IUCN Nat ional Commit tee of The Nether lands

IUCN NL Small Grants Programmes

Knowledge Management Series

Number 3

Mark van Dorp

October 2010

Conflict and Post-Conflict in Africa Part A) Overview and Synthesis

2

3

IUCN NL Small Grants Programmes

Knowledge Management Series

Number 3

Conflict and Post-Conflict in Africa

Part A) Overview and Synthesis

October 2010

IUCN (www.iucn.org)

The mission of IUCN is to influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable. IUCN was founded in 1948 and is unique in bringing together states, government agencies and a diverse range of non-governmental organizations. IUCN has a membership of more than 1,000 organizations, as well as 10,000 individual scientists and experts structured in six Commissions. Together they form the world’s largest network for nature conservation, responsible for, amongst others, the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Member organizations within a country or region often organize themselves into National or Regional Committees to facilitate synergy and cooperation and help coordinate the work of IUCN.

IUCN NL (www.iucn.nl)

The IUCN National Committee of the Netherlands (IUCN NL) was founded in 1983 as a platform of the Dutch member organizations of IUCN, and the Dutch members of the six Commissions. The IUCN NL office is based in the centre of Amsterdam and employs around thirty staff, making it the largest IUCN National Committee office. Since 1994, IUCN NL has managed several small grants funds for NGOs in the South that work on the linkages between ecosystem and biodiversity management and the livelihoods of rural communities.

The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect those of IUCN or IUCN National Committee of the Netherlands.

Contact data of the author: Mark van Dorp, T: +31 (0) 20 737 05 74 / www.duvilla.nl.

Cover photo (Sierra Leone): Aukje ter Horst.

4

CONTENTS

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................5

1. Introduction.......................................................................................................9

2. Environment and Conflict ..................................................................................10 2.1 On the links between environment and conflict .............................................. 10 2.2 The role of environmental NGOs in conflict or post-conflict settings .................. 13 2.3 The need for conflict analysis in environmental projects .................................. 13

3. Approach and Methods......................................................................................15 3.1 Quick Scan ................................................................................................ 15 3.2 In-Depth Review ........................................................................................ 16

4. Results of the Quick Scan ..................................................................................17

5. Key Findings of this Study .................................................................................21 5.1 Education, Extension and Awareness Raising ................................................. 21 5.2 Production, Income Generation and Poverty Reduction.................................... 21 5.3 Capacity Building, Networking and Training ................................................... 23 5.4 Policy Influencing, Lobby and Advocacy......................................................... 23 5.5 Ecosystem Planning, Management and Conservation....................................... 24 5.6 Integration of the conflict context in environmental projects ............................ 25

Annex I. Results of the Quick Scan– basic project data .............................................26

Annex II. Thematic areas per country .....................................................................36

Annex III. Questionnaire for in-depth review ...........................................................37

Annex IV. List of Abbreviations ..............................................................................38

Annex V. List of References ...................................................................................39

5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

1.1 The small grants programmes of IUCN NL have played a key role in helping environmental

NGOs to bridge the difficult times during and after prolonged civil conflict in Africa.1 Where most funding agencies tend to withdraw from escalating conflict zones, IUCN NL has been one of the few funding partners that kept supporting environmental and development NGOs throughout conflict periods. Their institutional survival throughout the conflict is crucial to enable them to play a meaningful role in policy influencing in the post-war setting.

1.2 There have been some other small grants programmes with a presence in the countries concerned , but these tended to be less flexible, provided smaller grants and acted more as pure funding agencies and less as strategic partners than IUCN NL did.

1.3 Small grants made by IUCN NL in conflict and post-conflict settings in Africa have been most effective in: � enabling environmental NGOs to maintain or increase their institutional strength and to

retain professional staff throughout the conflict that otherwise would have left the organization, area or country.

� sustaining a basic civil society fabric throughout conflict periods that is able to start working on conservation and natural resource management issues right after the end of the conflict.

� allowing NGOs to prepare for post-conflict windows of opportunity when donors return and institutions have to be rebuilt.

� allowing NGOs to obtain hands-on experience in project management and donor relations, in preparation for larger funding opportunities after the end of the conflict.

� influencing aid and humanitarian relief organizations so that environmental aspects are increasingly taken into account in their policies and operations.

� strengthening the voice of civil society towards government and the international community.2

� providing a sort of quality check to other funding agencies about the reliability, commitment and professionalism of NGOs supported by IUCN NL.

1.4 One of the frequently mentioned advantages of small grants funding by IUCN NL is that it actually serves as seed or bridging capital before other donors step in with more substantial financing. This is especially relevant in conflict settings, because it is typical for large conservation groups with in-country presence to withdraw from a country as soon as violent conflict erupts.

1.5 The present review confirms earlier conclusions on small grants programmes that in many projects, results and impacts in relation to livelihoods and ecosystem management are less apparent than the contribution made to the strengthening of the partner organization itself or of the communities that it is working with.

1.6 The IUCN small grants programme seems to have achieved few significant long-term conservation or livelihood impacts in the countries included in this review. This is due to a combination of factors: � project results were often negatively affected by civil unrest or violent conflict (in some

cases, though, it seems that the conflict was used as an excuse for not delivering project results as agreed).

� limited capacity of most NGOs in project planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. NGOs tend to be too ambitious given the crisis situation that they find themselves in; in those cases they should adjust their (and the donor’s) expectations to

1 Examples of organizations that were able to survive due to the support of IUCN NL include EFA (Liberia / Sierra Leone), Green Scenery (Sierra Leone) and CREF Network (DR Congo).

2 Successful initiatives funded by IUCN NL include: - High-level international lobby against illegal and conflict-related resource exploitation (SDI in Liberia). - Creation of an effective high-profile network of community based organizations for forest conservation

(CREF Network in Eastern DRC).

- Creation of a legal framework for natural resource management, including logging and mining (Forests Monitor and the Rainforest Foundation in supporting the set-up of a civil society network for natural resources in Eastern DRC).

6

more realistic proportions. Since 2005, IUCN NL has been paying more attention to the coaching of partners, especially in proposal development.

� absence of long-term impact evaluation. Project reports are limited to short-term effects, whereas long-term effects often become visible only after 5 to 10 years.

� relatively short funding periods of the small grants. In those cases where long-term impacts have been identified, it may be difficult to attribute these impacts to small grants provided by IUCN NL if partners relied on more than one donor.

1.7 In a number of cases, the programme has been able to strengthen the sustainability of grantee organizations by the continued support throughout and after conflicts. This has ensured a continued operation of organizations, although often on a very basic level. It has also prevented valuable staff of these NGOs to look for alternative occupations and thus limited the brain drain from conflict countries. Success factors usually include a combination of strong leadership, a sound vision, mission and strategy.3

1.8 Most projects operated in isolation from other NGOs or outside interventions. In general, very few projects used experience from elsewhere to feed in their project design. This was felt to be strongest in Eastern DRC, Burundi and Rwanda, and is partly caused by the fact that the Great Lakes region is still very unstable. Cultural, ethnic and linguistic barriers also played a significant role. Since 2007, IUCN NL has made efforts to tackle this issue by working in a more context-specific way.

1.9 Environmental and natural resource management can and should be used as a vehicle to help prevent conflict and for reconciliation and peace building in a post-conflict setting, especially if the root causes of the conflict are related to natural resource management. Environmental management can serve as a platform to identify common interests, contribute to economic development and provide opportunities for employment.

1.10 Very few environmental NGOs have been able to integrate the conflict context into their conservation and livelihood interventions in a systematic way. This is a missed opportunity, because of the potential to use environmental management and conservation for conflict prevention or post-conflict reconciliation. Most environmental NGOs tend to respond to the outbreak of violent conflict in a rather practical and ad hoc way, by reshuffling zones of interventions and delaying activities until the violence has subsided. But there have also been positive examples, where NGOs took the initiative to work alongside relief or development organizations to reduce the environmental impacts or to raise awareness about the importance of ecosystem management.

1.11 Training among large concentrations of displaced persons in natural resource management that helps improve livelihoods -such as tree planting, firewood production, improved stoves, improved agricultural methods, bee keeping etc.- can be a useful investment because of the upscaling potential after they return to their villages of origin.

1.12 In a conflict setting it is extremely difficult to work on ecosystem planning, management and conservation. Refugee flows and violent confrontations may effectively undermine the long-term impacts of conservation efforts, as has been observed in several projects of this review. On the other hand, conflict may in some cases ensure temporary and localized conservation of species or ecosystems, due to the inaccessibility of certain areas.

1.13 The lack of projects working on policy influencing seems to be caused by two factors: (1) during conflicts opportunities are scarce, due to the lack of clear governance structures and the focus on more immediate needs such as emergency aid and conflict resolution; (2) lack of strategic focus and capacity of NGOs in the field of lobby and advocacy at the macro level; most NGOs work on micro-level interventions that are not working on structural solutions.

3 Some examples of partners that have grown into strong, mature NGOs thanks to external support of various donors include ABO-Burundi (Burundi), ARECO (Rwanda), CREF Network (DRC), SDI (Liberia) and EFA (Liberia/Sierra Leone).

7

CONCLUSIONS ON INTERVENTION TYPES

Table 1.

Sector

Importance as intervention in conflict context, level of representation in the project cluster

Pitfalls and risks in conflict context

1. Capacity building / training / networking

High importance, underrepresented: small grants funding often serves as seed or bridging capital until other donors provide more substantial financing, enabling NGOs to survive throughout conflict.

Turn-over of staff is high due to instability (during conflict) or because the international community pulls many local staff away (during recovery phase). In that context, capacity building needs long-term commitment and patience.

2. Education / extension / awareness raising

High importance, well-represented: in fragile situations, environmental awareness raising is often a first and necessary step for mainstreaming ecosystem management in development processes.

In post-conflict situations, environment is considered as a “luxury” issue, that is not high on the agenda. However, if not tackled from the beginning, environmental destruction may have a negative impact on peace processes.

3. Policy influencing / lobby / advocacy

High importance, underrepresented: Important in case a functioning governance structure remains intact or to prepare for post-conflict policy frameworks. Although a key element for creating an enabling environment for medium or long term poverty alleviation, very few NGOs are currently working on policy development in conflict or post-conflict settings.

Lack of political space for policy influencing, and lack of strategic focus or lobby capacity of local NGOs. Any progress made is vulnerable to institutional instability. Security risks.

4. Production / income generation / poverty alleviation

Average importance, well-represented: Investing in economic development projects during conflict may be little effective due to instability. However, after conflict it is crucial to invest in economic recovery to contribute to the peace process and to address root causes of the conflict.

Limited impact, high risk of destruction of physical investments.

5. Ecosystem planning / management / conservation

Average importance, underrepresented: during conflict there is very little space for conservation efforts due to instability; in post-conflict situations, it is often not high on the agenda, but needs to be tackled from the start to ensure sustainable peace.

