Peoples’ Right to Land and Natural resources · Peoples’ Right to Land and Natural resources ... Reviewer initials: MO Report ... land titling in full respect of their customary

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION

Promoting Indigenous Peoples’ Right to Land and Natural resources TECHNICAL COOPERATION FINAL PROGRESS REPORT (FPR)

Basic Information Countries covered: Cambodia

Donor: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ)

Budget: 112,689 USD

TC Symbol: CMB/14/02/GIZ

Administrative unit: DWT/CO Bangkok

P&B Outcome: Outcome 17

DWCP outcome: KHM128 – More effective application of equality and rights for discriminated and vulnerable groups

Start date: 15 September 2014

End date: 30 June 2015

Reporting Information

Report prepared by: Sek Sophorn, ILO Consultant, 17 August 2015

Report reviewed by:

Martin Oelz, Senior Specialist, Gender, equality and Diversity Branch (GED), ILO Geneva

I have reviewed the classifications and agree they are a fair and accurate reflection of progress Reviewer initials: MO

Report approved by: Maurizio Bussi, DWT/CO Bangkok

I have reviewed the classifications and agree they are a fair and accurate reflection of progress Approver initials: MB

Instructions

This is the standardized format for final progress reporting. It is completed at the end of every technical cooperation intervention to provide an overview of progress and achievements. The Final Progress Report (FPR) is an opportunity to reflect on implementation and draw lessons learned, making an initial self-assessment on the efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability and relevance of the intervention. FPRs should not only include the final status of outputs and immediate objectives, but also explain which factors contributed to or hindered the achievement of results, explain how the intervention was managed, identify what could have been done differently and what methods or strategies can be replicated in other technical cooperation activities. Completing the FPR should be an inclusive process of consultation among stakeholders, implementing partners and constituents. Self-assessments in the FPR should flow from the involvement of constituents in monitoring and evaluation and be based on wrap-up workshops held at the close of an intervention. FPRs must be submitted as per the schedule outlined in the Approval Minute. All reports should be sent in electronic copy (Word format) to PARDEV for onwards submission to the donora. Please delete this instruction box before finalizing the document. Please note this is the format for final reports only. Interim reports must use a different template.

a In some Approval Minutes the responsibility for submitting TCPRs directly to donors is delegated to the ILO responsible official if the

funding agreement has been signed locally. However, these TCPRs must still be copied to PARDEV in electronic format.

ILO Technical Cooperation Final Progress Report: page 3 of 17

Summary

The intervention was a joint effort of the GIZ and the ILO to enhance implementation of indigenous peoples’ rights

to land and natural resources in Cambodia. The immediate objectives of the intervention were as follows:

1. Selected Indigenous communities have completed the process of identification, determination of by-laws

and registration towards land titling in full respect of their customary law concerning land use and natural

resource management

2. Government institutions, indigenous peoples’ organizations, ILO social partners and NGOs at all levels

have the capacity to implement national legislation, policies and regulations for the recognition and

protection of indigenous peoples’ rights to collective land, based on internationally recognized principles

3. Indigenous communities and local authorities establish dialogue to address indigenous peoples’ needs and

priorities for development through community development plans

The intervention built on previous ILO work since 2005 in this field and on on-going partnerships and support for

governmental and other partners active in Cambodia on indigenous peoples’ issues, including the Ministry of

Interior (MoI) and Ministry of Rural Development (MRD), indigenous organizations, NGOs, UN agencies as well

as indigenous communities themselves.

Prior to the signing of the Grant Agreement and the effective start date, the ILO, following consultations and

coordination with GIZ, recruited a National project coordinator as of May 2014 who started to provide services in

support of the objective and outcomes of the joint initiative. These services ensured continuing support for national

actors including MRD and MoI as well as NGOs, indigenous communities. This final report includes achievements

resulting from work undertaken since May 2014. The key results can be summarized as follows:

15 indigenous communities received support for the community identification process (See Annex 1). As a

result, MRD issued letters recognizing the indigenous identity of 11 indigenous communities (Letters

issued by MRD attached). Three other communities in Preah Vihear have completed administrative work

and have submitted applications to MRD. Two other communities in Mondulkiri are preparing their

submissions.

Overall, 23 communities were supported for legal entity registration (See Annex 1). MoI has issued 14

letters respectively for 14 indigenous communities, while letters for 09 other communities are pending in

the Minister’s cabinet for signature.

