Table of Contents

FOREWORD AND AKNOWLEDGMENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

INTRODUCTION

Consolidation and dissemination of pilot field experiences.

1.1. Findings and recommendations of 1996 project Tripartite Review Missions:

1.2. Technical and methodological elements of project experience for handling-over to local partners.

1.3. Interchange on problems currently dealt with by the NFT in Tunisia.

1.4. Systematisation and dissemination of project technical and methodological results.

A REVIEW OF PROJECT EXPERIENCE IN PLANNING, MONITORING AND EVALUATION (PME)

2.1. Project-level planning, monitoring and evaluation.

2.2. Community-level planning, monitoring and evaluation .

ON THE INSTITUTIONALISATION OF PROJECT APPROACH

3.1. Institutional scenarios for project follow-up phase.

3.2. Summary of FAO's initiatives on Sustainable Mountain Development.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1) Follow-up to recommendations of 1996 TRM.

2) Handing-over local project to local partners.

3) Transfer of the Inter-regional project expertise to the NFT in Tunisia.

4) Systematisation and dissemination of project experience.

5) Project and community level planning, monitoring and evaluation (PME) system.

6) Consolidation of the institutional scenarios for the follow-up phase.

7) Linkages with other FAO initiatives on sustainable mountain development.

ANNEX 1

ANNEX 2

ANNEX 3

ANNEX 4

ANNEX 5/1

ANNEX 5/2

ANNEX 5/3

ANNEX 5/4

ANNEX 5/5

FOREWORD AND AKNOWLEDGMENTS

"A genuine participatory experience can only be a learning process for all partners involved..... No pre-conceived answers and solutions are available and a step-by-step and highly flexible approach is the only practicable itinerary in order not to artificially orient the open-ended process of people's mobilisation and self-organisation".

Of course, we fully agree with the above basic assumptions which are shared by practically all participatory development experiences promoted during the last years, and we try to operate accordingly.

Also, we believe that, nowadays, an innovative participatory experience has to fight against the risk of isolation and the possible temptation of keeping some distance from governmental policies and related institutional frameworks, as well as from the often increasing role played by private interests within the same territory of project intervention.

This project is, and we wanted it to be, a small-scale pilot-initiative, with few resources of its own and with an ever-increasing need for linking with and relying on other technical and financial partners, in the framework of existing national policies.

This has helped this inter-regional project to progressively develop and diversify collaboration and links with different institutional and non-formal partners sharing the same perspective: promote and support truly bottom-up experiences in diversified ecological, institutional and socio-economic contexts, in order to distil lessons learned of more general relevance and to offer elements of orientation to concerned governments and existing networks interested in sustainable and participatory natural resource management.

This is why the project Internal Technical Meeting held in December 1996 in Tunisia, has been focused on the exchange and comparative analysis of real field experiences and on the issue of how better assist in the process of institutionalisation of the elements drawn from these experiences.

We hope that some parts of this document could then be of interest also to other partners active in the area of improved natural resource use and management.

As special thanks goes to all colleagues and friends who contributed to this Meeting and to representatives of the Tunisian Government who offered their warm hospitality and competent contribution to this joint exercise.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

APO Associated Programme Officer

CTA Chief Technical Adviser

CRDA Commissariat R�gional au D�veloppement Agricole

COOR Coordination Unit

CCODER NGO - Center for Community Development and Research (Nepal)

COPED NGO - (Burundi)

D/CES Direction de la Conservation des Eaux et du Sol (Tunisie)

DPAE Direction Provincale de l'Agriculture et de l'Elevage (Burundi)

FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations

FSD Farming System Development

GIS Geographic Information System

GO Governmental Organisation

GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft f�r Technische Zusammenarbeit

IAO Istituto Agronomico d'Oltremare (Italy)

ICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (Nepal)

IFAD International Fund for Agriculture and Development

IIED International Institute for Environment and Development

ITR Internal Technical Review

IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature

MARP M�thode d'Analyse Rurale Participative

MINAGRI Ministry of Agriculture

MINATE Ministry of Environment (Burundi)

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

NEPAN Nepal Participatory Action Network (Nepal)

NFT National Field Team

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation

NPD National Project Director

ODESYPANO Office de D�veloppement Sylvo-Pastoral du Nord-Ouest (Tunisia)

OTB Organizacion Territoral de Base (Bolivia)

PME Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation

PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal

PREFED NGO R�gionale (Burundi, Rwanda et Za�re)

PRODOC Project Document

PVUUP Participatory Village Upland Use Plans

RTD Research, Technology and Development

SEARPI The Pirai River Watershed Authority (Bolivia)

SWOL Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Limitations

UNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and Development

UNDP United Nations Development Program

UNICEF United Nations International Children Emergency Fund

USAID United States Agency for International Development

VDC Village Development Committee

WID Women in Development

INTRODUCTION

The 1996 Internal Technical Meeting (ITM) of the "Inter-regional Project for Participatory Upland Conservation and Development" (PUCD) took place in Hammamet (Tunisia) from 9 to 14 December. This event was organised by the Coordination Unit, and attended by the NPDs (National Project Directors), CTAs (Chief Technical Advisors), and selected staff and consultants of the five field-components of the project (Bolivia, Burundi, Nepal, Pakistan and Tunisia). FAO/Hqs was represented by a member of the Forestry Department unit in charge of coordinating activities in the area of Sustainable Mountain Development1.

Held a few months after the Tripartite Review Missions (TRMs) to Bolivia, Nepal, Pakistan and Tunisia2 and eight months before the expected ending date of project phase 2 (August 1997), this Meeting had two major goals:

i) to outline a common strategy for the termination and for the dissemination of activities implemented in the five pilot areas during project phase 1 and 2 (August 1992-August 1997); and

ii) to review and discuss the working hypothesis identified by the TRMs for a follow-up phase, aimed at institutionalising project approach at the national and/or regional (sub-national) level.

During the period before the Meeting, consultations with the National Field Teams (NFTs) led to the identification of a number of specific objectives instrumental to the achievement of the above goals. These included:

* to review and compare the findings and recommendations of the Tripartite Review Missions, including elements on the proposed follow-up phase;

* to identify technical and methodological elements of project experience able to be transferred to local partners, in order to ensure the continuity of the pilot-experience carried-out during project phase 1 and 2;

* to outline the institutional and operational scenarios for the replication and institutionalisation of project experience after the end of project phase 2;

* to explore the current prospects for consolidating the collaboration between the project and FAO "normative" functions in the area of Sustainable Mountain Development; and,

* to develop a plan of action for the systematisation and dissemination of project methodological and technical results.

Based on NFTs suggestions, two additional objectives were eventually included:

* to review the experience gained so far in establishing and operating a planning, monitoring and evaluation system (PME), at both project and community-level; and,

* to review and provide orientations to the project field component in Tunisia3, in light of the experience gained by other NFTs.

While designing the programme of the Meeting4, a major effort was made to fit this quite large agenda in the limited time available. A detailed time-table was developed, including presentations and discussions in plenary session and group-works. Guidelines for these exercises were prepared and made available in advance to participants. A small team of facilitators was formed and secretarial support ensured. Moreover, a number of background papers (including a special issue of the Project Bulletin), were prepared by NFTs and the Coordination Unit staff5.

This preparatory effort allowed for a smooth development of the Meeting sessions. According to final evaluation results, most participants found the work done relevant to their needs and consistent with their expectations.

This report summarises the results of the interchange which took place during the event, according to major topics dealt with.

Chapter 1 is entirely devoted to the core issues of consolidation and dissemination of project pilot-experiences. In Section 1.1., findings and recommendations of 1996 TRMs are summed-up and discussed. A review of technical and methodological elements of project experience to be handed-over to local partners, (including preliminary indications on the strategy for transfer) is presented in Section 1.2. In Section 1.3. results of the interchange among participants on specific issues currently faced by the NFT in Tunisia are summarised. Finally, a short-term plan for the systematisation and dissemination of project technical and methodological results is outlined in Section 1.4..

In Chapter 2, the results of the review of NFTs experience in planning, monitoring and evaluation (PME) are summarised. Section 2.1. focuses on project-level PME, while Section 2.2. deals with community-level PME. Each of these sections covers both the initial design of the PME system and its actual functioning.

Chapter 3 focuses on the key-objective of the proposed follow-up phase: the progressive institutionalisation of project approach at the national and regional level. Section 3.1. provides an update of the scenarios developed by NFTs to promote the adoption of project approach by national institutions. In Section 3.2., FAO/Hqs initiatives on "Sustainable Mountain Development" are summarised and prospects for a closer integration of the project in this framework are explored.

Operational conclusions and recommendations of the Meeting are reported in Chapter 4, with the aim of outlining a number of strategic orientations for the work to be done in the period up to August 1997.

Consolidation and dissemination of pilot field experiences.

1.1. Findings and recommendations of 1996 project Tripartite Review Missions:

As indicated in the reports of the Tripartite Review Mission which visited Bolivia, Nepal, Pakistan and Tunisia6 between April and September 1996, the key features of overall project progress are as follows7:

i) A genuine mobilisation process is taking place at grassroots level in all pilot areas.

ii) Local environmental perception and awareness has increased both among men and women, and has resulted in a number of significant activities where the active engagement of the population plays a major role. This goes along with an increasing diversification both of local farming systems 8 and of off-farm sources of family income.

iii) Local and district level authorities show an increasing appreciation for local participatory planning exercises: these have proved to be able, not only to promote the confidence and self-reliance of rural families, but also to provide local administrative and political bodies with operational indications for optimising the use of public investment funds9.

In this sense, the project is increasingly solicited to complement training of grassroots associations and field agents, with a capacity building and advisory role in micro-planning addressed to Village and District Council's members, also in view of facilitating adequate support from relevant technical line-agencies and promoting cooperative links among projects and NGOs.

iv) In all concerned countries, there is quite a general understanding and appreciation among decision-makers at central level for the above elements. A request for the extension of the project for at least two-year, along an evolutionary scenario, where project support moves from a field pilot-area to a role of policy guidance at central department level, has been clearly expressed by concerned national authorities.

v) This demand for an evolution from a field pilot-project dimension to a sectoral policy support and capacity building programme, appears a very positive signal of the initial success of the overall initiative and an encouraging step toward the institutionalisation of project approach and experience.

At this level, the role to be played by the project in the planned replicability-tests of its participatory and integrated approach, will essentially focus on capacity-building, training of line-agencies field staff, and logistic support. Funds required for subsequent implementation of activities jointly selected with local people, are expected to be essentially originated through the regular programme and budget of the same line-agencies and other collaborating NGOs and projects.

Acknowledging these results, local and national authorities of the concerned countries requested support to improve their planning capacity along the participatory methodology promoted by the project and representatives of the concerned Ministries/ Institutions expressed their interest to consolidate project field experience and to replicate it in other areas.

Based on the very positive findings of the Project Review Mission, a further 2-year follow-up phase was highly recommended, within the overall framework of the Inter-regional Project.

