WCS? .

10. Who typically buys your stoves? Where are they from?

How do your customers hear about your fuel-efficient stove? referred by happy customer, advertising, discover while shopping in bazaar, other (specify):

11. Which months/season of the year do you sell the most fuel-efficient stoves? Fall, Winter, Spring, Summer, Not much seasonal difference

12. What is your current retail price? , AFN Has the retail price changed? Yes No. Please describe:

13. What prevents you from selling more stoves?

15. What other stove designs do you sell and what is their retail price? Describe:

Why do some people choose a non-efficient stove? 16. Have other donors approached you to promote fuel-efficient stoves? Yes No. Who?

17. How much fuel does the fuel-efficient stove save over traditional stoves?

128

Date: May 2013 Form #: LIVE2W- Performance Evaluation: Wildlife Conservation Society – Improving Livelihoods and Governance Through Natural Resources Management Project Components Community Livelihoods Development II Target Group Women using fuel-efficient stoves Survey Type Interview Focus Group Interviewer Abelardo Lorene Samadi Noorullah Province & Dist. Kabul Bamyan Badakhshan, Bamyan Jakawlang Wakhan Village & GPS # in Household Interviewee Name and Title Age Photo No.

M F Questions 1. Do you have a fuel-efficient stove? Yes No.

2. When did you buy it? _______ (Afghan date).

3. What do you most like about your fuel-efficient stove?

4. Is there anything that could be done to improve the stove? Yes No. Describe:

5. Overall, how happy are you with your fuel-efficient stove? Extremely happy, Somewhat happy, Neutral, Somewhat unhappy, Extremely unhappy.

6. Would you recommend this stove to your family, friends, or neighbors? Yes No.

7. How much did you pay for your fuel-efficient stove? ____ AFN.

8. Did you receive a subsidy (did someone cover some of the cost of stove)? Yes No. How much was the subsidy?____ AFN.

9. Do you currently use other stoves in your house? Yes No. Which stoves? Tandoor (for naan), Bokhari (for room heating).

129

Why?

10. How many loads of firewood do you use per week since you bought your fuel-efficient stove? _______(number of loads). How many kg in a typical load? (number).

How do you transport the loads? donkey, camel, horse, shoulder.

11. How many loads of firewood did you use per week for your household needs before you bought your fuel-efficient stove? _______(number of loads).

12. How many loads of bush/shrubs do you use per week for your household needs since you bought your fuel-efficient stove? (number of loads). How many kg in a typical load? (number)

How do you transport the loads? donkey, camel, horse, shoulder.

13. How many loads of bush/shrubs did you use per week for your household needs before you bought your fuel-efficient stove? (number of loads).

14. Does your family have fewer respiratory illness and eye problems since you started using your fuel-efficient stove? Yes No.

Overflow:

130

ANNEX X: BIBLIOGRAPHY

ARDC, The Earth’s Best Defense, Wildlife Facts, The Ecological Importance of Predators

www.ardc.org/policy

AKDN, Afghanistan, Annual Report 2009, Available from Agha Khan Foundation

AKF, Wakhan Facts 2010, Available from Agha Khan Foundation

Ayrapetyants, A., Charney, C. and collaborators, 2011 Afghanistan Civil Society Assessmen,. Available from Counterpart Intl., Kabul

Beck, T., and Nesmith, C. 2001, “Building on Poor People’s Capacities,” World Development 29(1): 119– 33.

BAPAC, MAIL, and NEPA, the Environment and People of Band-e-Amir National Park: a Social and Physical Inventory, 2011. Band-e-Amir Protected Areas Committee, Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock, and National Environment Protection Agency

Beath, A., Christia, F., and Enikolopov, R. Direct Democracy and Resource Allocation: Experimental Evidence from Afghanistan, Working Paper No. 192 (2013), Centre for Economic and Financial Research at New Economic School, Moscow. Available at: http://www.cefir.ru/papers/WP191.pdf

Beath, A., Christia, F., and Enikolopov, R. Elite Capture of Local Institutions: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Afghanistan. Available at: http://federation.ens.fr/ydepot/semin/texte1011/ENI2011ELI.pdf

Bedunah, D.J., Shank, C.C., and Alavi, M.A. (2010) “Rangelands of Band-e-Amir National Park and Ajar Provisional Wildlife Reserve, Afghanistan” Rangelands 32(5):41-52.

BPPAC, WPA, MAIL, and NEPA, Summary of the Management Plan for the Big Pamir Wildlife Reserve: 2012-2016. (Hamal 1391), Big Pamir Protected Areas Committee, Wakhan Pamir Association, Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock, and National Environmental Protection Agency.