Weak interest and capacity in both government and civil society, low priority. Environmental policies and institutions are easily overruled.

8

RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 In conflict and especially in post-conflict settings, small grants should focus on the

organisational development of young and promising environmental NGOs, or networks of CBOs and NGOs, which are able to establish meaningful linkages to policy makers on a local, national and international level.

2.2 Environmental NGOs in conflict and post-conflict settings should be encouraged and trained to use environmental and natural resource management as a vehicle to help prevent conflict and contribute to reconciliation and peace building.

2.3 Environmental NGOs should pro-actively establish linkages with humanitarian relief, reconstruction and development programs to ensure that environmental sustainability and the ecosystem approach are mainstreamed in these programs from the start. In this way, environmental and natural resource management can make a positive contribution to the peace building process, while at the same time minimizing potential negative environmental impacts and enhancing the sustainability of relief and reconstruction efforts.

2.4 There is a need for more insight into the impacts of projects in conflict settings. The best way to increase insight in the long-term impacts is to improve post-project monitoring and evaluation skills and procedures.

2.5 In general, reporting tends to be weak in the context of conflict or post-conflict settings, as a result of practical problems and of limited capacity and skills. It is recommended to pay particular attention to the reporting skills when selecting partners, and to coach them in writing their reports.

2.6 From the outset of any environmental or livelihood development project in a conflict or post-conflict setting, it is recommended to carry out conflict mapping as an integrated part of the planning phase. It is recommended for project staff of IUCN NL and local organizations to receive training in ‘Do No Harm’ and conflict-sensitive approaches. This should be done in close collaboration with peace building organizations with experience in the region.

9

1. Introduction

IUCN NL has been managing small grants programmes4 for environmental NGOs in developing countries since 1994, with the following aims: • To give civil society organisations and their constituency a voice and strengthened capacity in

the protection and sustainable management of ecosystems and the resources and services they provide.

• To mainstream ecosystem and biodiversity management in the work of civil society organisations.

• To contribute to a better understanding of, and an increased knowledge on how the maintenance or rehabilitation of healthy ecosystems contributes to poverty alleviation.

Two analyses of clusters of small grants projects based on specific common themes have been

published in 2007, one on mapping indigenous territories5 and one on policy relevance6. In 2008, IUCN NL commissioned a third desk study, which was more context- than theme-specific, on small grants projects in conflict and post-conflict settings in Africa.

This report is the result of that desk study and covers a cluster of 48 projects that were funded with 63 small grants contracts from IUCN NL between 1996 and 2006. The projects took place in five countries: Rwanda, Burundi and the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of Congo in East Africa and Liberia and Sierra Leone in West Africa. Most projects concerned local or national levels, while a few projects had a regional focus.

The objective of this study was to identify under what conditions and with what types of interventions small grants projects carried out by NGOs can be most effective in addressing

environment and human livelihood linkages in conflict and post-conflict settings in Africa. The analysis identifies weaknesses, strengths, pitfalls, opportunities and lessons learned, with emphasis on the sustainability of the grantee organizations and of project results and impacts. Types of interventions were classified under six project categories: environmental education, production / income generation, capacity building, policy influencing, ecosystem management and background studies. Each project could be assigned to more than one category.

After a quick scan of all 48 projects, 16 (one third) were selected for an in-depth review. This review consisted of an assessment of the project files, as well as other available information about the organizations involved (web sites, monitoring reports of IUCN NL, external evaluations). In addition, interviews were conducted with a number of partner organizations by phone and with IUCN NL staff and with other organizations in the Netherlands. The interviews were held to obtain insights in the longer-term impacts of small grants, several years after the IUCN NL funding had ended.

The conclusions and recommendations will help IUCN NL to (1) improve its financial and technical assistance strategy and (2) communicate the results and impacts of its grants in (post-) conflict settings to policy makers, donors and other interested parties. The outputs of the study are also meant to assist NGOs in the preparation of project proposals and in improving project implementation.

Another purpose of this study is to use the outcomes in dialogues with development and humanitarian relief organizations about the usefulness and need to integrate environmental concerns in their relief, reconstruction and development efforts in (post-) conflict settings. In particular, IUCN NL hopes that this review contributes to a better understanding of the environment as a vehicle for reconciliation and peace building.

4 Between 1994 and 2006, there were three ecosystem-based funds: Tropical Rainforest Programme (TRP), Small grants for Wetlands Programme (SWP) and Small Grants for Dry and Sub-Humid Areas (DAS). In 2007, these were merged into a single fund, the Ecosystem Grants Programme (EGP). 5 van de Sandt and MacKinven, April 2007. 6 Laurie, October 2007.

10

2. Environment and Conflict

2.1 On the links between environment and conflict The importance of analysing the linkages between environment and natural resources on the one hand, and conflict and peace building on the other is increasingly recognized. In 1988, the Brundtland Commission already called for a broader definition of security that included instability caused in part by environmental factors. Armed conflict was highlighted as a direct and indirect impediment to achieving sustainable development. Environmental stress was identified as both a cause and an effect of political tension and military conflict. However, attention to the environment in relation to security slowly faded away in the following years (Dabelko, 2008).

In the late 1990s, climate change and the 1997 Kyoto Protocol captured the attention of the global community. There is now widespread concern on the potential impacts of climate change, which some consider as a bigger threat to the world than terrorism. By awarding Nobel peace prizes to Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, as well as to environmental activist Wangari Maathai, the Nobel Committee has helped push environmental security back into the limelight, 20 years after the Brundtland Commission brought it to the fore. This includes UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon who has linked UN efforts to battle climate change with its mission to address the underlying causes of conflict in Darfur, Sudan. According to UNEP, important underlying factors to the conflict include regional climate variability, water scarcity, and the steady loss of fertile land, due to overgrazing and deforestation (UNEP, 2009). UN Secretary-General’s Special Adviser on conflict, Jan Egeland, has recently dubbed Darfur and the entire Sahel region

“ground zero” for vulnerable communities struggling to adapt to climate change7. The British Government has mentioned environmental security as one the main future risk factors for stability (van de Giessen, 2008). At the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Barcelona in 2008, a special session was devoted to Environment and Security. Climate change was recognized as a threat to national security, because it can be a multiplier for instability in fragile states (IES, 2008).

The relationship between natural resources, the environment and conflict is multi-dimensional and complex. Three principal pathways can be drawn (UNEP, 2009):

• Contributing to the outbreak of conflict: attempts to control natural resources or grievances caused by inequitable wealth sharing or environmental degradation can contribute to the outbreak of violence. For example, in Darfur, the steady loss of fertile land, coupled with rapidly increasing human and livestock populations, is one of the factors that have driven the region to war.

• Financing and sustaining conflict: once conflict has broken out, extractive “high-value” resources may be exploited to finance armed forces, or become strategic considerations in gaining territory. In such cases, the duration of conflict is extended by the availability of new sources of financing, or complicated by efforts to gain control over resource-rich areas. One example is the exploitation of diamonds in Sierra Leone, Angola, Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia and Côte d’Ivoire. “Conflict Diamonds” are produced in areas controlled by rebel forces that are opposed to internationally recognized governments. The rebels sell these

diamonds, and the money is used to purchase arms or to fund their military actions8.

• Undermining peace making: the prospect of a peace agreement may be undermined by individuals or splinter groups that could lose access to the revenues generated by resource exploitation if peace were to prevail. Once a peace agreement is in place, the exploitation of natural resources can also threaten political reintegration and reconciliation by providing economic incentives that reinforce political and social divisions. One example is Côte d’Ivoire, where the division over who will control the cocoa sector is stalling political reintegration. In Sudan, control over oil fields have remained a dividing factor for years, after a peace agreement was signed between the Government in Khartoum and Southern Sudanese rebels in January 2005. Oil is primarily located in the Southern part, but exploitation is still controlled by the North, mainly through Chinese, Malaysian and Indian companies. This is a continuing source of tension.

7 See: http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?ReportID=78515 8 See the blockbuster Blood Diamond (2006) or the documentary Africa: War is Business (2006)

11

Paul Collier (2007) has come up with four distinct traps explaining why over one billion people are in extreme poverty. Two of these traps are directly dealing with the above-mentioned link: the natural resource trap and the conflict trap. The natural resource trap explains why the discovery of natural resource wealth, such as oil, gold or iron ore, has in most cases led to more poverty instead of economic growth. This so-called “resource curse” comes from the fact that resource rents generally make democracies malfunction. And to make things worse, the natural resource trap has sometimes contributed to the conflict trap. Collier states that dependence upon primary commodity exports substantially increases the risk of civil war. Natural resources help to finance conflict and sometimes even help to motivate it. There are several cases where international companies have advanced massive amounts of funding to rebel movements in return for resource concessions in the event of rebel victory9.

Indeed, since 1990 at least eighteen violent conflicts have been fuelled by the exploitation of natural resources. Recent research shows that over the last sixty years at least 40% of all intra-state conflicts have a link to natural resources (UNEP, 2009). This includes Liberia, Sierra Leone and the DR Congo, three of the countries included in this study, where conflicts have centred on “high-value” resources like timber, diamonds and minerals. The map in figure 1 clearly shows the overlap between the presence of precious resources and the main conflict zones in Africa.

Figure 1: Map of African natural resources and geopolitics

Source: van de Giessen, 2008 (Institute for Environmental Security) - purple: oil and natural gas belts; red: mining belts. - country colours (based on sources describing situation around 2000): orange= active conflicts;

yellow=tensions or unstable political situation; green= stable political situation; dashed zones=chronic undernutrition and starvation.

But not only rebels or government soldiers are taking advantage of natural resources. In DRC, Indian and Pakistani UN troops have been trading gold with militia in Ituri District and North Kivu, in exchange for weapons. In another case, ivory was traded for ammunition (van de Giessen, 2008). A recent study found out that over 90% of the major armed conflicts between 1950 and 2000 occurred within countries containing biodiversity hotspots (Hanson et al., 2009). Apart from the

9 As an example, former rebel leader and ex-president of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Laurent Kabila, marched across Zaire (as it was called then) with a small army to seize power from President Mobutu, with only USD 10,000 and a satellite phone. By the time Kabila reached Kinshasa he reportedly had arranged USD 500 million worth of deals with resource extraction companies (Collier 2007, p.21).

12

direct environmental destruction that conflict brings by the use of conventional, chemical and biological weapons, there are also indirect effects. These have often more far-reaching impacts than the direct impacts on battlegrounds. Military expenditure can come at the expense of other government programmes, including natural resource management. For rebel groups, natural resources often provide their main source of revenue, as noted above. And the humanitarian crises accompanying wars can also have devastating impacts on wildlife and natural resources. As an example, during the civil war in Rwanda in the mid-1990s, over 2 million refugees flooded camps in neighbouring countries. The demand for fuel wood led to the deforestation of more than 300 sq. km. of land in Virunga National Park in DRC (Hanson et al., 2009). In Tanzania, which hosted hundreds of thousands of refugees over the last four decades, the impacts on forest cover and wildlife populations have been disastrous (see Box below).