1.2. Technical and methodological elements of project experience for handling-over to local partners.

Monday 9 (afternoon) and Tuesday 10 December (morning and afternoon) sessions were entirely devoted to the identification of technical and methodological aspects of project field experience which may be transferred to (or continued by) local counterparts and partners after project phase 2 ending date (August 1997). Presentations and discussions were organised in a round-table format, focusing on a number of topics selected by each NFT as core aspects of the end-of-project situation10. These included:

i) technical measures for natural resource "conservation-by-use", based on local knowledge

ii) and/or appropriate technologies;

ii) income-generating activities;

iii) incentives and credit schemes;

iv) initiatives/actions aimed at promoting and/or strengthening women involvement in "conservation-by-use" and development initiatives;

v) initiatives/actions aimed at promoting and/or strengthening grassroots organisations in "conservation-by-use" and development initiatives;

vi) measures for promoting and/or facilitating the incorporation of the participatory and integrated approach in the district/municipality-level planning systems.

For each one of the above topics participants were asked to answer to the following key-questions:

a) What element(s) of the project experience in this area is/are likely to be transferred or continued?

b) To (by) which institutional framework or grassroots initiatives will it/they be transferred or continued?

c) What action could be taken in the forthcoming months to facilitate this transfer or continuation?

At the end of this series of round-tables, a comparative summary was prepared by the Meeting facilitators and discussed in plenary. Results of this final winding-up session are presented hereinafter, according to the above key questions.

a) Methodological and Technical elements for transfer/continuation.

In Table 1, elements of project experience likely to be transferred to or continued by local partners, are classified according to major topics, type of activity and country. Whenever relevant, additional specifications are given in the footnotes.

Table 1 - Summary of elements of project experience likely to be transferred/continued after project termination, by major category, type and country (based on NFTs presentations and discussions at 1996 ITM).

Information included in the above table shows the richness11 of the heritage that PUCD project field components are expected to leave to their local counterparts and partners by the end of phase 2. It also suggests that, beyond differences related to local features or specific opportunities and constraints met during implementation, the work done so far has brought all NFTs to fulfil almost all the core elements of the end-of-project situation foreseen by the ProDoc.

b) Actors involved in handing-over / continuation.

As shown in Table 2, all NFTs entrust the continuation of project field-experience to a variety of institutional and social actors. As stressed by NFTs representatives, this is being made possible by rooting this experience in the local institutional setting and civil society, through the collaborative and participatory implementation process promoted by the project.

Table 2 - Institutional and community actors to be involved in the handing-over of project experience (based on NFTs presentations and discussions at 1996 ITM).

c) Means for transfer /continuation

Based on elements presented in Table 1 and 2, all NFTs highlighted the continuity existing between the work done so far, and the special effort to be made in the forthcoming months for handing-over project experience. Three types of action related to specific activities or elements of project experience were identified as necessary to support this process:

* support to the negotiation process for the finalisation of relevant agreements between local institutions and communities;

* organisation of training events (including workshops, short-courses, study tours, etc..), for local institutions staff and members of grassroots organisations; and

* production of extension and training materials.

The ITM discussions highlighted two main critical concerns about the very optimistic prospects for transfer and continuity presented by NFTs. One of the facilitators (the M&E consultant), recalled that insufficient evidence has been produced so far, both on the actual effectiveness of technical measures aimed at improving natural resource management, and on the cost/ effectiveness of income-generating activities promoted by the project. The Project Manager also expressed his concern for the institutional and social sustainability of joint management procedures and mechanisms established with NFTs support up to date.

Based on the above concerns, it was agreed to identify and select from the comprehensive lists presented by each NFT (see Table 1), those elements which are actually going through a process of test, proof, evaluation and adjustment, and which could then realistically be transferred or continued. Criteria for facilitating this selection included:

Effectivenes: refers to available evidence that "conservation-by-use" activities actually facilitate both conservation and production; that income generating activities actually generate income; that people mobilisation methods actually promote participation and empowerment; etc.

Efficiency: refers to the favourable balance between cost and effects taking into account financial and human resources invested, time required for implementation, and other relevant inputs.

Acceptability: refers to the available evidence that the elements selected for transfer and continuation are consistent with the local culture and social organisation, as well as with local political and institutional settings.

Sustainability: refers to the potential continuity of positive effects versus equal or decreasing environmental, economic or institutional costs. Long-term risks should be reasonably excluded.

The production of technical papers documenting the respect of the above criteria for each element selected for transfer and continuation was eventually suggested as a complementary means to facilitate field projects hand-over (see below, Section 1.4.). To this end a stronger and sounder use of findings from project monitoring and evaluation exercises, as well as from ad hoc studies carried out in the framework of the project was recommended.

1.3. Interchange on problems currently dealt with by the NFT in Tunisia.

As recalled in the introduction, the Tunisia NFT expressed its interest to take advantage of 1996 ITM held in Tunisia for presenting in some detail the state-of-the-art of their national project component to colleagues from other NFTs, and discussing with them two major problems met during implementation: a) the formation of a village-level team able to ensure continued support to the participatory process and related activities; and (b) people's organisation at local level.

To this end, a field day has been carried out on Thursday 12 December including a briefing on the experience gained so far by the NFT in Tunisia, and a visit to project area. During the visit, a reconnaissance of sites where forestry and soil conservation activities are being implemented, and a meeting with women groups with a demonstration of improved stoves, have been also carried out.

The field day has allowed ITM participants to get more familiar with the work done so far by the NFT in Tunisia and to get a direct and visual experience of the local environmental and social setting. After the visit, a session aimed at discussing the two major issues at stake was carried out. Main topics dealt with in this session are summarised in the following paragraphs.

a) Formation of a village-level team.

As clarified at the beginning of the session by Tunisian NFT members, during the first year of operation, village-level activities have been carried out by a team of four persons, including:

* a national consultant in social communication and community development;

* a senior women communicator/group promoter, recruited through the national NGO "ASAD";

* a senior civil works engineer, seconded by the CRDA (Regional Centre for Agricultural Development), the project local counterpart;

* a junior women extensionist also seconded by the CRDA.

With the support of other NFT members, this core-field staff has been able to complete the first group of PRAs (including PRA and participatory planning exercises) in the douars (villages) of Agailia, Ben Ameur, Ben Rejeb and Dhouaya, and to start-up the PRA process in the douars of Lachleb and Mastoura.

Also based on Tripartite Review Mission recommendations, a significant expansion of project field activities is foreseen by 1997 Workplan. This includes:

* the continuation of on-going activities in the douars of El Agailia, Ben Ameur, Ben Rejeb and Dhouaya;

* the completion of the PRA cycle and the start-up of selected activities implementation in the douars of Lachleb and Mastoura;

* the start-up of a new PRA cycle in the douars of Tebainia, Ben Rezig, Ben Alya and Ben Jebril.

Given also the size of the project area and the poor accessibility of some donors, the Tunisian NFT felt that this workplan could not be implemented by the existing limited field team and the following alternatives have been envisaged:

i) To recruit against project funds one or two additional communicators/group promoters, either through the national counterpart or the collaborating NGO. This solution was found not sustainable: indeed, the project local counterpart and the collaborating NGO, for the time being, do not appear able to ensure the continuity of this staff after the end of the project.

ii) Two or three extensionists could be seconded by the "Cellules de Rayonnement Agricole" (agriculture extension agency of the Ministry of Agriculture). In this case, training intensive on participatory and communication methods should be provided to this staff by the project.

iii) Selected Village people could be recruited as group promoters. Also in this case, the project should provide appropriate training, as well as adequate incentives or a small salary.

Exchange of experience on this issue with members from other NFTs led to the following conclusions:

* Recruitment of village people resident in the project area as group promoters should be considered the first choice solution to ensure expansion of project activities, as well as a more continuous presence in the field.

* In any case, in order to facilitate future handling-over of this personnel to local institutions, project institutional partners should be involved in the selection, training and management of new group promoters.

* Time and resources for training group promoters in participatory methods, social communication and extension, should be carefully allocated and considered in 1997 Workplan.

b) People's organization

In 1995, before starting the first PRA cycle, the NFT in Tunisia decided not to consider the establishment of a community-level organization as a pre-condition for launching the participatory process and starting-up field activities. Indeed, the experience of other projects carried out in the country, showed that the creation of "ad hoc" organizations which may act as project grassroots partners can sometimes lead to artificial and poorly sustainable forms of participation.

Throughout the first PRA cycle the project has therefore worked with individuals or informal groups. However, the need for a more structured organization has been felt at the moment of the implementation of the action plans developed through the participatory planning exercises.

Regarding this issue the following suggestions were given to the Tunisia NFT by colleagues from other teams:

* Project experience in other countries has shown that people's organization is a basic condition for actual participation in decision-making and implementation. The NFT in Tunisia should therefore start to discuss with villagers possible forms of organization better fitting their indigenous social setting. Given the unsatisfactory results of other experiences elsewhere in the country, the project should take this step with a creative and open-minded attitude.

* In order to ensure the sustainability of new grassroots organizations, the existing institutional framework should be carefully considered. In particular the potential of grassroots organizations already foreseen by the Tunisian law, (such as the "Associations d'Int�r�t collectif" (AIC), and the more specific "Association Foresti�re d'Int�r�t Collectif" (AFIC) or tge "AIC de Conservation des Eaux et du Sol" (AIC/CES) should be carefully analysed, and, if appropriate, field-tested in the project area.

* Finally, the establishment of legally acknowledged grassroots organizations should be seen as a medium-term objective. However, the formation of small interest groups, focusing on specific (entry-point) activities and supported by local traditional leaders, could be an appropriate start-up for this process.

1.4. Systematisation and dissemination of project technical and methodological results.

A session held on Friday 13 afternoon was devoted to discuss the progress and prospects in the systematisation and dissemination of project results through the production of written and audio-visual materials.

Following decisions made during 1995 ITM, an increased effort was made during 1996 by the Coordination Unit and NFTs in order to document the work made so far by the project. In particular:

* A Coordination Field Document series was started-up through the publication of a major mid-term evaluation report based on elements presented and discussed during 1995 ITM meeting. This document was widely circulated within and outside FAO and has been appreciated by many readers.

* Three "regular" issues and one Special Issue of the Project Bulletin were prepared by the Coordination Unit staff. Project Bulletins are regularly sent to a mailing list including NFTs, FAO relevant Departments, sister institutions and projects. Feedback received so far is generally very positive.

* Several field-documents focusing specific aspects of project implementation have been prepared by NFTs and circulated at national level. Some of these documents have been re-edited and published in forestry and development journals, or in the Project Bulletin Special Issue.

* Action to start-up the production of an audio-visual documenting the overall project experience was taken by the Coordination Unit, including the identification of a specialist consultant and the preparation of a draft script, which was submitted to Meeting participants for comments and suggestions.

Appreciation was expressed by Meeting participants for the efforts made. However the need for increasing and improving Coordination Unit editorial activities was also stressed. Suggestions given and decisions made in connection with the Field Document series, the Project Bulletin and the production of the above mentioned audio-visual, are reported in the following paragraphs:

a) Field Document Series

In ITM participants opinion, this series should include major "inter-regional" studies, aimed at reviewing and comparing methodological and technical aspects of national components field experience, as well as less comprehensive (and shorter) papers, focusing on specific aspects of implementation in a given location. Publications in this series should continue to be presented in a high quality desk-top publishing format and circulated at the international level, within and outside FAO. The series should host documents and papers written in all the three project languages.

In this respect, the Project Manager, due to the current delay in systematisation and dissemination of project experience, recommended that a major effort should be made, before Phase 2 termination, to write, edit and prepare for publication a number of selected technical documents and papers. This effort should involve both the Coordination Unit and NFTs staff. Participants in the ITM were therefore asked to tentatively agree on a number of subjects/titles which may be included into a publication plan for 1997. Results of this exercise are presented in the following table:

Table 3 - 1997 tentative publication plan for the Field Document Series .

b) Project Bulletin.

The three regular Project Bulletin numbers, issued in April, July and September 1996 basically included miscellaneous information such as news on missions, consultancies, training opportunities, congresses and workshops, leave periods, etc. The Special Issue prepared in the occasion of the '96 ITM, also included a number of short papers on selected aspects of project experience.

As shown in Table 4, in the opinion of some ITM participants, the different content of regular and special issues of the Bulletin entails significant differences in the objectives, target audience and desirable features of the publication:

Table 4 - Main features of Regular and Special Issues of Project Bulletin, as identified by ITM participants.

Based on the above, and considering the time and cost needed to produce on a quarterly basis the Bulletin, a suggestion was made to split this editorial activity in two different formats:

i) Project internal newsletter (Project Bulletin)

This newsletter including in-project and miscellaneous information, will be issued every two/three months. It will be prepared in English in a simple electronic format and disseminated among NFTs by E-Mail. In French and Spanish countries, news will be translated by the CTAs for dissemination among their staff, on an as-needed base.

ii) Project Bulletin (Special Issues)

Following December 1996 Special Issue, the Project Bulletin Special Issues will include short-papers, an annotated bibliography of reports produced by the project during each semester, and major miscellaneous news (congresses, training opportunities, etc.). Papers will focus on field experience carried-out in the framework of the project and will include a brief introduction of each issue under consideration, a description of the practical experience and the lesson(s) learned. Their length will not exceed two/three A4 pages. Each paper of the Bulletin will be published in its original language and in English (translations to be prepared by the Coordination Unit in Tunis). A Spanish version could be prepared by the NFT in Bolivia, through Coordination Unit funding. Lay-out will be based on the existing one. Distribution will be made through the Coordination Unit and NFTs mailing lists.

c) Audio-visual on overall project experience.

This initiative was presented by the Project Manager who highlighted the importance of relying on a professional quality product for disseminating project experience to a larger public. The draft script prepared by the consultant in-charge was circulated, discussed and eventually approved without major changes.

Agreements for sharing production and post-production costs among Coordination Unit and NFTs were made. A timetable for implementation was also fixed.

A REVIEW OF PROJECT EXPERIENCE IN PLANNING, MONITORING AND EVALUATION (PME)

"In accordance with the character of a participatory process, the (PUCD) project is designed with a flexible outline of the nature and type of activities that will be undertaken. The iterative process of assessment planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation and feedback of results for further planning in the course of the project, will provide a better design of activities of each national component according to the needs and requirements of participating rural communities."12

This statement from PUCD ProDoc for phase 2 explains why the development of a sound internal planning, monitoring and evaluation PME practice is so important for project successful implementation. It also justifies the significant amount of time and money invested (specially, in the last three years) for designing and operating a comprehensive PME system.

Since 1993, technical support to this endeavour has been provided by Mr. Patrizio Warren, co-author of this report. Based on results of an initial need assessments and on a preliminary reconnaissance visit to Bolivia, an outline of the system was designed in 199413. Being more a conceptual and operational framework for PME than a series of guidelines, the recommended design was meant to be structured enough for establishing a common PME practice among PUCD field-projects, and, at the same time, flexible enough to fit the variety of institutional and social environments.

From 1994 to 1996, a number of field missions to Bolivia, Nepal, Pakistan and Tunisia, allowed to fine-tune this initial design to the specific situation of each project field-component, to start-up the operation of the system, provide some follow-up and get relevant feed-back after initial field-tests14. In the occasion of these missions, interaction among concerned NFTs and the consultant, facilitated the identification of several adjustments to be included in the original design. Further suggestions for improvement were identified during yearly Internal Technical Meetings and in other occasions. The current conceptual and operational structure of PUCD project PME systems (as summarised in Annex 1), should therefore be considered as the outcome of a joint elaboration, also based on preliminary results of field-tests carried out in the different countries.

By October 1996, a number of critical remarks by the NFTs in Nepal, Pakistan and Tunisia15, and criticisms about the overall functioning of the system in Pakistan and Bolivia reported by the APO posted at the Coordination Unit16, led to include into the ITM programme two half-day sessions on project and community-level PME. Aimed at identifying strengths and weaknesses of the system and its operations, and at collecting suggestions for improvement based on actual field-experience, these sessions included short NFT's presentations, group-work exercises and a plenary discussion. Previous discussions on the pivotal role of evaluation information for the identification of elements of project experience to be transferred to local partners, contributed to give momentum to this issue. High participation, readiness to give and take criticism, and concern for reaching a consensus beyond personal opinions and idiosyncrasies, contributed to make relevant and productive this inter-change, whose results are presented in the following sections.

2.1. Project-level planning, monitoring and evaluation.

At the beginning of this session, each NFT presented its actual project-level planning, monitoring and evaluation practice. Main elements of these presentations are summarised in Table 5. A comparative review of this information leads to the following two main findings:

i) The project-level PME practice of all NFTs (including Burundi) fits to some extent the normative outline of the system presented in Annex 1, at least in that all its four basic modules have been implemented (or, in the case of Tunisia, will soon be implemented). However, consistency between the methodological framework and the actual practice increases proportionally with the length of each NFT experience in operating the system and with exposure to consultant's inputs (in this connection, see the relevant information provided in the first column of Table 5).

ii) Beyond the above common elements, a significant degree of variation exists among NFTs in connection with the schedule and technicalities of planning and monitoring tools for conducting process evaluation (namely, the use of time allocation indicators), and in connection with the subjects of results evaluation exercises. This variation is indeed related to local factors, such as NFTs priorities and preferences, project institutional setting and specific environmental, economic and social problems addressed by each NFT. The existence of such a variation within a common conceptual and operational framework, appears to confirm the high degree of flexibility and adaptability built into the proposed system.

These findings are consistent with the results of the group-work exercises which followed NFTs presentations. During this part of the session, two separate working groups were asked to identify, in light of their experience, strengths and weaknesses of the system and possible suggestions for improvement. The reports of the two working groups were then consolidated and discussed in a plenary session.

Table 5 - Elements of project-level PME practice, as presented by NFTs representatives

Table 5 continued

Table 5 continued

According to results of this exercise, main strengths of the system are as follows:

* the system features a high flexibility and adaptability to local conditions;

* its functioning and its practical outcomes improve trough experience (the more you use it, the better it works);

* the system is open-ended: in particular, the result evaluation module allows for the progressive integration of new elements, according to the evolution of users information needs;

* the operation of the system has significantly contributed to improving the planning of activities (through the identification of results and steps), to a stronger responsibilisation of field staff (through the task-sharing mechanism built-in the planning module) and, in general, to an increased availability, circulation and use of information about project functioning and achievements.

On the other end, perceived weaknesses of the system include:

* difficulties for a consistent breaking-down of each activity in results and steps (specially at the beginning of the operation of the system);

* insufficient reliability of data needed to calculate time allocation indicators, related also to their poor acceptability to field staff (who sometimes perceived estimates of staff time spent as a means of control over individual performance);

* the overall system is perhaps too complex and sophisticated (and innovative), to be transferred to counterpart institutions.

No special suggestions for improvement were identified by the two groups. Rather, the opportunity of continuing the implementation of the system, according to its basic structure, was reiterated. However, it was also made clear that, following the leading example of the two NFTs in Bolivia and Pakistan which, so far, gained more experience in project-level PME, a strong initial effort is needed by less experienced NFTs to adapt the system to their local institutional context and needs.

Based on this assessment, a general discussion took place in the final part of the session. This included the identification of elements of stronger consensus among NFTs, a review of the "burning issue" of the use of time allocation indicators for project-level process evaluation, and a number of considerations about the implementation issues of the system observed by the consultant during the last field visits.

Regarding the first topic, after thorough internal discussion, the participants agreed on the following:

* The PME system planning module provides a sound logical framework for operational planning of project activities, according to grassroots and institutional inputs. The suggested method allows to conceal a smooth and flexible implementation of project-promoted initiatives with basic managerial needs such as ensuring project operations efficiency, optimising the use of available resources (including time), and achieving the expected outcomes. Technical difficulties in breaking down activities into specific results and implementation steps are more contingent than structural: as shown by the experience of NFTs in Bolivia and Pakistan, they are likely to be progressively overcome through practice and experience.

* With regard to the monitoring module, it was found that regular follow-up of workplans implementation (and subsequent adjustments to contingencies) is essential to ensure flexibility to project operations and to promote staff participation in relevant decision-making. Use of "delay from planned deadlines" as a key-monitoring indicator, to be combined with qualitative information provided by concerned staff, allows to focus monitoring meeting discussions on relevant topics, and therefore to decrease the length of these meetings and the burden of reporting work required from field workers.

* Even though some participants suggested that such a participatory project should not engage in collecting "hard" data on results, the opportunity was reiterated to keep into the system a number of conventional evaluation research exercises aimed at assessing the effectiveness and/or technical quality of project efforts.17 It was therefore agreed that a stronger and more continued commitment in the implementation of the applied research exercises built-in the result evaluation module should be ensured by NFTs.

A consensus among NFTs also existed on the need of some form of regular assessment of the quality of the implementation process. However different opinions arose among NFTs about the relevance, appropriateness, acceptability and "political correctness" of the suggested time allocation indicators (see box, in Annex 1).

In particular, Bolivia NFT representatives stated that, even though initial practical difficulties were met and acceptability by staff is still limited, these indicators have proved to be really useful for both project management and subsequent cost/effectiveness analysis. Nepal NFT representatives agreed about the necessity of collecting information on staff time allocation, but considered ideologically/questionable the evaluation of community participation on the basis of time allocated for achieving project/community negotiated goals. On the contrary, the representatives of the NFT in Pakistan found poorly acceptable any measurement of staff working time, but considered important to include time spent by participants into cost/effectiveness analysis of project activities. Finally, the representatives of the NFT in Tunisia identified several practical problems met in starting up the collection of time allocation data, but observed that it will be difficult to develop a better way to keep track of project and community efforts in activities implementation.

Given this variety of opinions, no attempt was made to reach a common solution to the controversy. The consultant just clarified that the suggested indicators have been proposed (and agreed upon with each NFT), as a means for increasing validity and reliability of qualitative information, based on staff perceptions of their own field experience. Therefore they are important, but not essential for the functioning of the process evaluation module. This entails that, beyond consultant's opinion, each NFT should feel free to replace or combine these indicators with alternative means of verification of the quality of the work done, according to field-test results.

During the following discussion, several options were mentioned including keeping process evaluation on a plain qualitative base (i.e., staff and project participants perceptions); identifying activity-specific quantitative indicators of project and participants commitment (to be combined with qualitative assessment); limiting the use of the suggested method (time allocation indicators plus qualitative assessment) to selected pilot-initiatives. Readiness of the consultant to assist each NFT in sorting out the solution more appropriate to its felt needs was reiterated.

Finally, based on observations made during the recent follow-up missions a number of problems related to the actual implementation of the PME system in Nepal and Pakistan18 were raised by the consultant and briefly discussed with participants. These included: i) insufficient training and supervision of data collectors; ii) insufficient investment in the operation of the system; and (iii) unsatisfactory performance in processing and utilisation of evaluation information collected:

i) Insufficient training and supervision of data collectors.

During start-up missions, training inputs were provided by the consultant, with the aim of introducing the technicalities of the system to the whole staff (as well as of facilitating the development of proper attitudes towards M&E practice). Additionally, the need of providing further training (in local language) and a continued formative supervision to data collectors, was stressed in all consultant reports. Elements collected during follow-up missions suggest that this recommendations was applied only to a very limited extent. In the consultant's opinion, this probably is the main cause of the poor reliability and the lack of systematic organisation of most evaluation data sets, which was identified during recent follow-up visits.

ii) Unsatisfactory performance in processing and utilisation of evaluation information.

As clearly shown by the Meeting discussion on the elements of project experience to be transferred/handed over to local partners (see Chapter 1), in various occasions NFTs have so far shown a limited capability to extract from evaluation data the information needed for decision- making19. Often acknowledged by NFTs, this weakness has been related to time constraints and/or insufficient experience of the staff in-charge20. However, as clearly stated by the ProDoc, collection, analysis and use of evaluation data (as well as of other sources of information21), is a top priority for such an action/research-oriented project. A solution, including intensive training and/or hiring of local qualified personnel, should therefore be found and implemented as soon as possible.

iii) Insufficient investment in the operation of the system.

In consultant opinion, this is the root-cause of most of the above problems. As clearly stated in all consultant reports, NFTs cannot expect to have all their PME needs fulfilled at once by a three-four weeks consultancy. Clear allocation of responsibilities, motivation and commitment of all staff and time22 are needed to make this system (as well as whatever other PME system) work. Elements collected during the recent follow-up missions, suggest that this has not been always the case. This obviously relates to the shortage of staff and funding limitations affecting the overall operation of PUCD NFTs. However, the impression remains that the perception of PME as an additional burden, more than as substantial element of project practice, has played a significant role in this connection.

Subsequent discussions allowed to clarify that the above problems were met in the past also by the NFT in Bolivia which, however, was able to address them successfully. It was also observed that, if relevant action is not timely taken, the same difficulties are likely to affect in the next future the development of project-level PME practice in Tunisia. Increased consultant inputs, continued commitment by project management and development of information management skills within the team were identified as the elements which may more directly contribute to overcome the above constraints.

Based on these considerations, some participants stressed that the design and the establishment of a project-level PME system should had taken place at the very beginning of project operations. This lesson learned was found specially relevant in view of the forthcoming project follow-up phase. In this connection, the Coordination Unit was recommended to review the overall PME experience gained by the project in the last three years; to re-design the overall system according to findings of this review and the objectives of the project institutionalisation process; to provide relevant training to CTAs, NPDs and staff, at the start-up of the new phase; and to ensure a more timely and continued technical assistance on this subject-matter.

2.2. Community-level planning, monitoring and evaluation .

Design and test of methods for facilitating planning, monitoring and evaluation by communities and interest groups, has been a major concern for all the field components of the inter-regional project. As a result of this effort, during this session, NFTs were able to present a comprehensive repertoire of community-level PME techniques and tools. This included techniques and tools suggested by consultants, as well as a number of interesting innovations developed by field staff through interaction with local communities and interest groups23.

Key-features of the different community-level PME systems are displayed in Table 6, according to NFTs representatives initial presentations. A comparative review of this information has led to the following findings:

i) The five experiences are inspired by a view of community-level PME as "community members planning/monitoring/evaluating their own development efforts". However, in all countries, the project and the partner institutions are deeply involved in PME, as facilitators of the process, technical advisors and donors. Consequently, a more realistic way to look at PME could be: "continued negotiation of community demand against project and partner institutions resources and mandate"24.

ii) PME systems framework is based on the iterative project cycle (i.e., it is very close to the project-level PME framework). The link between evaluation and re-planning (i.e. the system main feedback loop), seems less strong in Pakistan than in other countries.

iii) Small, locally-based, interest groups (user groups in Nepal), are the main grassroots actors of PME. However, in Pakistan and Nepal opportunities are provided to user groups to exchange ideas and experience and to coordinate planning (community forums, Village Conventions). The appropriateness of community-wise evaluation and re-planning workshops (as tested in Bolivia, Nepal and Burundi) is controversial25.

iv) Participatory feasibility analysis is practised in all countries. Moreover, Bolivia, Nepal and Pakistan use cost/benefit analysis to assess (ex-ante) and evaluate (ex-post) income generation activities. However, in some cases, both types of exercises are more "extractive"(RRA-like) than truly "participatory" (PRA-like).

v) Monitoring is mostly based on group discussions. All NFTs consider a soft approach nearer to the way local people do their own monitoring. Only in few cases, more structured tools were developed. In Pakistan, visual monitoring forms for illiterate women have been successfully tested.

Table 6 - Elements of community-level PME practice, as presented by NFTs representatives.

Table 6 continued

Table 6 continued

vi) Evaluation exercises are essentially based on verbal techniques (group discussions, SWOL analysis, problems/causes/solutions analysis). Visual methods have been tested (such as slide-language), but found to be too sophisticated and not sustainable. Experimental trials on selected plots involving concerned interest groups, have been carried-out so far only in Bolivia.

Following initial presentations and project PME experience, a strengths and weaknesses exercise was carried-out by each NFTs as a group work. Main strengths in community-level PME present practice as perceived by NFTs are as follows:

* PME has a positive impact on local communities and is highly motivating and rewarding for project staff.

* PME has also contributed to strengthen interest groups cohesion, effectiveness and efficiency. Its practice has an empowering effect.

* PME has facilitated the dissemination of project approach among people and communities.

No special weaknesses in the design or implementation of the PME system were identified during this exercise. Instead two main needs were forwarded:

* to ensure further training of field staff in designing and managing PME exercises26;

* to develop a number of participatory exercises focusing on economic and environmental effects of project activities.

After discussion of group-work results, a feedback on the overall operation of the PME system was given by the consultant and discussed with participants. Three main topics were dealt with, as follows:

i) Continuity.

Community-level planning, monitoring and evaluation are essential elements of the participatory process, whose development and strengthening require an important facilitation effort by the project. However, it has been observed that organisational and time constraints have so far prevented pilot-experiences made in this area, to evolve into a systematic community-level PME practice. The need for ensuring continuity to the experiments and tests so far conducted, is therefore currently perceived by all NFTs as an operational priority.

ii) Validity, reliability and accuracy.

A further limitation of project community-level PME practice is the actual validity, reliability and accuracy of the information produced in its framework. Biases and misunderstandings (including inaccurate translations from national/indigenous languages), were found to affect the results of PME exercises more often than acceptable. This is related to the ubiquitous use of verbal techniques (such as group meetings, interviews, SWOL analysis, etc.). A more intensive use of observational and visual techniques based, whenever appropriate, also on simple quantitative procedures (such as measurements, simple calculations and rankings), or experimental protocols (e.g. measurement of soil losses through erosion boxes; transect counting for re-vegetation; survival counting in re-afforested areas, etc.), was therefore suggested as a means to improve the quality of the information on which community-level evaluation exercises (and subsequent re-planning) are based27.

iii) Relevance and usefulness.

Finally, it was stressed that the real capability of the project (and of its local partners) to effectively re-orient its action according to ideas and suggestions coming from community-level PME, is often affected by institutional and communication groups. A major effort to overcome these constraints (which could easily disrupt the partnership with local communities and interest groups), was found to be necessary. An improved and strengthened role of participatory technical, economic, social, institutional and environmental feasibility analysis, was suggested as a means to improve the capability of the project and local institutions to process community and interest groups inputs.

ON THE INSTITUTIONALISATION OF PROJECT APPROACH

Friday 13 and Saturday 14 sessions were devoted to discuss the actual opportunities for the institutionalisation of project approach. To this end, the work done so far by all NFTs in order to outline the follow-up phase institutional setting was presented. With the aim of informing participants on recent development in relevant international and regional policies, a summary of on-going FAO initiatives in the area of Sustainable Mountain Development (Chapter 21 of Agenda 21), was also presented. Finally, the role to be played by the Coordination Unit to facilitate the above institutionalisation process was discussed.

3.1. Institutional scenarios for project follow-up phase.

Since the Tripartite Review missions in early 1996, the Italian Government expressed its interest in principle to support the concerned governments request for a project follow-up phase aimed at facilitating the process of integration in national policies and plans of project participatory and integrated approach to watershed management and upland development. However, due to limited available funds, indications were provided that this follow-up phase could be assured only to three out of the five present PUCD national components, showing higher potential for the effective institutionalisation of project experience (i.e., Bolivia, Nepal and Tunisia). Moreover, the donor budget for a possible follow-up phase could essentially cover the cost of technical assistance and basic operational requirements. Thus, the feasibility of such a follow-up phase would also centrally depend on national governments willingness and capability to invest their own regular programme funds in the institutionalisation of project experience, with the possible integration and co-funding of other bilateral or multilateral donors.

Based on working hypotheses identified in the occasion of the Tripartite Review missions, and on further discussions with local partners, each NFT developed one or more possible scenarios for the institutionalisation of project approach within their countries. Results so far achieved by these efforts are summarised in the following paragraphs:

a) Bolivia

In Bolivia the institutionalisation of project approach could rely on two main assets: the interest shown in principle by the Italian Government to include this country in PUCD project follow-up phase; and the new institutional profile and role that project counterpart (SEARPI, the Pira� River watershed authority) is expected to develop in the framework of the institutional reform on-going in this country.

In this connection, it was indicated that during 1997 SEARPI could become more directly connected to the National Watershed Management Division, as well as to the Santa Cruz Department Regional Government. SEARPI institutional mandate could therefore expand, to include coordination and supervision of all watershed management activities within the Department. Furthermore, in accordance with the new policy of the National Watershed Management Division, SEARPI's action, traditionally focused on civil works, could shift towards a more integrated approach also covering productive and economic aspects. Moreover, according to on-going decentralisation process, SEARPI's activities should be carried-out with the more active involvement of Municipalities and local organizations.

In this framework, and thanks to SEARPI's interest for the pilot-experience carried-out in Samaipata in collaboration with the project, SEARPI managers expressed their wish to establish a full-fledged Watershed Management Wing and to transfer project key-staff to headquarters in Santa Cruz. To this same end, new positions for national staff will be created through SEARPI regular budget.

Negotiations with other donors (namely DANIDA, EU and Belgian Cooperation) have also been started in order to assure additional funds to continue field-work in Samaipata and to start-up similar initiatives throughout the Department (and the Country). The possible collaboration with a participatory and integrated watershed management project being launched by the National Watershed Division in La Paz Department, is also being explored.

b) Burundi

In Burundi local counterpart institution with the direct assistance of the project, have been able to negotiate with UNDP a major national-level initiative, inspired by the field-experience carried-out in Makamba area by PUCD NFT.

The immediate objectives of the proposed UNDP/FAO initiative are as follows:

1. To support the development of a national strategy and institutional framework for environmental management and conservation.

2. To strengthen governmental and grassroots institutions in the area of natural resource management.

3. To implement technical actions aimed at facilitating community-based and integrated natural resource management in selected watersheds, wet areas and protected areas.

4. To contribute to the dissemination and transfer of approaches, methods and techniques for participatory natural resource management.

This project would be part of the UNDP-sponsored National Plan of Action for addressing the environmental impact of the country socio-political crisis. Similarly to the Burundi PUCD project field component, it will be implemented in collaboration with the Ministry of Agriculture (MINAGRI) and the Ministry of Environment (MINATE). Local-level initiatives will be implemented through the Provincial Divisions for Agriculture and Livestock (DPAEs). As stated by the proposed Project Document, collaborative links with the FAO/Italy "Inter-regional Project for Participatory Upland Conservation and Development" will be kept and strengthened, in order to take advantage of a continued exchange of experience with other countries testing a participatory and integrated approach.

Preliminary feedback to the proposed Project Document have been highly positive and final approval is expected during 1997.

c) Nepal

As highlighted by the relevant TRM report, DSC (Department of Soil Conservation) project counterpart in Nepal) wants to consolidate the PUCD project's experience and use it as a basis for the institutionalisation of an improved policy for participatory and integrated watershed management. To this end, during TRM, DSC requested that the main technical assistance during the follow-up phase would shift from Gorkha District to the Department itself (in Kathmandu).

On November 1996, a Project Follow-Up Phase Formulation Workshop was organised in Kathmandu with the objective of:

i) Identify and specify what the role and responsibilities of the PUCD project at the DSC central level should be.

ii) Clarify what the FAO role would be with regards to other projects and donors active in the same sector (in particular with regard to DANIDA funded assistance on watershed management).

iii) Give all directly concerned parties the opportunity to participate in the project formulation process.

During this workshop all parties stressed that the project should not attempt to achieve more than could realistically be expected in view of its resources (budget) and duration. Therefore, the main objective for PUCD project follow-up phase in Nepal could be as follows:

"To assist in the development and institutionalisation of an improved concept of integrated, participatory watershed management and related policies in the Department of Soil Conservation."

Outputs and activity will most probably focus on:

i) Facilitation and development of a clear and realistic policy on integrated and participatory watershed management at the DSC (taking account of other relevant experiences in Nepal).

ii) Assist in the development of manuals and guidelines on integrated and participatory watershed management and participatory monitoring and evaluation (this will entail collaboration from other partners).

iii) Assist in curricula development for different level of training (technical staff, group promoters, user groups) on relevant subject matters, such as PRA, PME, user group capacity building, etc. (the training itself would largely be done by the DANIDA funded project).

iv) Assist in the development of improved relevant legislation (FAO international expertise could be of great use, but it would require substantial specific assistance from HQs).

v) Assist in the design of new watershed management initiatives and support in the identification of (and negotiation with) potential collaborative management partners and funding agencies.

d) Pakistan

Pakistan is the other country which most probably will not be directly included into the Italian Government-funded follow-up phase. During 1996 TRM, two different scenarios for continuing and institutionalising Phases 1 and 2 experience were identified:

i) The formation of a Social Forestry Wing within the Balochistan Forestry Department (which may had led the Italian Government to reconsider its withdrawn); and

ii) the transfer of project know-how and staff to the UNDP Integrated Area Development Project (IADP).

In the last months, little progress has been made in connection with both scenarios. Formation of a Social Forestry Wing has been postponed by Balochistan Government. Furthermore, due to delay in administrative procedures, start-up of UNDP's IADP is unlikely to take place before 1998.

However, less ambitious prospects for assuring some continuity to and (limited) institutionalisation of project experience have been identified. In particular:

i) Balochistan Forestry Department has shown interest for supporting the implementation of a small social forestry project in Mastung District, staffed by a national project manager and two group promoters (trained by PUCD project); and

ii) the American NGO "Mercy Corps International" is ready to support with its own staff and funds the continuation of some of the income-generating activities launched by the project in Kanak Valley villages.

CTA and NPD are currently working to consolidate and, if possible, expand these opportunities.

e) Tunisia

Due to the relatively short field-experience, institutionalisation at the national-level of the work developed so far by PUCD project in Tunisia is perhaps premature. However, the strong link already existing in this country between the NFT and the National Direction for Water and Soil Conservation, is likely to facilitate integration of the methodology tested in Zaghouan at the central level.

In particular, the possibility of disseminating selected elements of PUCD's project experience throughout the twenty pilot areas included in an on-going UNDP sponsored soil and water conservation project, is currently explored. Following Tunisian NFT, this could represent a significant contribution to the practical implementation of the new National Soil and Water Conservation Law.

3.2. Summary of FAO's initiatives on Sustainable Mountain Development.

Beyond organizational and financial aspects, the institutionalization process will entail for the project a shift from a field-centred to a national policy centred view of integrated and participatory watershed management and sustainable development. A need for getting updated information on activities carried out at the international-level to develop Agenda 21' Chapter 13 policies and on the role played by FAO, as task manager of this process was felt by NPDs and CTAs.

To fulfill this need a comprehensive presentation on the above topics was given by Mr. Simone Borelli on Friday 13. A summary of Mr. Borelli presentation is hereinafter reported.

The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) agreed on a global action programme on sustainable development, called Agenda 21. FAO's Forestry Department has the role of Task Manager on Chapter 13 of Agenda 21, "Managing fragile ecosystems: sustainable mountain development." Related activities are currently referred to as the Mountain Agenda.

Essentially the Mountain Agenda has two thrusts:

* to increase knowledge about the ecology and sustainable development of mountain ecosystems, and

* to promote integrated watershed development and alternative livelihood opportunities.

FAO's Chapter 13 effort on mountains is facilitated by the FAO Forestry Department, but because the effort is broader than forestry, a FAO inter-departmental working group was created so that expertise from eleven divisions within FAO Headquarters can be tapped. This group advises on economics, sociology, soils, pastures, water resource development and other topics relevant to mountain development. The main role of FAO, so far, has been that of facilitating regional meetings on follow-up to Chapter 13. The first regional meeting took place in Nepal in December 1994. This was followed by the Latin American meeting which was held in Peru in July 1995 and by the African meeting which was held in Ethiopia in June 1996. The European consultation was divided into two sessions ( April 1996, Scotland and October 1996, Italy).

At the initiative of FAO, an UN Inter-agency Working Group on Chapter 13 was constituted in 1993 to support and coordinate the various contributions and also to complement the work of Chapter 11. This group contributes to the reporting effort by providing first-hand information on various agencies' activities. A number of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are also active in the Mountain Agenda, and FAO works closely with them on meetings, projects, publications and other activities.

To coordinate this effort the Mountain Forum has been established, with some organizations acting as regional focal points for networking and information sharing, such as the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) in Kathmandu for Asia; the International Potato Centre (CIP) in Lima for Latin America and the Mountain Institute (TMI) in West Virginia, USA, for North America. Focal points for Africa and Europe have not been identified yet, but it is expected that this will be done in the near future.

Main activities carried out so far by Mountain Forum participants in collaboration with FAO's inter-departmental Working Group on Mountains include:

i) State of the World's Mountains.

A book on "The State of the World's Mountains" is in preparation, as part of the Mountain Agenda, to update the 391 page version produced in 1992. This book provides a progress report on the status and trends in mountain areas around the world, considering the environmental, sociological and economic aspects as related to development and environmental protection.

ii) Guidelines

The UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) issued a number of recommendations concerning mountain development, including the goal to develop a set of "Guidelines for sustainable mountain development," for use by UN member governments, international organizations and others. A collaborative effort, which also included an E-mail conference, is underway to develop the Guidelines, and FAO has contracted The Mountain Institute to coordinate the elaboration of this guideline project with close cooperation, support and inputs from all the international inter-governmental and non-governmental partners. The Guidelines work is building on existing guidelines for national level planning in forestry, environment, conservation and other areas as a starting point, to avoid duplicating existing materials. The Guidelines therefore should complement available guides and manuals, but focus on planning needs specific to mountain development. The Guidelines are intended as a tool for use in formulating comprehensive mountain development programmes. TMI is incorporating inputs from the Mountain Forum group, as well as other organizations, government agencies and institutes with relevant knowledge.

iii) Indicators

The Commission on Sustainable Development also recommended preparation of a set of "Indicators of sustainable development." The primary objective of developing these indicators is to provide another tool for decision-makers and policy-makers at the national level, to help them focus attention on sustainable development, set priorities on project selection, pick project sites and recognize data needs. This project is facilitated by FAO's Inter-Departmental Working Group on Chapter 13, and a second draft of the indicators for mountain lands is now at the discussion stage. The Indicators, as now drafted, include three sub-indices: (i) population numbers and changes; (ii) "human well-being" based primarily on nutrition; and (iii) natural resources status, as indicated mainly by erosion and vegetative cover conditions. The natural resources sub-index of the Indicators consists of four factors (in the latest draft): (i) the extent of protection of watersheds by vegetative cover or conservation; (ii) the extent of hazard or high risk zones, e.g., landslide areas; (iii) the percentage of already degraded areas; and (iv) an index of natural resource productivity (for wood, fodder, plants, meat and other goods). This project is continuing.

iv) Field Projects

As usual, FAO's Forestry Department provides technical assistance to FAO field projects in soil and water conservation in mountain or hilly areas around the world. In recent years, these projects have gradually moved away from the purely technical focus, placing more emphasis on development of participatory and integrated approaches, thereby giving greater attention to the social and economic issues and to strengthening people's organizations. At this time the Forestry Department provides technical support to individual watershed management projects in Nepal, Morocco, Pakistan (three projects), Vietnam, Myanmar and Western Samoa, and, of course also is involved in PUCD project. Development of a follow-up phase shifting PUCD project focus from the local to the national level is likely to increase collaboration with the Inter-Departmental Working Group

v) Publications, information, dissemination

FAO's Forestry Department continues to produce technical publications such as the "Conservation Guide" series. During 1995 a Conservation Guide was prepared for FAO by watershed specialists at Colorado State University, USA entitled Computer assisted planning in watershed management --technologies for national planning ; this document is now in the final editing stages in English and Spanish. Two new Conservation Guides have become available in 1996: Income generation from non-wood forest products in Upland Conservation and the English version of Monitoring and evaluation of watershed management project achievements which was already available in Spanish. Last but not least, FAO's mountain and watershed work will be included in FAO's Internet "home page" within the next few months. FAO also will be cooperating closely with the Mountain Forum as they develop their own networking on the Internet.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In order to summarise previous chapters, and provide the reader with a quick reference to the main outcomes of 1996 ITM, core conclusions of discussions held during the meeting are hereby reported. Each conclusion is complemented by a number of operational recommendations, which all together are meant to provide the outline of a strategy for the conclusion of project Phase 2, and the start-up of the forthcoming follow-up phase.

1) Follow-up to recommendations of 1996 TRM.

Based on the results of the Tripartite Review Missions carried-out during 1996, a proposal for a 2-year Phase III/Follow-up Phase will be prepared, covering the three participating countries showing the highest potential for institutionalising project approach and experience.

Recommendations will also be prepared for maintaining continuous links with the present project components in Burundi and Pakistan, where other possible donors have been or are being identified.

The Phase III/Follow-up proposal will include both the continuation/consolidation of the on-going field experience within project (sub)watersheds, and an increased assistance at central level for promoting/strengthening the process of institutionalisation of project approach within existing sectoral policies and for replicating project experience in other areas of the concerned countries.

2) Handing-over local project to local partners.

After five years of intensive field-work, all project field components (with the exception of Tunisia) have achieved to a substantial extent the end-of-project scenario foreseen by the Project Document. Institutional conditions exist for transferring selected elements of project methodology and know-how to local partners (including GOs, other international project, NGOs and grassroots organisations).

This hand-over process should be considered the main priority of National Field-components work-plan for 1997. To this end, all NFTs are recommended to:

* identify, on the basis of available M&E information and ad hoc studies and reviews, short-lists of highly effective, cost-effective, acceptable and sustainable elements of project experience, on which the hand-over process should be focused;

* identify for each of the above elements, the practical activities needed to assure proper transfer and/or continuation (including training; preparation of guidelines, manuals, extension materials; institutional facilitation among concerned parties; etc.);

* develop as soon as possible detailed hand-over plans to be discussed with the concerned partners and implemented with their active participation.

3) Transfer of the Inter-regional project expertise to the NFT in Tunisia.

Interchange occurred during the Meeting highlighted the importance of establishing a mechanism to assure the transfer of know-how from the NFTs who started their field-work in 1992 to the less experienced NFT in Tunisia. To this end, the Coordination Unit and all NFTs adopted the following recommendations:

* facilitate the implementation of short missions to Tunisia by the staff, and consultants of the Coordination Unit and other National Components, on topics identified as especially relevant by the NFT in Tunisia;

* promote the organisation of field visits by members of the NFT in Tunisia to other field components of the project;

* establish an on-line consultation flow, making use of available E-Mail facilities.

4) Systematisation and dissemination of project experience.

The importance of systematising and dissemination project technical and methodological results has been reiterated in several opportunities during the meeting. Efforts made in this connection during 1996 by the Coordination Unit and the NFTs have been acknowledged. However, most 1996 ITM participants felt that these activities are still to be strengthened, namely at the Coordination Unit level. To this end, a dissemination plan was drafted, including: strengthening of the Coordination Unit Field Document Series, improvement of the Project Bulletin, and production of a professional-quality audio-visual documenting the overall project experience. In order to implement this plan the following recommendations were forwarded:

* In 1997, a significant part of NFTs senior members working time should be devoted to the production of technical documents and papers, documenting selected aspects of project experience. This task should be appropriately considered by national work-plans for 1997.

* A major organisational and financial investment on publication activities is requested by the Coordination Unit. Available consultancy funds should be therefore allocated during 1997 for performing activities such as preparation and editing of technical documents. Publication of special numbers of the Project Bulletin (including short-papers on project field experience) should be the main task of the APO working at the Coordination Unit.

* Production of the above mentioned audio-visual will require taking professional-level shoots on project locations. Similarly, preparation of technical papers may entail collection of additional information in the field. A major collaborative effort between the Coordination Unit and NFTs (including cost-sharing) is therefore needed to implement these activities.

5) Project and community level planning, monitoring and evaluation (PME) system.

A rapid review of the experience gained so far in project- and community level planning monitoring and evaluation (PME), led 1996 ITM participants to identify positive aspects, as well as areas for improvement. Positive aspects included: high flexibility and adaptability to local conditions; progressive improvement through experience; contribution to better planning; involvement of field-staff; improved availability of information on project functioning and achievements; significant impact on communities capacity-building; and contribution to the dissemination of the project approach. On the other hand, main weaknesses, as identified by meeting participants, included: technical problems in the operation of the system; controversial value of some key-indicators; limited reliability and validity of M&E data; lack of institutional sustainability; insufficient investment in the operation of the system; unsatisfactory performance in processing and utilisation of M&E information; and discontinuous community involvement.

Given the importance of project- and community-level PME for the successful implementation of project's participatory approach, a twofold need was identified for improving current PME practice, and adapting it to the institutional and operational setting of the forthcoming follow-up phase. Based on this need, it was recommended to:

* implement a comprehensive and in-depth review of overall project's PME system, covering both design and implementation aspects, aimed at identifying lessons learned and suggestions for improvement;

* re-design the system according to findings of the above review and taking into consideration the follow-up phase institutional and operational setting;

* design and start-up a training programme on PME, targeted on project managers and M&E officers, to be implemented at the very beginning of the follow-up phase.

6) Consolidation of the institutional scenarios for the follow-up phase.

Presentations carried out in the framework of the meeting showed that all national components have gained the necessary experience to shift from the local field level, to the national institutional level. In Bolivia, Nepal and Tunisia, this institutionalisation process will take advantage of Italian Government support (official follow-up phase). In Burundi, international assistance will be handed over to UNDP. Unfortunately, in Pakistan prospects of institutionalisation are less solid and perhaps more time will be needed to ensure international support to the continuation of project experience.

Meeting recommendations in connection with this issue could be summarised as follows:

* Italian interest for keep on supporting the project should be formalised as soon as possible. To this end NFTs in Bolivia, Nepal and Tunisia, under the supervision of the Coordination Unit, should timely finalise all the relevant documents (Project Documents, Terminal Reports, etc.) and get necessary clearances from the concerned Governments. The Coordination Unit should also be responsible for preparing the Inter-regional "umbrella" document, continue negotiations with the Italian Government and FAO concerned bodies, and fulfil all the relevant administrative requirements. In order to avoid further uncertainty and any "bridging period" situation, these activities should be fully accomplished by the end of April 1997.

* As far as Italian funding will be rather limited, the Coordination Unit and the NFTs in Bolivia, Nepal and Tunisia should continue to search for donors which may be interested in providing the financial resources needed to implement field initiatives, hire further national staff, carry out training activities, and publish relevant documentation. Whenever applicable, on-going preliminary agreements should be finalised before the official starting date of the follow-up phase (September 1997).

* In the case of Burundi, hand-over to UNDP should not entail a weaker relationship with the other teams of the Inter-regional Project. As specified in UNDP's project document, regular contacts and continued interchange on technical matters (through exchange of materials, visits and experts) should be facilitated. The Coordination Unit should identify with UNDP project manager the more appropriate institutional and administrative mechanism to assure that such a continued collaboration will actually take place.

* Further effort should be made to provide a prospect for continuation and institutionalisation to the Pakistani field experience. To this end, direct contacts should be established between the Coordination Unit and the FAO and UNDP departments in charge of the Integrated Area Development Programme for Balochistan.

7) Linkages with other FAO initiatives on sustainable mountain development.

Following Mr. Borelli presentation of on-going initiatives carried-out to support the implementation of Agenda 21 'Chapter 13 recommendations, all ITM participants felt the need for a stronger and more continued linkage with FAO Inter-Departmental Working Group on Mountain Sustainable Development, as well as with the broader Mountain Forum. To this end, the Coordination Unit was recommended to:

* regularly report information on FAO Inter-departmental Working Group on Sustainable Mountain Development and Mountain Forum activities and initiatives on the relevant section of the Project Newsletter and Bulletin;

* facilitate inclusion of NFTs in the mailing list of FAO's Inter-departmental Working Group on Mountain Sustainable Development and of Mountain Forum, so that publication and materials will be timely made available;

* regularly disseminate project publications among members of the FAO Inter-departmental Working Group on Sustainable Mountain Development and Mountain Forum;

* prepare a list of expertise existing in FAO Inter-Departmental Working Group on Sustainable Mountain Development and make it available to NFTs;

* facilitate provision of backstopping services by officers involved in the FAO Inter-Departmental Working Group on Sustainable Mountain Development;

* organise workshops aimed at presenting and discussing project experience with members of the departments involved in the FAO Inter-Departmental Working Group on Sustainable Mountain Development.

ANNEX 1

FAO/ITALY

INTER-REGIONAL PROJECT FOR PARTICIPATORY

UPLAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT

GCP/INT/542/ITA

INTERNAL TECHNICAL MEETING 1996

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

BOLIVIA

M. Javier Escobedo, CTA

Santa Cruz, Phone: (591 3) 461 448 Fax: 462 145

Samaipata Phone/Fax: (591) 944 6143

E-mail: [email protected]

BURUNDI

M. Eduardo Seminario, CTA

FAOR, Bujumbura, Phone: (257) 226 461/222 655 Fax: 227 364

Makamba, Phone: (257 50) 8135/8146 Fax: 8147

E-mail: [email protected]

NEPAL

M. B.K. Rimal, National Project Director

M. Fritz Ohler, CTA

Ms. Helle Qwist-Hoffman, Associate Professional Officer

FAOR, Kathmandu, Phone: (977 1) 523 200 Fax: 526 358

Gorkha, Phone/Fax: (977) 64 20230

E-mail: [email protected]

PAKISTAN

M. Shah Rehman, National Project Director

M. Paolo Mori, CTA

Mme. Marilee Kane, International WID Expert

Quetta, Phone/Fax: (92 81) 444 579

E-mail: [email protected]

TUNISIA

M. Isaam Anatar, National Project Director a.i.

M. Mohamed Lamine Toumia, National Coordinator

M. Andrea Ambroso, Associate Professional Officer

Zaghouan, Phone/Fax: (216 2) 676 742

E-mail: (c/o Coordination Unit) [email protected]

COORDINATION UNIT

M. Luca F� d'Ostiani, Inter-regional Project Coordinator

Ms. Antonella Tomasin, Associate Professional Officer

Ms. Neila Kaffel, Assistant/Secretary

Tunis, Phone: (216 1) 794 818, Fax: (216 1) 793 692

E-mail: [email protected]

FACILITATORS AND RESOURCE-PERSONS

M. Patrizio Warren , Int. Consultant in M&E and Participatory Methods.

M. Simone Borelli, FAO/FORC

OTHER PARTICIPANTS/OBSERVERS

Mme. Dalila Ghabri, D/CES-Tunis

M. Amor Ben Ismail, D/CES-Zaghouan

M. Ali Ben Mabrouk, National Consultant GCP/INT/542/ITA-Zaghouan

Mme. Asma M'Hamdi, Senior Group Promoter GCP/INT/542/ITA-Zaghouan

M. Ismail Rhimi, D/CES-Tunis

Mme. Henda Trabelsi, D/CES-Zaghouan

ANNEX 2

FAO/ITALY

INTER-REGIONAL PROJECT FOR PARTICIPATORY

UPLAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT

GCP/INT/542/ITA

INTERNAL TECHNICAL MEETING 1996

PROGRAMME

Monday, 9 December 1996

(*) expected to continue at grassroots-level and/or to be transferred to local partners.

Tuesday 10 December

(*) expected to continue at grassroots-level and/or to be transferred to local partners.

Wednesday, 11 December

Thursday, 12 December

Friday, 13 December

Saturday, 14 December

ANNEX 3

FAO/ITALY

INTER-REGIONAL PROJECT FOR PARTICIPATORY

UPLAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT

GCP/INT/542/ITA

INTERNAL TECHNICAL MEETING 1996

ITM '96 BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS

Programme ITM '96

List of participants

Note on Project Documentation Centre

NFTs Visit Exchanges (Table)

Backstopping Missions (Table)

List of Documents produced by the Project

Draft Project Leaflet

Draft paper on Monitoring and Evaluation System in Pakistan. A review of project experience.

Draft paper on Participatory Cost-benefit Analysis in Feasibility Assessment, Monitoring and Evaluation of Income Generating Activities: A review of project experience.

Draft script for Video

Note on Project Follow-up Phase.

ANNEX 4

FAO/ITALY

INTER-REGIONAL PROJECT FOR PARTICIPATORY

UPLAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT

GCP/INT/542/ITA

PUCD PROJECT PLANNING, MONITORING AND EVALUATION

SYSTEM: AN OUTLINE

PUCD's PME system includes both a project-level and a community level component. The former addresses the planning, monitoring and evaluation needs of project management and staff. It is based on conventional PME techniques and tools. The second is meant to facilitate the development of a self-reliant PME practice by the grassroots organisation collaborating with the project and is based on participatory action-research techniques and tools.

Project level M&E aims at providing project staff with basic information for:

i) identifying and designing activities to be implemented according to project mandate, institutional partners policies and needs and priorities of grassroots partners;

ii) ensuring monitoring of the above activities throughout implementation;

iii) facilitating self-assessment of project performance; and

iv) carrying-out simple evaluation exercises focusing on the environmental, financial, social and technical results achieved through implementation.

Project-level PME include four modules, as follows:

Planning (or re-planning) module facilitates the processing of grassroots planning inputs (e.g. Community Action Plans) and institutional planning inputs (e.g., FAO and DSC policies, National and Interregional Project Documents, etc.). into a sound and feasible project workplan, in which specific results to be achieved, major steps in implementation of each result, and tentative deadlines are identified. It includes priority setting, feasibility analysis, logical framework and programming exercises.

Monitoring module provides project staff with an updated picture of the state of implementation. It includes a continuous assessment of timelines in implementation (key indicator: number of days of delay from planned deadlines); and regular monitoring meetings in which assets and constraints found on in implementation are discussed among staff. Its main outputs is a continued adjustment of the project work-plan according to problems met and remedial actions identified.

Process evaluation module facilitates a periodical (yearly or six-month term) assessment of the quality of implementation. It is based on a review of project and partners input in implementation, covering both quantitative aspects (based on time allocation indicators: see box below), as well as management and staff perception and results of community-level process evaluation exercise (see below). Its main output is the identification of strengths and weaknesses of implementation (and/or planning) to be taken into account in the preparation of the next planning cycle.

Result evaluation module allows for a periodical assessment of the effects related to project implementation. Based on specific NFTs needs (which may vary through location and time), this module may include exercises aimed at evaluating: environmental changes (e.g., re-vegetation of rangelands;), social changes (e.g. capacity building of grassroots organisations, women participation); changes in people competence and/or behaviour (adoption of "conservation by use practices"; management of community nurseroes); economic results of income-generating activities; and technical results of field trials and experiments(e.g., introduction of new species or innovative natural resource conservation measures, etc.). According to design requirements, these exercise may be carried out at once during project life-time of repeated several times (before/after or time series design). Their main output is the identification of working and not working aspects of project technical proposals. Also this information is meant to be duly considered in subsequent planning decision-making.

Community-level PME aims at providing project' grassroots partners with a conceptual and operational framework for:

i) reviewing the results of initial appraisal of subsequent evaluation exercise, in order to design participatory workplans to be implemented in collaboration with the project and/or other agencies;

ii) monitoring the implementation of these plans through participatory techniques; and

iii) carrying out simple participatory evaluation exercises focusing on both implementation process and the results.

Community level PME is organised into three modules, as follows:

Initial planning (or replanning) module. This module follows the initial participatory appraisal exercise. It is aimed at facilitating the identification of priority needs to be addressed through the community (or interest-group) workplan, the identification and design of relevant activities, the assessment of their actual feasibility and the preparation of a simple workplan, answering the basic planning questions ("What?", "What for", "How?", "By whom?", "By when?"). Participatory action research tools to be used in the framework of this module include: problem trees or similar need assessment devices, priority rankings and/or nominal group scoring, participatory feasibility analysis matrixes(including quantitative participatory cost/benefit analysis for income generating activities); and planning (programming) matrixes.

Monitoring module. Exercises included in this module are carried during implementation, with the aim of making the group of participants aware of progress and difficulties met in putting into practice initial planning decisions and adjusting the process accordingly. This is usually done through open-ended discussion, carried out in the framework of regular interest groups monitoring meetings. In some cases, monitoring tasks are facilitated by including and ad hoc monitoring column in the initial planning matrix. Special visual devices, such as seried photographs or drawings have been developed to facilitate involvement of illiterate participants.

Evaluation and re-planning module. Run in the framework of ad-hoc community workshops or interest-group meeting at the completion of a given activity or at the end of the agreed planning period (usually one year), this module allows participant to review the process and results of work done, extract from this experience a number of lessons learned, and plan accordingly the continuation of their development effort. Implementation process is reviewed through the following techniques and tools: focused discussion, Strengths Weaknesses, Opportunities and Limitations analysis, and Problems, Causes and Solutions analysis. Devices used for facilitating the analysis of results achieved throughout implementation include: observational walks, slide language, community-based experiments, participatory mapping of changes, scoring of key-indicators, and ex-post participatory cost-benefit analysis. Lessons learned are extracted through a participatory analysis of evaluation information.

ANNEX 5/1

INTER-REGIONAL PROJECT FOR PARTICIPATORY

UPLAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT

GCP/INT/542/ITA

WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS

Country: BOLIVIA

Counterpart institution: SEARPI (Servicio de Encauzamiento de Aguas del Rio Pirai)

Administrative framework:

Municipality: Samaipata

Province: Florida

Department: Santa Cruz

Physical characteristics:

Reference watershed: Upper Rio Pirai

Project area: 10 sub-watersheds (Paredones, Achiras, Samaipata, Rinconada, Lajas, Bermejo, Caparosa, Gabeta, Lagunillas, Misca)

Size of project area: 140,000 ha

Altitude range: 1240-2400 m

Climatic regime: Temperate (dry to sub-humid)

Annual precipitation: 800-1,100 mm

Main soil types: Regosols, Inceptisols, Fluvisols

Natural vegetation: Shrubs, prairy, forest

Socio-demographic characteristics:

Population: 9,500 inhabitants (2,500 urban)

Density: 8,7 inhbs/km2 (urban population included)

Type of settlement: Villages, scattered houses, semi-urban (Samaipata)

Ethnic groups: Mestizos, Quechuas

Economic characteristics:

Main subsistence/cash crops: Potatoes, maize, tomatoes, vegetables, beans, fruit trees

Livestock (type): Local cattle

Forest plantations: Eucalyptus sp., Pinus sp.

Average farm size: 10-20 ha (only 2-3 ha cultivated per year)

Land tenure system: Small holders

Other economic activities: Tourism (Samaipata, Achiras)

Infrastructures:

Accessibility: State tarred road S. Cruz-Cochabamba, trails

Electrical power availability: Only in Samaipata

Credit institutions: None

ANNEX 5/2

INTER-REGIONAL PROJECT FOR PARTICIPATORY

UPLAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT

GCP/INT/542/ITA

WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS

Country: BURUNDI

Counterpart institution: MINATE (Minist�re du Tourisme et de l'Environnement) et MINAGRI

Administrative framework:

Region/Province: Makamba

Commune: Vugizo (7 hills) and Nyanza-Lac (1 hill)

Physical characteristics:

Reference watersheds: Rwaba (25,800 ha)

Project area: 8 hills (Karonge, Nyamirinzi, Mbizi, Kigombe, Murinda, Mazuru, Kagege and Buheka) which include 5 Rwaba sub-watersheds

Size: 10,600 ha

Altitude range: 1000-1800 m

Climatic regime: Sub-equatorial

Annual precipitation: 1600 mm

Main soil types: Ferrisols

Natural vegetation: Patches of forest and grassland

Socio-demographic characteristics:

Population: 11,800 inhabitants (plus 2,300 inhabitants of the lower part of Buheka hill in the Rwaba plain)

Density: 98 inhabs/km2

Type of settlement: Scattered farms

Ethnic groups: Hutu and Tutsi

Local social structure: By hill and sub-hill

Economic characteristics:

Main subsistence/cash crops: Beans, maize, banana, manioc, potato, wheat, peas, groundnuts, coffee

Livestock (type): Cows, goats, sheep, pigs, poultry

Forest plantations: Eucalyptus sp., Grevillea Robusta

Average farm size: Approx. 1 ha

Land tenure system: Small holders, communal lands, public forest land

Other economic activities: Commerce, handicrafts

Infrastructures:

Accessibility: By trail, with poorly developed network (now being upgraded)

Electrical power availability: None

Credit institutions: COOPEC (Coop�rative d'Epargne et Cr�dit).

ANNEX 5/3

INTER-REGIONAL PROJECT FOR PARTICIPATORY

UPLAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT

GCP/INT/542/ITA

WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS

Country: NEPAL

Counterpart institution: Department of Soil Conservation (DOSC) of the Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation (MOFSC)

Administrative framework:

District: Gorkha

Village Development Committees Harmi, Ampipal, Khoplang and Chhoprak in Bhusunde Khola watershed

(VDC): and Mashel, Pandrung and Tandrung in Maudi Khola watershed

Wards: 10 in Bhusunde Khola and 9 in Maudi Khola watershed

Physical characteristics:

Reference watershed: Bhusunde Khola and Maudi Khola

Size: 4,800 ha (3,200 + 1,600)

Altitude range: 500-1,700 m

Climatic regime: Temperatures range from 5 to 30 C. Rainy season: July-September

Annual precipitation: 1990 mm

Main soil types: Ultic Hapludalfs,Dysteric Eutochrepts

Natural vegetation: Patches of forest (Castanopsis sp., Schima sp.)

Socio-demographic characteristics:

Population: Approx. 16,000 inhabitants (10,000 + 6,000)

Density: 367 inhabs/km2

Type of settlement: Villages and scattered houses

Ethnic groups: Brahmins, Chettris, Gurung, Kumal

Economic characteristics:

Main subsistence/cash crops: Rice, wheat, maize, millet, buckwheat, mustard

Livestock (type): Cows, buffaloes, goats, poultry

Forest plantations: Small patches of Pinus roxburghii, Albizia lebbek, Dalbergia sissoo

Average farm size: 0.8 ha

Land tenure system: Small holders, some communal lands for grazing, public forest land

Other economic activities: Small food processing activities, nurseries

Infrastructures:

Accessibility: Trails

Electrical power availability: None

Credit institutions: None

ANNEX 5/4

INTER-REGIONAL PROJECT FOR PARTICIPATORY

UPLAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT

GCP/INT/542/ITA

WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS

Country: PAKISTAN

Counterpart institution: Forest and Wildlife Department of Balochistan

Administrative framework:

Province: Balochistan

Division: Kalat

District: Mastung

Union Councils: Kanak and Sheik Wasil

Villages: 40 villages

Physical characteristics:

Reference watershed: Kanak valley

Project area: Noza and 2 additional sub-watersheds

Size: about 20,000 ha out of the total 40,000 ha for the whole Kanak Valley

Altitude range: 1600-2500 m

Climatic regime: Arid sub-tropicalcontinental highland

Annual precipitation: 170 mm

Main soil types: Limestone and shales

Natural vegetation: Perennial shrubs (degraded)

Socio-demographic characteristics:

Population: About 10,000 inhabitants out of the 20,000 for the whole Kanak valley

Density: 50 inhbs./km2

Type of settlement: Villages

Ethnic groups: Brahui/Baloch

Economic characteristics:

Main subsistence/cash crops: Wheat, barley, onions, potatoes, vegetables, cumin, apples, almonds, grapes.

Livestock (type): Sheep and goats (90%), poultry, rabbits, camels

Forest plantations: Russian olive, Robinia, Salix sp., Populus sp., Ailanthus sp., Morus alba (along waterways)

Average farm size: 2-20 ha

Land tenure system: Small and medium holders

Other economic activities: Urban employment in Quetta, commerce

Infrastructures:

Accessibility: Tarred roads, railway, trails

Electrical power availability: Widespread electrification

Credit institutions: None in the area (5 banks in Quetta)

Water sources: Dugwells, tubewells

ANNEX 5/5

INTER-REGIONAL PROJECT FOR PARTICIPATORY

UPLAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT

GCP/INT/542/ITA

WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS

Country: TUNISIA

Counterpart institution: Minist�re de l'Agriculture, Direction de la Conservation des Eaux et du Sol (CES)

Administrative framework:

Governorate: Zaghouan

Delegation: Zaghouan

Sector (Imada): Jimla

Villages: Ouled Ben Alya, Dhouaia, Tbaynia, Hnaiania, Ouled Ben Rezg, Msatria et Lachhab, Ouled Ben Rejeb, Lagailia, Ouled Ameu.

Physical characterisitcs:

Reference watershed: Oued Sbaihya

Project area: Sous-secteurs Jimla (30%of total) and Oued Sbaihya (100%)

Size: 6 800 ha

Altitude range: 400-700 m

Climatic regime: Upper semi-arid

Annual precipitation: 450 mm

Main soil types: Sand-marly

Natural vegetation: Rosmarin, Alep pine

Socio-demographic characterisitcs:

Population: 1 400 inhabitants

Density: 20 inhabs/km2

Type of settlement: Scattered hamlets and houses

Ethnic groups: Arabs, berbers

Economic characterisitcs:

Main subsistence/cash crops: Wheat, barley, oats, olive and almond trees, beans

Livestock (type): Sheep, cows, goats, poultry

Forest plantations: Eucalyptus sp., Pinus Halepensis., Acacia Cyanophylla., Cactus.

Average farm size: Approx. 5 ha (upper part of the watershed)

Land tenure system: Private lands and public forest lands

Other economic activites: Building works, seasonal migration

Infrastructure:

Accessibility: Main road, tarmac and all weather raods

Electrical power availability: Some areas are provided with electrical power, others will soon be

Credit institutions: Cr�dits APMANE (Assistance des Petits et Moyens Agriculteurs du Nord Est) and Banque Nationale de l'Agriculture.

1 For the list of participants see Annex 1.

Prevailing security conditions prevented the carrying-out of a Tripartite Review Mission in Burundi.

3 The field component in Tunisia was started with the phase 2 of the Inter-regional Project.

4 See Annex 2.

5 See Annex 3.

6 Burundi was not visited, due to prevailing security conditions.

7 It should be recalled that field activities in Tunisia only started in August 1995.

8 E.g.: introduction of different cash-crops in traditional staple crops fields in Bolivia and Nepal; improvement of irrigation and run-off techniques and degraded rangeland rehabilitation in Bolivia, Pakistan and Tunisia.

9 This specifically applies to Village and District Development Councils in Nepal; "Organizaciones Territoriales de Base, Planes Comunales y Municipales" in Bolivia; "Fond National de Solidarit� et Programmes de D�veloppement R�gional" in Tunisia.

10 See Coordination Unit. 1994. Project Document. Inter-Regional Project for Participatory Upland Conservation and Development, GCP/INT/542/ITA. Rome: FAO/Italy (pages 18-20)

11 This richness is also related to the multipurpose orientation of most project-promoted initiatives. For instance: promotion of improved stoves b decreases both the exploitation of the forest resource base and women workload; agroforestry activities have both an environmental and an economic impact on household economy; introduction of water saving crops and variety leads to a better water management as well as to higher yields; and so on. This feature of project implementation contributes to explain why in notes to Table 1 some items have been entered under different categories.

12 Coordination Unit. 1994. Project Document. Inter-regional Project for Participatory Upland Conservation and Development, GCP/INT/542/ITA - Extension Phase. Rome: FAO/Government of Italy Cooperative Programme (page 22).

13 See P. Warren. 1994. Suggestions for Designing and Operating a Project-level and Community Level Monitoring and Evaluation System. Rome: GCP/INT/542/ITA, Coordination Unit.

14 Unfortunately, it was not possible to directly involve in this process the NFT in Burundi. In fact, two missions of the consultant to this country, were cancelled at the last moment, due to prevailing security conditions. This led the NFT in Burundi to develop autonomously its own project-level PME practice. It is interesting to observe that, as shown in Table 5 and 6, the outcome of the work done in Burundi is conceptually very similar to the systems established in other countries (though less structured and organised). It could also be observed that, the special security conditions in which Burundi NFT experience has developed, prevented during the Meeting an in-depth review of its potential contribution to the improvement of PUCD "mainstream" project-level PME system. This limitation is hereby acknowledged as a gap for the discussions reported in the following pages.

15 See P. Warren. 1996. Consultancy on Monitoring and Evaluation for the Field Component in Nepal (Kathmandu, Gorkha and Bhusunde Khola Watershed, 18 September - 14 October 1996). Mission Report. Kathmandu - Rome: GCP/INT/542/ITA, Nepal; P. Warren. 1996. Note on a Brief Follow-up Visit of the M&E Consultant (Quetta, 15 - 22 October 1996). Quetta - Rome: GCP/INT/542/ITA, Pakistan; and A. Ambroso. 1996. Themes de reflecxon sur le systeme de PSE au niveau du projet. Document submitted to the 1996 ITM. Zaghouan: GCP/INT/542/ITA, Tunisie.

16 See A. Tomasin. 1995. Report of the Mission to Pakistan and Nepal. Tunis: GCP/INT/542/ITA, Coordination Unit; and 1996. Report of the Mission to Bolivia. Tunis: GCP/INT/542/ITA, Coordination Unit.

Limitations of participatory action/research methods in meeting some project information needs were already discussed in depth during 1995' ITR Meeting (See L.F� d'Ostiani and P.Warren. 1996. "Steps towards a Participatory and Integrated Approach to Watershed Management. A Qualitative Interim Evaluation of the Inter-regional Project for Participatory Upland Conservation and Development". Field Report No. 1. Tunis: FAO; GCP/INT/542/ITA-Coordination Unit, in particular, pages 113-116.

18 See references in Note 2.

19 Some data analysis was carried out by the consultant during follow-up missions to Bolivia, Nepal and Pakistan, and in the framework of the self-evaluation of initial participatory appraisal and planning in Tunisia. Main constraints found during these exercises have been the lack of comprehensiveness and consistency of data sets provided by NFTs and, in some cases, the poor reliability attributed to these data. Quite obviously, this affected the quality of the analysis and the relevance of its results. Indeed, there is very little point in trying to extract meaningful conclusions from incomplete information, which, furthermore, is considered unreliable by the persons who collected it.

In accordance with mission TORs, data analysis workshops were carried out by the consultant during follow-up missions to Bolivia and Pakistan, and in the framework of the self-evaluation of initial participatory appraisal and planning in Tunisia. An opportunity of improving skills in this area was also offered to the M&E officer of the NFT in Nepal during the last mission.

As shown, for instance, by the outcomes of the self-evaluation of the initial participatory appraisal and planning exercises, carried out by the NFT in Tunisia with the support of the consultant (See. P. Warren. 1996. Auto-�valuation formative de l'exp�rience de diagnostic et de planification participatives: Septembre 1995 - Juillet 1996, GCP/INT/542/ITA-Tunisie).

Time needed to operate the overall project and community-level PME system has been estimated by the consultant in 10% of the overall staff working time. This figure (which, initially, was found acceptable by all NFTs), is indeed consistent with the actual practice of the NFT in Bolivia. However, elements exist to think that other NFTs are investing much less of their time on these tasks. Beyond shortcomings in design, technical difficulties and delays in start-up, this is perhaps the key factor which so far has prevented other NFTs to get the best of what the system can offer.

Several consultants have contributed to the development of this component of the system, including P. Warren (Bolivia, Nepal and Pakistan), M. Dia and M.T. Cobelli (Burundi), L. Stone, P.Mori and P.L. Moktan (Nepal), J. Zeytlin and P.Mori (Pakistan), M.Rossi, B. Bou Baker and M.Zghidi (Tunisia). Significant contributions have also been provided by the following NFTs' members: R. Roca and M.Lino (Bolivia), G.Lama and D.Chapa (Nepal), M.Kane(Pakistan), A. Ben Mabrouk, A. M'hamdi and A. Ambroso (Tunisia).

Such a re-definition of the participatory process is consistent with one of the main lessons learned identified during PUCD's 1995 ITR Meeting. For a preliminary discussion of this issue, see L.F� d'Ostiani and P.Warren. 1996. "Steps towards a Participatory and Integrated Approach to Watershed Management. A Qualitative Interim Evaluation of the Inter-regional Project for Participatory Upland Conservation and Development". Field Document No. 1 GCP/INT/542/ITA-Coordination Unit. (pages 65-69).

In particular, after a number of initial experiences, this approach was found by the NFT in Bolivia too demanding in terms of staff time and commitment. On the other hand, the NFT in Burundi is currently promoting yearly watershed-wise evaluation and re-planning conventions of interest groups, while the NFT in Nepal has successfully adopted the format for evaluation and re-planning workshops tested during P. Warren last consultancy mission. (See P. Warren, P.L.Moktan and D.R. Chapa. 1996. "Strengthening the Participatory Process through Community-Based Evaluation and Re-Planning Workshops. Report of a Pilot-Experience Carried Out by Local User Groups and Project Staff in Majghaon Village, Choprak VDC". Field Document 7/96. GCP/INT/542/ITA-Nepal.

Initial training in community-level PME was provided by the consultant to NFTs in Bolivia, Nepal and Tunisia.

This issue also arose from the Tunisia NFT self-evaluation of the initial participatory appraisal and planning exercise carried-out in August 1996 (see P. Warren. 1996. "Auto-�valuation formative de l'exp�rience de diagnostic et planification participative", GCP/INT/542/ITA, Tunisie.