A consultation workshop hosted on 24-25 June 2015 by MRD with support from ILO, NGO Forum, and

Development and Partnership in Action (DPA), resulted in the identification of 24 new indigenous villages

in Kampong Thom Province (See Annex 2).

A workshop on Convention No. 169 bringing together the full range of stakeholders, including eight

government ministries was held in May 2014 resulted in a better understanding of international standards

on indigenous peoples and several government ministries concerned and organizations of indigenous

peoples expressing interest and willingness to engage in policy dialogue and assessments on the basis of

Convention No. 169. MRD also requested the ILO to expand its support to other aspects of the National

Policy on Indigenous Peoples Development, such as improved livelihoods and access to services and basic

infrastructure.

The ILO has played coordination and supporting roles among the key players to achieve the outputs as committed

in the project documents. However, decisions to be taken at the Ministerial level, in particular the issuance of the

letter of identify recognition by MRD and legal registration letters by MoI, are naturally beyond the ILO’s sphere

of control.

Several ILO-funded activities contributing to the project objectives and outcomes are still on-going, including the

production of ILO guides on Conventions Nos. 169 and No. 111 in Khmer language and an exploratory study on

local development needs of indigenous communities as a basis for future interventions.

It should be noted that the process of identity determination and registration as legal entity for indigenous

communities is now regulated by the Law on Association and Non-governmental Organization which was

promulgated in July 2015. The imminent promulgation has had a slowing down effect during the implementation

period regarding issuing legal recognition letters. The Law recognizes all associations and NGOs registered with

Government as lawful prior to its promulgation, but requires indigenous communities with legal entity status to

submit annual reports and to comply with other legal duties as association and NGO have under the Law. This

development has implications for indigenous communities and the process of their legal recognition, as it increases

the burden of formal requirements for communities with generally weak capacity.

Finally, it should also be noted that the progress achieved at the level of identify and legal recognition this was not

matched by the issuing by the Government of new collective land titles (CLT) in 2014 and 2015, despite public

commitments made in this respect and the allocation of government funds for issuing some 10 titles per year. Only

six out of 166 indigenous communities that are in the CLT process have received CLT since 2012 and early 2013.

While the assistance provided to indigenous communities in securing customary land and natural resources in their

territory through the process of land registration contributes to strengthening their livelihood at both individual and

community level, there is a strong need to enhance their traditional livelihoods and create additional income

opportunities through a broader intervention that addresses in an integrated manner the multiple socio-economic

vulnerabilities of indigenous communities. The ILO stands ready to engage in a reflection on new approaches and

strategies to promote rights-based and inclusive development in Cambodia, including on overcoming bottlenecks in

the land titling process.


SECTION A: RESULTS ANALYSIS (Outputs, Immediate Objectives) 1. Outputs

Immediate Objective 1:

Output

weighting Percent

completion Indicator targets

(compare planned against actual) Analysis of output delivery

Output: 1.1. Completion of community identification procedures

20% 90% Planned: 15 communities Actual: 14 communities [+ 2 more currently processing their application at the provincial level]

11 indigenous communities have received the identification letter from MRD (letters attached) 3 others have completed procedure at provincial levels, signed by Governor, and are waiting the formal certification letter from MRD. 2 additional indigenous communities are processing the administrative papers at provincial level.

Output: 1.2. Completion of community registration procedures as legal entity

20% 100% Planned: 14 communities Actual: 23 communities

14 indigenous communities have received registration letters from MoI. Registration letters for 9 others are pending at the level of cabinet of MoI for signature by the Minister


Output

weighting Percent



Output: 2.1. Government officials, indigenous peoples’ organizations, ILO social partners and NGOs are trained and sensitized on the rights of indigenous peoples as enshrined in national legislation and policies and ILO Conventions Nos. 111 and 169, UNDRIP and other international instruments.

30% 80% Planned: 3 workshops, 2 tools Actual: 3 workshops

1 extension workshop in Kampong Thom province with 160 participants in June 2015 1 extension workshop in Preah Vihear with 124 participants In addition to the above-mentioned training workshops, three meetings with NGOs including OPKC, ARD, ICSO were held in Preah Vihear, Mondulkiri, Ratanak Kiri, respectively, as a part of capacity-building and technical support for them on procedure for communal land titling. 1 Multi-stakeholder workshop to sensitize stakeholders on ILO Convention No. 169 and a related comparative legal study on Conventions No. 111 and 169 on 8th May 2015. Khmer versions of ILO Guides on Convention No. 111 and 169 are currently under preparation (expected data of publication: September 2015).