Butt, B. and Turner, M.D. “Clarifying competition: the case of wildlife and pastoral livestock in Africa.” Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice, 2012, 2:9, http:///www.pastoralismjournal.com/content/2/1/9

European Union and GIRoA. Summary of National Risk And Vulnerability Assessment, 2007/8, A profile of Afghanistan. Available from Checchi Consulting and Company, Inc

Getz, V., Wafeq., M and Rahimi. H. 2012. Gender Analysis of ILGNRM, Afghanistan

SUPPORT II Project. Available from Checchi and Company Consulting, Inc

http://www.ardc.org/policy

http://www.cefir.ru/papers/WP191.pdf

http://federation.ens.fr/ydepot/semin/texte1011/ENI2011ELI.pdf

http://www.pastoralismjournal.com/content/2/1/9

131

GIRoA. National Development Strategy ANDS, 2008- 2011, Available from Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, Kabul

GEF, USAID, NEPA, and WCS, National Protected Area System Plan of Afghanistan, (NPASP). Global Environmental Fund, United States Agency for International Development, National Environmental Protection Agency and the Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Quarterly Report, Period Q3 FY 10, April 10, 2010 to June 30, 2010. Available for Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, First Year Implementation Plan Including Life of Project (LOP) Activities and Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP), April 22, 2010 to April 21, 2011. Submitted June 21, 2010, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, First Year Implementation Plan Including Life of Project (LOP) Activities and Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP), April 10, 2010 to April 09, 2013. Submitted September 14, 2010, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Quarterly Report, Period Q4 FY 10, July 01 2010 to September 30, 2010. Final amended version December 06, 2010, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Annual Report, Period, First Project Year, April 10, 2010 to April 09, 2011. Submitted May 10, 2011 – Word Version, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Second Year Implementation Plan Including Life of Project (LOP) Activities and Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP), April 10, 2011 to April 09, 2012. Submitted May 10, 2011, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Quarterly Report, Period Q1 FY 11, Oct 01, 2010 to December 31, 2010. Submitted February 01, 2011, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Quarterly Report, Period Q2 FY 11, January 01, 2011 to March 31, 2011. Amended May 01, 2011, Word Version, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul.

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Quarterly Report, Period Q3 FY 11, April 01, 2011 to June 30, 20, Amended August 01, 2011. Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM) in Afghanistan, Quarterly Report, Period Q4 FY 11, July 01, 2011 to September 30, 2011. Amended November 01, 2011, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Annual Report, Period, Second Project Year , April 10, 2011 to April 09, 2012. Submitted May 10, 2012, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

132

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Third Year Implementation Plan Including Life of Project (LOP) Activities and Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP), April 10, 2012 to April 09, 2013. Submitted May 10, 2012, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Quarterly Report, Period Q1 FY 12, October 01, 2011 to December 31, 2011. Amended February 01, 2012, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Annual Report, Period Second Project Year, April 01, 2011 to April 09, 2012. (Includes Period Q2 FY 12), Submitted May 10, 2012, available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Quarterly Report, Period Q3 FY 12, April 01, 2012 to June 30, 2012. Submitted August 01, 2012, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Third Year and Extension Implementation Plan Including Life of Project (LOP, Activities and Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP), April 10, 2012, to December 31, 2013. Submitted `September, 2012 Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Quarterly Report, Period Q4 FY 12, July 01, 2012 to September 30, 2012. Submitted November 05, 2012, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Quarterly Reports, Period Q1 FY 13, October 01 to December 31, 2012. Submitted February 03, 2013 Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM in Afghanistan, Fourth Quarterly Annual Report, including Q2 FY 13 and 3rd Annual Report, Period 10 April 2012 to 9 April 2013, Submitted on May 8, 2013, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

ILGNRM, Executive Summary, Modification 07 (undated), Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

Jackson, A., Mountain Voices and Community Actions March 01 2012. Local Initiatives in Biodiversity Conservation and Livelihoods in Central Asia Available from Snow Leopard Conservancy

Kabul Press, Agriculture Natural Development Cluster from 1 – 4 documents http://www.thekabulprocess.gov.af/index.php/clusters--npps/archive/agriculture-and-rural-development-cluster

Lund, J. F., and Treue. T. 2008. “Are We Getting There? Evidence of Decentralized Forest Management from the Tanzanian Miombo Woodlands,” World Development 36(12): 2780– 800.

http://www.thekabulprocess.gov.af/index.php/clusters--npps/archive/agriculture-and-rural-development-cluster

http://www.thekabulprocess.gov.af/index.php/clusters--npps/archive/agriculture-and-rural-development-cluster

133

Mansuri, G. and Rao, V. Localizing Development, Does Participation Work? The World Bank, Washington, D.C., (2013)

Mishra, C. and Fitzherbert, A. “War and wildlife: a post-conflict assessment of Afghanistan’s Wakhan Corridor.” Oryx Vol. 38 (1), January 2004, 102-105.

