Upload
iied
View
57
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The presentation of Gorettie Nabanoga and Justine Namaalwa, of Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda, to the IIED-hosted Innovations for equity in smallholder PES: bridging research and practice conference. The presentation, made within the second session on new research to improve understanding of participants' preferences for different PES payment formats, focused on a group-based choice experiment approach to understand the preferences of the Ongo Community in Uganda. The conference took place at the Royal Botanic Gardens in Edinburgh on 21 March. Further details of the conference and IIED's work with PES are available via http://www.iied.org/conference-innovations-for-equity-smallholder-pes-highlights, and can be found via the Shaping Sustainable Markets website: http://shapingsustainablemarkets.iied.org/.
Citation preview
POVERTY AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS OF REDD
ARCHITECTURE:
Experiences from Ongo Community Forest, Uganda
Assoc. Prof. Gorettie NabanogaDr. Justine Namaalwa
21st March 2014 -Edinburgh
PRESENTATION OUTLINE• The Ongo Community Forest Project • The Socio-Economic conditions of the
Community• The Pre-REDD Analysis• The approach to examining preferences
– The focus group discussions – The low-cost choice experiment
• The Key findings • Lessons Learnt• The Information Dissemination Sessions
2
PROJECT BACKGROUND
• Aim: To generate knowledge on how REDD can be designed at the national/sub-national level to promote positive development co-benefits
• The project tasks (Outputs)
(1) Investigating the different REDD design options feasible under different management regimes
(2) Working with a REDD pilot project – to generate evidence and improve the understanding
of implementing low-cost REDD pilot activities
3
THE ONGO COMMUNITY PROJECT• Historical Events (2000-2006)– Community Forest Management Initiatives by 2 CBOs– Formation of the Communal Land Association (CLA)– Forest Boundary Demarcation– Draft Constitution & Management Plan
• Pilot CFM Activities by ECOTRUST (2007)– Further development of CLA– Final Drafting of Constitution & FM plan – Complementary TGB Project
• Idea of the SFM/REDD Pilot by ECOTRUST (2011)– Project Documents, Solicit carbon buyers/funders
4
THE ONGO COMMUNITY PROJECT
• ACQUISITION OF LEGAL DOCUMENTS– Formal Registration of CLA as CBO (2012)
– Application for Land Title (Freehold)• Request Approved (2012)
• Forest Land Surveyed (2013)
• Site visit by Project Funders (Myclimate)
• Review of the constitution
5
FORMATION/FUNCTIONALIZATION OF INSTITUTIONS
• The CLA was formally registered as a CBO – Facilitate communities to abide by
rules & regulations– Collaboration between district
technical staff & environmental protection unit in enforcing rules and regulations
• Community empowerment– CLA mandated to convene meetings
for several purposes– More information sharing– Review of the constitution
• Accountable and transparent management of funds– Streamlined through opening up a
bank account
THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS (2011/12)
• Livelihood activities • Most of the households
practice subsistence farming
• Major cash crops: Tobacco, Rice and Maize– About 50% engaged in
Tobacco = harvest poles at least once every 3yrs for construction of barns
• Rice and Maize – minimal use of fertilizers = clear new land for high yields
Clearing of land for cultivation and extraction of poles (for both subsistence & commercial activities) are the major drivers of deforestation
and forest degradation
THE PRE-REDD ANALYSIS
• Sufficient awareness of the role of forests in countering climate change (rainfall patterns and quantity as the most important aspects).
• Individuals we willing to halt DD activities if compensated for their income/livelihood loss
• Preferred compensation formats were;– alternative sources of livelihoods– increased employment opportunities – better social services in the community
• However, some individuals preferred compensation by cash payments
THE PRE-REDD ANALYSIS CONT’D
• 12% of the women felt that compensation scheme might limit their access to important subsistence forest resources-firewood
• 16% individuals disagreed with the proposed intervention-(insufficient compensation for reduced use of the resource)
• Those in agreement with the proposed intervention– improvement of the overall income situation in the
community and reduction of conflicts (+ve)– corruption and unequal distribution of benefits (-ve)
REDD+ interventions are generally agreeable to the community. However, community heterogeneity must be considered with
regard to forest uses & thus diverse forms of compensations preferred (cash, several in-kind or both)
The approach to examining preferences -
1. The Focus Group Discussions2. The Low-cost Choice Experiment
10
THE FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS
• Sessions disaggregated by sexAreas of Focus • The major drivers of Deforestation &
Forest Degradation• Activities that require compensation• The commitment activities to be
undertaken• Compensation types and levels• Distribution and Governance
arrangements for the compensation packages
• Sustainability of the project
THE LOW-COST CHOICE EXPERIMENT
• Different commitment activities and compensation formats & levels = designed into packages
• Adequate visual aids used to enhance people’s ability to understand the packages
• A total of 5 packages were designed and a status quo option (package 6)
12
THE LOW-COST CHOICE EXPERIMENT
• Packages were explained to the participants• Participants given a chance for peer
learning• Individuals present were assigned a unique
voter’s number– Linked to their socio-economic characteristics (Sex,
Membership to CLA, proximity to the forest boundary, and wealth status (poor, rich average)
• Individuals expressed personal preferences for the different packages – Casting votes (twice)
• Results of the 2nd round of voting announced – discussions
01
06
72
47
12
0
Linking with the Socio-Economic Characteristics
• Sex of respondent: –majority of the men preferred package 3 • Package 3 = raising seedlings for income and
revolving fund
–majority of women preferred package 5 • Package 5 = An additional aspect of improved
agricultural practices• Daily subsistence and income generating for
women16
Linking with the Socio-Economic Characteristics• Proximity to the forest:– Proportionately more women than men who live near
the forest =Preferred Option 5– Distant participants = Preferred Option 3
• Age of Participants– Increasing preference for package 3 with increasing age– Decreasing preference for package 5 with increasing age• Involvement in agricultural activities
17
LESSONS LEARNT1. Process should be consultative with
effective information flow – a pre-requisite to smooth implementation process
2. Misinterpretation of Terminologies & approaches – Compensation vs Incentives = promote perverse
incentives
3. The problem of elite capture
LESSONS LEARNT
4. Ensure effective participation of all stakeholders (FGDs)– Documents in local languages
– Freedom of expression by both men and women
5. The local/poor communities are not homogeneous, and even for communally owned resources, individuals have specific preferences – Even if the approach is assumed pro-poor/pro-people,
specific interest groups should be considered in the design and implementation of a given approach
19
DISSEMINATION OF FINDINGS
20
THE PEOPLE’S CHOICE ON COMPENSATION FORMATS
STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK
• Ecotrust team– The research outputs inform the implementation process
for the pilot
• District technical staff– Acknowledged the value added in the partnership
between Academicians/researchers and project implementers
22
STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK• Local people of
Ongo Community– Community were very
anxious and had long waited: delayed implementation = perverse incentives
– The dissemination process gave them an opportunity to own the findings
23
STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK• National-level stakeholders
(MPs, Line Ministries, Researchers, Academicians, CSOs)– Evidence-based research
should support discussions in National and international Fora e.g. the COP 19 at Warsaw
– Urgent need for up-scaling the methodology (pilots & research)• Systematic flow of data =
benefit the National REDD process
• Need for more research as many of the questions had no concrete answers = Discussion opened a Pandora box
24
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
• Funding: Norad
• Co-ordinators: UMB & IIED
• Implementing Agent -REDD+ Pilot: ECOTRUST
• Field Activities: Makerere University
Researchers & Field Assistants • Key Stakeholders: Ongo Community• Other Collaborators: District Technical staff
and other Local leaders
Thank YouAsante sana Mwebale nyoAfoyo matek
26