Output 2.2. Indigenous peoples’ organizations, NGOs and indigenous youth have the capacity to facilitate the development of by-laws, and internal rules for land and natural resources use and management and the application for collective land title

10% 60% Planned: Actual:

Activities under this output are integrated under 2.1. above. NGO staff and IP facilitators where targeted by the above workshops and meetings No separate regional experience sharing workshops were organized as originally envisaged in the Project document. No youth fellowship were granted


Output

weighting Percent



Output: 3.1. Indigenous communities and local authorities establish dialogue to address indigenous peoples’ needs and priorities for development through community development plans, while increasing women participation in consultative and decision-making bodies

20% Planned: Community plans for selected communities are developed Actual: non

The target under this Output was not met during the project period. However, the ILO is currently undertaking an exploratory study and needs assessment as a basis for designing and implementing this intervention in the future.

Rating of output delivery

CLASSIFICATION b

Highly satisfactory Almost all (>80%) outputs were delivered and the quality (>80% of planned indicator targets met) of outputs was good.

Satisfactory The majority (60-80%) of outputs were delivered and the quality (60-80% of planned indicator targets met) of outputs was fair.

Unsatisfactory Some (40-60%) outputs were delivered and/or the was a problem with the quality (40-60% of planned indicator targets met) of outputs.

Very unsatisfactory Few (<40%) outputs were delivered and/or there was a serious problem with the quality (<40% of planned indicator targets met) of outputs.

Briefly explain the major factors taken into account to justify the output classification and provide any other comments (2000 characters maximum): Outputs were either fully achieved or achieved at a rate between 70-90 per cent. Regarding output 3.1, the ILO is currently undertaking an exploratory study and needs assessment as a basis for designing and implementing an intervention to strengthen indigenous communities’ livelihoods.

b This is a self-assessment


2. Immediate Objectives and Decent Work outcomes

2.1 Immediate Objectives

Indicator Baseline Indicator targets

(compare planned against actual)

Immediate Objective: 1: Selected indigenous communities have completed the process of identification, determination of by-laws and registration towards land titling in full respect of their customary law concerning land use and natural resource management 2: Government institutions, indigenous peoples’ organizations, ILO social partners and NGOs at all levels have the capacity to implement national legislation, policies and regulations for the recognition and protection of indigenous peoples’ rights to collective land, based on internationally recognized principles 3: Indigenous communities and local authorities establish dialogue to address indigenous peoples’ needs and priorities for development through community development plans

14 new applications for land titling submitted by indigenous communities

MRD: 104 (2014) MoI: 87 (2014) ( step 2 among 104 that have identified by MRD)

Identity recognition: Planned: 15 communities Actual: 14 communities Legal registration: Planned: 1 Actual 23

Progress in the application of indigenous peoples’ rights recorded by the ILO’s supervisory bodies

Comments adopted by the CEACR in 2013 on the application of Convention No. 111

During the brief life span of the project, the application of Convention No. 111 by the Government of Cambodia has not been examined by the CEACR. The new report by the Government is due by September 2015.

Number of community development plans designed and integrated in the commune development and investment plans

The ILO is currently undertaking an exploratory study and needs assessment as a basis for designing and implementing an intervention to strengthen indigenous communities’ livelihoods, including through participatory design of community development plans.

Analysis of immediate objective achievement: Overall, the project supported 39 communities in the different steps required for land titling, i.e. identity appraisal and request for identify certification, participatory drafting of by-laws, community’s formal adoption of by-laws and submission of request for registration through the different levels of public administration (please see Annex 1). In addition to providing support to the various stakeholders concerned in the context of the procedures for community identification and registration, the ILO has played a facilitating and coordinating role between the various actors involved, levering its technical expertise on indigenous peoples’ issues and institutional authority creating an enabling environment for progress to be achieved across 8 provinces, with NGOs playing a complementary role at the community and provincial levels. The initial planning and selection of target communities was made by the ILO in consultation with NGOs, MRD and MoI in November 2013, and continuously updated and adjusted, taking into account implementation challenges (see below). Compared with the limited resource and time available, the pre-existing working relations between the ILO and other actors in the princess have contributed to the results achieved. It should also be noted that the results achieved during the project period were also based on work performed by the ILO since May 2014 prior to the effective date of the grant agreement which was delayed. The multi-stakeholders’ dialogue workshop held in May 2015 entitled “Promoting Inclusive and Rights Based Development for Indigenous Peoples: Using Convention No. 169 as an enabling tool” served as a platform for discussion about indigenous peoples’ rights and demonstrated that using Convention No. 169 as a guiding framework for assessing national law and practise is strategic and may provide the framework of reference to establish dialogue on the priorities, needs and measures to be adopted in the context of national and local development. The workshop built on previous ILO interventions to raise awareness on relevant national laws and international standards, particularly ILO Conventions Nos. 111 and 169 among government officials, NGOs, indigenous peoples’ organizations, traditional leaders and indigenous men and women members of indigenous communities and was designed around a comparative legal analysis on the national laws and regulation in the light the Convention No. 169 that the ILO had previously undertaken at the request of MRD. As a result of the workshop, stakeholders, including several government ministries concerned and organizations of indigenous peoples, have expressed interest and willingness to engage in policy dialogue and assessments on the basis of Convention No. 169.

2.2 Decent Work outcomes

CONTRIBUTION TO DECENT WORK OUTCOMES

DWCP outcome(s)c IRIS/SM CP code (e.g. LBN103)d

Brief summary of contribution (2000 characters maximum)

CP 1.5 : More effective application of equality and rights at work for discriminated and vulnerable groups

KHM 128

The project contributed to the achievement of the specific indicators on indigenous peoples under the DWCP outcome 1.5 concerning the training of Government officials, social partners and NGOs/indigenous peoples’ organizations on indigenous peoples’ rights, and the recognition of indigenous identity and the registration as legal entity of, respectively, a total of 121 and 70 communities by MRD and MOI.

2.3 Effectiveness analysis

a) Based on the achievement of immediate objectives, explain the likely contribution the intervention will make

towards the development objective:

The project supported the identity recognition and the registration as legal entities of the targeted communities which are preliminary steps of the land titling process, and thus are key to securing control and use over customary land and natural resources by indigenous communities and to strengthening their livelihoods. Additionally, the dialogue workshops held in the context of the project also promoted reflection and triggered interest in using Convention No. 169 as a framework for policy dialogue, including as regards improved livelihoods and access to services and basic infrastructure under the National Policy on Indigenous Peoples Development.

b) Describe changes that are expected or have already been observed relating to the project’s ultimate beneficiaries:

The preparatory work required for the communities to engage in the various steps of the land titling process, notably the awareness-raising on national and international standards, the self-identification exercise and the drafting of the by-laws, in itself has proved to have an important ‘empowering’ impact on the concerned communities, strengthening their collective organization and giving an opportunity of dialogue with the Government authorities.

c) Describe how the project has contributed to the achievement of national development strategies and other development frameworks such as UNDAF and PRS:

In its National Strategic Development Plan (NSDP), the Royal Government of Cambodia has assigned a high priority to

poverty reduction and sustainable socio-economic development. This priority emphasizes security of land tenure including those of indigenous peoples’ communities. By supporting the implementation of the Land Law and related regulations, the project has contributed to the progress towards the NSDP goals as regards indigenous communities.

The project was also aligned with the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) which anchors itself on the National Strategic Development Plan and identifies a number of challenges concerning indigenous communities’ rights which need attention, including land grabbing.

d) Describe any lessons learned relating to the overall effectiveness of the intervention, taking into account the suitability of the technical approach or intervention model deployed. With hindsight, identify anything that would have been done differently to increase the intervention’s effectiveness:

<The successful registration of indigenous peoples’ lands rests on extensive preparatory work at community level

before engaging with the multiple steps of the titling process and requires skillful and trained facilitators. The strategy and approach of the project was originally designed for a larger scale intervention over longer period of time. Capitalizing on ILO’s technical expertise and facilitation capacity between the various actors involved and building on previous work done by the ILO have allowed progress towards the set targets in a relatively short time. While the assistance provided to indigenous communities in securing customary land and natural resources in their territory through the process of land registration contributes to strengthening their livelihood at both individual and community level, there is a strong need to enhance their traditional livelihoods and create additional income opportunities through a broader intervention that addresses in an integrated manner the multiple socio-economic vulnerabilities of indigenous communities.

Rating of project effectiveness

c Global projects report on their contribution to Global Products under the Outcome-Based Workplans d For Global projects this is the Global Product code, e.g. GLO126


CLASSIFICATION e

Highly effective Almost all (>80%) of the immediate objectives were achieved and the intervention will make a substantial contribution to the achievement of the development objective and decent work outcomes.

Effective The majority (60-80%) of the immediate objectives were achieved and the intervention will make a contribution to the achievement of the development objective and decent work outcomes.

Ineffective Some (40-60%) of the immediate objectives were achieved, which will result in a limited contribution to the achievement of the development objective and decent work outcomes.

Very ineffective Few (<40%) of the immediate objectives were achieved, and it is unlikely a contribution will be made to the achievement of the development objective and decent work outcomes.

Briefly explain the major factors taken into account to justify the effectiveness classification and provide any other comments (2000 characters maximum):

e This is a self-assessment

SECTION B: IMPLEMENTATION ANALYSIS

1. Factors affecting implementation

Check key reasons for shortfalls in the delivery of outputs and achievement of immediate objectives:

Implementing partner (constituents or private entities) performance

ILO (Office and staff) performance

Difficulties in inter-agency coordination Inadequate cost estimates

Lack of constituent or implementing partner commitment/ownership

Inadequate project design

ILO policy changes Counterpart funding shortfall

Budget processing (revision/disbursement etc.) delays

Unexpected change in external environment

Community/political opposition HR difficulties (recruitment, contracts)

Other - please specify: short time-frame of the project

a) Explain the major challenges faced during implementation and explain how these were dealt with:

Given that the process leading to land titling is long and complex for each of the indigenous communities concerned, one of the challenges facing the project implementation was the short timeframe of the project. Further, tensions between NGOs and provincial authorities in Preah Vihear province caused some delay as regards fieldwork with communities there. Implementation of project activities was also affected by challenges arising in connection with Economic Land Concessions (ELC). In some cases implementation difficulties and delays related to unexpected staff changes in with partner NGO in Mondulkiri and the Provincial Government of Ratanakiri province. In Koh Kong province some of the communities were unable to receive the support needed due to lack of responsiveness from the NGO that was supposed to provide the support. Though the ILO stepped-in to mitigate, support for the communities concerned was delayed. The promulgation of the Law on Association and Non-governmental Organization which now regulates the process of identity determination and registration as legal entity for indigenous communities has also had a slowing down effect during the implementation period regarding issuing legal recognition letters.

Actions taken to address implementation challenges included selection of alternative target communities to avoid further delay. To allow for flexibility and avoid blockage of project activities, a list of target communities has been established with the partner NGOs, while the ILO ensures overall coordination of interventions. Challenges and constraints were also managed through ensuring close collaboration and contacts with Government ministries at the central level, particularly MRD and MoI. Furthermore, as indicated above, prior to the signing of the Grant Agreement and the effective start date, the ILO, following consultations and coordination with GIZ, recruited a National project coordinator as of May 2014 who started to provide services in support of the objective and outcomes of the joint initiative. These services ensured continuing support for national actors including MRD and MoI as well as NGOs, indigenous communities and prepared for the implementation of the project. b) Describe any lessons learned relating to challenges faced during implementation:

Whereas the capacity of Government officials has improved at the national level, there is still a strong need for capacity-building among government officials at district and provincial level and NGOs staff as well as broader awareness-raising on indigenous people’s rights. As highlighted above, there is also a strong need to enhance indigenous communities’ traditional livelihoods and create additional income opportunities through a broader intervention that addresses in an integrated manner the multiple socio-economic vulnerabilities of indigenous communities and unlocks and shows their potential contribution to national development. The cost of CLP, which is about 30USD per hectare, remains a huge constraint.

2. Risk management

Key Assumptions Risk level

Describe any mitigation measures applied Start of project End of project

The government continues to implement

green yellow The Law on Association and Non-governmental Organization which was promulgated in July 2015


the 2001 Land Law and related regulations and its obligations under international treaties, including Convention No. 111 There is a risk that Government-promoted economic exploitation in indigenous peoples’ areas take precedence over efforts to protect indigenous peoples’ rights and enhance their livelihoods

now regulates the process of identity determination and registration as legal entity for indigenous communities. The Law recognizes all associations and NGOs registered with Government as lawful prior to its promulgation, but requires indigenous communities with legal entity status to submit annual reports and to comply with other legal duties as association and NGO have under the Law. This development has implications for indigenous communities and the process of their legal recognition, as it increases the burden of formal requirements for communities with generally weak capacity.

The progress achieved at the level of identification and legal recognition of indigenous communities was not matched by the issuing by the Government of new collective land titles (CLT) in 2014 and 2015, despite public commitments made in this respect and the allocation of government funds for issuing some 10 titles per year. Only six indigenous communities have received CLT since 2012 and early 2013. The implementation of Directive no. 01, under which private land titles have been issued to some indigenous families, also continue to affect the implementation the CLT process.

a) Provide an overview of how assumptions and related risk levels changed throughout the lifetime of the intervention.

Describe the relevance of originally-identified assumptions and highlight any new assumptions identified during implementation:

Priority continues to be accorded to ELCs over communal land titling and indigenous peoples are not consulted nor

do they participate in decisions affecting their lives. Prejudices against their traditional economic activities persist.

b) Explain the intervention’s approach to risk management and how effective the risk monitoring system and mitigation measures proved to be:

Please see section B.1 a). It should also be noted that the initial planning and selection of target communities was

made by the ILO in consultation with NGOs, MRD and MoI in November 2013, and continuously updated and adjusted, taking into account implementation challenges

c) Describe any lessons learned related to risk management:

The increasing number of indigenous communities which have received identity letter from MRD and have been recognized as legal entities is putting pressure to MLMUPC and Government to address the issue of indigenous peoples’ land recognition and protection.

3. Management and Institutional arrangements

a) Describe the adequacy of management arrangements:

The choice of having a small technical team working with the range of actors involved rather that addressing by itself directly the complexities of working with hundreds of indigenous peoples, men and women, has proven successful. ILO’s mandate and standards has enabled to address politically sensitive issues with authority, while being perceived by stakeholders as impartial facilitator. The project team was able to rely on ILO’s network of technical specialists in Bangkok and Geneva.

b) Explain the role that partners, including ILO constituents, played during implementation. Identify any alternative arrangements that may have helped increase the effectiveness, efficiency or inclusiveness of the intervention:

Project implementation evolved through close working relationships with Government, NGOs, Development partners, UN agencies, and indigenous leaders. It was based on the initial planning and selection of target communities made by the ILO in consultation with NGOs, MRD and MoI, and continuously updated and adjusted c) Describe any lessons learned related to management and institutional arrangements:

Rating of project implementation

CLASSIFICATION f

Highly efficient Almost all (>80%) outputs were of expected quality and delivered within the budget and schedule set out in the original implementation plan.

Efficient The majority (60-80%) of outputs were of expected quality and delivered within the budget and schedule set out in the original implementation plan.

Inefficient Some (40-60%) outputs were delivered within the budget and schedule set out in the original implementation plan.

Very inefficient Few (<40%) outputs were delivered within the budget and schedule set out in the original implementation plan.

Briefly explain the major factors taken into account to justify the implementation classification and provide any other comments (2000 characters maximum):

f This is a self-assessment


SECTION C: SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS

a) Analyze the sustainability of results, taking into consideration the institutional and technical capacities and commitment of constituents and partners:

The pre-titling stage of the communal land titling (CLT) process has played an important role in building

capacity of indigenous communities as a group and obtaining legal recognition. This can constitute the basis for future advocacy and action to claim rights legally recognized under national and international law.

Further assistance and capacity building should be provided to sub-national government authorities to overcome capacity gaps at that level. Sub-national authorities play an important role in the process, and it is difficult to see how the process of identification, legal registration and titling can become sustainable without enhanced government capacity at the district and provincial level. Currently, local government staff is often not in position to effectively service communities and their central government counterparts. b) Describe the intervention’s exit strategy and specify agreements in place with constituents and implementing

partners to ensure the continuity of project benefits: The ILO is considering new approaches and strategies to promote rights-based and inclusive development in

Cambodia, including on overcoming bottlenecks in the land titling process taking into account the results of the dialogue workshop held in May 2015 described in the previous sections. c) Describe any major internal or external factors that may affect the sustainability of project results in the

future:

In a context of unsecure land tenure, strong pressures from third parties and weak institutions, the project had a major role in ensuring progress in the implementation of the Land Law and related regulations. The results achieved by the project may risk being jeopardized as a result of weak governance and the growing pressures on indigenous peoples’ lands by external actors and investors, including as regards those communities which have engaged with the titling process or have already received a land title.

Rating of project sustainability

CLASSIFICATION g

Highly likely All factors influencing project sustainability have been clearly identified. The sustainability of results has been ensured and there is a firm commitment from constituents and partners to maintain an ongoing flow of project benefits.

Likely Factors influencing project sustainability have been identified. The sustainability of results is likely and there is an understanding with constituents and partners to maintain an ongoing flow of project benefits.

Not likely Some factors influencing project sustainability have been identified. There is no consensus among constituents and partners about concrete actions needing to be taken to ensure project sustainability.

Very unlikely Factors influencing project sustainability have not been identified. The commitment of constituents and partners maintain an ongoing flow of project benefits is unknown.

Briefly explain the major factors taken into account to justify the sustainability classification and provide any other comments (2000 characters maximum): Although external factors exist that may affect the sustainability of the results in the future, options for future interventions are under discussions which will protect and enhance the results achieved.

g This is a self-assessment

SECTION D: MONITORING, EVALUATION AND KNOWLEDGE SHARING

M&E self-assessment:

YES NO

Progress was regularly reported both internally (within the ILO) and externally (to donors and partners) against the logical framework

A progress monitoring system was supported by data collection and analysis

Cost effectiveness of activities and outputs was monitored

Constituents were able to use M&E for discussion and decision-making in their own organizations

Baselines and data were adequate to document progress towards results

a) Reflect on the approach to performance measurement and describe mechanisms in place for monitoring and evaluation:

A common workplan was discussed and finalized with NGOs partners, MoI, and MRD. This became the key tool to implement, monitor, and evaluate progress of the project. Period self-assessments were undertaken to take into account the above-mentioned challenges and to make arrangements with partners with a view to coordinating the different activities at the field in a flexible fashion. b) Outline efforts made to involve a broad range of stakeholders in M&E, including the role played by

constituents and implementing partners: The following strategies were used: Regular meeting at NGO Forum Regular meeting with Development partners at TWGL (Technical Working Group on Land) A list of indigenous community state of progress for each step, which was shared with key stakeholders Progress reports from service providers (SC and Consultant)

c) If any evaluations were carried out, briefly describe how findings and recommendations were addressed by the intervention:

d) Describe the approach to knowledge sharing and how key achievements and success stories generated by the intervention will be captured and communicated: The achievements of the project have been reported to ILO supervisory bodies and were included in the ILO

report to the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues


ANNEXES

Annex 1

List of indigenous communities having received the support from ILO 2014-2015, and achievement

in each step which is a pre-communal land titling.

A. Identity certification - MRD

Two separate tasks were completed during the reporting period for 14 indigenous communities,

namely (1) appraisal of identity; and (2) preparation of administrative papers as supporting

documents for submission to MRD level.

The MRD has issued identity letter to the following 11 indigenous villages, 3 other have completed

documents and submitted at MRD while 2 others are at provincial level.

No Village/Community Commune District Province NGO partner

1 Kachut Nhang Andongmeas Ratanakkiri ICSO

2 Ket Nhang Andongmeas Ratanakkiri ICSO

3 Dal Nhang Andongmeas Ratanakkiri ICSO

4 Tangchis Nhang Andongmeas Ratanakkiri ICSO

5 Tangse Nhang Andongmeas Ratanakkiri ICSO

6 Patang Sesan Oyadav Ratanakkiri ICSO

7 Kengsan Seda Lumphat Ratanakkiri ICSO

8 Tumpounroeungthom Tavengkrom Taveng Ratanakkiri GAA

9 Tus Ta Orng Kounmum Ratanakkiri DPA

10 Phnom Pi Srae Chis Sambo Kratie CED

11 Srae Chis Srae Chis Sambo Kratie CED

Three villages have completed at provincial level, and already submitted to MRD

1 Bangkoeunphal Rumtum Rovieng Preah Vihear OPKC

2 Svaydamnak Rumtum Rovieng Preah Vihear OPKC

3 Tropeangtotim Rumtum Rovieng Preah Vihear OPKC

Two villages are processing documents at Mondulkiri

1 Pukeh Memang Keoseima Mundulkiri WCS

2 Sre E Rommania Semmonorum Mundulkiri WCS

B. Legal registration – MoI

MoI has issued legal entities letter to 14 indigenous communities as below:

No Community Commune District Province NGO partner

1 Srei Chuok (Bunong) Okreang Sambo Kratie CED

2 Thnot (Krol) Srei Chis Sambo Kratie CED

3 Srei Thom (Bunong) Sam kok Koh Nheak Mondulk Kiri ARD

4 An Tres (Bunong) Or Buon Loeu Koh Nhek Mondulk Kiri ARD

5 An Chor (Bunong) Sok San Koh Nhek Mondulk Kiri ARD

6 Chi Klob (Bunong) Sok San Koh Nhek Mondulk Kiri ARD

7 Rok Kok Lak Vernsai Ratanak Kiri NTFP

8 Pu Cha Me Mong Keoseima Mondulkiri ARD

9 Pu Treng Dak Dam O Raing Mondulkiri ARD

10 Kreang (Tampuon) Kekchong Bokeo Ratanakiri ICSO

11 Pyang (Brao) Tavengkrom Taveng Ratanakiri ICSO

12 Tampuonreoung

Toch (Brao)

Tavengkrom Taveng Ratanakiri ICSO

13 Kek Kuon (Brao) Tavengkrom Taveng Ratanakiri ICSO

14 Sieng Say (Brao) Tavengkrom Taveng Ratanakiri ICSO

Documents necessary for registration of 9 communities have been completed and submitted

to MoI for registration.

No Name of IC Commune District Province NGO Partners

1 Srei Thom (Bunong) Sam kok Koh Nheak Mondulk Kiri ARD

2 An Tres (Bunong) Or Buon Loeu Koh Nhek Mondulk Kiri ARD

3 An Chor (Bunong) Sok San Koh Nhek Mondulk Kiri ARD

4 Chi Klob (Bunong) Sok San Koh Nhek Mondulk Kiri ARD

5 Tik Team (Kavet) Santepheap Siempang Steung Treng MVI

6 O char (Kavet) Santepheap Siempang Steung Treng MVI

7 Kmeng (Kreung) Peoy Ochum Ratanak Kiri DPA

8 Teun (Kreung) Teun Koun Mun Ratanak Kiri DPA

9 Taheuy Teun Konmum Ratanak Kiri DPA

Annex 2

List of 24 indigenous communities in Kampong Thom province found in Extension Work Shop 24 June 2015. (Note: The name of villages, communes, district in this list is translated right away from list written in Khmer that was hand writing. It is subject to be verified)

No Village/Community Commune District Province NGO partner

1 Andann Salavisay Prasat balang Kampongthom

2 Talek Salavisay Prasat balang Kampongthom

3 O Kroch Salavisay Prasat balang Kampongthom

4 Srae Salavisay Prasat balang Kampongthom

5 Marak Kor Tuol Kreul Prasat balang Kampongthom

6 Marak Khor Tuol Kreul Prasat balang Kampongthom

7 Salavisay Salavisay Prasat balang Kampongthom

8 Lakhan Tieng Salavisay Prasat balang Kampongthom


9 Khmat Salavisay Prasat balang Kampongthom

10 Kon Thnot Chey Kampongsvay Kampongthom

11 Skonn Trapaeng

Reusay

Kampongsvay Kampongthom

12 Ngon Ngon Sandann Kampongthom

13 Roveang Ngon Sandann Kampongthom

14 Chang Ho Khna Ngon Sandann Kampongthom

15 Krang Deum Ngon Sandann Kampongthom

16 Chong Prey Kampongsvay Sandann Kampongthom

17 Krasang Trapaeng

Reusay


18 Trapaeng khnong Phan Nheum Prasat balang Kampongthom

20 Kal mek Kampongsvay Sandann Kampongthom

21 Svay Sor Phan Nheum Prasat balang Kampongthom

22 Smoanh Phan Nheum Prasat balang Kampongthom

23 Slaeng Slaeng Sandann Kampongthom

24 Prey Mool Trapaeng

Reusay