Milbrandt, A. and Overend, R. Assessment of Biomass Resources in Afghanistan, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. Available from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy11osti/49358.pdf

Mock, J., O’Neil, K., and Ali, I. January 2007, Socioeconomic Survey & Range Use Survey of Wakhan Household Using the Afghan Pamir, Wakhan District, Badakhshan Province, Afghanistan. Consultancy with Wildlife Conservation Society’s Afghanistan Biodiversity Project Kabul, Afghanistan Available from USAID

Natural Resources Defense Council, Ecological Importance of Predator, March 2011

USAID, Snapshot, fuel-efficient stove save forest. Available from USAID/Afghanistan

OAG/USAID, Mid-Term Evaluation Statement of Work, ILGNRM, (undated) Available from the Office of Agriculture and Growth, USAID/Afghanistan

OAG/USAID, Statement of Work, Performance Evaluation of ILGNRM,(undated). Available from the Office of Agriculture and Growth, USAID/Afghanistan

Odadi, W.O., Karachi, M., Abdulrazak, S., and Young, T.P. “African wild ungulates compete with or facilitate cattle depending on season” Science 333 (2011):1753-1755.

Ostrowski, S. Wakhi Livestock in Big Pamir in 2006. WCS Afghanistan Ecosystem Health Project, January 2007. Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, New York

Post-Performance Management Plan, 2011-2015 Volume I Summary. Available from USAID/Afghanistan

Rennie, R., Osman, M., Ayoubi, T.N., and Haqbeen, F.R. Afghanistan in 2011, A survey of the Afghan People, Available from the Asia Foundation AINA Media, Kabul

Robinson J. G. Jun 06, 2012. Corporative Agreement: 306-A-00-10-00516-00 ILGNRM (Memorandum). Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, New York

Ribot, J. C., J. Lund, and T. Treue 2010, Forestry and Democratic Decentralization in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Review. Background paper prepared for Policy Research Report, World Bank, Washington, DC.

Sharp, K. May 03, 2012. Subject Justification for Exception to Competition, JEC (Memorandum), Available from USAID/Afghanistan

SUPPORT II, Data quality Assessment of ILGNRM, October 31, 2012, Available from Checchi and Company Consulting Inc

http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy11osti/49358.pdf

134

Straka, J., and Ahmad, S. Bamyan Trip Report, Period June 18-20, 2012 WCS/CHAMP/ADF, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul,

Tilman, D. “Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats.” Ecology 75(1994):2-16.

UNDP, The Afghanistan Subnational Governance Program ASGP, July 2009, Available from UNDP, Kabul.

USAID Fact Sheet, Band-e-Amir National Park (undated) Available from USAID/Afghanistan

USAID Fact Sheet, Improving Livelihoods and Governance through Natural Resource Management (ILG-NRM) (undated) Available from USAID/Afghanistan

USAID Partnership, Progress, Perseverance, 2012. Available from USAID/Afghanistan

USAID Press Office USAID Program aims to kink snow leopard conservation with water security in Aisa, Tuesday, December 4, 2012. Available from Press Release http://www.usaid.gov/news-information/press-releases/usaid-program-aims-link-snow-leopard-conservation-water-security

USAID, Snapshot, Animal health to support sustainable economic opportunities (undated). Available from USAID /Afghanistan

USAID Snapshot, Fuel-Efficient Stoves Saves Forest, (undated) Available from USAID/Afghanistan

WCS, Work Plan, April 22, 2010 to April 21 2011, Bamyan and Badakhshan components Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

WCS, Band-e-Amir National Park Visitor Facilities Zone Physical Development Plan. July 11, 2011, Prepared by John Coe for Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

WCS, Band-e-Amir Bamyan Ranger Program, Submitted May 03, 2012, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

WCS, Afghanistan Program Highlights/Accomplishment, Submitted October 2012, Available from Wildlife conservation Society, Kabul,

WCS, Urial Survey in the Hindu Kush Range in the Wakhan Corridor, Badakhshan Province, Afghanistan, November 06 2012. Available from Wildlife Conservation Society,

WCS, Work Plan, April 22, 2011 to April 21 2013, Bamyan and Badakhshan components, Project year 2 and 3, Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul,

WCS, Afghanistan Parks and Wildlife Authority Oversight Group Meeting Notes, Grand Ballroom at Serena Hotel, Kabul, April 27, 2013. Available from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul,

http://www.usaid.gov/news-information/press-releases/usaid-program-aims-link-snow-leopard-conservation-water-security

http://www.usaid.gov/news-information/press-releases/usaid-program-aims-link-snow-leopard-conservation-water-security

135

WCS, Fuel-Efficient Stove in Afghanistan. PowerPoint Presentation,(undated, Available ,from Wildlife Conservation Society, Kabul

Zhongqiu, L.I., Zhigang, J. Chunwang, L.I. “Dietary overlap of Przewalski’s Gazelle, Tibetan Gazelle, and Tibetan Sheep on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau.” Journal of Wildlife Management 72(2008):944-948.