The recognition that environmental issues can contribute to violent conflict underscores their potential significance as pathways for cooperation, transformation and the consolidation of peace in war-torn societies. Natural resources and the environment can contribute to peace building in three ways (UNEP, 2009): � Supporting economic recovery: when properly governed and carefully managed, high-value

resources hold out the prospect of positive economic development, employment and budget revenue. In DRC, logging concessions can play a key role in providing the government with the necessary revenues for economic recovery. However, so far, the forest sector has been plagued by abuse, fraud and illegal exploitation. There is a need for continued support from the international community to monitor the forest sector, and build governance and

enforcement capacity10.

� Developing sustainable livelihoods: for peace to become durable, it is essential to develop sustainable livelihoods, provide basic services and sound management of the natural resource base. For example, in Afghanistan a USAID funded programme has been set up to generate long-term improvements in the livelihoods of local people by providing labour-intensive work opportunities for income generation, while at the same time conserving nature. This included the planting of over 5 million trees (UNEP, 2009).

� Contributing to dialogue, cooperation and confidence-building: environmental peace making has been introduced as a way of using natural resource management as a key tool to help

prevent or end conflict and for building peace in a post-conflict setting11. As an example, the Nile Basin Initiative, in which 10 countries participate, has over the past decade developed a shared vision of sustainable use of the Nile and its tributaries. This initiative, although it is not without criticism, is a practical illustration of an effort to prevent conflict related to environmental interdependence.

10 See Rainforest Foundation & Forests Monitor (2007). 11 Environmental peace making utilizes cooperative efforts to manage environmental resources as a way to transform insecurity and create more peaceful relations between parties in dispute. Environmental management may help overcome political tensions by promoting interaction, confidence building, and technical cooperation (Dabelko, 2006).

Case: Impact of refugees on wildlife populations in Tanzania

A study by TRAFFIC has shown that the large refugee influxes into north-western Tanzania, primarily from Burundi and DRC, have caused significant forest degradation and loss. They also appear to have coincided with a dramatic increase in the scale and scope of wild meat exploitation. The study identified a number of important root causes and influencing factors behind wild meat usage in refugee hosting areas of north-western Tanzania. The placement of some camps close to Game Reserves and National Parks and the use of wild meat in this region prior to the large refugee influxes of the 1990s meant that increases in wild meat harvesting were, in the absence of mitigating factors, inevitable. Wild-sourced meat was both less expensive than local beef and more desirable for many refugees. Moreover, despite its illegality, wild meat was an important local resource before the arrival of refugees. Thus, its declining availability, combined with the illegal nature of wild meat harvesting, has likely fuelled local resentment, particularly by local authorities, toward the refugees in their midst. This in turn can fuel new conflicts over scarce resources.

Source: Jambiya et al., 2007

13

2.2 The role of environmental NGOs in conflict or post-conflict settings

After this overview of the context at macro-level, we will now step down to the specific challenges of environmental NGOs in conflict or post-conflict settings. It is generally seen as a major advantage for future conservation efforts if NGOs have been able to continue to operate and maintain some sort of presence throughout the conflict. However, most donors tend to reduce or cease their financial support during conflicts, either because of political constraints or risk aversion. Yet to maintain a presence, a reasonably regular flow of funds for salaries and basic supplies is crucial (CARPE, 2001). Due to the absence of functioning political, economic and social systems needed to maintain ecological integrity in conflict situations, continued international engagement is essential, as well as quick action in the aftermath of war (Hanson et al., 2009). Environmental NGOs need the flexibility and the resources to remain engaged throughout conflict periods and during post-war recovery. Conservation organizations, rather than working only in stable countries, must also develop programs in war-torn regions if they are to be effective in conserving global biodiversity. This includes support to local conservationists and protected area staff. In addition, conservation should be integrated into military, reconstruction and humanitarian programs in the world’s conflict zones (Hanson et al., 2009).

Small grants are an appropriate tool to bridge difficult periods of conflict, because of the small administrative burden and relatively light application and approval procedures. Laurie (2007) confirms the importance of the small grants programme of IUCN NL, which should be credited for investing in civil society and institution building where it doesn’t exist and in countries where other donors have walked away. This has helped to maintain links, partnerships and networks during times of strife and helped NGOs re-start when conflicts subside. However, it is also admitted that in cases of high uncertainty due to natural disasters or insecurity, more rigour is needed to ensure lessons learned are being well-documented and shared (Laurie, 2007).

In the case of West-Africa, the ability of environmental NGOs to respond to and counteract the threats of violent conflict has been largely inadequate in the past. In 2001, environmental NGOs were few in number and most had limited capacity. They often operated in isolation, without connections and most significantly without a regional vision or awareness (CEPF, 2006). An assessment of five years of support by the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund states that small and not-so-small grants of CEPF, IUCN NL, Birdlife International, among others, have created the

building blocks for a West-African conservation movement12.

In post-conflict settings, environmental NGOs can play a crucial role in post-war reconstruction ands peace building with natural resource management as a vehicle. Playing that role will be easier if NGOs manage to maintain a presence throughout the conflict (IUCN NL, 2006). This is in line with one of the recommendations of UNEP (2009), which says that it is crucial to address natural resources and the environment as part of the peace making and peace keeping process.

For both conflict and post-conflict settings, this study will look for evidence and illustrations of the role that small grants for environmental NGOs can play.

Apart from the IUCN Netherlands small grants programme, several other small grants schemes operate in the countries concerned13. According to one expert interviewed, none of these schemes is as flexible as IUCN’s grants programmes. It had the highest maximum amount per grant (€ 85,000) and the application procedure and reporting requirements were less burdensome than in most other small grants schemes.

2.3 The need for conflict analysis in environmental projects In recent years a large number of analytical frameworks and planning methods have been created for development organizations for an in-depth understanding of conflicts and its implications for the development agenda. A range of analytical and methodological approaches has emerged from

12 In total CEPF awarded 72 grants valued at USD 6.2 million between 2001 and 2005 in the Upper Guinean Forest Ecosystem of West-Africa (CEPF, 2006). The grants ranged in size from USD 1,000 to 655,000. This includes IUCN NL partners in Liberia and Sierra Leone: EFA, SCNL, SAMFU and FACE. 13 Main ones are: Global Greengrants Fund (www.greengrants.org/index.php), Rufford Small Grants Foundation (www.ruffordsmallgrants.org/rsg/), Critical Ecosystems Partnership Fund (www.cepf.net/xp/cepf/) and UNDP-GEF Small Grants Programme (http://sgp.undp.org/index.cfm).

14

this14. A common typology used to describe these different approaches distinguishes between

indicator-based conflict analysis (for early warning purposes for instance)15, strategic conflict

analysis (for planning country strategies, programs, projects)16, process-oriented methods

(repetitive, aligned with the phases of the project management cycle)17. It is crucial to define the purpose of the conflict analysis: does it serve as a basis for strategic programming, or does it focus on individual projects or programmes? Given the strong interaction between environment, natural resources and conflict, it follows logically that in any intervention in conflict situations, there is also need for a focus on a better understanding of the conflict. Conflict analysis can contribute to more effective environmental programme interventions.

• Working in, on or around conflict

Another important question is whether organisations are working on, in or around conflict18. Working on conflict refers to the assumption or attitude that the intervention can exploit opportunities to positively affect the dynamics of conflict. Working in conflict refers to interventions working in a conflict context and hinges on the idea that interventions can be negatively affected by, and have a potential negative impact on, the dynamics of a conflict. Working around conflict, then, is based on the assumption or attitude that conflict is a ‘disruptive factor’ over which little influence can be exercised; interventions can continue without being negatively affected by the conflict. Environmental or livelihood interventions are most commonly working in or around conflict. Seldom do they work on conflict. However, as was stated above in 1.2, there are examples of so-called “environmental peace making” which can work on positively affecting the conflict.

• ‘Do No Harm’ approach

As much as possible, environmental projects in a conflict or post-conflict setting should ensure that their efforts are not exacerbating conflicts, but instead are aimed at promoting peaceful co-existence, return and reintegration. A tool that is widely used by humanitarian and development NGOs is the ‘Do No Harm’ (DNH) approach, developed by the US based organisation CDA Collaborative Learning Projects. This approach is based on the premise that conflicts are never simple. Instead, war settings are complicated, multi-faceted, and unique (each having its own special characteristics, personalities, histories, etc.). DNH does not, and cannot, make things simpler. Rather, DNH helps us to understand more clearly the complexity of the conflict environments where we work. It helps us see how decisions we make affect relationships between groups and to anticipate the likely interactions of assistance with a context. It helps us think of different ways of doing things to have better effects. The aim of DNH is to help people deal with the real complexities of providing assistance in conflicts with less frustration and more clarity and,

it is hoped, with better outcomes for the societies where assistance is provided19. Although the basic principles of Do No Harm are also applicable to environmental interventions, it is recommended to adapt the DNH approach for their specific use.

14 Refer to Shmueli’s useful introduction on Conflict Assessment (2003); http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/conflict_assessment/ 15 FEWER model (Conflict and Peace Analysis and Response Manual, 1999; http://www.reliefweb.int/library/documents/studman2.pdf), or FAST model by the Swiss Peace Foundation; http://www.swisspeace.ch/typo3/projects/previous-projects/fast-international/about.html. 16 DFID model (Conducting Conflict Assessments: Guidance Notes, 2002); http://www.conflictsensitivity.org/publications/conducting-conflict-assessments-guidance-notes, ICCO model (Conflict Analysis, a practical tool to analyse conflict in order to prioritise and strategise Conflict Transformation programmes, 2008); www.transitioninternational.com/?download=ICCO_ENG.pdf 17 GTZ model (Conflict Analysis for Project Planning and Management, 2001); http://www.gtz.de/de/dokumente/en-conflictanalysis.pdf 18 For an overview of the policy debate, refer to the UK based Bond Conflict Policy Group’s session notes; http://www.bond.org.uk/data/files/CPG_session_write_up.pdf

19 See for instance Mary B. Anderson (1999). Do No Harm: How Aid Can Support Peace - Or War; also refer to: http://www.cdainc.com/cdawww/project_profile.php?pid=DNH&pname=Do%20No%20Harm

15

3. Approach and Methods

3.1 Quick Scan Initial discussions on the strengths and weaknesses of the projects on the long list with IUCN NL resulted in an increased understanding of the partner organisations and the context in which they operate. As a first step, all 48 projects on the long list were reviewed using a Quick Scan. This consisted of a review of the project proposal, technical reports written by grantee partners, communication between IUCN and the partner and monitoring and evaluation reports20.

The information from this Quick Scan has been structured in a set of tables. The table with basic project data is included in this document as Annex I. Due to its length, the table summarizing the assessments has been included in the separate Part B of this report, together with an in-depth analysis of 16 selected projects. A list of basic data and assessment criteria for each project was developed in close collaboration with IUCN and is listed in Table 2.

Table 2: Basic project data and assessment criteria for the Quick Scan

Basic project data (Annex I in this document) Project assessment criteria (see tables in the separate document Part B)

- Country - Name of NGO (grantee partner) - Project code - Project title - Project goal - Duration - Budget - Coverage (in terms of area size and target

population) - Project type (see below) - Thematic focus

- Key results and impacts - Relevance for specific (post) conflict

contexts - Policy relevance (local, national,

international policies) - Replication / upscaling potential - Sustainability - Conflict impacts on the project

All projects were classified under one or more of the following categories 21: 1. Capacity building / training / networking 2. Education / extension / awareness raising 3. Policies / lobby / advocacy 4. Production / income generation / poverty alleviation 5. Ecosystem planning / management / conservation 6. Background studies

To further specify the abovementioned project categories, the following thematic areas were defined:

1. awareness raising 2. tree planting / firewood production 3. agroforestry 4. environmental education 5. forest conservation 6. monitoring logging / mining industries 7. improved stoves 8. improved agricultural methods / food security 9. protected area management 10. beekeeping

20 This included field visit reports by IUCN staff members, and internal or external evaluation reports of the partner organisation. 21 Based on IUCN’s project categories, see IUCN NL, First Annual Report 2007, Ecosystems and Human Well-Being, p.16. One additional category was used: Background studies.

16

11. livestock / pasture management 12. environmental management 13. forest sector policies 14. non-timber forest products production / trade 15. ecotourism 16. nature conservation 17. species conservation 18. dryland conservation 19. animal breeding 20. refugee camp impacts 21. linking conservation & relief

As a next step, the data from all projects in the Quick Scan were analyzed, the results of which are presented in Chapter 4. Key data on each project can be found in Annex I.

3.2 In-Depth Review Out of the 48 projects, 16 projects of 15 grantee partners were selected for an in-depth review. One partner organization, the Environmental Foundation for Africa (EFA), is active in both Liberia and Sierra Leone. In Table 3 below the selected partner organizations are listed.

Selection took place on the basis of the following criteria:

• Relative importance of each country in the project portfolio

• Projects have a clear linkage to the conflict context

• Partner organisations are still linked to IUCN NL through continued funding or other ways of collaboration (e.g. policy development or lobbying efforts)

The in-depth review consisted of an assessment of the project files, as well as other available information about the organizations involved (websites, monitoring reports of IUCN NL, external evaluations). In addition, telephone interviews with a number of partner organizations were conducted (see questionnaire in Annex III), as well as interviews with IUCN NL staff and with other organizations that have close working relationships with some of the organizations selected. This includes Rainforest Foundation (UK and Norway), NCRC (Ghana), Forests Monitor (UK) and ICCO (Netherlands).

Table 3: Selected partner organizations for the in-depth review

Country Selected partners

Burundi

- ABO-Burundi

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)

- AGIR - CREF - OCEAN - PAL - PIL - UGEAFI

Liberia - EFA - SAMFU - SDI

Rwanda - ARECO Sierra Leone - EFA

- Green Scenery - Step by Step / Tacugama Chimpanzee

Sanctuary Regional projects - EFA

- Forests Monitor (United Kingdom)

17

4. Results of the Quick Scan A total of 48 projects were reviewed during the Quick Scan. Annex I has an overview of basic data of all projects. All projects were carried out in the period 1996-2006. The distribution of partners supported over this period (see Table 4) shows that the DR Congo had the largest country share of the total funding provided, followed by Sierra Leone and Liberia. The total portfolio of funding provided by IUCN NL between 1996 and 2006 in the C5 (Conflict 5) countries has been around 1.7 million €.

During the review, it was noted that many projects were split up into a number of follow-up proposals. This is caused by the fact that due to the higher risks involved in conflict or post-conflict settings, IUCN NL had requested some partners to split proposals into multiple phases in order to spread the risk. Another factor is that a number of partners have requested additional funding for an extension of the project, simply because they were not able to finalize according to plan due to civil unrest and insecurity. These multiple phased projects were counted as one project, leading to a corrected total of 48 distinct projects, with 63 contracts. As can be seen in Table 4 below, average funding per project was 35,675 €, which is slightly higher than the average funding

amount per project for the whole Small Grants Programme of IUCN NL22. Sierra Leone shows the highest average amount per project: 50,054 €.

Three projects were labelled as regional projects, as they dealt with more than one country from the same region. These projects focused on influencing policies and coordinating civil society on a

regional and global level, and have been carried out by international NGOs or consultants23.

Table 4: Distribution of funding, partners and projects over the C5 countries

Country total funding in €

(and %) number of partners

number of projects

average grant per project

DRC 684,000 (40%) 16 22 31,100

Sierra Leone 400,000 (23%) 7 8 50,000

Liberia 342,000 (20%) 9 12 28,500

Burundi 78,000 (5%) 2 2 39,000

Rwanda 47,000 (3%) 1 1 47,000

Regional 161,000 (9%) 3 3 54,000

Total 1,712,000 38 48 35,670

During the Quick Scan, each project was assigned to one or more of the following project categories: - capacity building / training / networking. - environmental education / extension / awareness raising. - policies / lobby / advocacy. - production / income generation / poverty alleviation. - ecosystem planning / management / conservation. - background studies.

The frequency distribution of the project cluster over categories and countries is presented in Figure 2 and Table 5, with Education & awareness raising (50% of all projects) and Production & income generation (40%) topping the list. It is worth noting that this distribution is almost the opposite as compared to the distribution of all small grants projects funded by IUCN NL across the globe in 2007, where most projects had a strong focus on capacity building, ecosystem management and policy influencing, whereas education and awareness raising projects were

22 Average budget per project in Africa was 31,112 € for the period 2001-2006 (Source: IUCN NL, Report 2001-2006, Three Small Grants Funds for dry tropics, wet tropics and wetlands) 23 EFA, who received funding as a focal point for IUCN NL in West-Africa, is also considered an international NGO (NCRC, 2008).

18

relatively less represented (Source: IUCN NL, First Annual Report 2007, Ecosystems and Human Well-Being).

Figure 2: Project categories for all projects in C5 countries

Table 5: Project categories for all projects per country

Country

Capacity building /

Education /

Policy influencing /

Production /

Ecosystem planning /

Background studies

Total number of projects (48)

DRC 7 12 4 8 1 2 22

Sierra Leone 0 6 1 5 2 1 8

Liberia 4 5 2 3 3 3 12

Burundi 0 1 1 2 0 0 2

Rwanda 1 0 0 1 0 0 1

Regional 1 0 2 0 0 1 3

Number of project links 13 24 10 19 6 7 79

% of all projects (48) 27% 50% 20% 40% 12.5% 15%

Table 5 above shows that the number of project links (79) is much higher than the total number of projects (48). This reflects the fact that most projects have been assigned to more than one project category.

This is further elaborated in Table 6 below, which shows the number of projects with one, two or three different project types assigned. A striking result is that the combination of project types 2 (Education / extension / awareness raising) and 4 (Production / income generation) is occurring in 25% of all projects included in this review. In other words, projects that are focusing on education

19

and awareness raising are often linked to livelihood development projects. On the contrary, capacity building/training is the project category that is most often found as a single category.

Table 6: Combinations of project categories for all projects

Number of projects

% of all projects (48)

One project type only

1. Capacity building/training/networking 6 12.5%

2. Education / extension / awareness raising 4 8.3%

3. Policy influencing / lobby / advocacy 3 6.3%

4. Production / income generation / poverty alleviation

2 4.2%

5. Ecosystem planning / management / conservation 2 4.2%

6. Background studies 1 2.1%

total number of projects 18 37.5%

Two types combined

1. + 2. 2 4.2%

1. + 3. 2 4.2%

2. + 4. 12 25.0%

2. + 5. 2 4.2%

3. + 6. 4 8.3%

4. + 5. 2 4.2%

Other combinations of two types 3 6.3%

total number of projects 27 56.3%

Three types combined

1. + 2. + 4. 1 2.1%

1. + 2. + 6. 1 2.1%

total number of projects 2 4.2%

It can be concluded that a majority of projects (61%) in this review have an integrated character. This is in line with the general observation, regardless of the conflict context, that most projects funded by the Ecosystem Grants Programme have a multi-dimensional character (IUCN NL, 2007).

As a further specification, thematic areas have been assigned to each project (see Figure 3). As explained earlier, twenty-one different thematic areas appeared to occur in at least one project. The five most frequent thematic areas are awareness raising (occurring in 31% of all projects), tree planting/firewood production (also 31%), agroforestry (25%), environmental education (17%) and forest conservation (17%).

Very few projects are focused on strictly conflict-related issues. Only one project was specifically dealing with the link between conservation and conflict (EFA in Sierra Leone, with a focus on refugee camp impacts). In fact, there are some projects with attention for the conflict context, but their primary focus is environmental conservation or human livelihoods.

In addition, some NGOs are also active in peace building or human rights, but not in the projects funded under the IUCN small grants programme (e.g. SDI and SAMFU in Liberia and CREF Network in DRC). These organisations tend to have a more holistic approach in their interventions, by trying to integrate environmental concerns in their peace building interventions. For instance, SAMFU from Liberia is specialized in environmental issues, but due to the conflict context, they

20

also started to include peace issues in their work. Outsiders perceive this as a very strategic choice, since environment and conflict are so closely related (see section 1.2).

A preliminary conclusion is that projects working on the cutting edge between environment and conflict are more in tune with the context in which they operate, and have a better chance of “doing the right thing”. It is also in line with one of IUCN NL’s policy priorities of “mainstreaming environmental concerns into post-war recovery, emergency and humanitarian aid programmes” (one of the focal themes for the Central Africa region for the period 2007-2010).

Figure 3: Thematic areas for all projects in C5 countries (see Annex II for list per country)

21

5. Key Findings of this Study In this section, key findings are presented on the set of projects, in relation to their project types and thematic areas. Findings may refer both to projects of the quick scan and of the in-depth review. Specific project examples are given in the text boxes. More detailed information on the partners and projects mentioned can be found in a separate document (Part B), which is available from IUCN NL on request only.

5.1 Education, Extension and Awareness Raising Fifty percent of all projects reviewed are focusing on education, extension and awareness raising (24 out of 48). In many conflict and post-conflict societies, environmental issues are not yet (high) on the agenda. Environment and sustainability are often considered as “luxury” issues that will be tackled at a later stage, when peace has been restored and the economy has been rebuilt. “We first need peace, then we will worry about nature”, is a generally heard observation in countries recovering from war. Communities affected by violent conflict usually do not consider environmental issues or resource governance as a priority, even though the conflict often has strong linkages to natural resource management. Local or international NGOs are more concerned with providing emergency aid (during the conflict) or basic services, shelter and food security (during the early recovery phase). It is in this context that the emphasis on environmental education and awareness raising should be understood. There are usually a few committed nature conservationists that decide to start sensitizing communities about the importance of ecosystems both in terms of livelihood provision and in terms of conflict prevention. This will prepare the ground for a more integrated approach to sustainable development.

Box 1: Examples of projects working on Education & Awareness Raising

PAL, DRC:

The organization has provided a balanced package of environmental education, agroforestry, energy saving techniques, and forest protection. A major strength is the long-term involvement of local communities in the project. According to PAL, this has made the results of the project more sustainable, which has only started to show many years after the project finished. For instance, PAL’s interventions have led to a shift in the local population’s attitude. Compared to the start of the project, when they were not prepared to pay for seedlings planted in tree nurseries, they are now willing to pay 3 dollar cents (20 FC) for one seedling. This indicates that they have become aware of the benefits of tree planting to their livelihood and to long-term conservation.

Green Scenery, Sierra Leone:

During Operation Restore Green, the focus was on creating awareness on tropical forestry conservation and environmental protection in young school children in Freetown, during which time Sierra Leone suffered from a civil war. After civil conflict had ended, environmental education and awareness raising continued. In addition, teaching and learning modules on tropical forest conservation were developed as a first step towards inclusion of environmental education in schools. The project has gone through both conflict and post-conflict settings, which makes it an interesting case for this review. During the conflict, tree planting did not succeed very well due to the unrest that destroyed many seedlings. After the conflict had ended, the focus shifted from the urban population to returnees in the rural areas as well. During this phase, Green Scenery has played an important role in awareness raising of the importance of environmental rehabilitation. Another interesting aspect is that the human rights aspect was incorporated into the environmental awareness program. Children were taught that it is their right to live in a healthy and congenial environment, and that environmental issues are also human right issues.

5.2 Production, Income Generation and Poverty Reduction A significant number of projects (19 out of 48 or 40%) have a combined focus on conservation and poverty reduction. These projects are usually focused on improved production and income generation, and are often carried out by NGOs or CBOs that have a strong focus on livelihood issues, and less on nature conservation. This includes tree planting and firewood production,

22

improved stoves, improved agricultural methods, beekeeping etc. Training in such techniques among large concentrations of displaced persons can be a useful investment for times when they return to their villages of origin. This focus can be observed in all five countries involved in this study. This is partly due to the recent shift of IUCN’s small grant policies from a conservation-oriented approach to a more socially oriented approach with more attention for poverty

reduction24.

It appears to be very difficult to establish the impact of these micro-level livelihood projects. This is related to the generally weak reporting skills of most NGOs working in conflict zones. There is a need for more insight into the impacts of projects in conflict settings. Improved reporting skills are one way to do this. However, it is often very difficult to establish the impact right after the end of a project. Long-term effects often become visible only after 5 or 10 years. One way to increase insight in long-term impacts is to improve post-project monitoring procedures in IUCN NL’s grants programmes.

It is clear from the review that conflict-related environmental impacts have a devastating impact on poverty, e.g. by the influx of refugees (fuelwood shortages) or by the invasion of small-scale miners and hunters in protected areas (increased competition for scarce resources). Successful projects should therefore focus on the root causes of poverty and conflict. In this review, only very few examples were found that effectively work on these linkages. Examples of projects that have generated a positive impact on poverty reduction while preserving nature at the same time can be found in Box 2 below. In a few cases they included a conflict analysis, but in most cases the conflict context was not integrated in the set-up of the project.

Another success factor for income generating projects is environmental education. In those cases where tree planting or agroforestry projects were introduced through environmental education programs, the chances of success were significantly higher (e.g. UGEAFI in DRC).

Box 2: Examples of projects working on Poverty Reduction and Nature Conservation

UGEAFI, DRC:

The project was set up as a response to fuelwood shortage due to influx of refugees from Burundi. Its goal was to diminish pressure on the forest by environmental awareness raising, agroforestry and introduction of improved stoves. Several hundreds of women were trained in energy saving techniques. One of the strengths is the focus on secure areas where impact can still be made, and linking women groups to other communities abroad for exchange of experiences and knowledge.

After the project ended, the women have gone back to their communities and have applied their skills, leading to a multiplier effect for the whole community. This has led to a reforested area of 23 ha. and a strong decrease in the number of households involved in slash-and-burn agriculture (from 100 to 5 households per year). The tree planting component was successful, as the population was quickly convinced that forest conservation and reforestation was necessary for sheer survival. In a follow-up project financed by OXFAM-NOVIB, another 81,000 seedlings were planted in degraded forests.

FACE, Liberia:

The project is focused on mangrove conservation through poverty alleviation in the Lake Piso Nature Reserve. Conservation is promoted by providing alternative income sources for the population dependent on the Reserve, including beekeeping and tree planting. The approach was interesting, but there was no link to the conflict context.

ABO-Burundi, Burundi:

Project goal was to involve the population living next to the Rusizi Reserve in nature conservation and sustainable use of natural resources. This should be achieved through income generating activities such as goat and hen rearing, beekeeping, fisheries, and vegetable gardening. The project led to improved collaboration among key stakeholders in the area. A coordination committee has been created, consisting of representatives of the local government, NGOs and local communities. A ditch of 2 km was constructed to fence off the Reserve. One positive spin-off is that the project is now considered by the Government as a pilot for co-management between the authorities and the communities.

24 IUCN NL, Report 2001-2006, p.13

23

5.3 Capacity Building, Networking and Training It appears that many projects have a strong Capacity Building, Networking and Training component. This is inevitable given the weak capacity in civil society in sub-Sahara Africa in general, and in (post) conflict settings in particular. IUCN NL earlier concluded: “the main strengths of small grants are in strengthening civil society organisations, both in terms of building

their capacities and in increasing their sustainability as organizations” (IUCN NL, Report 2001-2006, p.21). This conclusion is confirmed by the present review. It is observed that in many projects, the results and impacts are less apparent than the contribution made to the strengthening of the partner organization itself or of the communities that it is working with. In project reports, this is often mentioned as one of the key advantages of small grants funding through IUCN NL: it serves as seed or bridging capital before other donors can be found for more substantial financing, both in terms of time and volume of the support. This is especially relevant in conflict settings, because it is typical for large conservation groups with in-country presence to withdraw from a country as soon as violent conflict erupts. Institutional development of NGOs is also crucial in conflict settings, as a way to create the basic conditions for keeping civil society alive throughout the conflict.

Key factors for the successful empowerment of civil society appear to be ownership by the participants of the process (local communities or NGOs) and sufficient means for meetings and workshops. An outstanding example is the CREF Network. With relatively modest means, the organisation was able to empower its member organizations with the capacity to do joint strategy development and joint lobby, leading to changes in national policy.

Box 3: The role of EFA as “pilot” focal point for West-Africa

EFA was founded in 1992 with a primary focus on Sierra Leone, where civil war was ongoing. It was created to highlight and justify the importance for environmental considerations in conflict and post-conflict situations. EFA (Environmental Foundation for Africa), with offices in Sierra Leone and Liberia, is a partner to UNHCR in refugee and returnee affected areas. EFA’s Director, Mr Tommy Garnett, is an advisor to the United Nations and a pioneer in putting environmental issues on the agenda in conflict and post-conflict settings. EFA became regional focal point for IUCN NL in 2004 and is hosting the secretariat of GAWA (Green Actors of West Africa).

In 2004, EFA was requested to become IUCN NL’s focal point for West-Africa. In that capacity, EFA did organizational assessments of green NGOs in the region and played a key role in the establishment of GAWA (Green Actors of West-Africa), a network of environmental NGOs in the region. From the perspective of IUCN NL, the collaboration with a regional focal point has been an interesting experiment, but it has not been entirely successful. It appeared to be too ambitious to serve the whole West-Africa region from Sierra Leone. This was caused by transport and communication problems (including the earlier mentioned cultural/language barriers) and by the limited size of EFA. On a positive note, the experiment has served as useful input to the ongoing discussion on how to improve effectiveness of IUCN NL on the ground and how to connect better with its local partners. A shift has recently been made from one regional focal point to less formal

in-country hubs and key partners/resource persons per country25.

5.4 Policy Influencing, Lobby and Advocacy There are relatively few projects working on policy influencing, lobby and advocacy (only 9 out of 48), even though it is known that policy influencing is a key element to create an enabling

environment for poverty alleviation in the medium or long term26. Very few projects that look beyond the micro-level of the intervention area. The lack of projects working on policy influencing seems to be caused by two factors:

25 IUCN NL, First Annual Report 2007, Ecosystems and Human Well-Being, p.6. 26 Also as a key criterion in the selection and reviewing process for project approval. Internal IUCN document, ‘Factors to be considered when assigning scores in reviews of final technical reports of EGP grantees’, April 2008.

24

1. In a conflict setting there is very little opportunity for policy influencing. This is due to the lack of clear governance structures and the focus on more immediate needs such as emergency aid and conflict resolution.

2. Another limiting factor is the lack of strategic focus of NGOs in the field of lobby and advocacy. In the countries included in this study, there are very few NGOs that are capable of strategically working on the macro level. Most of them are focusing on micro-level interventions that are not working on structural solutions.

Therefore, it is probably more realistic to ensure that NGOs can continue to exist throughout the conflict, in order to be able to play a meaningful role in policy influencing in the post-war setting. This will allow NGOs to prepare for post-conflict windows of opportunity when donors return and institutions have to be rebuilt. A number of examples are highlighted in Box 4. It should be noted that all four examples have been set up with strong international backing. This is an indication that in conflict or pots-conflict settings it is crucial to involve international partners.

Box 4: Examples of projects working on policy influencing, lobby and advocacy AAPDMAC, DRC:

Study on illegal logging shows involvement of a Thai company and the Uganda army in deforestation, which was used in lobby efforts to tackle deforestation.

CREF Network, DRC:

CREF Network is a regional network of CBOs and NGOs working on forest conservation in North-Kivu. Most of them focus on community development including sanitation and HIV/AIDS, agriculture, agroforestry and tree nurseries, with women and pygmy communities as special target groups. The project helped both members as well as CREF staff to agree on a common vision and priorities concerning sustainable forest management in North-Kivu. The network has grown from a small regional initiative to an internationally well-known player in less than 5 years. The CREF Network has created an enabling environment for many local NGOs to grow and raise funds for their work under very difficult circumstances. In this way, it has become a very important linking pin between the local level and the national and international levels.

Rainforest Foundation and Forests Monitor, DRC/Congo Basin:

A civil society network was created (Reseau des Resources Naturelles), a consultation organized on the future of forest policies, and a report published on logging concession systems with large international exposure. A key strength was that civil society experts were given the opportunity to influence national level policies.

SDI, Liberia:

This project focused on the coordination of civil society participation in forest sector reforms and the publication of reports on illegal forest exploitation resulted in a comprehensive civil society proposal for reforming the Liberian forest sector. A civil society workshop helped to secure space for civil society and public participation in the process. This proposal was used as input to the US-led Liberian Forest Initiative. It is a successful example of creating links between NGOs working in human rights and democracy and nature conservation and using this alliance for effective policy influencing.

5.5 Ecosystem Planning, Management and Conservation Very few projects (6 out of 48) focus on ecosystem planning, management and conservation. This is partly caused by the fact that in a conflict setting it is extremely difficult to work on these issues. Refugee flows and armed raids effectively undermine the long-term impacts of conservation efforts, as has been observed in several projects of this review (see Box 5 for some examples). On the other hand, conflicts may in some cases ensure temporary and localized conservation of species or ecosystems, due to the inaccessibility of certain areas. Again, it should be stressed that keeping conservation NGOs alive already justifies the continued support throughout the war. This will enable them to start working on conservation and natural resource management right after the end of the conflict.

25

Box 5: Examples of conflict impacts on nature conservation projects AGIR, DRC:

Due to the civil unrest in North-Kivu, the project beneficiaries were displaced several times and the project could not be carried out as planned. Therefore, project activities concentrated on two strategically located villages. Many of the project beneficiaries from smaller villages were hiding in these two larger settlements until they could return to their villages. During this time, AGIR set up two large tree nurseries, around which five training farms of 2 ha. each were created. In these two relatively safe locations, many more farmers could be reached because they were all concentrated there. In total 426,000 fertilizing plants and 24,000 fruit trees were produced and distributed, and 85,000 plants were actually planted.

Step by Step / Tacugama Chimpanzee Sanctuary , Sierra Leone:

This project supported the continued operation of a chimpanzee sanctuary throughout the war with strong support from local communities. Continued funding created a strong position in post-conflict environmental rehabilitation with potential to become an eco-tourism destination.

Fauna and Flora International, Liberia:

Faunal and socio-economic surveys of forest areas in Liberia could not be completed due to invasion by miners and hunters in Sapo Park after the outbreak of violence in 2003.

5.6 Integration of the conflict context in environmental projects

In general, there is a lack of systematic attention to the conflict context in most of the projects under the small grants programme. It is widely acknowledged that natural resources can contribute to violent conflict, and that natural resource management can be a pathway for cooperation and confidence building in war-torn societies. However, very few local organizations had incorporated this insight into their project design, and very few projects included a conflict assessment. There are a few examples of the integration of peace building activities in conservation projects that are relevant to the international policy agenda (see Box 6 below).

Box 6: Examples of integration of the conflict context in conservation projects EFA, Sierra Leone:

An environmental awareness programme was set up for returnees and Liberian refugees in Sierra Leone, in an innovative collaboration with UNHCR. This project was successful because it engaged people in environmental rehabilitation even though the conflict was still ongoing. It raised awareness about the links between mismanagement of natural resources and conflict. By focusing its attention towards refugees and returnees, it worked pro-actively on mitigating the environmental impacts of refugee camps.

SAMFU, Liberia:

The project focused on improved participation in park management of communities around Sapo National Park. People were trained in monitoring and reporting on illegal forestry activities, Environmental Action Committees were established, and are now said to be participating in park management. The approach taken is very relevant, as SAMFU is empowering local communities to tackle problems resulting from the flow of refugees and returnees and the threats that it brings to Sapo National Park, indirectly threatening its own livelihood base. In neighbouring areas, SAMFU has a program on peace building and community development through training, conflict mediation and sport games. Lessons learnt from their work in Sapo National Park have been incorporated in that program. SAMFU made a very strategic decision to combine environment and peace building issues. To be able to do so, it will have to forge strong partnerships with other NGOs specialized in peace and human rights issues.

26

Annex I. Results of the Quick Scan– basic project data

The information from the Quick Scan of all 48 projects has been structured in two types of tables. The country tables in this Annex summarize basic administrative data for each project of the cluster. The tables summarizing the assessments can be found in a separate document as Part B of this report, together with an in-depth analysis of 16 selected projects.

Project activities can be categorized in the following types (“project type” in the tables): 1. Capacity building / training / networking 2. Education / extension / awareness raising 3. Policies / lobby / advocacy 4. Production / income generation / poverty alleviation 5. Ecosystem planning / management / conservation 6. Background studies

BURUNDI

Partner

Project Code

Project Title Project goal Duration Budget (in €)

Coverage: Area (size)

Coverage: Target population

Project type

Thematic focus

ODEB 1AF00066A

Ecosystem protection of the Kibira natural forest

To protect Kibira forest through environmental education and tree planting

07-2000 to 04-2001

23,899

North-West Burundi: Kibira National Park and surroundings

27,775 households living next to park

2 + 4

tree planting/firewood production/ agroforestry/ environmental education/ awareness raising

ABO 2AF000233A

Conservation of the Rusizi Reserve through income generating activities

To involve the population living next to the Rusizi Reserve in nature conservation and sustainable use

11-2004 to 11-2006

54,414 West-Burundi: Rusizi Reserve 5932 ha. (DRC border)

local communities, local and national authorities (no. unknown)

3 + 4 tree planting/firewood production/ animal breeding/ beekeeping/ eco-tourism

TOTAL BURUNDI 78,313

27

DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC (DR) OF CONGO

Partner

Project Code

Project Title Project goal Duration Budget (in €)

Coverage: Area (size)

Coverage: Target population

Project type

Thematic focus

AAPDMAC

1AF00196A

Investigation of logging around Beni

To investigate logging activities around Beni, South-Kivu

11-2000 to 03-2001

6,147 North-Kivu/ Oriental: survey on road network of 1800 km

indirectly: 65.000 pygmies; several 1.000s Bantus

3 + 6 monitoring logging/mining industries

AGIR

6AF00256A

Improving fertility of agricultural land

Contribute to protection and sustainable use of tropical forest by growing vegetables and fruit trees

06-2003 to 01-2005

20,778 North-Kivu: Lubero territory (22 villages)

1100 households, 22 community development committees

2 + 4 agroforestry/ improved agricultural methods/food security/ awareness raising

AVOLAR

1AF00103A

Reforestation of 15 hectares at Sogololo

Improved livelihoods of local communities and forest conservation

09-1999 to 05-2001

13,408 Bas-Congo: 15 ha reforested at Songololo district

unknown 2 + 4 tree planting/firewood production/ awareness raising

CADIC

1AF00144A

Workshop for Congolese NGOs

To organize workshop for Congolese NGOs in the framework of African Forest Action Network

10-1996 to 12-1996

10,108 National: NGOs from all over DRC

- 1 forest conservation

CADIC

1AF00143A

Development of alternatives around Kahuzi, phase II

To set up tree nurseries and agroforestry demonstration plots and improved agricultural methods

04-1998 to 04-1999

24,186 South-Kivu, area size not relevant (nurseries)

120 farmers 4 agroforestry/ animal breeding

CADRE

1AF00170A

Promoting reforestation through agroforestry

To assist local communities with the introduction of agroforestry to reduce pressure on forest resources in Virunga NP

10-2000 to 05-2001

11,345 North-Kivu (Masisi district): 32 ha reforestation, tree nurseries

10 local communities and local institutes

2 + 4 tree planting/firewood production/ agroforestry/ improved stoves

CADRE

6AF00269A

Rehabilitation of the vegetation cover in Virunga

To safeguard the Virunga forests through alternative income generating activities and awareness raising

02-2004 to 02-2005

45,351 North-Kivu: surroundings of Virunga NP; Masisi, Nyiragongo, Rutshuru districts

240 households in 30 local communities

2 + 4 tree planting/firewood production/ animal breeding/ beekeeping/ awareness raising

28

CAMV

6AF00310A

Informing local communities about new forest and mining laws

To assure the participation of pygmies and other minority groups in sustainable forest management and conservation

09-2004 to 09-2005

27,998 North & South-Kivu, Ituri: 14 districts

pygmies and other forest inhabitants (not specified)

2 awareness raising

Reseau CREF

6AF00288A + B

Strengthening of forest conservation network in N-Kivu

institutional capacity strengthening of forest conservation network

07-2004 to 09-2006

28,090

+29,094

North-Kivu: 45% of total area size (area covered with forest)

30 NGOs/CBOs, 1200 people working in forest conservation

1 + 3 forest conservation

Horizon Nature

6AF00322A

Promotion of wild yam

Upscaling of cultivating wild yam for increased food security and reduced illegal hunting;

03-2005 to 08-2006

31,802 South-Kivu: Kahuzi-Biega National park and surroundings

1000 (including 100 pygmy) households in 4 communities

2 + 4 improved agricultural methods/food security; awareness raising

NC-IUCN

6AF00283A

Changes for natural resources and their sustainable use in DRC

To organise a conference in Brussels to increase attention for the Central-African region, DRC in particular

05-2003 to 12-2003

5,830 Whole country political decision-makers

3 forest conservation

OCEAN

1AF00175A + 1AF00205A

Fighting deforestation in and around Kisangani

To diminish pressure on forest by awareness raising, tree planting and agroforestry

10-2000 to 12-2002

9,643 + 10,920

Haut-Zaire: 184 ha improved agricultural techniques, 3 sites for ex-situ conservation

1000 households, 14 NGOs/CBOs

2 + 4 tree planting/firewood production/ agroforestry/ improved stoves/ improved agricultural methods

PAEV

6AF00276A + B

Agroforestry in Kilunda, phase 1 and 2

pilot project for tree planting to improve agricultural productivity and to provide fuelwood for cooking

12-2003 to 02-2004 and 03-2005 to 05-2006

18,309 Kilunda district, Bandundu province (500 km south east of Kinshasa): 25 ha of forest, 10 ha of savannah

direct: 1300 inhabitants; indirect: 5200 people from neighbouring villages

4 tree planting/firewood production; agroforestry

PAL

6AF00253A

Capacity building 2003-2004

strengthen capacity of PAL and local CBOs & promotion of agroforestry and husbandry

03-2003 to 03-2005

76,106 North-Kivu: Lubero/Walikale

10 local associations

1 + 2 tree planting/firewood production/ agroforestry/ livestock/ pasture management/ env education / awareness raising

29

Conservation and rehabilitation of forests in Lubero and Walikare

To reduce pressure on the rainforest in the territories of Lubero and Walikare, orth-Kivu through education, establishment of forest reserves and agroforestry

08-1998 to 02-2001

43,243 North-Kivu: 320 ha. reforestation, 3,000 ha community reserves (total area size: 130,000 ha)

4,500 farmers (env education), 200 people - 50% female (energy saving cooking techniques)

2 + 5 tree planting/firewood production/ agroforestry/ protected area establishment/management / env education / awareness raising

Conservation of forest ecosystems in Nord-Kivu

To reduce pressure on the rainforest in the territories of Lubero and Walikare, orth-Kivu through education, establishment of forest reserves and agroforestry

08-2001 to 02-2002

35,017 North-Kivu: 260 ha tree planting and agroforestry, 225 ha forest conservation

1075 farmers (env education), 600 households (energy saving techniques), 80 m/w trained in gender

2 + 5 tree planting/firewood production/ agroforestry/ protected area establishment/management / env education / awareness raising

PAL

(combined projects)

1AF00101A

6AF00206A

6AF00220A Improving documentation on forest ecosystems in Nord-Kivu

To provide an overview of the situation of the forests in North-Kivu and on the key stakeholders in the region

05-2002 to 09-2002

5,500 North-Kivu: all 7 territories

200 people involved in forest conservation, 50 people trained in documentation techniques

2 + 6 forest conservation

PIDP

1AF00166A

Participation of Twa representatives in Conference Medicinal Plants

To enable Twa representatives to present the situation of Batwa in Central-Africa at conference

05-2000 to 06-2000

2,555 not relevant not relevant 1 non-timber forest products production/trade

Rehabilitation of livestock and agricultural production along national road II

Development of livelihood strategies and awareness raising of conservation value of Itombwe forests

07-2000 to 05-2001

16,909 South-Kivu: Itombwe mountains (500.000 ha)

unknown (target groups only in % of total population)

2 + 4 livestock/pasture management/ awareness raising

PIL

(combined projects)

1AF00073A

6AF00204A

Improved food production, Mont Itombwe (phase 2)

Development of livelihood strategies and awareness raising of conservation value of Itombwe forests

08-2001 to 05-2002

9,727 see above see above 2 + 4 livestock/pasture management/ awareness raising

30

6AF00254A Rehabilitation of agricultural production around Itombwe forest

Improved livelihoods and land use planning for conservation and sustainable use of the forest

07-2003 to 01-2006

75,016 see above 5 cooperatives (700 households) Indirectly: 300,000 people

2 + 4 livestock/pasture management/ awareness raising

PROPRE

1AF00140A

PROPRE 2000 newsletter

To publish environmental magazine in DRC

04-1999 to 08-2000

7,200 DRC wide DRC population 2 awareness raising

Rainforest Foundation (RFF)

6AF00323A

Ensuring civil society participation in forest legislation in DRC

To provide civil society organisations with opportunity to contribute to development of forest regulations

02-2005 to 02-2006

71,815 DRC wide RFF, Congolese NGOs (12 focal points), Congolese communities

1 + 3 monitoring logging/mining industries

UGEAFI

1AF00184A

Seminar on Itombwe forest

Organizing seminar on forest protection and community development

01-1999 to 09-1999

3,410 South-Kivu: Itombwe mountains (area size unknown)

32 rural women 1 awareness raising/ environmental management

Cooking stoves for refugees

Introduction of cooking stoves for refugees to reduce pressure on forest from charcoal production

08-1999 to 02-2000

4,329 South-Kivu: Ruzizi plains (Uvira)

30 Baka women for training, 350 households for cooking stoves

2 improved stoves UGEAFI

(combined projects)

1AF00105A,

1AF00070A +

6AF00207A

Women's program on management, protection and restoration of Itombwe forest ecosystem

To diminish pressure on forest by awareness raising, agroforestry and improved stoves

07-2000 to 01-2002

27,132

+

13,475

South-Kivu: Ruzizi plains (Uvira) and Itombwe mountains

200 women for reforestation techniques, 2000 hh to receive improved stoves

2 tree planting/firewood production/ improved stoves

TOTAL DR CONGO 684,443

31

LIBERIA

Partner

Project Code

Project Title Project goal Duration Budget (in €)

Coverage: Area (size)

Coverage: Target population

Project type

Thematic focus

EFA/L

AF2103 + 1AF00114A (combined project)

Campaign for environmental awareness, education and positive action in Liberia

To motivate people in Liberia to restore, protect and manage local natural resources and to develop alternative income generating activities

05-1998 to 05-1999 + 05-1999 to 05-2000

70,333 Monrovia and Montserrado and Nimba counties

55 schools, 8 communities, 100 volunteers

2 + 4 tree planting/firewood production/ agroforestry/ improved stoves/ environmental education/ awareness raising

EFA/L

1AF00118A

Booklet on nature conservation in Liberia and Sierra Leone

To raise interest in and increase level of knowledge about environmental issues in Liberia and Sierra Leone in the context of civil conflict

07-1997 to 07-1999

9,064 Liberia and Sierra Leone

local and international nature conservation and donor communities

3 + 6 nature conservation

FACE

6AF00242A

Mangrove conservation through poverty alleviation: the Lake Piso Nature Reserve

To contribute to protected forest area management through alternative income sources for the communities

11-2002 to 11-2004

10,576 Grand Cape Mount County: Lake Piso Nature Reserve (30,000 ha.)

Directly: 20 community members (training) and 60 households (improved living standards)

4 + 5 tree planting/firewood production/ protected area establishment/management/ beekeeping

Computer entry of botanical collections to identify priority conservation areas

To complete entry of geo-referenced Liberian botanical specimens into ECOSYN database

09-2004 to 11-2004

5,800 Liberia Gov. of Liberia and international nature conservation NGOs

5 forest conservation FFI

(follow-up phases)

6AF00313A +

6AF00313B

Completing faunal and socio-economic surveys of significant forest areas of Liberia

To protect a biologically representative sample of Liberia's forest biological diversity in a socially and economically sustainable manner

11-2004 to 07-2005

39,689 Liberia Gov. of Liberia and international nature conservation NGOs

5 forest conservation

32

FPI

6AF00303A

Socio-economic survey of Sapo NP, Liberia

To repeat socio-economic surveys to obtain current data for updating protected area database

09-2004 to 05-2005

14,458 South-West region: Sapo NP

20 communities, international conservation organisations and government

5 protected area establishment/management

Life

6AF00243A

Survey of threatened and vulnerable timber species of Liberia

To collect data on threatened timber species and organize stakeholder workshop

11-2002 to 05-2003

16,770 Liberia donors and general public

6 forest conservation

POCAL

6AF00244A

POCAL Botanical garden education program

To help conserve Liberia's valuable biodiversity by further developing a Botanical Garden

09-2002 to 09-2003

13,550 Montserrado County, Johnsonville: Botanical Garden

15,000 persons (education/awareness raising)

2 nature conservation/ environmental education/ awareness raising

SAMFU

6AF00305A

Participation in park management of communities around Sapo National Park

To empower communities around SNP to assist in monitoring and reporting of illegal forestry activities

09-2004 to 10-2006

55,490 South-East Region: Sinoe County, Sapo National Park and buffer zones

5 communities around SNP

1 + 2 + 4

non-timber forest products production/trade/ beekeeping/ monitoring logging/mining industries

SDI

6AF00299A

Coordinating Liberian civil society participation in forest sector reforms

To enhance participation of CSOs in forestry sector reform process and to raise awareness

03-2004 to 07-2004

5,822 Liberia CSOs, gov. institutions, international NGOs, public

1 + 2 forest sector policies/ awareness raising

SDI

6AF00321A

Indep. monitoring of forestry activities to promote sustainable NRM

To monitor and report on forest resource exploitation activities to support national forest law enforcement and governance

12-2004 to 12-2005

47,491 Liberia civil society in Liberia, international NGOs

1 + 2 + 6

forest sector policies/ monitoring logging/mining industries/ awareness raising

SRNCL

1AF00113A

Institutional strengthening of rainforest conservation

Re-establish office of SCNL, conservation education center and Monrovia Zoo

07-1997 to 07-1999

43,847 Liberia SCNL (Society for Conservation of Nature in Liberia)

1 forest conservation

SRNCL

1AF00116A

Symposium on the conservation of Liberian rainforest

To explore and promote potential cooperation with new Liberian gov. through a symposium on management and conservation of forest and wildlife resources

10-1998 to 07-2000

9,064 Liberia government stakeholders, national and international community

3 forest conservation

TOTAL LIBERIA 341,954

33

RWANDA

Partner

Project Code

Project Title Project goal Duration Budget (in €)

Coverage: Area (size)

Coverage: Target population

Project type

Thematic focus

ARECO

6AF00262A + B

Conservation of Mukura forest, phase 1 + 2

To contribute to the protection, conservation and sustainable management of the Mukura forest reserve

06-2003 to 06-2004 / 05-2005 to 04-2006

46,678 West province (Kibuye): Mukura forest, 16 km2

1000 locals next to Reserve, 600 local leaders

1 + 4 tree planting/firewood production/ improved agricultural methods/food security/ beekeeping

TOTAL RWANDA 46,678

SIERRA LEONE

Partner

Project Code

Project Title Project goal Duration Budget (in €)

Coverage: Area (size)

Coverage: Target population

Project type

Thematic focus

EFA

6AF00215A

Preparing for the future: national environmental awareness programme - "Land Rover project"

To improve the sustainable natural resource management capacity of local communities, CBOs and other Action Groups; Budget is additional to other donor's funding and is mainly meant for purchase of vehicle and core funding

01-2002 to 02-2004

83,810 national: 8 districts (out of 12), no. of ha. unknown

135,000 SL returnees, 70,000 Liberian refugees

2 + 4 tree planting/ firewood production/ agroforestry / refugee camp impacts / env education / awareness raising

EFA

6AF00368A

Socially and environmentally responsible rutile and bauxite mining

Investigation of environmental and social issues related to the reopening of large scale mining activity from perception of all stakeholders

08-2005 to 09-2006

28,879 South-West province: rutile and bauxite mining areas of Moyamba and Bonthe disctricts (unknown size)

local communities, govt. officials, local academics, conservationists, mining companies

3 + 6 monitoring logging/mining industries/ environmental management

34

ENFORAC

9AF00402A

Dry of Fry? Collaborating to combat bushfires through dryland ecosystem education

To educate people living in dry areas about sustainable management practices through assessment of current practices and painting murals

06-2006 to 10-2006

12,076 3 sites in dry areas: Makeni, Mile 91, Magburaka, and in Freetown

Sierra Leoneans at 3 sites (unknown no.)

2 dryland conservation

ENFOSAL

1AF00146A

Freetown City environmental awareness and education campaign

to strengthen NGOs capacity for environmental awareness raising (in proposal 7 project goals and 9 objectives mentioned!)

06-1999 to 05-2001

52,560 Freetown and peninsula mountain forest areas, no. of ha unknown

40 environmental action groups, 15 tree nurseries in 15 villages

2 + 4 tree planting/ firewood production/ agroforestry / env education / awareness raising

Post-war activities: fuelwood production to stop environmental degradation

To restore the Foindu-Tankoro forest by planting community woodlots and by creating environmental awareness

09-2000 to 04-2001

13,076 North-East province: 50 acres of community woodlots in Foindu village

directly: 18 youths as nursery workers; indirectly: 10,000 community members

2 + 4 tree planting/ firewood production/ agroforestry / env education / awareness raising

FORPS

(combined projects)

1AF00068A

6AF00216A

Enhancing forest conservation in SL

To achieve conservation awareness in Kono district

04-2002 to 05-2003

20,000 Eastern region: Kono district

70 schools in eastern region

2 + 4 tree planting/ firewood production/ agroforestry / env education / awareness raising

Operation Restore Green, phase 1 + 2

Environmental awareness raising for children and tree planting

11-1996 to 07-1999 (phase 1)/ 07-2000 to 04-2001 (phase 2)

30,867 Freetown and surroundings

unknown (24 schools)

2 + 4 tree planting/ firewood production/ agroforestry / env education / awareness raising

Green Scenery

(follow-up projects)

1AF00145A+B

6AF00227A

Hatching the future - Preserving Sierra Leone's tropical rainforest

To create environmental awareness on tropical forest conservation and environmental protection among school children

06-2002 to 04-2005

84,100 National: Freetown, Bo and Kenema (Eastern & Southern region)

22 Green Clubs, no. of children unknown

See above

tree planting/ firewood production/ agroforestry / env education / awareness raising

Step by Step

AF2233

Tacugama Chimpanzee Sanctuary

Urgent Action appeal for running costs of Sierra Leone Chimpanzee Rehabilitation & Environmental Education Programme

05-1998 to 11-1998

4,265 40 ha. of Tacugama Chimp Sanctuary and surroundings (Regent Town)

unknown 2 + 5 species conservation/ environmental education

35

Step by Step

1AF00050A

Chimpanzee Rehabilitation centre

Halting chimpanzee and other exotic pets trade in SL, provide model environmental education program and halt illegal forest use

01-2000 to 04-2001

25,057 Western Area Forest Reserve (17,688 ha.) including the Tacugama Chimpanzee Sanctuary

7 communities (140 members); indirectly: 2700 people living in the project area; teachers and school pupils

See above

species conservation/ environmental education

TIAC

6AF00307A

Establishing a secretariat for the Tiwai island Administrative Committee

To strengthen the capacity of TIAC and ensure the sustainability of the Tiwai Island Wildlife Sanctuary

10-2004 to 03-2006

45,743 Southern Region (near Moa River): Tiwai Island, area size 12 sq. Km.

unknown (host communities close to Tiwai Island)

4 + 5 protected area establishment/management/ eco-tourism

TOTAL SIERRA LEONE 400,433

REGIONAL SCALE

Partner

Project Code

Project Title Project goal Duration Budget (in €)

Coverage: Area (size)

Coverage: Target population

Project type

Thematic focus

EFA

6AF00298A

Focal point support for TRP

Framework for financing of advisory services to IUCN's Tropical Rainforest Programme by EFA, who will act as a regional focal point

03-2004 to 12-2005

84,547 West-Africa: Liberia, SL, Guinea, Gambia, Ghana, Benin, Togo

Green NGOs in West-Africa

1 no specific thematic focus

Forests Monitor

6AF00324A

The industrial forest logging concession system: a success in Central Africa?

To draw attention of policy makers and donor community to problems and pitfalls of forest sector reform

01-2005 to 04-2006

72,963 Congo basin (focus on DRC)

policy makers of international agencies, international and national NGOs

3 + 6 monitoring logging/mining industries

Green Consult

6AF00280A

Consultation Great Lakes Region

To assist IUCN NL in developing a programmatic approach for the Great Lakes region

07-2003 to 01-2004

3,051 Great Lakes region (focus on DRC, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda)

NC-IUCN, Dutch development organisations

3 linkages nature conservation & development/relief

TOTAL 160,561

36

Annex II. Thematic areas per country

Thematic focus DRC Sierra Leone Liberia Burundi Rwanda Regional Total % of all projects (48)

awareness raising 8 3 4 0 0 0 15 31.3%

tree planting/firewood production 7 4 2 1 1 0 15 31.3%

roforestry 7 4 1 0 0 0 12 25.0%

environmental education 2 4 2 0 0 0 8 16.7%

forest conservation 4 0 4 0 0 0 8 16.7%

monitoring logging/mining industries 2 1 2 0 0 1 6 12.5%

improved stoves 4 0 1 0 0 0 5 10.4%

improved agricultural methods/food security 3 0 0 1 1 0 5 10.4%

protected area establishment/management 1 1 2 0 0 0 4 8.3%

beekeeping 0 0 2 1 1 0 4 8.3%

livestock/pasture management 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 4.2%

environmental management 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 4.2%

forest sector policies 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 4.2%

non-timber forest products production/trade 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 4.2%

ecotourism 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 4.2%

nature conservation 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 4.2%

species conservation 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2.1%

dryland conservation 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2.1%

animal breeding 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2.1%

refugee camp impacts 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2.1%

linkages nature conservation & development/relief 0 0 0 0 1 1 2.1%

37

Annex III. Questionnaire for in-depth review

Questions/key topics for interviews:

1. Impact/Sustainability of the project:

a. Have the results and products of the project been sustained since the project ended?

b. Has the project had any long-term impacts in terms of sustainable improvements in livelihood security of local communities, government or corporate policies, the management of natural resources or the conservation of biodiversity?

c. Has follow-up funding been obtained or has the project become economically self-sustaining?

2. Sustainability of your organisation:

a. How has your organisation developed since the project (in what sense did it become stronger or weaker)?

b. Has staffing been stable or has there been high staff turnover, with staff leaving to other organisations or government institutions?

3. Conflict impacts:

a. What impacts did the conflict have on your project and on your organisation?

b. How has the project responded to this?

4. Policy influencing:

a. Has the project contributed to the national or international policy agenda (specifically related to conflict prevention, peace building, environmental governance, poverty reduction strategy papers)?

5. IUCN Netherlands Committee support:

a. Has the organization had any positive spin-offs from IUCN NL’s specific support? E.g. by strengthening the organization’s capacity, bridging difficult periods in terms of fund raising, etc.

b. How unique has IUCN NL’s small grants support been?

6. Conflict context:

a. How has the project taken the conflict context into account?

b. Did the project establish any linkages between conservation/livelihood development and conflict prevention/ mitigation or peace building?

7. Lessons learned:

a. What lessons did you learn from this project, particularly in terms of project design or implementation?

b. Do you consider the project supported by IUCN NL as a success? If so, in what respect?

38

Annex IV. List of Abbreviations

Note: This list includes abbreviations of all partner organizations included in this study.

AAPDMAC Action d'Appui pour la Protection des Droits de Minorités en Afrique Centrale

ABO Assocation Burundaise pour la Protection des Oiseaux

AGIR Agro-Industrie Rurale

ARECO Association Rwandaise des Ecolgistes

AVOLAR Association des Volontaires pour l'Autopromotion Rurale

CADIC Collectif d'Actions pour le Developpement Integré dans les Communautés

CADRE Comité d'Appui au Développement Rural Endogène

CAMV Centre d'Accompagnement des Autochtones Pygmées et minoritaire Vulnérables

CREF (Réseau) Réseau pour la Conservation et la Réhabilitation des Ecosystèmes Forestiers du Nord-Kivu

EFA Environmental Foundation for Africa

EFA/L Environmental Foundation for Africa/Liberia

ENFORAC Environmental Forum for Action

ENFOSAL Environmental Foundation for Sierra Leone

FACE Farmers Associated to Conserve the Environment

FFI Fauna and Flora International

FORPS Forest Resources Promoters

FPI Forest Partners International

Life Liberia Indigenous Forum for the Environment

ODEB Organisation de Defense de l'Environnement au Burundi

OCEAN Organisation Concertée des Ecologistes et Amis de la Nature

PAEV Programme d'Approvisionnement en Eau pour les Villages

PAL Programme d'Action Locale

PIDP Programme d'Intégration et de Développement du Peuple Pygmée au Kivu

PIL Promotion des Initiatives Locales

POCAL Pollution Control Association of Liberia

PROPRE Programmes de Protection et de Preservation de l'Environnement

SAMFU Save My Future Foundation

SDI Sustainable Development Institute

SRNCL Society for the Renewal of Nature Conservation in Liberia

TIAC Tiwai Island Administrative Committee

UGEAFI Union des Groupes d'Etudes et d'Actions pour le Développement de Fizi/Itombwe

39

Annex V. List of References

� CARPE (2001). Conservation in a region of civil instability – The need to be present and assist.

Issue Brief No. 22 by WCS and Biodiversity Support Programme.

� CEPF (2006). Assessing five years of CEPF investment: Guinean Forests of West Africa biodiversity hotspot. Special report by the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund

� Collier, P. (2007). The bottom billion – Why the poorest countries are failing and what can be done about it. Oxford University Press

� Dabelko, G.D. (2006). From Threat to Opportunity: Exploiting Environmental Pathways to Peace. Paper for “Environment, Peace and the Dialogue Among Civilizations and Cultures” May 9-10, 2006, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran

� Dabelko, G.D. (2008). An uncommon peace: environment, development and the global security agenda. Environment Magazine May/June 2008.

� Giessen, E. van de (2008). Charcoal in the Mist - an overview of environmental security issues and initiatives in the Central Albertine Rift. Institute for Environmental Security (IES), The Hague, The Netherlands.

� Hanson T., Brooks T.M., Da Fonseca G.A.B., Hoffmann M., Lamoreux J.F., Machlis G., Mittermeier C.G., Mittermeier R.A., Pilgrim J.D. (2009). Warfare in Biodiversity Hotspots. In: Conservation Biology, published online: Feb 19 2009

� IES (2008). Environment and security – challenges for change. Roundtable Workshop report, IUCN World Conservation Congress, 6 October 2008.

� IUCN NL (2006). Small grants, big impacts. How small grants can help civil society organizations in the South to conserve nature and fight poverty.

� IUCN NL (2007). Report 2001-2006. Three small grants funds for dry tropics, wet tropics and wetlands. Report to DGIS.

� IUCN NL (2007a). Ecosystems and human well-being. First Annual Report 2007. Report to DGIS.

� Jambiya, G., Milledge, S.A.H. and Mtango, N. (2007). ‘Night Time Spinach’: Conservation and livelihood implications of wild meat use in refugee situations in north-western Tanzania. TRAFFIC East/Southern Africa, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

� Laurie, M. (2007). Policy relevance in small grants projects. IUCN Small Grants Programmes Knowledge Management Series No. 2.

� NCRC (2008). Capacity assessment of environmental organizations in Liberia in preparation for REDD. Prepared by Nature Conservation Research Centre, Ghana.

� Rainforest Foundation & Forests Monitor (2007). Concessions to Poverty. The environmental, social and economic impacts of industrial logging concession in Africa’s rainforests.

� Sandt, J. van de and MacKinven, A. (2007). Mapping indigenous territories. IUCN Small Grants Programmes Knowledge Management Series No. 1.

� UNEP (2009). From conflict to peace building – The role of natural resources and the environment.