136

ANNEX XI: DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Name Abelardo Rodriguez Title Independent Consultant Organization Checchi and Company Consulting, Inc. Evaluation Position? Team Leader Team member Evaluation Award Number (contract or other instrument)

Contract No. AID-306-C-12-0012

USAID Project(s) Evaluated (Include project name(s), implementer name(s) and award number(s), if applicable)

Improving Livelihoods & Governance through Natural Resources Management (ILGNRM) Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) Cooperative Agreement No. 306-A-00-10-00516-00

I have real or potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Yes No

If yes answered above, I disclose the following facts: Real or potential conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to: 1. Close family member who is an employee of the

USAID operating unit managing the project(s) being evaluated or the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated.

2. Financial interest that is direct, or is significant though indirect, in the implementing organization(s) whose projects are being evaluated or in the outcome of the evaluation.

3. Current or previous direct or significant though indirect experience with the project(s) being evaluated, including involvement in the project design or previous iterations of the project.

4. Current or previous work experience or seeking employment with the USAID operating unit managing the evaluation or the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated.

5. Current or previous work experience with an organization that may be seen as an industry competitor with the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated.

6. Preconceived ideas toward individuals, groups, organizations, or objectives of the particular projects and organizations being evaluated that could bias the evaluation.

All my previous work in Afghanistan has not included research, description or evaluation protected areas. I have never been involved with the Wildlife Conservation Society in Afghanistan or elsewhere.

I certify (1) that I have completed this disclosure form fully and to the best of my ability and (2) that I will update this disclosure form promptly if relevant circumstances change. If I gain access to proprietary information of other companies, then I agree to protect their information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished.

137

Signature

Date 18 April 2013

138

Name Lorene Flaming Title Consultant Organization Checchi and Company Consulting, Inc. Evaluation Position? Team Leader Team member Evaluation Award Number (contract or other instrument)

Contract No. AID-306-C-12-0012

USAID Project to be Evaluated (Include project name(s), implementer name(s) and award number(s), if applicable)

Improving Livelihoods & Governance through Natural Resources Management (ILGNRM) Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) Cooperative Agreement No. 306-A-00-10-00516-00

I have real or potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Yes No

If yes answered above, I disclose the following facts: Real or potential conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to: 1. Close family member who is an employee of the

USAID operating unit managing the project(s) being evaluated or the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated.

2. Financial interest that is direct, or is significant though indirect, in the implementing organization(s) whose projects are being evaluated or in the outcome of the evaluation.

3. Current or previous direct or significant though indirect experience with the project(s) being evaluated, including involvement in the project design or previous iterations of the project.

4. Current or previous work experience or seeking employment with the USAID operating unit managing the evaluation or the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated.

5. Current or previous work experience with an organization that may be seen as an industry competitor with the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated.

6. Preconceived ideas toward individuals, groups, organizations, or objectives of the particular projects and organizations being evaluated that could bias the evaluation.

Potential COI sources nos. 1, 2, 3 and 6 are nonexistent in my case. Potential COI sources nos. 4 and 5 may apply, but are highly unlikely to constitute an actual or perceived COI for the reasons stated below.

No. 4: I previously served as the Senior Policy Advisor on the Accelerating Sustainable Agriculture Program (ASAP), which was implemented under the USAID/Afghanistan Office of Agriculture (OAG). OAG currently oversees ILGNRM. I left Afghanistan in November 2008 and the ILGNRM project started in April 2010. Given that over 4 years have passed since I’ve been in Afghanistan, I am unlikely to know anyone currently involved with OAG or ILGNRM. I have no experience with WCS and to my knowledge do not know anyone who works for them.

No. 5: I worked with Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI) from 1996-2007. I am not aware of any cases in which DAI and WCS competed against each other for a contract. It seems unlikely since DAI is for-profit and bids on RFPs, whereas WCS is non-profit and bids on RFAs. I mention this only because both organizations implement wildlife projects for USAID. I have not worked with DAI since 2007.

I certify (1) that I have completed this disclosure form fully and to the best of my ability and (2) that I will update this disclosure form promptly if relevant circumstances change. If I gain access to proprietary information of other companies, then I agree to protect their information

139

from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished. Signature

Date 4/16/2013

Checchi and Company Consulting, Inc.

Afghanistan SUPPORT-II Project Wazir Akbar Khan Kabul, Afghanistan

Performance Evaluation: IMPROVING LIVELIHOODS AND GOVERNANCE THROUGH NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT...

Documents

Transcript of Performance Evaluation: IMPROVING LIVELIHOODS AND GOVERNANCE THROUGH NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT...