Terminal Evaluation for WWF -GEF

TerminalEvaluationforWWF-GEF:

ImprovingMangroveConservationAcrosstheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)

DRAFT

GlenHearns,PhD

Eco-LogicalResolutionsLtd.Mobile:(+1)604.848.4096

www.eco-logical-resolutions.com

1May2019

TerminalEvaluationoftheETPS 1May,2019

i|P a g e

POSITIONDETAILSLocation CostaRica,Panamá,ColombiaandEcuadorReportingto Amelia KissickStartingDate March,2019Duration Approximately25daysReportdue April-May,2019PROJECTDATAProject/ProgramTitle ImprovingmangroveconservationacrosstheEasternTropicalPacific

Seascape(ETPS)GEFProjectID 5771WWF(Agency)ProjectID

G0011

ImplementingAgency(s) WWFGEFProjectAgencyExecutingAgency ConservationInternationalExecutingPartner(s) PermanentCommissionfortheSouthPacific(CPPS);UNESCO-QuitoCountries CostaRica,Panama,ColombiaandEcuadorFocalArea(s) InternationalWatersGEFOperationalProgram GEF5

TotalGEFApprovedBudget

$1,900,810.0

TotalCo-financingApproved

$4,516,858.0

RELEVANTDATESCEOEndorsement/Approval 7/18/2016

AgencyApprovalDate 9/23/2016ImplementationStart 9/23/2016ProjectCompletionDate/Actual

12/31/18(proposed)

PRIMARYCONTACTINFORMATIONOffice Name(s)(Last,First) Email/PhoneExecutingAgency Banks,Stuart [email protected](WWF)

Kaplan,Rachel [email protected]

OperationalFocalPoint(s)

Miss.ValeskaYanez(Ecuador)Ms.LauraCamilaBermudezWilches(Colombia)Ms.EnidChaverri-Tapia(CostaRica)Ms.AntonellaFinis

[email protected]@[email protected]@miambiente.gob.pa

PartnerContact(s) Banks,Stuart [email protected] ChristianLavoie [email protected]

TerminalEvaluationoftheETPS 1May,2019

ii|P a g e

DocumentTrackingTableDocument Version # Date Person Comment

v.1 16 April Glen Hearns Draft submission,

v.1 23 April WWF/CI Comments included in Audit Trail

Final 30April Glen Hearns Comments amended post discussion 29 April.

Final 1 May Glen Hearns A couple of minor revisions based on CI close out report

EvaluationTeam

GlenHearns,PhD.

Eco-LogicalResolutionsLtd.Mobile/Viber:(+1)[email protected]

www.eco-logical-resolutions.com

ETPSTerminalEvaluationReport 1May2019

iii|P a g e

1 ExecutiveSummary

1.1 ProjectSummaryTable

1.2 ProjectDescription

TheprojectseekstoaddresstheincreasingdegradationofmangrovesintheEastTropicalPacificSeascapes(ETPS).Despiteagrowingrecognitionoftheimportanceofmangrovesandthemanykeyservicestheyprovide,anestimatedthirdofglobalcoveragehasbeenreducedinrecenthistorythroughdeforestationanddegradationofthecoastalbuffer.Thisdramaticlossisalreadyimpactingcoastsgloballyasthenumerousecosystemservicesprovidedbymangrovesarereducedandlost.TheETPSregionharboursthehighestproportionofthreatenedmangrovespeciesinSouthAmericaalongthePacificcoastsofCostaRica,Panama,ColombiaandEcuador

1Co-financingaccountedforuptoDec2017.2WWF(2016)RequestforCEOEndorsement,23May2016.Noteitwas$4,398,864asperCI(2018)PIRforyear1

Project Title: Improving mangrove conservation across the Eastern Tropical Pacific Seascape

(ETPS) through coordinated regional and national strategy development and implementation

GEF Project ID: 5771 PIF Approval Date 16 April 2014

WWF Project ID: G0011 CEO Endorsement Date 18 July 2016

Country: Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador and Panama Project Start date 23 September 2016

Region: Planned Closing date 1 October 2018

Implementing Agency World Wildlife Fund -US Revised closing date 31 March 2019

Executing Partners

Conservation International (CI), Permanent Commission for the South Pacific (CPPS); UNESCO-

Quito

GEF Focal Area: International Waters

Project Partners GEF Project Size Mid-Sized (24 months)

Project Financing At CEO Endorsement (US$) At Terminal Evaluation (US$)

GEF financing 1,900,810 1,900,810

Agency contribution 1,286,664 998,6391

Governments 2,480,194 1,441,4011

Other partners 750,000 381,6411

Total Co-Fin 4,516,8582 2,821,6811

Project Total Costs 6,417,668


iv|P a g e

withextensionsofsomeofthehighestestimatesforabovegroundmangrovebiomassontheplanet.

Themainbarrierstoconservationintheregioninclude:

• Poorstakeholderawareness,institutionaltechnicalcapacity,lackofscientificdata;• Conflictinglegislation,lackofinstitutionalcoordination,gapsinpolicy,limitedfunding;• Weaklinkagesinspatialridgetoreefplanning,wellestablishedindustries(hydro-

power),differentautonomouscommunities;• Limitedattentiontolocalengagement;and,• lackofinternalorganization.

ThisProjectwasdevelopedtoimplementacomprehensive,multi-governmentratifiedandregionallyarticulatedmangroveconservationstrategyintheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)countriesofCostaRica,Panama,ColombiaandEcuadorthroughon-the-groundmanagementactivitiesandthestrengtheningofnationalandlocalpoliciesthatinformridge-to-reefdevelopmentplanningandpracticesrelevanttomangroveconservation.Thisisachievedthroughdevelopingcapacityandawarenessatthelocalandnationallevels;assessinglegislativeincompatibilitiesandgaps;andpromotingnewpoliciesandlaws.

TheProjectObjectiveis“Toimplementacomprehensive,multi-governmentratifiedandregionallyarticulatedmangroveconservationstrategyintheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)countriesofCostaRica,Panama,ColombiaandEcuadorthroughon-the-groundmanagementactivitiesandthestrengtheningofnationalandlocalpoliciesthatinformridge-to-reefdevelopmentplanningandpracticesrelevanttomangroveconservation”.

Theprojectwasdeliveredthroughthreeinterconnectedcomponents:

1. Regionalmangrovestrategydevelopmentandimplementation;

2. Nationalmangroveactionplansandpolicystrengthening;and,

3. Localconservationactions.

Theprojectstartdatewas23September2016withaproposedclosingdateof1October2018.Thiswasextendedto31March2019toensureallprojectdeliverableswereaccomplishedandtoconvenethe3rdlearningexchangewhichtookplaceinNovember2018,inSanJose,CostaRica.

Theoverallprojectbudgetwas$6,417,668USDwithaGEFcontributionof$1,900,810USD(or30%).Atthetimeofwritingthereportco-financingwasaccountedforupto31December2017,andaccountedforapproximately62%ofcommittedfunds.Finalco-financingisstillbeingdetermined;however,theprojectlikelyreachedorexceededco-financingcommitmentsassumingsimilarlevelsofactivityassumingsimilarco-financingexpenditureinthelast15monthsasinthefirst15months.

TheprojectwasimplementedthroughtheWorldWildlifeFund(WWF-GEF)andexecutedbyConservationInternational(CI)inpartnershipwiththeComisiónPermanentedelPacificoSur(PermanentCommissionfortheSouthPacific)(CPPS),andUNESCO-Quito.TheProject


v|P a g e

ManagementUnit(PMU)wasbasedinEcuadorandeachoftheETPScountrieshadacountryfocalpointwithinCIcountryoffices.TheSteeringCommittee(SC)comprisedCI-ETPS,CPPS,theOFPsofthecountries(orrepresentatives),CIGlobalMarineandUNESCO-Quito.

OveralltheprojectwaswelladministeredwitheffectivecommunicationanduseofGEFstandardreporting,suchasPPR,GEFTrackingTool,SCminutes,amongstother.Therewasnomajortransferoffundingbetweencomponents,andtherewerelittletonofinancialissues,otherthantheinabilityofUNESCO-QuitotoreceivefundingfromCItocompletethecommunicationanddisseminationofinformation(Outcome1.3).Asaconsequence,CIassumedtheresponsibilities,whichpartiallyaddedtodelaysinprojectoutputs.Oneofthemaincausesofdelays,however,wasthetimerequiredforcountriestoreviewmaterialsforapproval.

TheprojectshowedahighlevelofAdaptivemanagement,andincorporatedthelessonslearnedfrompreviousprojectsandthePPGphaseoftheprojectdevelopment.Forexample,thedemonstrationsiteofthetrans-boundarymangroveareabetweenEcuadorandColombiawasremovedfromtheprojectduetologisticallimitations.However,duetotheimportanceoftheColombianmangrovesintheETPSregion,theprojectsoughtandsucceededtodeveloplocalcommunityactivitiesintheGulfofTortugas.Moreover,newopportunitiesweretakenwhenpossible,suchasthedevelopmentoftherestorationguideinEperaalaSiapidaara,Colombia.

1.3 EvaluationRatingTables3

1.AssessmentofProjectObjectives&Outcomes

Relevance:Theoverallrelevanceoftheprojectissupportedbytheinterestinthecountriestoadvancemangroveconservationbothregionally(advancementoftheRegionalMangroveStrategy,withinclusionofCostaRica)andnationally(newregulationsinPanama2018,newnationalpolicyinCostaRica2017,revisionofexistingpolicyinColombia2016,nationalplanapprovedinEcuador2019).Theprojectisrelevantatthelocallevelasshownbytheinvolvementof9communitiesacrosstheregiontoengageinrestorationandconservationactivities.TheprojectisrelevanttoGEFIWObjectives3and1andWWFconservationinterests.

Effectiveness:Theprojectoveralleffectivenessoftheprojectisconsideredverysatisfactory.Virtuallyallofthetargetswereaccomplishedacrossallthecomponents,andinseveralcasesexceeded.Thisistruewiththelegislativeandpolicydevelopmentactivities,aswellasknowledgemanagementaspects(brochuresandlearningexchanges).Theprojectwassuccessfulinengaging9communitiesandinitiatingconservationandrestorationactivities.Theprojectdidnotachieveapolicybriefonmangrovevaluation,thoughadetailedreportwasdeveloped,andafinalcommunicationproductonlyawaitsinputfromCostaRica.

Thelongtermimpactsoftheprojectwilldependupontheabilityofthenationalgovernmentstoimplementactivitiesoutlinedintheirnationalpoliciesandregulationswhichhavebeenenhancedasaresultoftheproject.Inmanycases,governmentbudgetsareavailableforcontinuedadministrationbutnotnecessarilyforactivitiessuchason-thegroundrestoration,whicharedeliveredthroughexternalfinancing.Localcommunitieswilllikelycontinuetoengagewithmangroverestorationandconservation,providingtherearerealizedbenefitsassociatedwithdoingso,eitherfromsocio-economicfactorsorthroughcontinuedsupportinthenext0-5

3BasedonGEF(2017)GuidelinesforGEFAgenciesinConductingTerminalEvaluationforFull-sizedProjectshttps://www.gefieo.org/sites/default/files/ieo/evaluations/files/gef-guidelines-te-fsp-2017.pdf;


vi|P a g e

years.Improvementsineco-tourismandfisherieswilllikelybethedrivingforcesforcontinuedinterestatthecommunitylevelinconservationandrestorationinthelongerterm.

Efficiency:TheprojectwasoveralleffectiveindeliveringtheoutputsandresultingoutcomesasspecifiedintheProjectDocument.Inmanyareastheprojectexceededtheprojecttargetswhilekeepingwithintheprojectbudget.Indeed,theleveragingofotherpreviousandon-goinginitiativesmeanttheGEFfundswere“catalytic”inputsresultingingoodcostforactivityandoutput.The“no-costextension”of6monthsona24monthprojecthassomenegativebearingondeterminingtheefficiencywithwhichtheprojectwasexecuted.TheGEFgrantwassimilartothatofthe24monthUNDP-EMBLASIIprojectintheBlackSeawhichfocusedonregionallevelcooperationondataandinformationexchange,throughnationalandlocallevelactivities.OverallRatingofProjectObjectives&Outcomes Rating

Theprojectmetorexceededprojecttargetswithinbudgetalbeitwitha6monthno-costextension.Outcomesandprojectobjectiveshavegenerallybeenachievedasfollows:

Undercomponent1,theETPScountries,includingCostaRica,areadvancingtheRegionalMangroveStrategypromotedbytheCPPS.Although,anapprovedpublishedstrategywasnotachieved,recommendationsfromtheworkoftheGroupofExpertswereachievedandwilllikelybeadoptedin2019duringtheCPPS4yearreview.CostaRicaactivelyparticipatedinupdatingtheregionalstrategy.RegionalandnationalplanninghavebeenstrengthenedinallcountriesthroughthreesymposiumstyleregionallearningeventsandtheproductionoftoolsincludingtheBlueCarbonManualandBlueForesttools,andregionalandnationalreportonvaluationofgoodandservices.

Undercomponent2,Panamaupdatedregulations(July2018)andupdatedtheirNationalWetlandsPolicy(18December2018);assistancewasgiventoCostaRicaindevelopingnewwetlandspolicy(2017)developedwithUNDP;assistedColumbiainimplementing2016MangrovePolicy,withannualstakeholderworkshopsincludinglocalcommunities,anddevelopingaRestorationGuidedevelopedwithlocalcommunities;EcuadorimplementedEnvironmentalOrganicCode(April12,2018)withnewmangrovespecificinclusions,Ministerialresolutionsforsustainableuseandresourcecustodyagreementsfor3localfishingassociations(005/2018;006/2018;007/2018.NationalMangrovePlanwasapprovedinFeb2019.

UnderComponent3,PanamaUpdatedlocalmanagementinChiriquíincludingClimateAdaptationandastrategicplanandgovernanceschemefortheAltitudinalCorridorofGualaca;CostaRicainitiatedrestorationprojectsanddevelopedrecommendationsforintegratingRidgetoReefapproachesinlocalplansfortheGulfofNicoya;Ecuadordeveloped3co-managementplanswithfisherassociationsinElMorro;ColombiastrengthenedlocalgovernanceinBocanaBazanand2plotswererestoredwithmangroves,alocallanguagemanagementguidewasdevelopedforEperaalaSipidaaracommunityandimprovedplanninginsituationdiagnosisfortheGulfofTortugasarea,includingandevaluationofthemangroveecosysteminIslaAjí,Cajamabre,YurumanguíandNaya.Stakeholdersincluded221AfroColombianrepresentatives(126women).

Threeinternationallearningexchangesoccurredwithonefocussingonlocalcommunities.15trainingsessionswhereheldforlocaldecision-makers,aswellasoneregionaltrainingsessiononBlackClamfishing.Andcommunicationtoolsweredeveloped,includingBlueCarbonManualandBlueForestsmaterialstranslated,withnewexamplesfromtheLatinAmericancontext.

Satisfactory-HighlySatisfactory:


vii|P a g e

2.AssessmentofRiskstoSustainabilityofProjectOutcomes SustainabilityRating

FinancialRisks

Moderatelylikely

Attheregionallevelthereislittlefinancialriskstosustainedactivities.ItisthemandateoftheCPPStoadvancetheregionalstrategy.Theriskmaybethatthelevelofengagementdecreaseswithoutexternalsupport.Atthenationallevelthereisariskthaton-the-groundactionsassociatedwithupdatedplansmaynotbesustained.ItiscommonamongstETPScountriesthatthenationalbudgetsupportsadministrativeroles,butactivitiesareprojectdriven,oftenbyexternalfunding.Atthelocallevel,thefinancialrisksstemfromalackofbenefitsinthenext0-5yearsassociatedwithincentivesforconservation.Theprincipalincentivesarefromfisheries,eco-tourism,anderosioncontrol.However,unlesstherearelocalbenefitsthemomentumforconservationmaydwindle.

Socio-politicalRisks

Likely

Thesocio-politicalrisksarelowasthegovernmentsarecommittedtoconservationandrestorationofmangrovesattheregionalandnationallevels.Thelocalcommunitieshaveexpressedtheirinteresttocontinue,inparticularlearningfromtheEcuadorexperienceofdevelopingfisheriesmanagementplans.IntheAfro-ColombiancommunityBocanaBazan,theyhavealreadyinitiatedabeachprotectionprogrambyplantingtressoutsideoftheproject.

InstitutionalFrameworkandGovernanceRisks

Likely

Theinstitutionalandgovernancerisksarelow.AttheregionalleveltheCPPShasbeeninexistencesincethe1950sandhasamandatethatexpandsbeyondmangroves.AtthenationalleveltherecouldbemorechangestogovernmentinstitutionssuchasexperiencedbyPanamaduringtheprojectwheretwoministriesconjoined.However,ingeneraltheinstitutionalriskislowastherewillbeongoingsupportforthenewandrevisednationalpoliciesandregulations.Theinstitutionaldynamicsatthelocallevelarelesscertainascommunitycouncilscouldchangeandnotnecessarilykeeptheinterestofmangroveconservation.

EnvironmentalRisks

LikelyTherearelimitedenvironmentalrisksastheprojectprincipallydealtwithdevelopingenablingmeasures.Whererestorationsiteshavebeeninitiatedthereisastronglikelihoodthattheywillbemaintainedbythelocalcommunities.

OverallRatingofSustainabilityofProjectOutcomes Rating

Basedonthediscussionsabovetheoverallsustainabilityoftheprojectismoderatelylikely,duetothelackofcertaintyaroundcontinuedfundingforactivitiessuchasrestoration,amongstothers.

Moderatelylikely

3.AssessmentofM&ESystems

TheprojectmonitoringisbasedontheResultsFrameworkwithidentifiedtargetsandbaselines(seesectiononResultsFramework),andincludes,forthemostpart,baselineinformation.Forexample,thestatusofnationalpoliciesandlegislation,orlocalmanagementplans.Theindicatorsweregenerallywelldesignedwithsomeminorcomments,suchasnotusing“approvalofnewlegislation”asanoutcome,asitisbeyondthecontroloftheproject.


viii|P a g e

M&Ebudgetallocated$47,000USDforM&Easindicatedintheprojectdocument,whichwasadministeredinatimelyfashionoverthecourseoftheproject,includingreporting,etc.

Thedatageneratedbytheproject,forexamplethevaluationassessmentandextentofmangroves,wereintegratedintothelargerSPINCAMdatabaseoftheCPPS.ThisisalongtermdatabasewhichhasfundingandsustainabilityoutsidetheGEF-ETPSproject.Thedataisbeingusedbydecision-makerswhichaddress,notonlymangroves,butmarinespatialplanningintheETPSregion.

ReportingwasundertakenasplannedintheProjectDocument,andincluded:M&Eplan,inceptionreport,GEFFocalAreaTrackingtools,SteeringCommittee(PPSCSC)meetingsandminutes,WWF-GEFProjectAgencyFieldSupervisionMissions,quarterlyfinancialreporting,andprojectreportingincludingPPRandPIRs.

ThePSCwasusedeffectivelytomakeadjustmentstoannualplanning,withregardtocapacitybuildingactivities,andconvenedthreetimesduringtheproject.However,inordertoaccommodatetheparticipationofOFPs,theSCdidnotconveneatallin2018,andmoveditsfinalmeetingtoJanuary2019.Informalplanningoccurredthroughouttheyeartakingadvantageofothermeetings.

OverallRatingofM&EDuringImplementation Rating

TheM&EplanaslaidoutintheProjectDocumentwascomprehensive,andwasexecutedwellandtheM&EsystemwaseffectiveinmakingadjustmentstotheworkplanviatheSCandthroughEA-EIcommunication.

Satisfactory

4.ImplementationandExecution

QualityofImplementation Rating

WWF-GEFagencybecameinvolvedattherequestofGEFtoprovideimplementationoftheprojectwhichwasinitiallyconceivedandproposedbyCI.WWF-GEFwasthereforelessinvolvedwithconceptdevelopmentthanwithpreparationoftheproposaltoensurethatitmetWWFstandardsandcompliedwithGEFcriteria.ThroughouttheprojectWWFprovidedmonitoringandprojectassuranceinatimelyandeffectivemanner,whichincludedreviewofbudgetsandadaptingtorequestsfromtheexecutingagency(seesection4.2.1-AdaptiveManagementandCapacity).Annualsupervisionmissionswereconductedtwice,3-4November2017,&6-12March,2019.Thelatterassistingwiththeterminalevaluation.Overall,therewerenoshortcomingsandthequalityofimplementationmetexpectations

Satisfactory

QualityofExecution Rating

Section3oftheProjectDocumentoutlinestherolesoftheexecutingagency,whichincludesoversightandoperationsoftheProjectManagementUnit,disbursementandaccountingofGEFfunds,coordinationandimplementationofprojectactivities(onadaybydaybasis)andprojectreporting.CIachievedthisthroughestablishingitsPMUinEcuadorandhavingOperationalFocalPointsineachofthecountries.BuildingonthepreviousexperienceoftheCI-ETPSproject,CIwasabletocapitalizeonworkingrelationshipsinthecountriesandundertookitsactivitiesinaneffectivemanner.CIsoughttotakeadvantageofopportunitiesthatarosetoensureefficientuseoffundsandaddressbeneficiaryneeds(Seesection4.2.1-AdaptiveManagement).Overall,therewerenoshortcomingsandthequalityofexecutionmetexpectations.

Satisfactory

1.4 SummaryofConclusions,Recommendations&LessonsLearned

TheWWF-GEFETPSprojectwasverymuchanincremental,orcatalytic,projectbuildingonCI’sextensiveCI-ETPSproject(2005-2013),aswellastheSustainableDevelopmentOpen


ix|P a g e

Initiative(UNESCOQuito-CPPS-CI)andtheMangroveandSustainableDevelopmentOpenInitiativeranfrom2013-2015.Assuchitwasabletoengagerapidly,oncefundingbecameoperational,andachievethemajorityofitsintendedtargets,exceedingthemforthemostpart.Attheregionalandnationallevels,theincrementalGEFfundingensuredthatactivitieswereenhanced.Forexample,byconveninganexpertworkinggrouponmangrovestheCPPSreviewoftheRegionalStrategyin2019nowhassignificantrecommendationsatatechnicallevelonissuessuchasintegratedplanningandvaluationofgoodsandservicesofmangroveeco-systems.Throughaseriesof20nationallevelworkshops,nationalregulationsandplanshavebeenenhanced,includingforexampletheinclusionoflocalcommunitystakeholdersinnationalreviewmeetingsinColombia,implementationofCostaRica’snationalplanwithrestorationprojectsintheGulfofNicoya,assistingdevelopmentof2018regulationsinPanamaandEcuadorincludedmangrovesintheirOrganicCode,andapprovedanewNationalMangrovePlaninFebruary2019.

Atthelocalcommunitylevel,theGEFfundingpermittedcontinuationofsomeactivities,suchasengagementwithco-managementoffisheriesbetweenthegovernmentandlocalcommunitiesinElMorro,Ecuador;andstimulatednewwork,suchastherestorationsitesintheGulfofNicoya,CostaRica,andGulfofTortugas,Colombia.

Theprojecthadmultiplestakeholdersatthelocal,nationalandregionallevelsandwashighlysuccessfulinitsstakeholderengagementprocess-alargepartofwhichmustbeattributedtotheextensiveexperienceofCIatthelocallevelwithcountrylevelstaff.Thelocalcommunitydemonstrationprojectswerewelldevelopedandhadreplicatingeffectsbyhaving2bi-lateralexchanges(EcuadorwithPanamaandColombia)andaregionallearningexchangefocusedonlocalcommunityexperiences.Thegendermainstreamingplanwasimplementedwiththeresultthatintheinternationallearningexchangesabout35%ofthespeakersandpanellistswerewomen,whichgiventhecontextoftheregionshouldbeconsideredasolidresult.

ThechoiceofCPPSasanexecutingpartnerhadmanyadvantages.Itsmandatecoversmangrovesandmarinemanagement,anditactsatthepoliticaldecisionmakinglevel.PeruandChilearealsomembersofCPPSandparticipatedinseveralworkshops,despitenothavingsubstantialmangroveareas.CostaRicaisnotamemberoftheCPPS,nevertheless,participatedfullyintheprojectattheregionallevel.

OveralltheprojectwaswellimplementedwithgoodcoordinationbetweentheexecutingandImplementingagencies.TheexperiencesofWWF-GEFwithprojectexecutioninitsownrightassistedprojectexecutionparticularlyinprojectoversight,includingtwosupervisionmissions,andcommunityengagement.

Buildingonitspreviouswork,theprojecthasmadeadvancementstowardstheintendedimpacts.Theenablingenvironmentformangroveconservationhasbeenimprovedthroughthedevelopmentoflegislation,managementplans,andcapacitybuildingfordecision-makers.Moreover,theprojectsupportedinterventionstressreductionandpossiblereversethenet>30%deforestationanddegradationtrendsobservedsincethe1960s.Monitoringmangroveimprovementsoveratwoyeartimeframeischallenging.Nevertheless,


x|P a g e

mangroves(approximately655,342haascollectivelyregisteredbynationalinventoriesfor2018)benefitedfrompolicyimprovementsandawarenessbuildingforlossreductionandrecovery.Managersandcommunitiesofthefourpilotsites/gulfsbenefittedfromtraining,withthreeconservationinitiativesencouragingdirectstewardshipbylocalcommunitieswithpotentialforreplication.(e.g.>5khabetweenELMorro,Ecuador,BazanBocana,Colombia,andstepstoimprovelandusepracticesin>110,000haofassociatedupstreamlandintheChiriquí-Gualacacorridor,Panama).

KeyGoodPracticesemergingfromtheprojectinclude:

1. Conductasocialsafeguardreviewduringprojectdevelopmenttoidentifyanypotentialissuesupfront.TwosafeguardreviewsandscreeningswereundertakenduringthePPGphase.ThefirstwithCI,andthenre-screenedwithanindependentexperttoensurecompliancewithWWF-GEF.Theindependentsocio-assessmentoftheAfro-ColombiancommunitiesintheTortugaGulfensuredthatduediligencewastakeninaddressissuessurroundingindigenouspeoples.CIgenderofficeralsoprovidedtrainingatthebeginningoftheproject.Socialsafeguardpoliciesarecomplexinnatureandtheirapplicationisnotasimpleprocedure.Inanyfutureproject,itwouldbevaluabletoconductsafeguardanalysisduringthedevelopmentstage,orearlyinprojectimplementation,andprovidetrainingforcountrylevelstaffandotherpartnersintermsofidentifyingandflaggingpotentialsafeguardissues.

2. Partneringwithpoliticallyexpedientinstitutions.CPPSwasakeypartnerassociatedwithdevelopingaregionalstrategyformangroveprotection,andprovedaveryeffectivemechanismtoadvancearegionalstrategy,whichincludedCostaRica–anonCPPSmember.CPPSwasabletofacilitateatthenationalandregionallevelbecauseofitsmandateandhistoryintheregion.Partneringwithsuchanestablishedinstitutioncanhelpdeveloppoliciesandregulationswithincountries.

3. Promotingcommunitytocommunitylearning.Theprojectwasverysuccessfulinbringingcommunitiestogethertoexchangeinformationandknowledgethroughspecifictargetedvisits,aswellasaregionalcommunityfocusedconference.Decisionmakersatthecommunitylevelwereabletoengagewitheachotherresultinginprofoundimpactontheirlearningandinterestinapplyingnewapproachestoconservation.

Recommendationsinclude:

1. Developindicatorsthatmatchthelevelofprojectcontrolintheirachievement.IndesigninganyfutureprojectcareshouldbetakenwithregardtochoosingindicatorsthatarecompatiblewiththelevelcontrolthatthePMUhasassociatedwithrespecttooutputs,outcomesandprojectimpacts.Cautionshouldbetakenwhensuggestingthatnewlegislationorregulationswillbedevelopedwithinthetimeframeofa2yearproject.Itisthusbettertohaveneworupdatedlegislationasalikelyoutcomeasopposedtoanoutput,overwhichtheprojectshouldhaveahighdegreeofcontrol.


xi|P a g e

2. Conductefforttoenhancefinancialsustainabilityofoutcomesinthenext0-5years.Thegovernmentshavecommittedtocontinueimplementationoftheirnationalpoliciesatthecountrylevel;however,fortheimpactsoftheprojecttobesustainedcontinuedattentionwillalmostcertainlybeneededfrominternationaldonorsandNGOs.Thisisparticularlylikelywithrespecttotheinvolvementoflocalcommunities,includingtheexchangeofideasandexperiencesbetweencommunities.Theriskatthelocallevelisthatthemomentumdevelopedduringtheprojectmaynotbesustaineduntilthereareeconomicbenefitsassociatedwithimplementinglocalmanagementplans.

3. Testpotentialpartnershiparrangementsinpreparatoryphaseofprojectdesign.UNESCO-Quitoasapartnerorganisationproveddifficulttofinanciallyadministerandresultedindelaysinthedeliveryofprojectoutputsforcommunication.Attentionshouldbegiveninadvancetoclarifyinghowfundscanbetransferredtopartnerorganisationstoensurethereisnorepetitionoftimelostandpotentialreductioninthequalityofthecommunicationorotherprojectproducts.Ifadirecttransfercannotbeaccomplishedfromtheexecutingagencyitisrecommendedtoexploreseparatingoutaspecificcomponentwhichcanbeadministeredindependentlyofothers.

4. PromotetheGEFprofileinprojectproducts.CareshouldbetakentoensurethatGEFisprofiledonallrelevantproductswhereappropriate.ItisacknowledgedthatCImadeanefforttoacknowledgeGEFanditssupport.Itisunderstoodthatcertainpoliticallysensitiveproducts,suchaspoliciesorregulations,wouldnotnecessarilycontaindonorlogos,otherlesssensitiveandhighprofileproductssuchasvideosshouldwheneverpossible.Forexample,theinformationalvideofromtheGulfofNicoya,4didnotmentionGEF.

5. Useexistingknowledgeplatformstohelpshareknowledge(inparticularIW:LEARN).Theprojecthasdevelopedsomeproductsthatcouldbebeneficialtoawideraudience.ThedecisionofthePSCtomaintainfocusontheETPSregioninthe3rdlearningexchangewasimportanttoensurecoreprojectoutcomeswouldbemet.Nevertheless,projectsshouldplaceeffortonsharingtheexperiencesgainedintheETPSwithotherregions.WhilesomematerialsareaccessibleIW:LEARNsite,overallitcouldhavebeenusedmoreeffectively,forexamplewiththedevelopmentofexperiencenotesonapplyingpre-screeningforsafeguardsforexample.OpportunitiesforTwinningwithIW-LEARNweretakenadvantageof.

6. Buildtimeforapprovalsoftextsandproductsintoplanning.IttooklongertogainofficialapprovalfromtheETPScountriesthananticipatedresultingindelaystoseveralproducts.ThisshouldbebuiltintofutureprojectplanningworkingintheETPSregion.

4https://iwlearn.net/media/videos/29450


xii|P a g e

AcronymsAMPR ResponsibleFishingMarineArea(ÁreaMarinadePescaResponsable,Costa

Rica)ANAM NationalEnvironmentalAuthority(Panama).ARAP PanamaAquaticResourceAuthority.BlueForests Programdevelopingcarbonaccountingmethodologiesandecosystemservices

valuation.CC ClimateChange.CI ConservationInternational.CI-Colombia ConservationInternationalColombiaCountryProgram.CI-CostaRica ConservationInternationalCostaRicaCountryProgram.CI-Ecuador ConservationInternationalEcuadorCountryProgram.CI-ETPS ConservationInternationalEasternTropicalPacificSeascapeRegionalProgram.CI-HQ ConservationInternationalHeadOffice,Washington.CI-Panamá ConservationInternationalinPanama(CountryProgram).CPPS ComisiónPermanentedelPacificoSur(PermanentCommissionfortheSouth

Pacific).CREHO RamsarRegionalCentreforTrainingandResearchonWetlands.CSO CivilSocietyOrganization.CVC CorporaciónAutónomaRegionaldelValledeCauca(Colombia)EBM EcosystemBasedApproachtoManagement.EIA EnvironmentalImpactAssessment.ES EcosystemServices.ESIA EnvironmentalandSocialImpactAssessment.ESMF CIEcologicalandSocialManagementFramework.ETP EasternTropicalPacific(region).ETPS EasternTropicalPacificSeascape.GEF GlobalEnvironmentFacility.GEFTF GlobalEnvironmentFacilityTrustFund.GIS GeographicInformationSystem.GMSAP/GMP GenderMainstreamingStrategyandActionPlan/GenderMainstreamingPlanINVEMAR InstituteforMarineandCoastalInvestigation(Colombia)IOC IntergovernmentalOceanographicCommissionIPCC InternationalPanelforClimateChange.IPP IndigenousPeoplesPlan.IW:Learn GEFInternationalWatersLearningExchangeandResourceNetwork.IW-2/3 GEFInternationalWatersProgram(FocalAreaObjectives2&3)NGO Non-GovernmentOrganization.NMAP NationalMangroveActionPlan.NPIF NagoyaProtocolImplementationFund.OFP OperationalFocalPoint.OSPESCA Centro-AmericanIsthmusFisheriesandAquacultureSectorOrganization

(OrganizacióndelSectorPesqueroyAcuícoladelIstmoCentroamericano)


xiii|P a g e

PAPSE PlandeAcciónparalaProteccióndelMedioMarinoyÁreasCosterasdelPacificoSudeste.

PIF ProjectIdentificationForm.PMRC CoastalResourcesManagementProgram(Ecuador).PPG GEFPre-ProjectGrant.PPMS WWFProgramandProjectManagementStandards.PSC ProjectSteeringCommittee.Ramsar InternationalConventionforWetlandsofInternationalImportance(1971-

present).SAP StrategicActionPrograms.SEP StakeholderEngagementPlan.SIPP WWFSafeguardsIntegratedPoliciesandProcedures.SINAC ConservationAreaNationalSystem(CostaRica).SPINCAM SoutheastPacificDataandInformationNetworkinSupporttoIntegrated

CoastalAreaManagementproject(JointCPPS-UNESCO/IOC).TDA/SAP Trans-boundaryDiagnosticAnalysis/StrategicActionProgramme.TEEB TheUnitedNationsEconomicsofEcosystemsandBiodiversityProgram.TNC TheNatureConservancy.UNDP UnitedNationsDevelopmentProgram.UNEP UnitedNationalEnvironmentProgram.UNESCO UnitedNationsEducational,ScientificandCulturalOrganization.UNFCCC UnitedNationsFrameworkConventiononClimateChangeVPP VulnerablePeoplesPlanWAVES WorldBankWealthAccountingandtheValuationofEcosystemServicesWFF WaltonFamilyFoundation.WWF WorldWideFundforNature


xiv|P a g e

TableofContents

1 ExecutiveSummary........................................................................................................iii1.1 ProjectSummaryTable.......................................................................................................iii1.2 ProjectDescription.............................................................................................................iii1.3 EvaluationRatingTables......................................................................................................v1.4 SummaryofConclusions,Recommendations&LessonsLearned......................................viii

2 Introduction....................................................................................................................12.1 Purposeoftheevaluation....................................................................................................12.2 Scope&Methodology..........................................................................................................12.3 Limitationsoftheevaluation...............................................................................................12.4 StructureoftheReport........................................................................................................2

3 ProjectDescriptionandDevelopmentContext................................................................23.1 Projectstartandduration....................................................................................................23.2 Mainstakeholders...............................................................................................................23.3 Problemsthattheprojectsoughttoaddress........................................................................33.4 OutcomesandProjectObjective..........................................................................................43.5 ExpectedResults..................................................................................................................5

4 Findings..........................................................................................................................54.1 ProjectDesign/Formulation...............................................................................................5

4.1.1 AnalysisofResultsFrameworkandtheoryofchange(Projectlogic/strategies/indicators).54.1.2 Assumptionsandrisks............................................................................................................74.1.3 Lessonsfromotherrelevantprojectsincorporatedintoprojectdesign................................84.1.4 Replicationapproach..............................................................................................................94.1.5 WWFcomparativeadvantage................................................................................................94.1.6 Linkagesbetweenprojectandotherinterventionswithinthesector.................................104.1.7 Governanceandmanagementarrangements......................................................................104.1.8 Countryownership...............................................................................................................11

4.2 ProjectImplementationandM&ESystems........................................................................124.2.1 Adaptivemanagement(AdaptiveCapacity).........................................................................124.2.2 Partnershiparrangements(withrelevantstakeholdersinvolvedinthecountry/region)....134.2.3 FeedbackfromM&Eactivitiesusedforadaptivemanagement..........................................134.2.4 Monitoringandevaluation:designatentryandimplementation.......................................134.2.5 WWFandImplementingPartnerimplementation/executioncoordination,andoperationalissues..............................................................................................................................154.2.6 AlignmentwithWWFandcountrypriorities........................................................................15

4.3 ProjectAssessment............................................................................................................154.3.1 Relevance.............................................................................................................................164.3.2 Effectiveness.........................................................................................................................174.3.3 Efficiency...............................................................................................................................274.3.4 Overallresults(attainmentofobjectives)/Impact..............................................................274.3.5 Sustainability........................................................................................................................28

4.4 GenderEqualityandMainstreaming..................................................................................30


xv|P a g e

4.5 StakeholderEngagement...................................................................................................314.5.1 Evaluatestakeholderengagementand(ifGEF-7)assesstheimplementationoftheStakeholderEngagementPlan...........................................................................................................31

4.6 SafeguardsReview.............................................................................................................324.6.1 Assessmentofprojectactivitiesforanysocialandenvironmentalimpacts........................32

4.7 FinanceandCo-financereview...........................................................................................334.7.1 Financing...............................................................................................................................334.7.2 Extentofco-financerealizedtodate....................................................................................334.7.3 Financialmanagementoftheproject,withspecificreferencetothecost-effectivenessofinterventions;....................................................................................................................................354.7.4 Utilizationofgrantfundsdistributedtoprojectpartners,including[insertpartners]........35

5 Conclusions,Recommendations&LessonsLearned.......................................................35

6 AnnexA:TORofTE,includingevaluatorcompositionandexpertise.............................40

7 AnnexB:StrategicResultsFramework..........................................................................53

8 AnnexCItineraryofTE(PMUandfieldvisits)................................................................67

9 AnnexEListofpersonsinterviewed...............................................................................69

10 AnnexGListofdocumentsreviewed.........................................................................72

11 AnnexHPhotosandMapofProjectSites...................................................................75

12 AnnexIQuestionnaireused.......................................................................................77

13 AnnexJAuditTrail.....................................................................................................79

14 AnnexKEvaluationReportAcceptanceForm.............................................................82


1|P a g e

2 Introduction

2.1 Purposeoftheevaluation

WWFconductedaterminalevaluation(TE)oftheGEFcomponentsofthe“ImprovingMangroveConservationacrosstheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)throughCoordinatedRegionalandNationalStrategyDevelopmentandImplementation”project5.Themid-sizeprojectwasundertakentoimplementacomprehensive,multi-governmentratifiedandregionallyarticulatedmangroveconservationstrategyintheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)countriesofCostaRica,Panama,ColombiaandEcuador.Theconservationstrategywasdeliveredthroughi)thestrengtheningofnationalandlocalpoliciesthatinformridge-to-reefdevelopmentplanningandpracticesrelevanttomangroveconservation;ii)on-the-groundmanagementactivitiestobothdemonstratetheapplicationofpoliciesandinformnationalpolicydevelopment;andiii)harmonizingpolicyandconservationpracticesacrosstheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS).

Thisisreportbasedonafieldmission(6-12March2019)andinterviewsconductedbetween24Februaryand23April,2019;andaseriesofdeskreviewsofprojectreportingandproducts,includingwebsitesandvideos.

2.2 Scope&Methodology

TheobjectiveoftheTEistoexaminetheextent,magnitudeandsustainabilityofanyprojectimpactstodate;identifyanyprojectdesignproblems;assessprogresstowardsprojectoutcomesandoutputs;anddrawlessonslearnedthatcanbothimprovethesustainabilityofbenefitsfromthisprojectandaidintheenhancementoffuturerelatedprojects.

Theevaluationcomplieswiththeguidance,rulesandproceduresestablishedbyWWF6andtheGEFTerminalEvaluation7andEthicalGuidelines.8

2.3 Limitationsoftheevaluation

Theevaluationdoesnotprovideafinancialauditoftheactivities.Financialexpenditureisreviewedinlightofannualbudgeting,projectplanninganddisbursements,andassessedintermsofcostsbenefitsingeneral.Itisbeyondthescopeofthisprojecttoprovideadetailed

5https://iwlearn.net/iw-projects/57716WWF(2012),Step5.3:EvaluationGuidelines,ResourcesforImplementingtheWWFProjectandProgrammeStandards,availableat:http://assets.panda.org/downloads/evaluation_terms_of_reference.doc7GEF(2017),GuidelinesforGEFAgenciesinConductingTerminalEvaluationforFullSizedProjects,GlobalEnvironmentalFacilityEvaluationOffice,availableathttps://www.gefieo.org/sites/default/files/ieo/evaluations/files/gef-guidelines-te-fsp-2017.pdf8GEF(2007),GEFEvaluationOfficeEthicalGuidelines,EvaluationDocumentNo.2,GlobalEnvironmentalFacilityEvaluationOffice,availableathttp://www.gefieo.org/sites/default/files/ieo/evaluations/gef-eo-ethical-guidelines-2007.pdf


2|P a g e

analysisofproducts,beyondtheirgeneralimpressions.Forexample,inreviewingthe“Assessmentoflegalstructuresthroughouttheregion”orthe“NeedsAssessmentStudy”9limitedassessmentisconductedonthequalityorthecontentdocuments.

2.4 StructureoftheReport

Thereportisdevelopedinfourprinciplesectionswhichi)outlinetheprojectanddevelopmentcontext,includingrationaleforintervention;ii)theevaluationfindingsincludingprojectdesignpriortoimplementation,thecoreofthereportregardingprojectimplementationandassessments,gendermainstreaming,stakeholderengagement,safeguardsreview,financeandco-financing;iii)conclusions,recommendations&lessonslearned;andiv)supportingannexes.

3 ProjectDescriptionandDevelopmentContext

3.1 Projectstartandduration

AspertheProjectInformationthestartoftheETPSProjectwas1October2016andfinished31March2019.Therewasa6month“nocost”extensiontotheprojectasagreedbetweenWWF-GEFagencyandCI.

Therewerenosignificantdelaysoncetheprojectwas“started”butthelongtimebetweenPIFsubmission(16April2014)10andCEOapproval(18July2016)11wasprimarilyduetoachangeintheimplementingagency.Initially,theprojectwassubmittedtobeimplementedandexecutedbyConservationInternational.FollowingdiscussionswiththeGEF,itwasdeterminedthattheWWF-GEFshouldbetheimplementingagency.

Thereasonforthe6month“nocost”extensionwastohosttheensurehostingthe3rdinternationalexchangeinNovember2018andallowtimefortheendorsementoftheupdatedregionalstrategy.

3.2 Mainstakeholders

TheprojectdocumentoutlinestheKeyStakeholders(Section4)andelaboratedaStakeholderAnalysis(Section2.3).AstheETPSprojecthasbeenimplementedforover10years,therearesignificantnumberofstakeholdersintersectingattheregional,national,sub-nationalandlocallevels.Themainprojectstakeholdersinclude:

9MachucayFelix(2017)Informederesultadosdelaencuestasobrenecesidadesdecapacitación,ComisiónPermanentedelPacíficoSur,11octubre201710CI(2014)ProjectInformationForm(PIF)for“ImprovingmangroveconservationacrosstheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)throughcoordinatedregionalandnationalstrategydevelopmentandimplementation”,16April2016.11GEF(2016)CEOendorsementfor“ImprovingmangroveconservationacrosstheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)throughcoordinatedregionalandnationalstrategydevelopmentandimplementation”,18July2016,Availablefromhttps://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/project_documents/07-18-16_MSP_Approved_Letter_1.pdf


3|P a g e

3.3 Problemsthattheprojectsoughttoaddress

12PlandeAcciónparalaProteccióndelMedioMarinoyÁreasCosterasdelPacificoSudeste”de1981(PAPSEalsoknownastheConvencióndeLima)isthebasisforregionalcooperationbetweenChile,Colombia,Ecuador,PeruandPanamatoconservemarineandcoastalareas.Seehttp://cpps-int.org/index.php/principal/pda-quienes.ThePAPSEistheinter-governmentalinstrumentframingthedevelopmentoftheRegionalOpenInitiativeMangroveActionPlanconsideredintheproject.

Name Comment

CPPS - Comisión Permanente del Pacifico Sur CPPS leads the development of the regional mangrove strategy under the PAPSE12 on behalf of the member countries (Panama, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Chile).

Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development (Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible (MADS)) – Colombia; Ministerio de Ambiente y Agua - Ecuador MiAmbiente – Ministerio Ambiente de Panamá , DICOMAR Ministry of Environment and Energy – Costa Rica.

The national level ministries responsible for mangrove protection.

Costa Rica - SINAC (Conservation Area Nation System); CATIE, INCOPESCA (Costa Rica Institute for Fisheries and Aquaculture) – Ecuador Sub-secretary for Marine Coastal Resource Management; SETEMAR; INP, Colombia- CVC; National Parks - SINAP; AUNAP; INCODER; Panama - Ministries of Economy and Finance (MEF); Agriculture (MIDA); Housing and Land Zoning (MIVIOT); The National Wetlands Committee including national authrorities and Audubon Society (PAS), ANCON, CREHO, CEASPA, Fundación Natura and STRI.

National and Provincial level organisations dealing with nature conservation and/or fisheries.

UNESCO, UNDP, JICA, Wetland International, The Nature Conservancy, Ramsar Regional Centre for Training and Research on Wetlands,

International Organizations and NGOs

Golfos Vivos, Nazca, Natura, MarViva, Regional and National NGOS

Panama - Remedios/ San Felix/ David – Alanje Environmental Council Colombia - Bazan Bocana & Eperaala Siapidaara - Ecuador - Wildlife Refuge “El Morrro” - Costa Rica - Puntarenas (Nicoya) Gulf / Comunidad de isla Chira

Local Communities with demonstration projects.

Costa Rica - Finca Batipa Colombia – OAP;

Private sector


4|P a g e

TheProjectDocumentoutlinescontributingfactorstothreatsposedtomangrovesintheregion.Theprimarythreatishabitatdestruction,eitherduetourbanencroachmentorindustry,throughshrimpfarming(primarilyinthe80sbutpersisttoday),exploitationofwoodproducts(Charcoal,barkfortannins).However,secondaryeffectsfromupstreampollutionandalterationsingroundwaterlevels(throughagriculturaluse)arealsopertinent.Climatechangeisalsohavinganeffectonmangrovesintermsofsea-levelrise.Thecountrieshavedifferentsetofnationalplanninginstrumentsgiventhatlanduse,jurisdictions,stakeholderanddecisionmakerpriorities,concernsandinterestscandiffersignificantlyacrossridge-to-reefspatialscales.Nevertheless,manyoftherootproblemsaresimilarasarethebarrierstoachievingconservationandsustainableusewhichinclude:13

• Poorstakeholderawareness,institutionaltechnicalcapacity,lackofscientificdata• Conflictinglegislation,lackofinstitutionalcoordination,gapsinpolicy,limitedfunding• Weaklinkagesinspatialridgetoreefplanning,wellestablishedindustries(hydro-

power),differentautonomouscommunities• Limitedaddresstolocalengagement;lackofinternalorganization.

Theprojecthasworkedtoaddressmanyofthesebarriers,inparticular,developingcapacityandawarenessatthelocalandnationallevels;assessinglegislativeincompatibilitiesandgaps;andpromotingnewpoliciesandlaws.

3.4 OutcomesandProjectObjective

ProjectObjective:Toimplementacomprehensive,multi-governmentratifiedandregionallyarticulatedmangroveconservationstrategyintheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)countriesofCostaRica,Panama,ColombiaandEcuadorthroughon-the-groundmanagementactivitiesandthestrengtheningofnationalandlocalpoliciesthatinformridge-to-reefdevelopmentplanningandpracticesrelevanttomangroveconservation.

Thekeyoutcomesare:14

1.1- ImprovedconservationattheregionallevelthroughtheadvancementandadoptionofaregionalstrategypromotedbytheCPPS.

1.2- CostaRicaparticipatesinthedevelopmentoftheregionalstrategy.1.3- Improvedcapacityofpolicymakersandnationalmangrovemanagerstostrengthen

implementationoftheregionalstrategy.

2.1Improvedoradvancednationallevelmangroveactionplansincorporatingridgetoreefscaleplanning.

2.2Strengthenedlegislationandincentivesformangroveconservation.

13Table2,page26,WWF-GEF(2016)ProjectDocumentfor“ImprovingmangroveconservationacrosstheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)throughcoordinatedregionalandnationalstrategydevelopmentandimplementation,”12May2016.14Basedonstrategicframework.


5|P a g e

3.1localmanagementplansdevelopedthatreflectnationalpriorities,andincorporateresultsofeconomicvaluationassessments,andbuildonincreasednationalcapacitytosupportandprotectmangroves.

3.2EconomicevaluationtoolsandmethodologiesdevelopedthroughtheGEF-UNEPBlueForestsandotherrelatedprojectsaretestedinatleasttwoETPScountriesduringtheirdevelopmentphasestomaximizeapplicabilitytopolicyandmanagementatlocaltonationalscalesbyY2Q3.

3.3Localpolicymakershaveincreasedcapacitythroughoutreachandcapacitybuilding.

3.4Demonstratedsuccessinprovidingincentivesand/orbusinessopportunitiesassociatedwithconservationofmangroves.

3.5 ExpectedResults

Thekeyproductsoftheprojectaretoolsforpolicyanddecisionmakersatregional,nationalandlocallevels,informationexchange,andcapacitydevelopmentofstakeholdersatlevels.Theanticipatedresultsaresustainedreductionofbarrierstomangroveconservationbeyondthelifetimeoftheproject,andthusimprovedmangrovehabitatandecosystemfunctionintheETPSregion.

4 Findings

4.1 ProjectDesign/Formulation

4.1.1 AnalysisofResultsFrameworkandtheoryofchange(Projectlogic/strategies/indicators)

Theoryofchange

Ingeneral,theoveralldesignedlogicoftheprojectinterventionissound,anditdidnotchangethroughouttheprojectimplementation.The3-tierapproach15of(i)developingandimplementingaregionalmangrovestrategy;(ii)strengtheningnationalplansandpolicy;and(iii)andconductingon-the-groundpilotactivitiesillustratesasoundmethodtoaddressthemajorproblemsassociatedwithmangroveconservation.Theconceptualmodelfortheprojectoutlineshowthethreetiersaredesignedtoaddressthemajorbarriers,including:lackofcapacity;lackofincentivesandopportunities;dependencyonestablishedenergyandagriculturalindustries;limitedspatial“ridgetoreef”planning;andweaklocalinstitutionsandengagement.Giventheregionalcontext,thesearethekeybarrierstoaddressingmangroveecosystemconservationandprotection.Thetheoryofchangeandconceptualmodelisreflectedintheprojectdesignatthethreelevelsofengagement,theregional,thenational,andthelocallevelinterventions.Itisgenerallysound,howeveroneofthemainbarriersandthreatsislackofenforcement,whichisnotidentifiedintheconceptualmodel.Lackofenforcement,isaffectedpoliticalwill,thecapacitytoenforce,financialsupport,amongst

15ConceptualModelAppendix4ofProjectDocument


6|P a g e

others.Insomerespects,theprojectisaddressingthisthroughpromotionofnationallegislation,developmentoftechnicalbriefingdocumentsforpolicymakers,andthedevelopmentofgreaterpublicawarenessthroughthemangrovedaycelebrations(26thofJuly).Giventhetimeframeandscopeoftheproject,thefocusonthespecificoutputsintheresultsofframeworkarereasonable.Anyfutureprojectsshouldgivegreaterconsiderationtodevelopingpoliticalwillacrossabroaderpoliticalspectrumthenenvironmentalministries.

TheResultsChainanalysis16laysoutthebasictheoryofchangemechanismsforeachofthecomponents.Atboththeregionalandnationallevelsintermediatestagesof“Improveknowledgemanagementapplications”and“Improvementinpolicyandmanagementpractice”areneededtoarriveatthegoalofmangroveconservationforgoodsandecosystemservices.AttheregionalleveltheintermediatestatesareachievedthroughaccesstotoolsforpolicymakersandtheETPScountriesadoptingandadvancingtheregionalstrategy.Atthenationalleveltheintermediatestatesarearrivedatthroughupdatednationalactionplans,andimprovedregulationsandincentives.Theintermediatestagesareassumedtoinfluenceactionssuchasreductionoflandclearance,reducedimpactsfromupstream,reducedagriculture/aquacultureimpacts,amongstothers.

Thesearereasonableassumptions,providedthereisapoliticalwillandunderstandingoftheeconomicandsocialimportanceofmangrovesacrossabroadrangeministries.Forexample,thepollutioninBocana(Colombia)associatedwithupstreamdischargesfromBuenaventurawilltakeconcertedeffortstoaddressincludingworkatthemunicipalFederallevelinavarietyofministries.Animportantaspectunder“Improveknowledgemanagementapplications”istheexpansionofawarenesswithinthenationalpoliticalarena.

ThelocallevelresultschainiscomplexincorporatingtheprojectsitesacrosstheETPSregion.Theactivitiesandoutputsidentifiedtoarriveattheintermediatestagesarewelldeveloped.Ofparticularinterest,istheintermediatestageof“newincentivesandopportunitiesavailableinfavourofimprovedmangrovehealth”whichisakeytoalteringdestructivepracticesandencouragingrestorationconservation.Theoverallawarenessbuildinganunderstandingoftheimportanceofmangrovesatthelocalcommunityleveliswellconceived.

ResultsFramework

TheStrategicResultsFrameworkfortheETPSprojectisfoundinAnnexB.ItclearlyoutlinesthemajoroutcomesasdetailedintheProjectDocument,includingwellformulatedoutcomesandassociatedindicators,projecttargets,projectoutputsandassociatedindicators.

Theseparationofcomponentshelpsalignactivitiesandcounterparts.Forexample,CPPSisprimarilyconcernedwithactivitiesincomponent1thatdealswiththeregionalmangrovestrategy,whilecounterpartsincomponent2arenationalinstitutions,suchaslineministriesandagencies,andincomponent3itisnationalagencies,localgovernmentsandNGOs.

16Appendix5ProjectDocument


7|P a g e

Manyoftheoutputshaveimplicationsorsupportdifferentcomponentoutcomes.Forexample,on-the-groundactivitiesofcomponent3helpinformandtestnationallevelpolicydevelopmentofcomponent2.Likewise,thereisareciprocalinteractionbetweencomponents1and2.

ThechosenindicatorsgenerallyadheretoSMARTcriteria,particularlyasthereisaclearefforttobetime-bound.Forexample,Output3.4.1relatesto“localcommunityparticipationbyY1Q4”anditsindicatoris“MOUsareinplacewithcommunitiesbyY1Q3”.17Inmostcasestheyarecarefullyandwellcrafted.Duringthefirstyeartheprojectupdateditsoutcomeindicatorforoutcome1.1toinclude“RecommendationsforrevisedregionalstrategybyY2Q4.”18whichisamoreachievablegoalthanhavinganapprovedandpublishablestrategy.Therearehowever,someminorrestructuringwhichwouldhelpclarifyachievements,including:

• Theprojecttargetfor2.1indicatesthatforPanama“ANAMandARAPauthoritiescombineintoanewministrywherenewcompetenciesareestablishedthatimproveeffectivewetlandpolicydevelopment”.Thecreationofanewnationalministryisbeyondtheinfluenceofatwoyearprojectandiseitherover-ambitiousorrelatedtoaprocessthatwasunderwaybeforeprojectintervention.WordingcouldhavebeenusedtoindicatethereisimprovedefficienciesandclearresponsibilitiesinPanamanianlineministries.Thisisinlinewiththeindicator2.1.1whichistohave“#ofupdatedandratifiednationalmangroveactionplans(andindevelopment)byY2Q4”.Indiscussionswiththeexecutingagencyitwasrelatedthatthetargetwasnotthemergingoftheministries,butrathernewopportunitiestoprotectwetlandsemergingfromthenewauthority.

• Likewise,thecreationofnewnationallegislationunderOutput2.2.2“LegislationpassedtostrengthentheprotectionofmangrovesinatleasttwoETPScountriescompletedbyY2Q4”isambitiousforatwoyearprojectasoutputsshouldbemostlyunderthecontroloftheproject.Itwouldhavebeenbettertohaveanoutputas“Atleast2meetingsheldthatadvancelegislationstrengtheningtheprotectionofmangrovesinatleast2ETPScountries”.Outcomesaretheintendedimpactsoftheoutputswithintheprojectlife,andtheprojecthasadegreeofinfluenceoverthese,thoughnotnecessarilycontroloverthem.Theoutcome2.2couldalsohavebeenmodifiedtoread“AtleasttwoETPScountrieshaveimprovedenablingenvironmentsformangroveconservationthroughupdatedpolicies,and/orstrongerregulations,and/orincentivesconducivetoprotectmangroves”.

4.1.2 Assumptionsandrisks

Section2.7oftheProjectDocumentdealswithRiskandRiskManagement.Overalltheriskidentificationisadequateasarethecorrespondingmitigationmeasures.Forexample,inidentifying“weakinstitutionalcapacityforplanning”asarisktotheproject,thecorrespondingmitigationmeasureis“workingwithseveralinstitutions,therebyminimizingthedependencyonanyoneinstitution”.

17ResultsFrameworkAnnexB18WWF(2017)PIRforyear1.


8|P a g e

Theprojectassumptionsarewelldevelopedandrelatedirectlytotheprojectoutcomes.Theprojectriskswerealsoupdatedinprogressreports.Forexample,theriskregardingthePMUcapacitywasraisedtoalow-moderatelevelduetoassumingtheresponsibilitiesofoutput1.3communicationsandexperienceinterchanges.19

Absentfromthepotentialrisks,however,are:

• Identificationthat“developingandendorsinglegislation”inatleasttwojurisdictionscouldbedifficult.Whiletheriskofreducedpoliticalwill,orratherpoliticalturnover,isaddressedbydealingwithmidlevelmanagers,thisissignificantlydifferentfrompassinglegislationwhichcanbeacumbersomeprocessevenwhenthereispoliticalwillandpoliticalstability.Theissueoflegislationispartiallyaddressedunderassumptions,inwhichtheprojectassumes:“Atleasttwocountrieshavetheresourcesandprocessesunderwayorintentiontoestablishstrongerorimprovedregulationswhichcoincidewithcollaborativeprojectactionsand/orgenerationofrelevantinformation”.

• ThelogisticaldifficultiesandsecurityissuesrelatedtoworkingincertainpartsofruralColumbiawasnotidentifiedasarisk,despite“domesticsecurityissuescomplicateaccesstoprojectareas”beingoneoftheassumptionsassociatedwithoutcome3.4.20Aswasexperiencedbytheproject,thetransboundarypilotprojectsitehadtobeabandoned.AndaccesstothesitesinthegulfofTortugashadsomenegativeimpactsonprojectactivities.Forexample,thesafeguardsspecialistwasnotabletotravelthereduringthefirstsupervisionmission.

4.1.3 Lessonsfromotherrelevantprojectsincorporatedintoprojectdesign

TheprojectisheavilybasedonthepreviousworkandexperienceofConservationInternationalintheregion,andreliesonthestrongrelationsthatithasdevelopedworkingwithlocalcommunities,nationalgovernmentsaswellastheCPPSregionalmechanism.Indeed,CIwasinvolvedinassistingthedevelopmentofthe2016RegionalProtectionStrategyforMangrovesdevelopedbytheCPPS.Theprojecthasincorporatedlessonsfrompreviousinitiatives,inparticulartheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(CI-ETPS)ProgramandtheMangroveandSustainableDevelopmentOpenInitiative(UNESCOQuito-CPPS-CI).Theformerinitiativeranfrom2005to2013focusingoncoastalandmarineconservation,policyandcapacitybuildingprograms,includingelementsofsustainablefinancing,privatesectorandcoastalcityengagementinlargegulfs,smallscalefisheriesimprovementprojectsandbusinesscases.TheGEF-ETPSprojectbuildsontheextensiverelationshipsandpartnershipscreated,andintegratedlessonslearnedinhowtodealwithlocalandnationalgovernmentsintheETPScountries.

TheMangroveandSustainableDevelopmentOpenInitiativeranfrom2013-2015andfocusedonenvironmentallegislationandpoliciesrelatedtomangroves,bestpracticesandexperiencesofconservationandmanagementofmangroveecosystemswithintheCPPScountriesofChile,

19WWF(2018)ProjectProgressReport(PPR)1stOctober2017–31stMarch2018(Y2Q1-Q2),26April201820ProjectDocument.


9|P a g e

Colombia,Ecuador,PanamaandPeruculminatinginadraftOpenInitiativeCPPSRegionalMangrovePlanin2015.InComponent1,thisplanwasupdatedbasedoneconomicvaluationassessmentsandincorporatingaridgetoreefapproachduringthecourseoftheGEF-ETPSproject.

4.1.4 Replicationapproach

Theprojecthasenhancedthereplicationofsuccessfultoolsorlessonslearnedatthelocallevelthroughexchangesbetweenthe‘on-the-ground’demonstrationprojects.Forexample,localfishingassociationsfromEcuadorwereabletoparticipateinmeetingsandexchangeinformationwithlocalcommunitiesinPanamaandColombiaduring“informationexchangeexercises”.21Inparticular,theEcuadorianexperiencesofdevelopingfisheriesco-managementplansandthe“socio-manglarconcessionprogram”weresharedwithUNDP,ARPAandMiAmbiente.

4.1.5 WWFcomparativeadvantage

WWFadvantageastheimplementingagencyisitsextensivefieldexperienceininimplementingconservationprojectsfor50years.Ithasawell-establishednetworkofstaffintheregionandhasbeenabletoleveragethistotheadvantageoftheproject.Forexample,localWWFstaffinColumbiahaveworkingrelationshipswithbothCIstaffinColumbiaaswellasthenationalstakeholdersincludingMinistryofEnvironmentandSustainableDevelopment(MADS)aswellastheCorporaciónAutónomaRegionaldelValledeCauca(CVC).Thisstrongon-the-groundpresencecanbeusedtoenhancecommunicationbetweenimplementing,executingagencies,andstakeholders;and,canassistinfacilitatingactivitiesifneeded.AsCIhasahistoryofworkinrightsbasedmanagementintheregion,thecombinedstrengthsofthetwoorganisationshasaddedtoprojectdelivery(seesectionofefficiency).

WWFaslohaswelldevelopedstandardsinprojectapplication.Forexample,withrespecttosafeguardstheWWF-GEFProjectAgencySafeguardsIntegratedPoliciesandProcedures(SIPP)22iswelldevelopedandtested,andtheagencyhasdedicatedstaffensuringthatpoliciesandpracticesareimplementedintheirprojects.TheWWFSafeguardspecialist,conductedasupervisionmissioninNovember2017andanon-siteassessmentaspartoftheprojectclosure,March2019.

WWFalsohaswelldevelopedpolicyandexperienceingendermainstreamingininternationalwatersmanagement,23includinghaveconductedaseriesgendermainstreamingworkshopsandwebinarswithUNESCO-WWAPonpracticalmeasuretoincorporateandimplementgender

21The2ndInternationallearningexchangeinGuayaquil(date)focusedonlocalcommunityexchangeofinformation.22WWF(2017)EnvironmentalandSocialSafeguards,IntegratedPoliciesandProcedures,availablefromhttps://c402277.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/publications/807/files/original/17_432_Safeguards_Manual_Update_FINAL.pdf?150393236323WWF(2011).GlobalNetworkPolicy:GenderPolicyStatement


10|P a g e

mainstreaminginGEFIWprojects.24WWFisabletoensuregendermainstreamingwiththeprojectexecution.

4.1.6 Linkagesbetweenprojectandotherinterventionswithinthesector

Theprojecthasmadesolideffortstoengagewithotherprojectstoenhancetheoverallimpactofthisandtheotherprojects.AfulllistexistsintheProjectDocument(Table1).Keycollaboratingprojectsinclude:

• EasternTropicalPacificSeascape(CI-ETPS)ProgramfundedthroughtheWaltonFoundation(CI/WaltonFoundation)-

• BlueCarboninitiative(CI-IUCN-IOCUNESCO)• Conservation,sustainablebiodiversityuseandmaintenanceofecosystemservicesin

protectedwetlandsofinternationalimportance(SINAC/GEF-UNDP)• ProtectionofcarbonareasandsinksacrosswetlandsinPanama(ANAM-ARAP,CI-

Panama.WetlandsInternationalandTNC/BMU,IKI-UNDP)• ColombianProgramforthesustainableuse,managementandconservationof

mangroveecosystems(MADS-Colombia)• MangroveandSustainableDevelopmentOpenInitiative(UNESCOQuito-CPPS-CI)• Integratedmanagementofmarineandcoastalresources:Aconservationand

sustainableusebaselinecharacterization(CI-Colombia&OleoductosalPacífico)• Designingandimplementinganationalsub-systemofmarineprotectedareas(SMPA)in

Colombia(INVEMAR-MADS/GEF-UNDP)• Integratedmanagementofmarineandcoastalareasofhighvalueforbiodiversityin

ContinentalEcuador(CI-Ecuador–HIVOS/GEF-FAO).• ApplicationofBlueForestsmethodologiesandapproachesthroughsmall-scale

interventions(CI-Ecuador/

4.1.7 Governanceandmanagementarrangements

Thegovernanceandmanagementarrangementsarewelldocumentedinsection3.WorldWildlifeFundGEFAgencybasedinWashingtonwastheGEFImplementingAgency.TheprojectwasexecutedbyConservationInternational(CI)inpartnershipwithTheComisiónPermanentedelPacificoSur(CPPS).Note,UNESCO-Quitodidnottakeasactivearoleinimplementationasenvisionedattheonsetoftheproject,butdidparticipateinactivities,includingtheSteeringCommittee.Figure1outlinesthemanagementarrangement.

24Seewebinarlinksathttp://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/water/wwap/


11|P a g e

Figure1:ManagementArrangementforETPS

WWF-GEFProjectAgencyprovidedprojectassurance,includingsupportingprojectimplementationbymaintainingoversightofalltechnicalandfinancialmanagementaspects(seesection4.6).CIwasresponsiblefortheoverallprojectexecution,reportingandaccounting;whileCPPSwasresponsibleforregionalCIOutcomes1.1and1.2.

TheProjectManagementUnit(PMU)wasembeddedintheCI-ETPSprogrambasedinEcuadorwiththeProjectCoordinator,andcountryofficersineachoftheETPScountriestoensureoperationalsupport.TheProjectCoordinatoralsoassumedtheroleofProjectManagerwiththeassociatedresponsibilitiesofdaytodayoperationsandreporting.

TheProjectSteeringCommittee(PSC)comprisedCI-ETPS,CPPS,theOFPsofthecountries(orrepresentatives),CIGlobalMarineandUNESCO-Quito.WWF-GWFhasanobserverstatus.TheprojectSCwasresponsibleforinputtoprojectworkplanning,approvingannualworkplansandbudgets,reviewandapprovalofkeyprojectoutputswithOFPs(particularlypoliticalones)andmakeinformeddecisionsregardingplanninganddevelopmentofactionsduringtheproject.TheSCmetthreetimesoverthecourseoftheproject,butdidnotmeetatallin2018.ThiswasduetothelogisticsofgatheringOperationalFocalPointsfromallthecountriestogether.TheSCmetinJanuary2019.

4.1.8 Countryownership

AlltheETPScountrieshaveillustratedahighdegreeofcountryownershipandprojectalignmentwithnationalpriorities.TheCPPScountries,Ecuador,ColombiaandPanamaallhadsignedontothe2015RegionalMangroveStrategyandActionPlanandwerepoisedtoimplementtheagreedactionsandupdatethestrategyasnecessary.25CostaRica,notaCPPS

25Policyupdatesareeveryfouryears.Thenextupdatewouldbein2019.


12|P a g e

member,committedtofullyparticipateintheproject,bothintermsofnationaldevelopmentbutalsoinadvancingtheregionalstrategy.Indeed,theinterestsofthenationalgovernmentswasunderscoredduringthefirstsupervisionmissionNovember2017whichnoted“Governmentinvolvementandlevelofengagementcontinuestobehigh,whichhasbeenkeytotheproject’ssuccess”.26

ThecountrieshavealsosignedontotheRAMSARconventionwithsitesthatincludemangroves.Duringtheterminalevaluationnationallevelstakeholderconfirmedtheimportanceoftheprojectforadvancingtheirnationalpriorities,andemphasizedtheirinterestincontinuingtodoso.

4.2 ProjectImplementationandM&ESystems

4.2.1 Adaptivemanagement(AdaptiveCapacity)

Theprojectdisplayedadaptivemanagementindealingwithchangingcircumstances.Forexample,UNESCO-Quitowastoberesponsibleforcommunicationanddisseminationofinformationunderoutcome1.3.However,duetoproblemsassociatedwithreceivingmoneyfromCItheywerenotabletoparticipateasenvisioned.ThePMUtookonthisresponsibility,anddespitethedelaysinstartingsomeactivitiesthePMUwasabletocompletealltasks.

Aninternalevaluationsheet,aspartofthePPR,wasdevelopedandusedtohelpevaluatechallenges,opportunitiesandanynecessaryadjustmentsbetweenprojectpartnersaspartoftheadaptivemanagementoftheprojectbythePMU.27AdaptiveplanningwasidentifiedintherelevantPPRs.Forexample,adjustmentsinactivitieswererequestedthroughthePSCandapprovedbyEA/IAinNovember2017atrequestoftheCPPSpartnerandparticipatingcountrygovernments.Forexample,theSCrequestedaprojectextension,shiftingfundsfromComponent2tocomponent3inCostaRicatoconductawatershedwideanalysis,andhostingasecondnationalworkshopinColombiaduetocostsavingsinyear1.28Thesechanges(documentedintheWorkPlan)wereconducivetoeitherensuringand/orenhancingtheexpectedprojectoutcomesandwereprocessedbytheProjectManagementUnit(PMU)inYr2Q1.”29AnotherexampleisthechangetoOutcomeindicator1.1tobetterreflectachievablegoals,asnotedinthePIRforthefirstyear.

Someactivitieswereadvancedwhenopportunitiespresentedthemselves.Forexample,inthecommunityofEperaalaSiapidaara,inColombia,thepossibilityarosetoworkwiththecommunityandMADStodevelopamanualandguideformanagingmangrovesinbothSpanishandthelocallanguage.Inanotherinstance,CI-Panamaadvancedanopportunitytoconductworkshopsandcapacitybuildingwithalocalcommunityandrequestedfundstobeswitchedtodoso.Ultimately,WWF-GEFdeemedtoworkwiththecommunityinquestionwouldtriggergreaterinvolvementundertheirSIPP,andasaresultCI-Panamadidnotfurtherpursuethe

26WWF-GEF(2017)WWFGEFProjectImplementationSupportMission(PrISM)Report,22December,201727WWF(2017)ProjectProgressReport(PPR)1stOctober2016–30stSeptember2017(Yr1Q1–Q4).28WWF(2018)ProjectProgressReport(PPR)1stOctober2017–31stMarch2018(Y2Q1-Q2),26April2018.29WWF(2018)ProjectProgressReport(PPR)1stOctober2017–31stMarch2018(Y2Q1-Q2),26April2018.


13|P a g e

work.Nevertheless,itdisplaysaflexibilityandadaptivenesstotakeadvantageofopportunitieswherepossible.

4.2.2 Partnershiparrangements(withrelevantstakeholdersinvolvedinthecountry/region)

CIhasanextensivenetworkofconnectionsatthenationalandlocallevelshavingalreadyundertakentheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)ProgramfundedthroughtheWaltonFoundationbetween2005-2018andtheMangroveandSustainableDevelopmentOpenInitiative(2013-2015).OperationalactivitiesatthenationallevelwererunbytheCIcountryofficesandcontractedotherstoconductcertainaspectsoftheproject.Forexample,hiringtheNGONazcatohelpdevelopadatabaseoffishersinElMorro,Ecuador.OrhelpingfundnationalconferencesofmangrovesinColombiawiththeparticipationoflocalcommunities.Insitesvisited,ColombiaandEcuador,itwasclearthattheCIcountryofficershadgoodrelationswiththestakeholdersatthenationalandlocallevels.Forexample,inElMorro,Ecuador,thelocalfishingassociationsemphasizedtheassistancereceivedfromtheprojectinhelpingtoconvenemeetings,buildcapacityanddevelopgreatercollaborationwiththenationalagenciesresponsibleformangroveprotection.ThiswasechoedinBazanBocana,Colombia.

4.2.3 FeedbackfromM&Eactivitiesusedforadaptivemanagement

Thesteeringcommitteeistheprimaryplaceweredecisionsaretakenregardingtheworkplanandtechnicalaspectsoftheproject.SteeringCommitteemeetingminutesillustratediscussionsregardingworkplansandinparticulardecidingontrainingactivities.30NationalandlocalcomponentsofannualworkplansweredevelopedinadvancewithnationalofficesworkingwitheachfocalpointsothatmanyoftheissueshadbeendecidedpriortothePSCandrequiredlittledebate.31

TheSCdecidedtochangethe3rdknowledgeexchangeeventfromandinter-regionalexchangetoaregionaloneandremainfocusedontheETPsregion.32

AfewadjustmentsatthenationallevelwererequestedfromtheMinistryfocalpoints,facilitatedbytheCInationaloffices–thesewerediscussedwiththeWWF-AgencyandthenpresentedforapprovalofthePSCforYr2withoutobjection.

4.2.4 Monitoringandevaluation:designatentryandimplementation

Themonitoringandevaluationdesign,asoutlinedintheProDoc(Section7),isadequateandmeetsGEFstandardswithsufficientbudgetallocatedfortheactivities.33.Themethodologyissoundandwasimplementedincluding:

30CI(2017)2ndPSCMeetingReport1-2November,2017.31ThiswasconfirmedbyJorgeEliasJaen,amemberofthePSC.32CI(2017)2ndPSCMeetingReport1-2November,2017.33SeeTable10ofWWF-GEF(2016)ProjectDocumentfor“ImprovingmangroveconservationacrosstheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)throughcoordinatedregionalandnationalstrategydevelopmentandimplementation,”12May2016.


14|P a g e

a) Inceptionworkshop–October2016.b) InceptionPhasereport–completedforthefirstphaseoftheprojectOctober2016-

January2017.Reportedontechnicalandadministrativetrainingworkshopsandincludingsteeringcommitteemeetingsheld.34

c) MonitoringandEvaluationPlan35–thishasdevelopedindicators,methodology,andresponsiblepartiesetc.andformedthebasisfortheGEFTrackingTool.

d) GEFFocalAreaTrackingTool36-filledandutilized.e) ProjectSteeringCommitteeMeetings–4meetingshavebeenheld:1stMeetingPSC,

13thOctober2016;ExtraordinaryMeetingPSC,13thJanuary2017;2ndMeetingPSC1-2November2017;and3rdMeetingPSC22January2019.37Nonewereheldin2018.

f) WWF-GEFProjectAgencyFieldSupervisionMissions–thesewereconductedtwice,i)3-4November201738andii)6-12March,2019alongwiththeterminalevaluation.

g) Quarterlyfinancialreporting–reportsconfirmedbyWWF-GEFh) ProjectProgressReporting–ProgressReports(PPR)andProjectImplementationReports

(PIR)weredevelopedanddetailed.39

TheprojectmonitoringisbasedontheResultsFrameworkwithidentifiedtargetsandbaselines(seesectiononResultsFramework),andincludesthemostpartbaselineinformation.Forexample,thestatusofnationalpoliciesandlegislation,orlocalmanagementplans.Theonlyindicatorwhichwasnotclearintermsofsourceofinformationandbaselinewasforoutput3.4.2“Localstakeholdersparticipatingindemonstrationprojectsincreasedby20%overtheprojectstart-upbaselinebyY2Q4”.Presumably,thedemonstrationprojectshadnostakeholderparticipationattheonsetoftheproject.Also,howparticipationismeasuredisnotclear.

Achangeinoutcomeindicator1.1wasdoneinyear1tomaketargetsmorerealistic,asdiscussedinsection4.1.1.

Adequatebudgetallocated$47,000USDforM&Easindicatedintheprojectdocument,whichwasadministeredinatimelyfashionoverthecourseoftheproject,includingreportingetc.

34CI(2017)ReportoftheInceptionPhasefortheGEF-IW-ETPSMangroveProject[PIMS5771].35Appendix9ofWWF-GEF(2016)ProjectDocumentfor“ImprovingmangroveconservationacrosstheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)throughcoordinatedregionalandnationalstrategydevelopmentandimplementation,”12May201636ExcelbasedtrackingtoolswereprovidedbythePMU.371standExtraordinaryPSCmeetingreportsarecontainedwithintheinceptionreport;CI(2017)2ndPSCMeetingReport1-2November,2017;CI(2019)3rdPSCMeetingReport,22January2019.38WWF-GEF(2017)WWFGEFProjectImplementationSupportMission(PrISM)Report,22December,201739WWF(2017)ProjectProgressReport(PPR)1stOctober2016–30stSeptember2017(Yr1Q1–Q4);WWF(2018)ProjectImplementationReporting(PIR)Oct2016toDecember2017,January2018;WWF(2018)WWF-GEFAgencyMemo-PPRReference:1Year6monthPPR;WWF(2018)ProjectProgressReport(PPR)1stOctober2017–31stMarch2018(Y2Q1-Q2);WWF(2019)ProjectImplementationReporting(PIR)December2017toDecember2018,January2019.


15|P a g e

Thedatageneratedbytheproject,forexamplethevaluationassessmentandextentofmangroves,wereintegratedintothelargerSPINCAMdatabaseoftheCPPS.ThisisalongtermdatabasewhichhasfundingandsustainabilityoutsidetheGEF-ETPSproject.

4.2.5 WWF and Implementing Partner implementation / execution coordination, andoperationalissues

DiscussionswithbothWWF-GEFandCIconfirmedthattherewerenocoordinationcommunicationissuesduringtheproject.RegularreportingwasconductedbyCI,WWFtooktwofieldmissions,andtherewasgoodemailandphonecommunication.

WWF-GEFagencybecameinvolvedattherequestofGEFtoprovideimplementationoftheprojectwhichwasinitiallyconceivedandproposedbyCI.WWF-GEFwasthereforelessinvolvedwithconceptdevelopmentthanwithpreparationoftheproposaltoensurethatitmetWWFstandardsandcompliedwithGEFcriteria.ThroughouttheprojectWWFprovidedmonitoringandprojectassuranceinatimelyandeffectivemanner,whichincludedreviewofbudgetsandadaptingtorequestsfromtheexecutingagency(seesection4.2.1-AdaptiveManagementandCapacity).Annualsupervisionmissionswereconductedtwice,3-4November2017,&6-12March,2019.Thelatterassistingwiththeterminalevaluation.Overall,therewerenoshortcomingsandthequalityofimplementationmetexpectations.

Section3oftheProjectDocumentoutlinestherolesoftheexecutingagency,whichincludesoversightandoperationsoftheProjectManagementUnit,disbursementandaccountingofGEFfunds,coordinationandimplementationofprojectactivities(onadaybydaybasis)andprojectreporting.CIachievedthisthroughestablishingitsPMUinEcuadorandhavingOperationalFocalPointsineachofthecountries.BuildingonthepreviousexperienceoftheCI-ETPSproject,CIwasabletocapitalizeonworkingrelationshipsinthecountriesandundertookitsactivitiesinaneffectivemanner.CIsoughttotakeadvantageofopportunitiesthatarosetoensureefficientuseoffundsandaddressbeneficiaryneeds(Seesection4.2.1-AdaptiveManagement).Overall,therewerenoshortcomingsandthequalityofexecutionmetexpectations.

4.2.6 AlignmentwithWWFandcountrypriorities

TheprojectisalignedwithWWFprioritiesofconservation,improvedgovernanceofnaturalresources,andclimatechangeadaptation.Itisalignedwiththepromotionofgendermainstreaming(seesection4.4)stakeholderengagement(seesection4.5)andensuringtherightsofindigenouspeoplesarerespected(seesection4.6).Theprojectisalignedwithcountryprioritiesasdiscussedunder4.3.1relevance.

4.3 ProjectAssessment


16|P a g e

4.3.1 Relevance

Theoverallrelevanceoftheprojectisillustratedbytheinterestinthecountriestoadvancemangroveconservationbothregionally(advancementofCPPSRegionalMangroveStrategy40,withinclusionofCostaRica)andnationally(newregulationsinPanama2018,newnationalpolicyinCostaRica2017,revisionofexistingpolicyinColombia2016,nationalplanapprovedin2019).Theprojectisrelevantatthelocallevelasshownbytheinvolvementof9communitiesacrosstheregiontoengageinrestorationandconservationactivities.TheprojectisrelevanttoGEFIWObjectives3and1.

Theprojectisrelevantonaglobalscaleasitisoneofthefewprojectsattemptingtoaddressmangrovepreservationataregionallevelacrossmultiplecountries.ItisrelevantfromtheregionallevelastheprojectdirectlyaddressesmangroveconservationinthePacificcoastofLatinAmericabyinvolvingCostaRica,Colombia,EcuadorandPanamawhichcontainthebulkofmangroves.41

Thenationalauthoritiesinterviewedaspartofthisevaluationconfirmedthattheprojectisalignedwiththeirnationalprioritiesinpromotingmangroveconservation,butalsoinadvancingcooperationonregionallevel.RepresentativesoftheCPPSinterviewedconfirmedthattheprojectsupportedandcatalysedengagementandactivitiesthatarepartoftheCPPSdirection–whichissupportedbythenationalgovernments.

TheprojectassistedindevelopingstrengthenednationallegislationandpoliciesonmangroveconservationinPanama(NationalWetlandsPolicy-draft2019);andCostaRica’sNationalWetlandPolicy,2017,whichwasdevelopedunderaGEF-UNDPproject.

Atthelocalleveltheprojectfacilitatedandsupportedengagementoflocalstakeholdersinnationalpolicydevelopmentaswellasitsimplementation.InthecaseofBazanBocana(Colombia)theConsejoCommunitario(CommunityCouncil)notedthat“theprojecthelpedstrengthenourgovernancesystemasthecommunityralliedaroundmangrovepreservationforenvironmentalandeconomic(clamharvesting&eco-tourism)benefits”.InelMorro,Ecuador,thefishingassociations(ManglaresCosténasandForeadoresdelFuturo)notedthat“theprojecthashelpedthecommunityunderstandthe[fishandclam]resourcesandgaincontrolovertheirexploitationsowecanbesustainableinthefuture”.

TheprojectisalsorelevanttoGEFoperationalprogramstrategies.TheprojectdirectlyrelatestoIWStrategicObjective3“Enhancemulti-statecooperationandcatalyzeinvestmentstofostersustainablefisheries,restoreandprotectcoastalhabitats,andreducepollutionofcoastsandLargeMarineEcosystems”42andisexpectedtocontributesignificantlytoregionalcooperationintheareaofmangroveconservationandsustainableuse.TheprojectalsorelatestoIW

40CPPS(2016)Plandeacciónregionalparalaconservacióndelosmanglares,GuayaquilEcuador2016.41SomemangrovesexistinnorthernPeru.42GEF(2016)GEF6ProgrammingDirections(WWF-GEFProjectAgencySafeguardsIntegratedPoliciesandProcedures)


17|P a g e

StrategicObjective1“Catalyzesustainablemanagementoftransboundarywatersystemsbysupportingmulti-statecooperationthroughfoundationalcapacitybuilding,targetedresearchandportfoliolearning”43throughitsactionsattheregionallevelwithCPPS,theresearchandeconomicvaluationassessmentsconductedthatfedintonationalpolicy,andtheexchangeofinformationandexperiencesthroughtheExpertWorkingGrouponmangrovesandthethreetechnicallearningexchanges.

4.3.2 Effectiveness

Virtuallyalloftheoutputtargetswereaccomplishedacrossallthecomponents,andinseveralcasesexceeded,whichhasresultedinachievingtheintendedoutcomes.Thisistruewithboththeknowledgemanagementaspects(brochures,communicationtoolsandlearningexchanges),aswellaslegislativeandpolicydevelopmentactivities.Theprojectwassuccessfulinengaging9communitiesandinitiatingconservationandrestorationactivities.Theprojectdidnotachieveapolicybriefonmangrovevaluation,thoughadetailedreportwasdeveloped,andfinalcommunicationproductawaitsinputfromCostaRica.DetailsoftheprogressmadeareinTable1,andhighlightedbelowforeachofthecomponents.

Component1:Regionalmangrovestrategydevelopmentandimplementation.ThisoutcomewasachievedthroughthedevelopmentofaninternationaltechnicalExpertWorskingGrouponMangroves(EWG)whichhadparticipationfromPeruandChileaswellastheETPScountries.OverthecourseoftheprojecttheEWGconvenedfour(4)timesanddeliveredrecommendationsfortheupdatingoftheregionalstrategydevelopedbytheCPPSin2015.Partoftheupdatingoftheregionalstrategywastoincorporateworkdoneatthenationallevel,inparticularvaluationassessmentofmangroves.Aspartoftheregionalcomponentthree(3)transboundarylearningexchangestookplace(September2017,SantiagodeVeraguas;July2018,Guayaquil;&November2018,SanJose)44.Recommendationsweredevelopedandadraftupdatedstrategyhasbeenadvancedforcountryendorsement.However,todateendorsementoftheupdatedstrategyhasnotoccurred.45

Nevertheless,oneofthekeysuccessesoftheprojecthasbeenthefullparticipationofCostaRicaintheEWGandadvancementoftheregionalstrategy,despitethefactitisnotamemberoftheCPPS.

Toolsforpolicyanddecision-makershavebeenadvanced,includinganeedsassessment,aregionalvaluationscopingdocument,translationoftheBlueCarbonManual,andBlueForestmaterialsintoSpanishforthelocalcontexttoincreaseitsaccessibility.TheCPPSwebsitehas

43Ibid.44Thefirstandlastfollowedasymposiumformat,thesecondafocusoncommunityexperiencesintheregion.45TheCPPSupdatespoliciesevery4years.Astheoriginalregionalmangrovestrategywaswrittenin2015itisscheduledtobeupdated2019.


18|P a g e

beenenhancedwithmaterialdevelopedfromtheproject(includingGISmangrovespatialdatainSPINCAM)46andformsaknowledgeplatformfortheregiononmangroves.47

RegionalcapacitydevelopmenthastakenplacewithaspatialplanningworkshopinJuly2017incollaborationwithIOC-UNESCO;aBlackClamfishingworkshoptoharmonizepracticesoccurredinMedellin,November2017;andamangroverestorationworkshopwasconvenedinCostaRica,October2018.

Underoutcome1.3theprojectexceededitstargetof2internationalknowledgeexchanges.3InternationalknowledgeexchangesoccurredinSantiagodeVeraguasPanama,September2017;Guayaquil,July2018,whichfocusedonlocalcommunityinterchangeofknowledgebringinglocalcommunitiesfromtheotherETPScountries;48andinSanJose,CostaRica,November2018.49Bi-lateralworkshopshavealsobeenconductedbetweenPanamaandEcuadorandColombiaandEcuador.

Component2:Nationalmangroveactionplansandpolicystrengtheningcooperation.Theprincipaloutcomefromthiscomponentisstrengthenednationalplansandcorrespondinglegislationtoenhancemangroveconservation.Theprojectachieveditstargetofhavingtwocountriesupdatenationalpolicies.Some20workshopswereheldtoadvancenationalpoliciesintheETPScountries.InApril2018EcuadorincludednewmangrovespecificprovisionstotheEnvironmentalOrganicCodeandanationalplanapprovedinFebruary2019andPanamaupdatedregulationsonwetlandsin2018andisstilldevelopinganewwetlandspolicy.Colombiadevelopedanewpolicyin2016(priortotheproject)andtheprojectenhancedimplementationfollowingstakeholderworkshopsinNovember2017and2018,whichincludedarestorationguidedevelopedwithlocalcommunities.TheprojectalsosupportedCostaRicaindevelopinganewwetlandpolicy50undertheGEF-UNDPproject.51ConversationswithMADS,inColombia,confirmedthattheprojectwasinstrumentalinsupportingtheparticipationoflocalcommunitiesatthenationallevelconferenceswhichenhancedthetop-downandbottom-uplearningthatwasachieved.

Aseriesofeconomicvaluationassessmentwereconductedbyeachofthecountrieswhichhelpedtoinformupdatestotheregionalstrategyaswellasthenationalpolicies.CInotedthat

46SPINCAMistheCPPSspatialdatabaseforcoastalmarineinformationamongsttheCPPScountries.ItiscarriedoutincollaborationwithIOC-UNESCOandtheUniversityofFlanders.47http://par-manglares.net/48DiscussionswithpeopleinbothElMorroandBazanBocananotedthatthiswasoneofthemostenrichingaspectsoftheengagementandhasresultedinnewideasofdevelopingco-managementregimesforblackclamsandothermangrovefisheries.49Seehttp://par-manglares.net/index.php/actividades/2018/40-taller-noviembre-201850CostaRica(2017)PolíticaNacionaldeHumedales2017-2030,febrero2017.51Conservation,sustainablebiodiversityuseandmaintenanceofecosystemservicesinprotectedwetlandsofinternationalimportance.


19|P a g e

aftersubstantialtimebeingreviewedbythecountries,thetechnicalbriefingdocumentonvaluationwasdevelopedforpolicymakersinFebruary2019.

Component3:Localconservationaction.Thiscomponentfocusedonlocalactivitiesandpilotprojectstoupdatelocalmanagementplansin2mangroveecosystems,applyBlueForestseconomicevaluationtoolsin2oftheETPScountries,conductoutreachandcapacitybuildingforlocaldecisionmakers,andhave2demonstrationsitesthatprovidedincentivesorbusinessopportunitiesformangroveconservation.Ingeneral,theprojectexceededtheanticipatedoutputs.Improvedplanningoccurredatthelocallevelin9communitiesacrosstheETPScountries.52NaturalCapitalAccountingETPSwidescopingexercisewasconductedandculminatedinaworkshopatDukeUniversityinNovember2017.AreportoneconomicassessmentonthevalueofecosystemservicesprovidedbythemangroveswasconductedfortheGulfofNicoya,2publicationsresultedfromstudiesonecosystemgoodsandservicesprovidedbyChiriquiGulfinPanama,aswellasareportongoodsandservicesprovidedbymangrovesintheGuayaquilarea.

Underoutcome3.4thetargetof2demonstrationprojectsprovidingincentives(orbusinessopportunities)alsoexceeded.InColombia,thecommunityofBazanBocanahasundertakengovernancestrengtheningworkshopsandcommunityengagementtobuildawarenessandunderstandingaroundthezoningandusesofmangrovesintheirterritorytoimprovefisheries,andhaveundertaken2restorationprojects,beachprotection,andvillagebeautification(muralproject)inaneffortimproveeco-tourism.DiscussionswiththePresidentoftheCommunityCouncilindicatedthattheyareengaginginbeachprotectionbyplantingtreesandcommunitybeachcleanups.Theyhavedevelopedclamfishingzonesthatarerotatedandbeingsupervisedbythewomenfishers.53InElMorro,Ecuador,threefishingassociations54currentlyrepresenting50%ofalltheartisanalfisherhavedeveloped3fisheriesmanagementplansfortheirareas.55Theworkincludesvoluntarymonitoringofcatchthatisincorporatedintoadatabaseformanagementpurposes.56Moreover,theElMorroWomen’sAssociationisactivelyusingbyproductsfromthefishingindustry,suchasshells,todevelopartsandcraftsforsalewhichhavehelpeddevelopincomeaswellasbringingwomenmorecloselyinvolvedinthefishingactivitiesbeyondcleaningandsellingfishproductsatmarket.57InPanama,anagreementhasbeendevelopedwiththeBatipafarmpilotsitetodeveloplandusealternativesthatcouldpotentiallyreducemangrovecuttinginChiriquíhas.

52Colombia:BazanBocana,EperaalaSipidaara,GulfofTortugasarea(IslaAjí,Cajamabre,YurumanguíandNaya);Ecuador:ElMorro(threeplansdeveloped);Panama:Chiriquíarea;andCostaRica:GulfofNicoya.53NidiaPatricia,personnalcommunication,9March2019.54Theterminalevaluationincludedinterviewswiththeheadsof2fishingassociationsManglaresCostenasandForeadoresdelFuturo,aswellastheMorroWoman’sAssociation.55Biotica(2017)PlandeManejoParaelUsoCustodiade1.843,00HectáresdeManglarSolicitadasporlaAsociacióndePescadoresArtesanalesForjadoresdelFuturoenelSectordePuertoelMorro,August2017.56Nazca(2019)PropuestadeplandeordenamientopesqueroenalrefugiodevidasilvestremanglaresElMorro,NazcayCI,28Febrerodel201957LuciMorales,personnalcommunication,8March2019.


20|P a g e

Intermsofglobalknowledgeexchange,theProjectCoordinatorandadelegatefromtheCostaRicanMinistryofEnvironmentattendedtheBiannualIWC9conferenceinNovember2018along.

Partofcomponent3focusedoncapacitybuildinginwhichtheprojectexceededitsanticipatedtargetof2workshopspercountrybyconducting14countryleveltrainingeventsand1regionalleveleventontheblackclamfishery.Trainingandparticipatoryworkshopsrepresentedanestimated200+hourstogroupsranginginsizefrom15-230individuals(dependingontheevent)acrosstheETPSgeography.


21|P a g e

Table1ProgresstowardsResultsSummaryTable

Comp Outcome (Indicator) Output targets (Indicator) Comments-achievement to 31 march 2019

1: R

egio

nal m

angr

ove

stra

tegy

dev

elop

men

t and

impl

emen

tatio

n

1.1-The four ETPS countries adopt and advance the regional strategy for the conservation of mangroves as elaborated by CPPS (Regional strategy approved by and published for the appropriate authorities of the four ETPS countries by Y2Q1. Recommendations for revised strategy by Y2Q4).

1.1.1 A Mangrove Technical Working Group/network comprised of leading mangrove experts is created (A Mangrove Technical Working Group is convened by Y1Q3)

TOR were developed and a mangrove working was established in Y1Q1 and has operated for the duration. Colombia (MADS-DAMCRA) was nominated as secretary. Regular 3-6 month videoconferences are planned to discuss PAR-workplan. Initial meeting - video conference 30/03/2017. 7 men/5 women. Participation in the EWG is also from Chile and Peru.

1.1.2- 2 meetings of a Mangrove Technical Working Group are held (# Technical Working Group Meetings generating recommendations)

EWG has convened: November 2016, 30 March 2017, June 2017, April 2018, Nov 2018. Reports available on line, and include recommendations for a regional strategy.

1.1.3-Updated regional strategy for the conservation of mangroves is ratified by Ministerial level authorities (# ETPS country governments that officially endorse a regional strategy)

CPPS regional mangrove strategy was successfully adopted by the ETPS countries of Ecuador, Colombia, Panama (and Costa Rica as non-CPPS country in 2015)-digital version available. Assessments have been undertaken. Recommendations have been made in April 2018 to revise 2015 Plan. The updates have been approved by the GEM. A revised Plan is scheduled for later in 2019 under the CPPS 4 year review of policies.

1.2-Costa Rica participates in the regional strategy by Y1Q3 (Costa Rica is an active participating member of the CPPS Open Initiative for Mangrove Conservation and Sustainable Development)

1.2.1- Official letter of confirmation from Costa Rica’s Ministry of Environment ratifying Costa Rica’s participation (Costa Rica agreement signed with CCPS by Y1Q3)

Costa Rica participates in activities as non-CPPS member. Formal invitation letter from CPPS to CRC (Costa Rica) sent 14th October 2016 and accepted. Costa Rica has established a national mangrove coordination group which includes representatives from MINAE, SINAC, the National Wetlands Program and CI.

1.3- Policy makers of at least three countries have the tools and capacity to strengthen the implementation of the regional mangrove

1.3.1- At least 2 ETPS trans-boundary learning and cooperation exchanges at least 1 international exchange by Y2Q4. (# of thought leaders trained per country)

1st transboundary learning exchange - 2 days (+1 field day) in Santiago de Veraguas Panama, September 2017, (217 participants, 37 speakers (panelists 15 men 12 women) 2nd experience interchange with focus on Community Level Exchange was undertaken in Guayaquil 25th-26th July 2018 (35 participants, 25 speakers, Panelists 18 men, 7 women)


22|P a g e

Comp Outcome (Indicator) Output targets (Indicator) Comments-achievement to 31 march 2019 strategy (# of countries that have # tools generated by the project that assist and inform integrated regional and national planning (by Y2Q4), available to 4 ETPS countries.)

3rd International exchange - 27th - 30th November 2018 in San Jose, Costa Rica.58 (70 people) – this was originally perceived as an inter-regional event but SC decided to keep it regional and focused. There were 2 additional bilateral exchanges with Panama, Colombia and the Ecuador socio-manglar program

1.3.2- Communication products on mangrove conservation by Y1Q3 (% completion of communication products by Y2Q4)

Needs assessment completed (GEM Nov 2017) ETPS base line for mangrove policy status, gaps and challenges was consolidated; Natural Capital accounting - workshop took place over 3 days (Nov 2017) in Duke University to standardize and consolidate information and near-term recommendations for the CPPS Mangrove Expert Group; Blue Carbon Manual translated and adapted for South American Countries; Blue Forest tool compilation and reference collection for countries; GIS mangrove data incorporated into the CPPS – SPINCAM data base (CPPS & IOC-UNESCO). Communication Plan for RMAP and internal guidelines developed (Y1Q2); communications and outreach products were produced, including a campaign with social media focused around the 26th July, International Day of the Mangrove Ecosystem (UNESCO); website developed and updated; a ETPS mangrove brochure and extensive 140 page ETPS mangrove goods and service scoping report – both published in Feb-March 2019 – the report needs to be shortened for a communication or briefing product.

2: N

atio

nal m

angr

ove

actio

n pl

ans a

nd p

olic

y st

reng

then

ing.

co

oper

atio

n

2.1- At least two ETPS countries have updated national mangrove action plans in line with the regional strategy by Y2Q4 (# ETPScountryupdatednationalplanssupportedbytheregionalmangrovestrategy)

2.1.1- Updated national mangrove action plans are formally ratified in at least two ETPS countries (# of updated and ratified national mangrove action plans (and in development) by Y2Q4)

Panama updated regulations (July 2018); Costa Rica has a new wetlands policy (2017) and council that includes NGOs; Columbia new Mangrove Policy (2016), and updated with stakeholder workshops in Gorgona Nov 2017 [and Nov 2018]; Restoration Guide developed with local communities. Ecuador implemented Environmental Organic Code (April 12, 2018) with new mangrove specific inclusions, Ministerial resolutions for sustainable use and resource custody agreements for 3 local fishing associations (005/2018; 006/2018; 007/2018. National Mangrove Plan was approved in Feb 2019.

- Workshops were held in Costa Rica (6); Panama (3); Colombia (3) and Ecuador (8).

58Seehttp://par-manglares.net/index.php/actividades/2018/40-taller-noviembre-2018


23|P a g e

Comp Outcome (Indicator) Output targets (Indicator) Comments-achievement to 31 march 2019 - In Colombia a national workshop was held with MADS (27people, 7

women including 3 local communities) 2.2- least two ETPS countries have passed stronger regulations and incentives for conservation (# of countries with stronger regulations or incentives that improve mangrove conservation underway and established at the national level by Y2Q4)

2.2.1 A national mangrove policy and threat assessment for each ETPS country by Y1Q4 (# of ETPS countries with an updated (post PPG) mangrove base-line, national policy)

Completed country assessments for synthesized regional assessment – produced report and GIS materials. Assessments available on CPPS website. An extensive 140 page review was developed; Annual meetings to advance this have taken place as noted in the annual reports. The indicator is an updated policy, whereas it should be an assessment conducted - the outcome should be a policy.

2.2.2 Legislation passed to strengthen protection of mangroves in 2 ETPS countries (# new policies containing elements attributable to the project assessment exercises)

Costa Rica – National Wetlands Policy done in 2017, Management plan developed for Puntarenas estuary to cover Gulf of Nicoya, – revised regulations for new Wetland Policy. Ecuador – Road Map for action developed including Action 1: Three Agreements on Sustainable Use and Mangrove Custody. Action 2: A draft Resolution of the Fishing Registry of the Protected Area (AMCP) El Morro. Explored options for sustainable financing of the socio-manglar incentives with the private sector interviewing 4 women and 11 men. Panama: Two regulations validated and delivered to the Ministry of Environment. a) Regulation for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Mangrove, validated and in the legal advice department of the Ministry of Environment for approval. b) Regulation for the establishment and management of the Special Coastal Marine Management Areas, validated and delivered to the Ministry of Environment


24|P a g e

Comp Outcome (Indicator) Output targets (Indicator) Comments-achievement to 31 march 2019

3: L

ocal

con

serv

atio

n ac

tion.

3.1.: At least two key mangrove ecosystems have updated management plans by Y2Q4 (# of site level management or local development plans generated with stakeholders directly and indirectly as a result of project developments)

3.1.1 At least two local management plans and/or local development plans developed by Y2Q4 (# of management plans, or % completed)

Panama Updated to local management in Chiriquí including Climate Adaptation criteria and alternatives livelihoods to cutting mangroves; as well as a strategic plan and governance scheme for the Altitudinal Corridor of Gualaca. Costa Rica - Recommendations for integrating Ridge to Reef approaches in local plans for the Gulf of Nicoya. Ecuador - MAE conducted scoping studies for Gulf of Guayaquil spatial planning and the El Morro Production Plan for Black Clam. Resulting in 3 management plans established for mangrove concessions in El Morro Reserve between community and Ecuadorian authorities. Spatial planning of marine areas has been conducted with local input in the Gulf of Guayaquil. Colombia – With the CVC in Bazan Bocana local governance was strengthened in terms of zoing and mangrove use and 2 plots were replanted with mangroves. A local language management guide was developed for Eperaala Sipidaara community. Improved planning in situation diagnosis for the Gulf of Tortugas area, including and evaluation of the mangrove ecosystem in Isla Ají, Cajamabre, Yurumanguí and Naya. Stakeholders included 221 Afro Colombian representatives (126 women)..

3.2- Economic evaluation tools and methodologies developed through the GEF-UNEP Blue Forests and tested in two ETPS countries (# of GEF-UNEP Blue Forests (BF) method and/or analogous economic evaluations and tools developed and presented to project stakeholders)

3.2.1- Final report on the economic valuation of ecosystem goods and services in two project sites (# of completed site studies presented to stakeholders by Y2Q1)

Natural Capital Accounting ETPS wide scoping exercise to map current levels of knowledge, methods and identify knowledge gaps, and synthesis workshop took place over 3 days (Nov 2017) in Duke University. Costa Rica: Report on economic assessment on the value of ecosystem goods and services provided by the mangroves of the Gulf of Nicoya Panama: study of the ecosystem goods and services provided by Chiriqui Gulf mangroves resulted in 2 publications, the report is almost complete. Ecuador: Report of the ecosystem goods and services provided by Guayaquil Gulf mangroves completed. Still needs to be put on line.

3.2.2- Summary outreach document for decision-makers on the methodology(ies) and toolkit(s) for economic valuation of mangrove ecosystem (% completion and presentation of outreach document with decision support strategy presented to ETPS decision makers by Y2Q4)

Spanish translation and adaptation of the Blue Carbon Manual (High and Low Resolution digital versions available). Materials from the Blue Forests Project form part of the on-line materials available to government, and distributed between partners of Blue Carbon project. Outreach materials on mangrove ecosystem valorization include Posters -Brochures -Videos -Artwork for social media or presentations, the final communication product is 80% completed – needing review from Costa Rica.

3.2.3- Mangrove valuation, policy and development planning outcomes are communicated by distribution, interactive

Blue Carbon Manual and Blue Forests materials are available on line. Project materials available on CPPS website.


25|P a g e

Comp Outcome (Indicator) Output targets (Indicator) Comments-achievement to 31 march 2019 knowledge platform, and three national/regional conferences (# of outreach and communication media/ platforms/ packages generated)

Geospatial project data for the region in an appropriate format with all metadata to the online regional CPPS-SPINCAM decision support tool from all ETPS countries. Biannual IW9 event (Program Manager and Costa Rica MINAE delegate). - CPPS, CI-Ecuador and CI-Americas participated in the IW-Learn Cape Town event (November 2017) -

3.3- Outreach and capacity building for at least 30 local policymakers and stakeholders finalized by Y2Q4. (# Policymakers and stakeholders trained per ETPS country). 3.3.1- At least two training events are conducted

per ETPS country with at least 15 participants each by Y2Q4 (# of events and training hours received per stakeholder in each ETPS country by Y2Q4)

Regular EA/ government planning meetings (6 Costa Rica; >3 Panama; 3 Colombia; >8 Ecuador) with the corresponding agency(ies) throughout the project as well as a series of outreach workshops in the project sites with managers and local communities. Costa Rica -2 training events on mangrove conservation and restoration. Panama – 2 trainings for educators on mangrove recovery (22 participants; 9 reps of different communities, 13 ecopromotors / 74 participants (51% men, 49% women) Colombia: 1 Mangrove Restoration Protocol workshop (50 afro-colombians (18 women) & 5 workshops with the Bazan Bocana Community council on mangrove management and protection. Ecuador: 4 training events to fishing commonwealth (mancomunidad pesquera) on "Biology of the black clam and good fishing practices". Regional: CPPS organized one regional workshop on Black Clam fishery, Ecuadorian National Fisheries Institute and CPPS, 17 participants from the 4 ETPS countries and Chile. Held in Medellin 14-16th November 2017. Training and participatory workshops represented an estimated 200+ hours to groups ranging in size from 15 - 230 individuals (depending on the event) across the ETPS geography.

3.4- Two demonstration projects that provide incentives and/or create business opportunities for sustainable use of mangroves by Y2Q4 (# of demonstration projects providing incentives and/or business opportunities successfully initiated and/or supported by the project

3.4.1- Local associations in at least two sites actively participate and commit to demonstration projects by Y1Q4 (MOUs with local associations that outline conservation and restoration activities by Y1Q3.)

Colombia: 2 restoration and monitoring plots as incentives to promote micro-tourism were supported by CVC and Bazan Bocana Community Council – The community is now leading the initiative under a “conservation agreement”. They have also, under their own initiative, undertaken to grow and plant mangrove and trees along their beach as a means of conservation and coastal protection. Also, interchange of socio-manglar concession program experiences from Ecuador with UNDP, ARPA and MiAmbiente (Pan) and MADS (Col) Costa Rica: Communities entered into agreements for restoration. Ecuador Fisher community entered into the Black Clam Fisheries Production Plan in Gulf of Guayaquil - and 3 new sustainable use fisheries management plans to support concession agreements.


26|P a g e

Comp Outcome (Indicator) Output targets (Indicator) Comments-achievement to 31 march 2019 in high priority mangrove conservation areas)

Panama agreement has been developed with the Batipa farm pilot site to develop land use alternatives that could potentially reduce mangrove cutting in Chiriquí. - a management plan has been drawn up for five pilot farms that incorporate conservation principles (local association included). Assistance to Wetland International with business plans for 4 communities.

3.4.2 Local stakeholders participating in demonstration projects increased by 20% over the project start-up baseline by Y2Q4.(% of initiatives where stakeholders lead activities and actively participate at each local project site between Y1Q4 and Y2Q4)

It is unclear how this is reported on.


27|P a g e

4.3.3 Efficiency

TheprojectwasoveralleffectiveindeliveringtheoutputsandresultingoutcomesasspecifiedintheProjectDocument.Inmanyareastheprojectexceededtheprojecttargetswhilekeepingwithintheprojectbudget.Indeed,theleveragingofotherpreviousandon-goinginitiativesmeanttheGEFfundswere“catalytic”inputsresultingingoodcostforactivityandoutput.The“no-costextension”of6monthsona24monthprojecthassomenegativebearingondeterminingtheefficiencywithwhichtheprojectwasexecuted.

UnderComponent1US$470,000wasdisbursedtoadvanceanddeveloptheRegionalMangrovestrategy,andincludedtheestablishmentandconveningfourtimesofanExpertWorkingGrouponmangroves(GEM),andtheconveningofthreeinternationallearningexchanges(seeTable1).Anumberofcommunicationandpolicytoolsweredeveloped,includinganeedsassessment,NaturalCapitalaccountingsurvey,BlueCarbonManualtranslated,amongstothers.Althoughtheupdatedregionalstrategyhasnotbeenfullyendorsedbythecountriesofficially,ithasbeenapprovedbytheGEMwhichcontainsrepresentativesofalltheETPScountries.Thepolicybrieffordecisionmakerswasnotdeveloped.Nevertheless,theextentofactivitiesisconsideredmoderatelycostefficientbasedonothersimilarprojectsandactivities.

Undercomponent2US$690,000wasdisbursedtoadvancenationalmangroveactionplansandstrengthencooperationinmangroveconservation.Activitiesincluded20workshopsacrossthecountries,a“threatassessmentsurvey”conductedforeachoftheETPScountries,andannualmeetingsheldtoadvancenationalpolicyineachofthecountries.Theactivesandstudiesconductedappeartobecosteffectivewithinthiscomponent.

Undercomponent3US$560,000wasdisbursedtoengagewithlocalcommunitiestodevelopandexecutemanagementplans,developoutreachtoolsandcommunicationproducts,andconduct14localandnationalleveltrainingeventsandoneregionaltrainingeventwhichconstitutedanestimated200hoursoftraining.Thiscomponentwasconsideredhighlycostefficient.

4.3.4 Overallresults(attainmentofobjectives)/Impact

Theprojectobjective,“toimplementacomprehensive,multi-governmentratifiedandregionallyarticulatedmangroveconservationstrategyintheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)countriesofCostaRica,Panama,ColombiaandEcuadorthroughon-the-groundmanagementactivitiesandthestrengtheningofnationalandlocalpoliciesthatinformridge-to-reefdevelopmentplanningandpracticesrelevanttomangroveconservation”,wasmeasuredby:

a. Officialendorsementofaregionallyarticulatedmulti-governmentmangroveconservationandsustainabledevelopmentplanbythefourETPScountries(CostaRica,Panama,Colombia,Ecuador)withacoordinatedactionplantorestoreandprotectmangrovesystemsbeyondthefundedscopeofthetwoyearproject.


28|P a g e

Therehasbeenanevaluationandupdateconductedonthe2015RegionalMangroveStrategy.Theplanhasbeenfinalizedandsubmittedforendorsementbythecountries.Aregionalexpertworkinggrouponmangroveswasestablishedandmet4times,andiscontinuingtomeetpostproject.59TheparticipationofCostaRica,despitenotbeingamemberoftheCPPS,isofsignificanceregionallyasitunderscorestheimportanceofregionalcollaborationandcoordinationthathasbeenachievedbytheproject.

b. Atleast2ETPScountrieshaveimprovedlegislationgoverningnationalridge-to-reefspatialplanning(e.g.upstreamwatershedmanagement)suchthatthemangrovesintheETPSregion(estimatedcollectivelyat736,000ha(afterGirietal.2011))aresubjecttoanimprovedpolicyconducivetomangroveconservation.

TherebeenupdatestonationalplansinCostaRica,EcuadorandPanamaandenhancedimplementationinColombia.RidgetoreefplanningisindicatedintheCostaRica2017WetlandsPolicy.60TheprojectadvancedtheimplementationofthenationalpolicybyworkingwithcommunitiesresultedrecommendationsforintegratingRidgetoReefapproachesinlocalplansfortheGulfofNicoya,CostaRica.

c. Atleast2examplesofsupportedlocalprivateand/orcommunitybasedmangroveinitiativesthatstrengthenlocalplanning,improveawarenessofkeyissues,buildlocalcapacity,reducemangrovedegradation,instigatereforestation,andimprovetheretentionofecosystemgoods,serviceswitheconomicandculturaldividendsforsustainablesocieties.

Theprojectsucceededindevelopingmultipleinitiativesatthelocallevelwhichhasempoweredlocalcommunitiestoconductbetterplanningandintegrateprivatesectorinterestsintoconservation.TheisparticularlytruewiththeBazanBocana,ElMorroandChiriquísites.

4.3.5 Sustainability

Thereisstrongnationalsupporttosustaintheprojectoutcomes,however,oftendevelopingplansandpolicyistheeasierpart,andactuallyfollowingthroughwithimplementationismoredifficultduetocostsandshiftingpriorities.TheSustainability61oftheprojectimpactsislikelytoberealizedasthecountriesthemselvesnowhaveNationalpolicieswhichreflecttheimportanceofkeyelementspromotedbytheprojectsuchasspatialplanning,whichtosome

59CCPS,personalcommunication,7March2019.60“Planicifación….deberáincorporarelanálisisdelterritorioobservándolocomounapartedelsistemadecuencas,considerandolosimpactosacumulativososinérgicosquelasdiversasactividadespuedanprovocaralolargodeestas”.Page36,CostaRica(2017)PolíticaNacionaldeHumedales2017-2030,febrero2017.

61Sustainabilityisdeterminedonasixpointscale.


29|P a g e

extentincludeRidgetoReefapproaches;valuingmangroveecosystemsforlivelihoodsandeconomicbenefits;incorporatingeffectivecommunitiesinplanningprocesses;andbuildingawarenessaroundimportanceofmangrovesandconservation,amongstothers.Inmostcases,theETPScountrieshavedevelopedsupportinglegislationandregulationstoimplementNationalpolicy.AsnotedindiscussionwithMADS,Colombia,theconservationofmangrovesisonthenationalagenda,andtheGEF-ETPSprojecthashelpedtoaccelerateimplementationofthe2016nationalpolicy,andenhanceitseffectthroughgreaterinclusionoflocalcommunitystakeholders.

Attheregionallevel,theCPPSismandatedtoadvancetheregionalstrategyonmangrovesthatwasupdatedthroughtheproject.Inthiswaytheprojectoutputanditsintendedimpactswillbesustainedbytheregionalorganisationsandnationalgovernments.AcommitmentofCostaRicatosignontotheregionalstrategywouldfurtherenhancesustainabilityofoutcomesandenhanceimpacts.

Themajorthreatstosustainabilityrelatetoon-goingactivitieswhichthreatenmangroveecosystemssuchaspollutionandwastefromnearbyurban,agricultural,andindustrialareas,anddeforestation.Stronggovernmentcommitmentandsubstantialfinancialresourceswillbeneededtoaddresstheseissues.Consequently,thefinancialsustainabilityoftheprojectimpactsareonlymoderatelylikelywithoutongoingassistancefromtheinternationalcommunityforthenext5-10yearswhilethecountriesbeginthereceiveeconomicandsocialbenefitsofmangroveconservation.

Atthelocallevelthecommunitiesappearcommittedtomaintaintheworktheprojectastheyfeeldirectbenefitsofthelocalmanagementplans.InthecasesofBazanBocanatheyareawareofpotentialfisheriesbenefitsaswellaseco-tourismandhavealreadybeguntheirowninitiativetoplanttreestoreduceerosionandenhancethebeach.InElMorrothefisherassociationsareverykeentoimplementthemanagementplansdeveloped,andtoengagemoreartisanalfishersinapplyingtheconcessionagreementstheyhavedevelopedwiththeEcuadoriangovernmentastheyseethisasawayofincreasingvoluntarycompliancewiththemanagementregimeandimprovingsustainabilityoftheresource.62Nevertheless,thelocalcommunitiesareinaninitialstagesofimplementingtheirplansandwillneedbothmomentumandsupporttocontinueuntiltheybegintobenefitfromthenewapproachedtomanagementoftheirresources.

Climatechangewillalsohaveaneffectonsustainabilityassealevelriseaffectsmangrovesurvivability.FutureprojectsmightlooktospecificGEFprojectsundertheclimatechangeinitiativetoseekpossibleandappropriatemitigationmeasures.

62SantiagoMoralesandAdolfoAbila,Personalcommunication,8March2019.


30|P a g e

4.4 GenderEqualityandMainstreaming

Overalltheprojectdiditsutmosttoensuregendermainstreamingwasincorporatedintobothplanningandimplementationoftheproject.

Section6oftheProjectDocumentdescribestheGenderMainstreamingapproach.TheapproachdescribedisconsistentwithboththeearlierGEF2014policyaswellastheupdated2018policy63aswellasWWF’sGenderPolicy,inparticularacknowledgingthattheproject“mayaffectwomenandmendifferently,andmayincludespecificmeasurestoempowerspecificmarginalizedgroupsandindividuals”.64

TwokeyGEFobjectivesofimprovingtheequityofwomenwereadvanced,particularlyatthelocallevel,including:

• ImprovingWomen’sparticipatingindecisionmaking;and,• Generatingsocio-economicbenefitsorservicesforwomen.

InthecaseofBazanBocana,inColombia,theroleofwomenindecisionmakingwasimprovedthoughstrengthenedgovernanceandawarenessbuildingaroundthelocalmangrovestrategy.ThePresidentoftheCommunityCouncil,NidiaPatricia,notedthatwomeninthecommunitygenerallyhaveastrongsayinaffairs,buttheprojecthelpedtofocussthecommunitytounderstaindthelocalmangroveplanwithitsdifferentzoingandhowconservationandeconomicbenefitscanbeachieved.Thisprocesshelpedemphasizetherolethatwomenandyouthplayinthecommunity,andinparticularthekeyrolethatwomenplayinbeingstewardsoftheblackclamresoure.Theeconomicempowermentofwomeninthatcommunitywasfurtheremphasizedasthereisawomen’scooperativeof“pianueras”65whichhavestclamsandmanagethepickingindifferentareas.

InElMorrocommunity,inEcuador,theWomen’sAssociationismoreintegratedintothefisheriesandmangroveconservationthanpriortotheproject.66Inthiscommunitythemenarethepredominantfishers,howeverthewomenhelpmarkettheproductsandarealsoinvolvedinvalueaddedactivitiessuchasartsandcraftswiththeshellsandotherbyproducts.TheWomen’sAssociationparticipatedinthediscussionssurroundingthemanagementplansforfishingandmangroveprotection.

AttheNationallevel,therearesomeinclusionsofgenderissuesintheneworeditednationallegislation.Forexample,theEcuadorianNationalPlan(2018)andCostaRicaNationalWetlandsPolicy(2017)refertohumanrights,includinggenderaspects.ThePanamaNationalWetlandsPolicyreferstosocialparticipationasaguidingprincipal,andreferstowomenwithinthedefinitionofvulnerablegroups.

63GEF(2018)GuidancetoAdvanceGenderEquityinGEFProjectandPrograms,TheGEF,December2018.64WWF(2011).GlobalNetworkPolicy:GenderPolicyStatement.65Clamharvesters66LuciMorales,PresidentofElMorroWomen’sAssociation,Personalcommunication8March2019.


31|P a g e

Attheregionallevel,agenderequitysectionwasdraftedfortheupdatedregionalstrategyandwillbe/isbeingreviewedbycountriesforinclusionintheupdatedstrategy.

Genderequity/balanceinmeetings,conferencesandtrainings,wasadvocatedbytheexecutingagencyandbyUNESCO-Quito.However,itwasnotedthatfindingbalancewasproblematicgivensuchasmallpoolofqualifiedfemaleindividualsinthetechnicalcirclesineachcountry.Genderaggregateddatawasconductedformeetingsandconferences.Forexampleofthepanelistsandspeakersofthe1stinternationallearningexchange12werewomenand15weremen;andofthe2ndexchange7werewomenand18weremen.Onaverageabout35%ofthepanelistswerewomen.

1of8peopleontheSteeringCommitteewasawoman,and2-3of13oftheGroupofExpertswerewomen(thechairbeingawoman).

4.5 StakeholderEngagement

4.5.1 Evaluate stakeholder engagement and (if GEF-7) assess the implementation of theStakeholderEngagementPlan.

Theprojectdevelopedastructuredengagementplanwhichwasimplementedinahighlysatisfactorymanner.

ThestakeholderengagementplanisdetailedinSection4oftheProjectDocumentandcontainsadetailedassessmentofthekeystakeholdersandtheoverallstructureoftheirinvolvementintheproject.67TheplanisconsistentwiththeGEF-5andupdatedGEFStakeholderEngagementPolicy.68

DuringthePPGphase,countrylevelconsultationwithstakeholdersoccurredbetweenNov2014-March2015alongwithCI-ETPSsitevisits.Stakeholdersintheupstreamareaswerealsoconsulted.Forexample,theOAP(oilpipelinedevelopersintheGulfofTortugas,Colombia)andlocalforestersandlandownersofupstreamteakwoodplantationsinterestedinsupportingconnectivitycorridorsacrosstheirpropertiesinGulfofChiriquí,Panama.

Duringtheprojectthecountryprogramsimplementedtheirapproachestotheprojectworkwiththegovernmentpartnersandcommunitiesdirectlyadaptingtothecontext.Forexample,ittookanextendedperiodoftimetoapproachandengagetheBazanBocanacommunity(Colombia)withCVCpartnersinColombia;andmappingupstreamusersinChiriquí(Panama)toidentifylocalpartnersandstartmangroveawarenessworkbeforedevelopingproposalsforlandusechanges.

OneofthekeyGEFprincipalsofstakeholderengagementisthat“involvementshouldenhancethesocial,environmental,andfinancialsustainabilityofprojects”.69Thiswasclearlythecase

67SeeTable8ofProjectDocument.68GEF(2017)GEFPolicyonStakeholderEngagement,GEFPolicySeries,10November,2017.69GEF(2017)GEFPolicyonStakeholderEngagement,GEFPolicySeries,10November,2017.


32|P a g e

withengagementwithboththeBazanBocan(Colombia)andElMorro(Ecuador)communities(SeesectiononSustainability).

Anotherkeyprincipalisthat“GEFPartnerAgencieswillincludeinprojectbudgets,asneeded,thenecessaryfinancialandtechnicalassistancetorecipientgovernmentsandprojectexecutingagenciestoensureeffectivepublicinvolvement.Theprojectensuredsufficientfundingwhenengagingcommunitiesandstakeholders.WWF-GEFconfirmedthatworkshopsandengagementactivitiesfollowedwithdocumentationthuskeepinganhistoricalrecordofthecommunityandstakeholderengagement.

4.6 SafeguardsReview

4.6.1 Assessmentofprojectactivitiesforanysocialandenvironmentalimpacts

Theprojectdidnotresultanyidentifiednegativesocialorenvironmentalimpacts.Theenvironmentalimpactsoftheprojecttodatehavebeentoenhancedconservationandsustainableuseofmangroves.TworeplantingplotswereundertakeninBazanBocanawiththeresultingeffectthatthecommunitynowhasthecapacityandknowledgetoundertaketheirownmangrovereplantationactivities.

Thesocialimpactsoftheprojecttodatehavebeenpredominantlybeneficialintermsofcommunityempowermentoverresourcesanddecision-making,capacitydevelopment,strengtheninggovernance,andadvancingeconomicsustainability.However,ifthereisafutureproject,moreattentionwillbeneededregardingimplementationandapplicationofthe“concessionagreements”developedinElMorro(Seebelow).

ToensurethattheprojectwasadheringtoprincipalsestablishedinInternationalLaborOrganization(ILO)ConventionNo.169andtheUnitedNationsDeclarationontheRightsofIndigenousPeoples(UNDRIP),astudywasundertakentodeterminethewhatsafeguardswereneeded,particularlyinrelationtoBazanBocana.70Although,underWWFpolicythecommunitywasconsideredanindigenouspeoples,thestudyconcludedthatitwasnotnecessarytoconductastandaloneIndigenousPeoplesPlanduetotheengagementbeingconducted,asrequiredundertheColombianlaw.71Furthermore,theWWFSafeguardSpecialistconductedtwosupervisiontripstotheproject(November2017andMarch2018).TherewasalsoadedicatedstaffpersonfromCIColombiaofficeasthesafeguardspersonwhogaveatrainingontheWWFpolicies.

Overall,carehasbeentaken,particularlybytheWWF-GEFtoensurethatsafeguardstandardshavebeenadheredto.

70Gross(2015),SAFEGUARDPOLICIESASAPPLIEDTOTHEPROJECT:ImprovingmangroveconservationacrosstheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)throughcoordinatedregionalandnationalstrategydevelopmentandimplementation,DanielGoss,24December,2015.71Law70–relatestotherightsofAfro-Colombiancommunities.


33|P a g e

UnderComponent3,attherequestofthecommunity,theprojectsupportedtheprocessofElMorrocommunitytoenterintoConcessionAgreementswiththeGovernmentofEcuador.AprerequisiteforenteringintoaconcessionagreementistodevelopaFisheriesManagementPlan.TheExecutingAgency–CI,supportedtheWildlifeRefugeElMorrocommunitieswiththedevelopmentofafisheriesdatabaseforrecording/monitoringfishcatchandsize,theestablishmentofthefisheriesassociations,thetechnicalassistanceandcapacitybuildingtofacilitatethedevelopmentofFisheriesManagementPlan.72However,theimplementationofthesefisheriesmanagementplanswereconsideredbeyondthelifeoftheprojectandwerenotfinancedbytheGEFfundsandthereforeanydirectorindirectimpactsoftheseplanswerenotconsideredforsafeguardspurposes.

4.7 FinanceandCo-financereview

4.7.1 Financing

Nofinancialaudithastakenplaceaspartofthisevaluation,however,reportedexpenseshavebeenreviewedandcompartedwithbudgetedexpenses.Discussionswiththeimplementingagency,WWF-GEFconfirmedthattherewasnoproblemorissuewiththefinancialreportingfromCI,theexecutingagency,anditspartnerCPPS.

Table1showstheexpendituresasofDecember2018showinganestimated97%disbursementoftheGEFGrant.Withtheadditional“nocostextension”to31March2019itseemsreasonabletosuggestthatthetotalgrantwillbedispersedbytheclosureoftheproject.Therewerenomajor,beyond10%,alterationstoexpenditurebetweencomponents.

4.7.2 Extentofco-financerealizedtodate.

Table2showstheco-financingaccountedforuptoMarch2019.Finalco-financingreportshavebeenrequestedsinceNovember2018,however,nonecountrieshavegivenupdatessinceDecember2017.Itcanbeassumedthatbasedonyear1reportingtheprojectwilllikelyhavebenefitedfromco-financingcommittedfromtheETPScountries.Thelowco-fundingreportedbyColombiaandCostaRicamaynotreflectthetrueco-financingdisbursed,butratheralackforreporting.InCostaRica,forexample,partoftheco-financingwasattributedtothedevelopmentofthenewwetlandpolicywhichwasdevelopedin2017.Thedevelopmentincludedconsultations,workshopsanddraftinghavelikelyexceededtheamountaccountedforinTable2.Likewise,effortsandactivitiesinColombialikelyexceededtheamountaccountedfortodate.Overall,accountedco-financingaccountsfor90%ofcommittedfunds.Thisisaveryacceptableresultcomparedtootherprojects.

72Biotica(2017)PlandeManejoParaelUsoCustodiade1.843,00HectáresdeManglarSolicitadasporlaAsociacióndePescadoresArtesanalesForjadoresdelFuturoenelSectordePuertoelMorro,MinisteriodelAmbientedeEcuador,ConservaciónInternacionalEcuador,InstitutoHumanistaparalaCooperaciónconlosPaísesenDesarrollo,OrganizacióndelasNacionesUnidasparalaAlimentaciónylaAgriculturayFondoparaelMedioAmbienteMundial.Guayaquil,Ecuador,30August,2017.


34|P a g e

Table2:GEFGrantProjectExpendituretoDec2018

Expenditure to Dec 2018 Budgeted Balance % Execution Component 1 $ 472,330 $ 455,760 -$ 16,570 103.6 Component 2 $ 616,217 $ 575,613 -$ 40,604 107.1 Component 3 $ 610,866 $ 678,281 $ 67,415 90.1 Project Management Costs $ 125,701 $ 144,198 $ 18,497 87.2 Monitoring and Evaluation $ 27,928 $ 46,958 $ 19,030 59.5

TOTAL $ 1,853,042 $ 1,900,810 $ 47,768 97.5

Table3:Co-FinancingforETPSasofDecember2018

Organization Committed Accounted Dec 2018 % Complete

In-kind Cash Conservation International $237,025.00 $1,049,639.00 $1,861,168.00 145% CPPS $480,000.00 $20,000.00 $517,653.91 104% UNESCO-Quito $250,000.00 $250,000 100% MINAE-Costa Rica $210,000.00 $31,261.00 15% MiAmbiente Panama $125,000.00 $202,723.00 162% MADS Colombia $145,194.00 $29,635.00 20% MAE Ecuador $2,000,000 $1,177,782 59% Total Co-financing $1,447,219.00 $3,069,639.00 $4,070,223.00 90%

ETPSTerminalEvaluationReport 30April2019

35|P a g e

4.7.3 Financialmanagementoftheproject,withspecificreferencetothecost-effectivenessofinterventions;

Overalltherewerenospecificissuesrelatedtofinancialmanagement.Theprojectseemedwellmanaged,andindeedwithsuchvariedactivitiesrangingfromaregionalstrategytodevelopingamanagementguideinalocallanguageitisimpressive.Thehostingofmeetingsandabilitytoleveragecashco-financingallowedtheprojecttodelivertargetsinacosteffectivemanner.

AsdiscussedunderthesectiononEffectiveness,theGEFfundsdispersedinthisprojectwereverymuch“incremental”fundingtoexistinginitiativescentredaroundtheCI-ETPSprogram,theCPPS-CI-UNESCOmangroveregionalstrategydevelopment,andotherprograms.TheGEFgrantwasusedtoextendandenhancetheproducts.Inthisway,itwasaneffectiveuseoftheGEFgrant.

4.7.4 Utilizationofgrantfundsdistributedtoprojectpartners,including[insertpartners].

UnderComponent1fundsweredistributedtotheCPPStoorganiseandhostthegroupofexpertsandinternationallearningexchanges.FundsweretogotoUNESCO-Quitotoconductthecommunicationtools;however,problemsarosewhentryingtotransfermoneyformCIandintheendtheProjectCoordinatorassumedtheresponsibilities.

5 Conclusions,Recommendations&LessonsLearned

TheWWF-GEFETPSprojectwasverymuchanincremental,orcatalytic,projectbuildingonCI’sextensiveCI-ETPSproject(2005-2013),aswellastheSustainableDevelopmentOpenInitiative(UNESCOQuito-CPPS-CI)andtheMangroveandSustainableDevelopmentOpenInitiativeranfrom2013-2015.Assuchitwasabletoengagerapidly,oncefundingbecameoperational,andachievethemajorityofitsintendedtargets,exceedingthemforthemostpart.Attheregionalandnationallevels,theincrementalGEFfundingensuredthatactivitieswereenhanced.Forexample,byconveninganexpertworkinggrouponmangrovestheCPPSreviewoftheRegionalStrategyin2019nowhassignificantrecommendationsatatechnicallevelonissuessuchasintegratedplanningandvaluationofgoodsandservicesofmangroveeco-systems.Throughaseriesof20nationallevelworkshops,nationalregulationsandplanshavebeenenhanced,includingforexampletheinclusionoflocalcommunitystakeholdersinnationalreviewmeetingsinColombia,implementationofCostaRica’snationalplanwithrestorationprojectsintheGulfofNicoya,assistingdevelopmentof2018regulationsinPanamaandEcuadorincludedmangrovesintheirOrganicCode,andapprovedanewNationalMangrovePlaninFebruary2019.

Atthelocalcommunitylevel,theGEFfundingpermittedcontinuationofsomeactivities,suchasengagementwithco-managementoffisheriesbetweenthegovernmentandlocal


36|P a g e

communitiesinElMorro,Ecuador;andstimulatednewwork,suchastherestorationsitesintheGulfofNicoya,CostaRica,andGulfofTortugas,Colombia.

Theprojecthadmultiplestakeholdersatthelocal,nationalandregionallevelsandwashighlysuccessfulinitsstakeholderengagementprocess-alargepartofwhichmustbeattributedtotheextensiveexperienceofCIatthelocallevelwithcountrylevelstaff.Thelocalcommunitydemonstrationprojectswerewelldevelopedandhadreplicatingeffectsbyhaving2bi-lateralexchanges(EcuadorwithPanamaandColombia)andaregionallearningexchangefocusedonlocalcommunityexperiences.Thegendermainstreamingplanwasimplementedwiththeresultthatintheinternationallearningexchangesabout35%ofthespeakersandpanellistswerewomen,whichgiventhecontextoftheregionshouldbeconsideredasolidresult.

ThechoiceofCPPSasanexecutingpartnerhadmanyadvantages.Itsmandatecoversmangrovesandmarinemanagement,anditactsatthepoliticaldecisionmakinglevel.PeruandChilearealsomembersofCPPSandparticipatedinseveralworkshops,despitenothavingsubstantialmangroveareas.CostaRicaisnotamemberoftheCPPS,nevertheless,participatedfullyintheprojectattheregionallevel.

OveralltheprojectwaswellimplementedwithgoodcoordinationbetweentheexecutingandImplementingagencies.TheexperiencesofWWF-GEFwithprojectexecutioninitsownrightassistedprojectexecutionparticularlyinprojectoversight,includingtwosupervisionmissions,andcommunityengagement.

Buildingonitspreviouswork,theprojecthasmadeadvancementstowardstheintendedimpacts.Theenablingenvironmentformangroveconservationhasbeenimprovedthroughthedevelopmentoflegislation,managementplans,andcapacitybuildingfordecision-makers.Moreover,theprojectsupportedinterventionstressreductionandpossiblereversethenet>30%deforestationanddegradationtrendsobservedsincethe1960s.Monitoringmangroveimprovementsoveratwoyeartimeframeischallenging.Nevertheless,mangroves(approximately655,342haascollectivelyregisteredbynationalinventoriesfor2018)benefitedfrompolicyimprovementsandawarenessbuildingforlossreductionandrecovery.Managersandcommunitiesofthefourpilotsites/gulfsbenefittedfromtraining,withthreeconservationinitiativesencouragingdirectstewardshipbylocalcommunitieswithpotentialforreplication.(e.g.>5khabetweenELMorro,Ecuador,BazanBocana,Colombia,andstepstoimprovelandusepracticesin>110,000haofassociatedupstreamlandintheChiriquí-Gualacacorridor,Panama).

KeyGoodPracticesemergingfromtheprojectinclude:

4. Conductasocialsafeguardreviewduringprojectdevelopmenttoidentifyanypotentialissuesupfront.TwosafeguardreviewsandscreeningswereundertakenduringthePPGphase.ThefirstwithCI,andthenre-screenedwithanindependentexperttoensurecompliancewithWWF-GEF.Theindependentsocio-assessmentoftheAfro-ColombiancommunitiesintheTortugaGulfensuredthatduediligencewastakeninaddressissuessurroundingindigenouspeoples.CIgenderofficeralsoprovided


37|P a g e

trainingatthebeginningoftheproject.Socialsafeguardpoliciesarecomplexinnatureandtheirapplicationisnotasimpleprocedure.Inanyfutureproject,itwouldbevaluabletoconductsafeguardanalysisduringthedevelopmentstage,orearlyinprojectimplementation,andprovidetrainingforcountrylevelstaffandotherpartnersintermsofidentifyingandflaggingpotentialsafeguardissues.

5. Partneringwithpoliticallyexpedientinstitutions.CPPSwasakeypartnerassociatedwithdevelopingaregionalstrategyformangroveprotection,andprovedaveryeffectivemechanismtoadvancearegionalstrategy,whichincludedCostaRica–anonCPPSmember.CPPSwasabletofacilitateatthenationalandregionallevelbecauseofitsmandateandhistoryintheregion.Partneringwithsuchanestablishedinstitutioncanhelpdeveloppoliciesandregulationswithincountries.

6. Promotingcommunitytocommunitylearning.Theprojectwasverysuccessfulinbringingcommunitiestogethertoexchangeinformationandknowledgethroughspecifictargetedvisits,aswellasaregionalcommunityfocusedconference.Decisionmakersatthecommunitylevelwereabletoengagewitheachotherresultinginprofoundimpactontheirlearningandinterestinapplyingnewapproachestoconservation.

Recommendationsinclude:

7. Developindicatorsthatmatchthelevelofprojectcontrolintheirachievement.IndesigninganyfutureprojectcareshouldbetakenwithregardtochoosingindicatorsthatarecompatiblewiththelevelcontrolthatthePMUhasassociatedwithrespecttooutputs,outcomesandprojectimpacts.Cautionshouldbetakenwhensuggestingthatnewlegislationorregulationswillbedevelopedwithinthetimeframeofa2yearproject.Itisthusbettertohaveneworupdatedlegislationasalikelyoutcomeasopposedtoanoutput,overwhichtheprojectshouldhaveahighdegreeofcontrol.

8. Conductefforttoenhancefinancialsustainabilityofoutcomesinthenext0-5years.Thegovernmentshavecommittedtocontinueimplementationoftheirnationalpoliciesatthecountrylevel;however,fortheimpactsoftheprojecttobesustainedcontinuedattentionwillalmostcertainlybeneededfrominternationaldonorsandNGOs.Thisisparticularlylikelywithrespecttotheinvolvementoflocalcommunities,includingtheexchangeofideasandexperiencesbetweencommunities.Theriskatthelocallevelisthatthemomentumdevelopedduringtheprojectmaynotbesustaineduntilthereareeconomicbenefitsassociatedwithimplementinglocalmanagementplans.

9. Testpotentialpartnershiparrangementsinpreparatoryphaseofprojectdesign.UNESCO-Quitoasapartnerorganisationproveddifficulttofinanciallyadministerandresultedindelaysinthedeliveryofprojectoutputsforcommunication.Attentionshouldbegiveninadvancetoclarifyinghowfundscanbetransferredtopartnerorganisationstoensurethereisnorepetitionoftimelostandpotentialreductioninthequalityofthecommunicationorotherprojectproducts.Ifadirecttransfercannotbe


38|P a g e

accomplishedfromtheexecutingagencyitisrecommendedtoexploreseparatingoutaspecificcomponentwhichcanbeadministeredindependentlyofothers.

10. PromotetheGEFprofileinprojectproducts.CareshouldbetakentoensurethatGEFisprofiledonallrelevantproductswhereappropriate.ItisacknowledgedthatCImadeanefforttoacknowledgeGEFanditssupport.Itisunderstoodthatcertainpoliticallysensitiveproducts,suchaspoliciesorregulations,wouldnotnecessarilycontaindonorlogos,otherlesssensitiveandhighprofileproductssuchasvideosshouldwheneverpossible.Forexample,theinformationalvideofromtheGulfofNicoya,73didnotmentionGEF.

11. Useexistingknowledgeplatformstohelpshareknowledge(inparticularIW:LEARN).Theprojecthasdevelopedsomeproductsthatcouldbebeneficialtoawideraudience.ThedecisionofthePSCtomaintainfocusontheETPSregioninthe3rdlearningexchangewasimportanttoensurecoreprojectoutcomeswouldbemet.Nevertheless,projectsshouldplaceeffortonsharingtheexperiencesgainedintheETPSwithotherregions.WhilesomematerialsareaccessibleIW:LEARNsite,overallitcouldhavebeenusedmoreeffectively,forexamplewiththedevelopmentofexperiencenotesonapplyingpre-screeningforsafeguardsforexample.OpportunitiesforTwinningwithIW-LEARNweretakenadvantageof.

12. Buildtimeforapprovalsoftextsandproductsintoplanning.IttooklongertogainofficialapprovalfromtheETPScountriesthananticipatedresultingindelaystoseveralproducts.ThisshouldbebuiltintofutureprojectplanningworkingintheETPSregion.

73https://iwlearn.net/media/videos/29450

ETPSTEDraftReport 20April2019

39|P a g e

.


40|P a g e

6 AnnexA:TORofTE,includingevaluatorcompositionandexpertise

POSITIONDETAILSLocation CostaRica,Panamá,ColombiaandEcuadorReportingto JohnMorrisonStartingDate January,2019Duration Approximately25daysReportdue February-March,2019PROJECTDATAProject/ProgramTitle ImprovingmangroveconservationacrosstheEasternTropicalPacific

Seascape(ETPS)GEFProjectID 5771WWF(Agency)ProjectID G0011ImplementingAgency(s) WWFGEFProjectAgencyExecutingAgency ConservationInternationalExecutingPartner(s) PermanentCommissionfortheSouthPacific(CPPS);UNESCO-QuitoCountries CostaRica,Panama,ColombiaandEcuadorFocalArea(s) InternationalWatersGEFOperationalProgram GEF5TotalGEFApprovedBudget

$1,900,810.0

TotalCo-financingApproved

$4,516,858.0

RELEVANTDATESCEOEndorsement/Approval 7/18/2016

AgencyApprovalDate 9/23/2016ImplementationStart 9/23/2016ProjectCompletionDate 12/31/18(proposed)PRIMARYCONTACTINFORMATIONOffice Name(s)(Last,First) Email/PhoneExecutingAgency Banks,Stuart [email protected](WWF)

Morrison,JohnKaplan,Rachel

[email protected]@wwfus.org

OperationalFocalPoint(s) Miss.ValeskaYanez(Ecuador)Ms.LauraCamilaBermudezWilches(Colombia)Ms.EnidChaverri-Tapia(CostaRica)Ms.AntonellaFinis

[email protected]@[email protected]@miambiente.gob.pa

PartnerContact(s) Banks,Stuart [email protected] ChristianLavoie [email protected]


41|P a g e

INTRODUCTIONANDPROJECTOVERVIEW

WorldWildlifeFund,Inc.(WWF)policiesandproceduresforallGEFfinancedfullandmedium-sizedprojectsrequireaterminalevaluation(TE)uponcompletionofprojectimplementation.Thefollowingtermsofreference(TOR)setouttheexpectationsfortheTEfortheproject“ImprovingmangroveconservationacrosstheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)”,hereafterreferredtoasthe“Project”.Thetechnicalconsultantselectedtoconductthisevaluationwillbereferredtoas“evaluator(s)”throughoutthisTOR.ProjectBackgroundDespite a growing recognition of the importance of mangroves and themany key services they provide, anestimatedthirdofglobalcoveragehasbeenreducedinrecenthistorythroughdeforestationanddegradationofthecoastalbuffer.Thisdramatic loss isalready impactingcoastsgloballyas thenumerousecosystemservicesprovided bymangroves are reduced and lost. The ETPS region harbors the highest proportion of threatenedmangrovespeciesinSouthAmericaalongthePacificcoastsofCostaRica,Panama,ColombiaandEcuadorwithextensionsofsomeofthehighestestimatesforabovegroundmangrovebiomassontheplanet.ThisProjectwasdevelopedtoimplementacomprehensive,multi-governmentratifiedandregionallyarticulatedmangroveconservationstrategyintheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)countriesofCostaRica,Panama,ColombiaandEcuadorthroughon-the-groundmanagementactivitiesandthestrengtheningofnationalandlocalpoliciesthat informridge-to-reefdevelopmentplanningandpracticesrelevanttomangroveconservation.TheProjectwasorganizedaroundthefollowingthreecomponents:

• Regionalmangrovestrategydevelopmentandimplementation• Nationalmangroveactionplansandpolicystrengthening.• Localconservationactions

SCOPEANDOBJECTIVESFORTHEEVALUATION

WWFisseekinganindependentevaluatortoundertakeaTerminalEvaluationoftheProject.TheTEwillcovertheGEFfinancedcomponentsandreviewtheprojectco-financingdelivered.

Theobjectiveofthisevaluationistoexaminetheextent,magnitudeandsustainabilityofanyprojectimpactstodate;identifyanyprojectdesignproblems;assessprogresstowardsprojectoutcomesandoutputs;anddrawlessonslearnedthatcanbothimprovethesustainabilityofbenefitsfromthisprojectandaidintheenhancementoffuturerelatedprojects.

EVALUATIONAPPROACHANDMETHOD

Theevaluationwillcomplywiththeguidance,rulesandproceduresestablishedbyWWF74andtheGEFTerminalEvaluation75andEthicalGuidelines.76Theevaluationmustprovideevidence-basedinformationthatisuseful,independent,participatory,respectful,credible,transparent,andethical.Theevaluator(s)mustbeunbiasedandfreeofanyconflictsofinterestwiththeproject.Theevaluator(s)isexpectedtoreflectallstakeholderviewsand

74ForadditionalinformationonevaluationmethodsadoptedbyWWF,seetheWWFEvaluationGuidelines,publishedonourWWFProgramStandardspublicwebsite.75ForadditionalinformationontheGEFTerminalEvaluationGuidelines,seetheGEFTerminalEvaluationGuidelines,publishedontheGEFEvaluationOfficewebsite.76PleaseseetheGEFEthicalGuidelinesaspublishedonGEFwebsite.


42|P a g e

followaparticipatoryandconsultativeapproach.Thereshouldbecloseengagementwithgovernmentcounterparts,theGEFoperationalfocalpoint,theExecutingAgencyProjectManagementUnit(PMU),partnersandkeystakeholders.Contactinformationhasbeenprovidedonthecoverpage.

TheevaluatorwillliaisewiththeWWFGEFAgencyProjectManageraswellasthePMUProjectManagerforanylogisticaland/ormethodologicalneedsforthereview.AdraftreportwillbepreparedandcirculatedtoWWFGEFAgencyandtheexecutingofficetosolicitcommentsandsuggestions.

Thereviewprocesswillinclude:

A. Deskreviewconsistingof,butnotlimitedto:

• ProjectDocumentandCEOEndorsementLetter;• SupportMissionReport;• Relevantsafeguardsdocuments,includingsafeguardsCategorizationMemo,SocialAssessment,

BeneficiariesSelectionCriteriaDocument,etc;• AnnualWorkPlans(AWP)andBudgets;• ProjectProgressReports(PPR)includingResultsFrameworkandAWPTracking;• GEFAgencyreports,includingAnnualMonitoringReviews(AMR)andProjectImplementation

Reports(PIRs);• GEFTrackingTools;• Relevantfinancialdocuments,includingfinancialprogressreports;co-financingmonitoring

tablesandco-financinglettersfromgovernment;• Meetingminutes(ProjectSteeringCommittee(PSC))andrelevantvirtualmeetingswiththe

WWF-GEFAMUandsupportteam;and• OtherrelevantdocumentsprovidedbytheExecutingAgencyandpartners.

B. FieldvisitswithPMUtoprojectfieldsites;

C. Interviews,discussionsandconsultationsatlocallevels,nationalandinternationallevels,includingexecutingpartners,GEFOperationalFocalPoints(OFP),ProjectSteeringCommittee(PSC)membersandbeneficiaries;

D. Post-fieldvisitdebrief;

E. Draftreportnottoexceed40pages(excludingannexes)sharedwithGEFAMUandPMUforreviewandfeedback.Asampleoutlinewillbeprovided;and

F. FinalTEreportthathasincorporatedfeedbackandcomments.

TheWWFmethodologyforconductingprojectevaluationsisakeyelementofouradaptivemanagementapproach.Theevaluator(s)isexpectedtoframetheevaluationeffortusingthesix(6)corecriteriaofrelevance,effectiveness,efficiency,results/impact,sustainabilityandadaptivecapacity.DefinitionsofeachofthesecriteriaareavailableinAnnexA.Asampleofquestionscoveringeachofthesecriteriahasbeenprovided(AnnexB).Theevaluator(s)willprovidearatingonrelevance,effectivenessandefficiencytoassessthelevelofachievementofprojectobjectivesandoutcomes.Acompletedratingstablemustbeincludedintheevaluationexecutivesummary.AperformanceEvaluationRatingsSummarytemplatehasbeenprovided(AnnexB)withtheGEFrequiredratingscales.Asampleoutlineisprovided(AnnexC).


43|P a g e

EXPECTEDOUTPUTSOFEVALUATION

TheTerminalEvaluationreportwillinclude:

• Informationontheevaluation,includingwhentheevaluationtookplace,sitesvisited,participants,keyquestions,andmethodology;

• Keyfindingsbycorecriteria77;plusrationaleforeachcriteriaratingprovided.Shouldincludeidentificationofkeystrengths,challengesandshortcomings;

• Riskstothesustainabilityofprojectoutcomes;• ReviewofMonitoringandEvaluationsystems;• Replicationandcatalyticeffectsoftheproject;• AssessmentofalignmentwithWWFpriorities;• Assessmentofanyenvironmentalandsocialimpacts;• AssessmentofWWFGEFAgency,PMUandprojectpartners;• Lessonslearnedregarding:projectdesign(theoryofchange),objectives,andtechnicalapproach;useof

adaptivemanagement;administrationandgovernancearrangements;relevance;implementationoftheworkplan;achievementofimpact;etc;

• Conclusions,andrecommendationsthatinclude:recommendationsonbestpracticestowardsachievingprojectoutcomesandreplicationforotherprojectsofsimilarscope.

PROJECTFINANCE/COFINANCE

TheEvaluationwillassessthekeyfinancialaspectsoftheproject,includingtheextentofco-financingplannedandrealized.Theevaluator(s)willassesstheappropriatenessofandcompliancewithfinancialcontrols.Financialplanningandreportsshouldhavesupportedtimelydecisionmakingforeffectiveprojectmanagement.Cashflowsshouldhavebeentimelyandsufficienttosupporton-goingprojectactivities.Co-financingactualsshouldbereviewedagainstcommitments.Evidenceandverificationofduediligenceandcomplaintmanagementoffunds,includinganyfinancialauditsshouldalsobeassessed.

Projectcostandfinancialsourcedatawillberequired,includingannualexpenditurereports.Variancesbetweenplannedandactualexpenditureswillneedtobeassessedandexplainedintheevaluationreport.Resultsfromrecentfinancialaudits,asavailable,shouldbetakenintoconsideration.Theevaluator(s)willreceiveassistancefromtheexecutingofficetoobtainfinancialdatainordertocompletetheco-financingevaluation.

IMPLEMENTATIONARRANGEMENTS

TheprincipalresponsibilityformanagingthisevaluationresideswiththeWWF’sConservationStrategies&Measures(CSM)teamincoordinationwiththeWWFGEFProjectManager.TheCSMwillselectevaluator(s)andensurethetimelyreimbursement,approvetravelarrangements,andrespondtoquestionsconcerningthescopeandrequirementsfortheevaluation.ThePMUwillberesponsibleforliaisingwiththeEvaluator(s)tosetupstakeholderinterviews,arrangefieldvisits,coordinatewiththeGovernmentpartners,etc.

77AnacceptabletoolforgaugingprogresstoimpactistheReviewofOutcomestoImpacts(ROTI)methoddevelopedbytheGEFEvaluationOffice.AlinkisprovidedhereforreferenceROTIHandbook2009.


44|P a g e

EVALUATIONTIMEFRAMEThetotaldurationoftheevaluationwillbeapproximately25daysaccordingtothefollowingplan:

Activity NumberofDaysforEvaluator

Documentreviewandpreparationofinceptionreport 4

SubmissionofInceptionReport -Evaluationmission,stakeholderconsultationsandfieldvisits 13Debriefpresentationoninitialfindings 1DraftEvaluationReport 5FinalReport 2

EVALUATIONDELIVERABLES

Inadditiontothedeliverablesoutlinedbelow,theevaluator(s)isrequiredalsotoprovidean'audittrail',detailinghowfeedbackandcommentshavebeenaddressedinthefinalevaluationreport.PleasenotethattheevaluationteammaybecontactedbytheGEFPartnershipforuptothreeyearsaftercompletionoftheterminalevaluationforinformationrequests.

Deliverable Content Timing Responsibilities

InceptionReport

Evaluator(s)providesclarificationsontimingandmethod

Nolaterthan2weeksbeforetheevaluationmission.

Evaluator(s)submitstoWWFCSM

Presentationforverbalfeedback

InitialFindings Endofevaluationmission Evaluator(s)providestoPMU,EA,WWF,OperationalFocalPoints

DraftReport Fullreport,(perannexedtemplate)withannexes

Within3weeksoftheevaluationmission

EvaluatorsubmitstoCSM,reviewedbyPMU,EA,WWFoffice,WWFGEFProject,andGEFOFPs

FinalReport Revisedreport Within1weekofreceivingWWF’scommentsondraft

EvaluatorsubmitstoCSM

EVALUATIONTEAMQUALIFICATIONS

Theevaluator(s)shallhavepriorexperienceinevaluatingsimilarprojects.Theevaluator(s)selectedshouldnothaveparticipatedintheprojectpreparationand/orimplementationandshouldnothaveaconflictofinterestwithprojectrelatedactivities.

TheEvaluator(s)mustpresentthefollowingqualifications:

• Minimum7yearsofrelevantprofessionalexperience;• ExperiencewithGEFfinancedprojectsisanadvantage;• TechnicalknowledgeinGEFInternationalWatersanadvantage;


45|P a g e

• KnowledgeofGEFMonitoringandEvaluationPolicyisanasset;• RecentexperienceconductingEvaluationsorMid-termReviewsforGEFprojectsisanasset;• Previousexperiencewithresults-basedmonitoringandevaluationmethodologies;• ExperiencewithWWFProjectandProgramManagementStandardsorOpenStandardsforthePractice

ofConservation(www.cmp-openstandards.org)ispreferred;• Experiencewithsocialassessments,participatoryprojectdesignandmanagement,andcommunity-

basedresourcemanagementpreferred;• Knowledgeandexperienceinimplementingorreviewingapplicationofsocialandenvironmental

safeguardspoliciesinGEF(orsimilar)projectspreferred;• Spanishlanguageskillsarerequired;• ExperienceinSouthAmericaisanasset.

EVALUATORETHICSEvaluationconsultantswillbeheldtothehighestethicalstandards.EvaluationsareconductedinaccordancewithWWFprinciples78andthetermsandconditionsoftheconsultingagreement.

PAYMENTMODALITIESANDSPECIFICATIONSPayment,expensereimbursement,andothercontractualtermsandconditionsareoutlinedintheagreementmadebetweenWWFandtheevaluator(s).Paymentsareaccordingtodeliverablessubmitted.

APPLICATIONPROCESSApplicantsarerequestedtoapplyonline(insertsitelink)byJanuary7,2019.IndividualconsultantsareinvitedtosubmitapplicationstogetherwiththeirCVforthesepositions.ApplicationsshouldcontainacurrentandcompleteC.V.inEnglishwithcontactinformation.TheselectionofcandidatesandcontractualagreementswillbeincompliancewithWWFprocurementpolicies79andsubjecttoGEFrequirements.

WWFappliesafairandtransparentselectionprocessthatwilltakeintoaccountthecompetencies/skillsoftheapplicantsaswellastheirfinancialproposals.Womenandmembersofsocialminoritiesareencouragedtoapply.

78WWFmaintainsprinciplesforethicalconductandconflictsofinterestthathavebeenarticulatedintopoliciesforemployees.Theseprinciplesforconductandprofessionalismareappliedtoexternalconsultantsconductingevaluations.79WWFProcurementPolicy


46|P a g e

ANNEXA:EVALUATIONCRITERIA

CriteriaforOverallEvaluationofProject

TheevaluationshouldassesstheprojectagainstthefollowingGEFandWWFProjectandProgramManagementStandards(OpenStandards)criteria:

1. Relevance–theextenttowhichtheprojectdesign,outcomes,indicatorsandtargetsremainvalidandconsistentwithlocalandnationaldevelopmentprioritiesandorganizationalpolicies,includingthecontextofthechangingcircumstancesofthecountry(e.g.politicalcontext);

2. Effectiveness-theextenttowhichtheoutputs,outcomesandprojectobjectivehavebeenorarelikelytobeachieved,takingintoaccounttheirrelativeimportance.Identifythemajorfactorswhichhavefacilitatedorimpededthisachievement.Reviewthemanagementstructureoftheprojectanddeterminewhethertheorganizationalstructureoftheproject,theresources,thedistributionofresponsibilitiesandcoordinationmechanismsareappropriateforachievingprogresstowardsprojectoutcomes;

3. Efficiency-theextenttowhichresultshavebeendeliveredwiththeleastcostlyresourcespossible.Thisincludesefficiencyof:fundingavailability,projectmanagementandhumanresources,coordinationandinformationflowamongtheprojectpartners;

4. Results/Impact–theextentofintendedorunforeseeneffectsthatprojectinterventionsorstrategieswillhaveontheprojectobjective,conservationtargetsandGEFglobalenvironmentalbenefits,whetherpositiveornegative.Assesstheproject’slogicortheoryofchangeandthepotentialtoscaleuporreplicatetheprojectoutcomesandimpact.

5. Sustainability-thelikelyabilityofaninterventiontocontinuetodeliverbenefits,progressandimpactafterexternalsupporthasended.Determinethedegreeofsupportandbuy-ingiventotheprojectatthenationalandlocallevel;

6. Adaptivecapacity–theextenttowhichtheuseofM&E,lessonslearnedandadaptivemanagementareusedtomeetindicatortargetsandmitigateprojectissues(suchasdesignflawsoranyadverseimpactsoftheproject).

ANNEXB:EVALUATIONRATINGSSAMPLESUMMARYTABLE1.AssessmentofProjectObjectives&Outcomes RemarksWereprojectoutcomesRelevantwhencomparedtofocalareastrategies,countrypriorities,andWWFstrategies?

HowdoyouassesstheEffectivenessofprojectoutcomes?Weretheactualoutcomescommensuratewiththeexpectedoutcomes?Ifassessmentofoutcomeachievementsisnotrealistic,outputachievementcanbeusedasaproxy.

Howdoyouassesstheachievementofanticipatedlong-termimpactsoftheproject?


47|P a g e

Ifitisnotpossibletoidentifytheimpactsjustyet,pleaseprovidenotesonpastorfuturestepstoassesstheseimpactsandhowthesefindingswillbereportedtoGEFinthefuture.HowdoyouassessprojectcostEfficiency?

• Didtheprojectusetheleastcostoptions?Ifnot,didtheychosethemostefficientcostoptionsavailable?

• Didanydelaysinimplementationaffectcosteffectiveness?• Evaluatorsshouldcomparecostsincurredandthetimetakento

achievetheoutcomeswithothersimilarprojects.

OverallRatingofProjectObjectives&Outcomes*80 Rating Justification81Usingabovecriteria,pleaseprovideanoverallrating82fortheachievementoftheProjectObjectiveandoutcomes.Thisassessmentshouldanalyzeboththeachievementandshortcomingsoftheseresultsasstatedintheprojectdocument.83

2.AssessmentofRisks84toSustainability85ofProjectOutcomesPleasedescribetheserisksbelow,takingintoaccountlikelihoodandmagnitude:

RatingperRiskCategory86

FinancialRisks

SociopoliticalRisks

80Asterix(*)denotesGEFrequirement.81Theevaluatorshouldbeobjectiveandprovidesufficientjustificationwithempiricalevidencetosupporttheratinggiven. 82Pleaseusetheratingcriteriaprovidedonthefollowingpage.83Ifanychangesweremadetotheseresults,pleaseindicatewhentheyweremadeandwhetherthosechangeswereapproved.84Risksareinternalorexternalfactorsthatarelikelytoaffecttheachievementofprojectoutcomes.Inthiscontext,pleaseconsiderhowtheseriskscouldaffectthesustainabilityorpersistenceofprojectoutcomes.Pleasefeelfreetolistindividualrisksforeachcategory(financial,sociopolitical,etc.)andprovideacorrespondingassessmentonlikelihoodandmagnitudeforeachofthese.Thiswillhelpyouinformingyouroverallratingofsustainabilityofprojectoutcomes.85Sustainabilityisdefinedby2010GEFM&EPolicyas:thelikelyabilityofaninterventiontocontinuetodeliverbenefitsforanextendedperiodoftimeaftercompletion;projectsneedtobeenvironmentallyaswellasfinanciallyandsociallysustainable.86Overallratingforsustainabilitywillnotbehigherthanthelowestrateddimension.Forexample,ifaprojecthasan“unlikely”ratinginanydimension,itsoverallratingcannotbehigherthan“unlikely.”Forfurtherguidance,seetheGEFTerminalEvaluationGuidelines


48|P a g e

InstitutionalFrameworkandGovernanceRisks EnvironmentalRisks

OverallRatingofSustainabilityofProjectOutcomes Rating87

Justification

Usingabovecriteria,pleaseprovideanoverallratingfortheriskstosustainabilityofprojectoutcomes.

3.AssessmentofM&ESystems RemarksM&EDesign–WastheM&EplanattheCEOendorsementpracticalandsufficient?DidtheM&Eplanincludebaselineconsiderations,88datasources,collectionmethodologies,assumptions,appropriateandSMARTindicatorsandtargets,andasystemforstoring,analyzingandsharingdata?

BudgetingandFundingforM&EActivities–WasthebudgetforM&Eadequateattheplanningstage?Wasthebudgetutilizedinatimelyandefficientmannerformonitoringduringimplementation?

Monitoringoflongtermchanges-Didthisprojectcontributetotheestablishmentofalong-termmonitoringsystem?Ifitdidnot,shouldtheprojecthaveincludedsuchacomponent?Whatweretheaccomplishmentsandshortcomingsinestablishmentofthissystem?Isthesystemsustainable–thatis,isitembeddedinaproperinstitutionalstructureanddoesithavefinancing?Istheinformationgeneratedbythissystembeingusedasoriginallyintended?

M&EPlanImplementation–WasanM&Esystemandprocessinplacetotrackprojectprogresstowardsoutcomes?Diditfacilitatetransparency,sharingandadaptivemanagement?Assessthequalityofimplementationandtherolemonitoringplayedintheadaptationandimplementationofprojectactivities.Didprojectmanagementensureappropriateinstitutionalandfinancialarrangementstoensuredataonlong-termimpactswillcontinueafterprojectclosure?

87Usingtheratingsforeachriskcategory,pleaseusetheSustainabilityRatingCriteriatoprovideanoverallSustainabilityofProjectOutcomesrating.Theevaluatorshouldbeobjectiveandprovidesufficientjustificationwithempiricalevidencetosupporttheratinggiven. 88AccordingtoGEFTerminalEvaluationGuidelines,ifthereisnotaprojectbaseline,theevaluatorshouldseektoestimatethebaselineconditionssoachievementsandresultscanbeproperlydetermined.


49|P a g e

OverallRatingofM&EDuringImplementation89 Rating JustificationUsingaboveinformationasguidance,pleaseprovideanoverallratingforM&Eduringprojectimplementation.

AchievementRatingCriteria:

• Highlysatisfactory(HS)-Theprojecthadnoshortcomingsintheachievementofitsobjectivesintermsofrelevance,effectiveness,orefficiency.

• Satisfactory(S)-Theprojecthadminorshortcomingsintheachievementofitsobjectivesintermsofrelevance,effectiveness,orefficiency.

• Moderatelysatisfactory(MS)-Theprojecthadmoderateshortcomingsintheachievementofitsobjectivesintermsofrelevance,effectiveness,orefficiency.

• Moderatelyunsatisfactory(MU)-Theprojecthadsignificantshortcomingsintheachievementofitsobjectivesintermsofrelevance,effectiveness,orefficiency.

• Unsatisfactory(U)-Theprojecthadmajorshortcomingsintheachievementofitsobjectivesintermsofrelevance,effectiveness,orefficiency.

• Highlyunsatisfactory(HU)-Theprojecthadsevereshortcomingsintheachievementofitsobjectivesintermsofrelevance,effectiveness,orefficiency.

Sustainability/RiskRatingCriteria:

• Likely(L)-Therearenoornegligiblerisksthataffectthisdimensionofsustainability.• Moderatelylikely(ML)-Therearemoderaterisksthataffectthisdimensionofsustainability.• Moderatelyunlikely(MU)-Therearesignificantrisksthataffectthisdimensionofsustainability.• Unlikely(U)-Therearesevererisksthataffectthisdimensionofsustainability.

M&ERatingcriteria:

• Highlysatisfactory(HS).TherewerenoshortcomingsintheprojectM&Esystem.• Satisfactory(S).TherewereminorshortcomingsintheprojectM&Esystem.• Moderatelysatisfactory(MS).ThereweremoderateshortcomingsintheprojectM&Esystem.• Moderatelyunsatisfactory(MU).ThereweresignificantshortcomingsintheprojectM&Esystem.• Unsatisfactory(U).ThereweremajorshortcomingsintheprojectM&Esystem.• Highlyunsatisfactory(HU).TheprojecthadnoM&Esystem.

AdditionalguidanceregardingtheevaluationcriteriaandratingsforeachdimensioncanbefoundinintheGEFTerminalEvaluationGuidelines.

ANNEXC:EVALUATIONREPORTOUTLINE90

89TheoverallratingofM&EduringprojectimplementationwillbebasedsolelyonthequalityofM&Eplanimplementation.TheratingsonqualityatentryofM&Edesignandsufficiencyoffundingduringplanningandimplementationwillbeusedasexplanatoryvariables.90TheReportlengthshouldnotexceed40pagesintotal(notincludingannexes).


50|P a g e

i. Openingpage:• TitleofWWFsupportedGEFfinancedproject• WWFandGEFprojectsummarytable(page1TOR)• Evaluationteammembers• Acknowledgements

ii. ExecutiveSummary• ProjectSummaryTable• ProjectDescription(brief)• EvaluationRatingTable• Summaryofconclusions,recommendationsandlessons

iii. AcronymsandAbbreviations1. IntroductiontoEvaluation

• Purposeoftheevaluation• Scope&Methodology• Limitationsoftheevaluation• Structureoftheevaluationreport

2. Projectdescriptionanddevelopmentcontext• Projectstartandduration• Mainstakeholders• Problemsthattheprojectsoughttoaddress• OutcomesandProjectObjectiveoftheproject• Discussionofbaseline(ofindicators)• ExpectedResults

3. Findings(Allcriteriamarkedwith(*)mustberated91)3.1 ProjectDesign/Formulation

• AnalysisofResultsFrameworkandtheoryofchange(Projectlogic/strategies/indicators)

• Assumptionsandrisks• Lessonsfromotherrelevantprojectsincorporatedintoprojectdesign• Replicationapproach• WWFcomparativeadvantage(ifapplicable)• Linkagesbetweenprojectandotherinterventionswithinthesector• Governanceandmanagementarrangements• Countryownership

3.2 ProjectImplementation

• Adaptivemanagement

91Usingasix-pointratingscale:6:HighlySatisfactory,5:Satisfactory,4:MarginallySatisfactory,3:MarginallyUnsatisfactory,2:Unsatisfactoryand1:HighlyUnsatisfactory,seeAnnexBforsummaryformatsample.


51|P a g e

• Partnershiparrangements(withrelevantstakeholdersinvolvedinthecountry/region)

• FeedbackfromM&Eactivitiesusedforadaptivemanagement• Monitoringandevaluation:designatentryandimplementation(*)• WWFandImplementingPartnerimplementation/execution(*)coordination,and

operationalissues• AlignmentwithWWFandCountrypriorities

3.3 ProjectAssessment

• Relevance(*)• Effectiveness• Efficiency(*)• Overallresults(attainmentofobjectives)(*)/Impact• Sustainability(*)• Adaptivecapacity

3.43.4 GenderEqualityandMainstreaming

• Assessimplementationofthegenderanalysisandgendermainstreamingstrategy• AssessgenderinclusionasperWWFandGEFgenderpolicies.

3.5 StakeholderEngagement

• Evaluatestakeholderengagementand(ifGEF-7)assesstheimplementationoftheStakeholderEngagementPlan.

3.6 SafeguardsReview• Assessprojectactivitiesforanysocialandenvironmentalimpacts• Assessimplementationofthebeneficiarycriteriadevelopedduringproject

preparationforsiteselectionandcommunitygrants;• Assessanyindirectordirectprojectimpactsrelatedtoaccessrestrictiontonatural

resources.

3.7 FinanceandCo-financereview• Extentofco-financerealizedtodate.Takeintoaccount:sourcesofco-financing,

nameofco-financer,typeofco-financing,amountconfirmedatCEOendorsement,approval,actualamountmaterializedatmidtermandactualamountmaterializedatclosing;

• Financialmanagementoftheproject,withspecificreferencetothecost-effectivenessofinterventions;and

• Utilizationofgrantfundsdistributedtoprojectpartners.

4. Conclusions,Recommendations&Lessons• Proposedcorrectiveactionsforthedesign,implementation,monitoringand

evaluationoftheproject


52|P a g e

• Actionstofollowuporreinforceinitialbenefitsfromtheproject• Proposalsforfuturedirectionsunderliningmainobjectives• Bestandworstpracticesinaddressingissuesrelatingtorelevance,performanceand

success.

5. Annexes• TORofTE,includingevaluatorcompositionandexpertise• ItineraryofTE(PMUandfieldvisits)• Geo-referencedmapsandphotosofprojectsites• Listofpersonsinterviewed• Summaryoffieldvisits• Listofdocumentsreviewed• EvaluationQuestionMatrix• Questionnaireusedandsummaryofresults• ResponsefromPMUand/orOFPregardingTEfindings• EvaluationConsultantAgreementForm


53|P a g e

7 AnnexB:StrategicResultsFramework

Objective: Toimplementacomprehensive,multi-governmentratifiedandregionallyarticulatedmangroveconservationstrategyintheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)countriesofCostaRica,Panama,ColombiaandEcuadorthroughon-the-groundmanagementactivitiesandthestrengtheningofnationalandlocalpoliciesthatinformridge-to-reefdevelopmentplanningandpracticesrelevanttomangroveconservation.

Indicator(s): a.Officialendorsementofaregionallyarticulatedmulti-governmentmangroveconservationandsustainabledevelopmentplanbythefourETPScountries(CostaRica,Panama,Colombia,Ecuador)withacoordinatedactionplantorestoreandprotectmangrovesystemsbeyondthefundedscopeofthetwoyearproject.

b.Atleast2ETPScountrieshaveimprovedlegislationgoverningnationalridge-to-reefspatialplanning(e.g.upstreamwatershedmanagement)suchthatthemangrovesintheETPSregion(estimatedcollectivelyat736,000ha(afterGirietal.2011))aresubjecttoanimprovedpolicyconducivetomangroveconservation.

c.Atleast2examplesofsupportedlocalprivateand/orcommunitybasedmangroveinitiativesthatstrengthenlocalplanning,improveawarenessofkeyissues,buildlocalcapacity,reducemangrovedegradation,instigatereforestation,andimprovetheretentionofecosystemgoods,serviceswitheconomicandculturaldividendsforsustainablesocieties.

ExpectedOutcomes

andIndicatorsProjectBaseline EndofProjectTarget

ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators

Component1:Regionalmangrovestrategydevelopmentandimplementation

Outcome1.1.:

ThefourETPScountriesadoptandadvancetheregionalstrategyfortheconservationofmangroveselaboratedbytheComisiónPermanentedelPacífico

Base-Line1.1.:

ThefourETPScountriesdonotshareacommonstrategyformangroveconservation.

Effortsareunderwaytoevaluatethestatusandvalueofmangrove

Target1.1.:

CPPSwithinits'regionalplanningfortheSouthPacificNationsdevelopsaRegionalOpenMangroveInitiativePlan.ThePlanis

Output1.1.1.:

AMangroveTechnicalWorkingGroup/networkcomprisedofleadingmangroveexpertsiscreatedwithinCPPStoadviseonthe


54|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators

Sur(PermanentCommissionfortheSouthPacificorCPPS)toimplementkeymangroveconservationandrestorationmeasuresidentifiedinthisprojectbyY2Q4.

OutcomeIndicator1.1.:

AregionalstrategyapprovedbyandpublishedfortheappropriateauthoritiesofthefourETPScountriesbyY2Q1.RecommendationsforrevisedstrategybyY2Q4.(inclfromPIR1)

ecosystemsineachETPScountry,andframenationalmangroveconservationinthecontextofinternationalconventionsandcommitmentssuchasUNFCCCandCBD.Theseeffortsstillremainrelativelyisolatedendeavorsoftenmissingthesciencetoactiontechnicaljustificationorscaleofeffecttoconsiderupstreamridge-to-reefprocessessuchaswatershedmanagementthatinfluencesites.

DespiteincreasingglobalandnationalawarenessoftheimportanceofmangroveforestedareasintheETPSregion(e.g.significantcarbonsequestration,multipleecologicalgoodsandservicesprovidedtolocalandnationalcommunities),deforestationremainsatanestimated1-2%/yearacrosstheregion.

supportedandvalidatedbyaninternationaltechnicalworkinggroupconvenedbyCPPS,andisapproved,publishedandimplementedthroughmembercountryActionPlansaspartoftheirnationalmangrovestrategy.

Inthemid-termtheregion-wideimplementationofthePlanpromotescoordinatedactions,cross-learning,anincreaseinawarenessformangrovesustainabledevelopmentandadvancespolicydevelopment.ConceptswithintheregionalplansuchasEBMridge-to-reefplanningandtrans-learningfortheconservationandrestorationofmangroveecosystemservicesandsupportedsustainablesocietiesareconsideredwhererelevantinthedevelopmentofnewnationalpolicy.

Inthelong-termpolicychangesreinforcethe

completionoftheregionalstrategyfortheconservationofmangrove.

OutputIndicator1.1.1.:

AMangroveTechnicalWorkingGroupisconvenedbyY1Q3aspartoftheCPPSOperatingPlanwitha2015-2017+commitment.

Output1.1.2.:

AtleasttwomeetingsofaMangroveTechnicalWorkingGroupareheldtocontributetoregionalstrategyfortheconservationofmangrove.


#TechnicalWorkingGroupMeetingsgeneratingrecommendationstowardsimprovedregionalmangroveconservationstrategybyY2Q2.

Output1.1.3.:

TheupdatedregionalstrategyfortheconservationofmangrovesisratifiedbyMinisteriallevelauthoritiesandpublished.


55|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators

benefitsofprivateand/orcommunityledconservationprogramsandspatialplanningmeasuresthatreducemangrovedegradationandreduceorreversedeforestationtrends.Asaresultrisktothreatenedmangrovebiodiversityisreduced,climatechangemitigationaffordedthroughcarbonsequestrationimprovesandnaturalcoastaldefensesarestrengthened.


#ETPScountrygovernmentsthatofficiallyendorsearegionalstrategycompatiblewiththeirNationalPlanningInstrumentsandpoliciesbyY2Q1.

Outcome1.2.:

CostaRicaviatheMinistryofEnvironment,attendstheofficialinvitationfromCPPStoparticipateinthedevelopmentoftheregionalstrategyfortheconservationofthemangrovesbyY1Q3.


CostaRicaisanactiveparticipatingmemberoftheCPPSOpenInitiativeforMangroveConservationandSustainableDevelopment.

Base-Line1.2.:

CostaRicaisnotaparticipatingmemberoftheCPPScommissionunderwhichtheprojectregionalframeworkisbeingdeveloped.

CostaRicahasnationalmangroveinitiativesunderwayofrelevancetotheregionalproject(e.g.MINAEandSINAC2014-19#4966GEF-PNUDgrantforwetlandconservation).

Target1.2.:

CostaRicabecomesafullparticipatingmemberoftheRegionalMangroveActionPlantechnicalforumandGEFETPSProjectSteeringCommittee,activelycontributingtoandbenefitingfrom,knowledgesharing/transferandconservationincentivesaffordedbytheRamsarMangroveandCoralStrategyandCPPSOpenMangroveInitiativeforConservationand

Output1.2.1.:

OfficialletterofconfirmationfromCostaRica’sMinistryofEnvironmentratifyingCostaRica’sparticipationinthedevelopmentofaregionalstrategyfortheconservationofmangrovesbyY1Q3.


CPPS-CostaRicaagreementsignedwithCPPSbeforeY1Q3.


56|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators

sustainabledevelopment.

Theresultingregionalstrategyismorerobust,whilebeingcoherentbetweenETPScountries,strategiesfordesignatedRamsarsitesandeffectiveinmeetinginternationalbiodiversitycommitments.TheETPScountriesmutuallybenefitfromcounterpartfinancing,complementaryactionsandnewopportunitiesleveragedduringregionalinterchanges.

Outcome1.3.:

Policymakersandnationalmangrovemanagersfromatleastthreecountrieshavethetoolsandcapacitytostrengthentheimplementationoftheregionalmangrovestrategy.


#ofcountriesthathavetoolsgeneratedbytheprojectthatassistandinformintegratedregionalandnationalplanning(byY2Q4),

Base-Line1.3.:

Decisionmakersresponsibleformangroveconservationandsustainabledevelopmentareveryreceptivetosoundtechnicalandscientificsupportthathelpsconsolidatecoordinatedactionsintheregion.

TheETPSmangrovecoastalareasaremanagedunderdifferentnationalregimesthatreflecttheirdevelopmenthistory.Theexistingresourcesavailabletopolicy

Target1.3.:

Policymakersandmangroveresourcemanagersbenefitfromcapacitybuildingviatheprojectinatleast3countries.Theybenefitfromaccesstothetechnicaladviceandtoolsnecessarytorationalizeandimplementimprovementsinnationalmangroverelatedpolicyandaddresspolicygaps.Thisencouragesaprogressiveregionalagendathatimproves

Output1.3.1.:

AtleasttwoETPStrans-boundarylearningandcooperationexchangesbetweenprojectcountriesandatleastoneinternationalexchangewithothercountrieswithsimilarmangroveconservationchallengescompletedbyY2Q4.


#ofthoughtleaderstrainedpercountryactivelyworkinginaspectsofmangrove


57|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators

availableto4ETPScountries

makersacrosstheregionaddressbase-lineunderstanding,publicawareness,prioritizationmethods,inter-sectororganization,financemechanismsandordinationofresourceuse.

Materialsandtoolsproduceddirectlyinsupportofpolicyimprovementsaremostlyspecifictoeachcountryandarelimitedinthethematicareasofclimatechangeandblueforesttechnologies,policyformangroverestoration,territorialridge-to-reefplanningandenvironmentaleducation.

overallmangrovehealthintheETPSregion.

Apracticalsharedreferencebaseisavailabletodecisionmakersbeyondthelifetimeoftheproject.Outreach,cross-learningopportunitiesandknowledgesharingduringtheprojectconsolidatesmangroveconservation"know-how"acrosstheETPSregion.

policyandresourceplanningbyY2Q4.

Output1.3.2.:

Communicationproductsonmangroveconservation(policy,regulations,fieldimplementationandotherrelatedissues)willbecompletedandmadeavailabletopolicymakersandstakeholdersbyY1Q3.


%completionofcommunicationproducts(asdescribedinSection2.13ofProDoc)byY2Q4.

Component2:Nationalmangroveactionplansandpolicystrengthening.

Outcome2.1.:

AtleasttwoETPScountrieshaveupdatednationalmangroveactionplansinlinewiththeregionalstrategythataddressespressureonmangrovesfromsourcesacrosstheridge-to-reef(watershed)scalebyY2Q4.

Base-Line2.1.:

Ingeneralecosystembasedmanagementthatintegratesupstreamprocessessuchaswatershedmanagementandotherridge-to-reefteleconnectionsarenottraditionallyrepresentedinnationalplanningformangroves.Instead,spatialplanningisoftenundertakenbydifferent

Target2.1.:

Nationalregulationsandnationalmangroveactionplansareimprovedandmadeconsistentwiththeregionalmangrovestrategy,suchthatpriorityPacificmangrovesareputunderanimprovedpolicyconducivetomoreeffectiveon-the-

Output2.1.1.:

UpdatednationalmangroveactionplansareformallyratifiedinatleasttwoETPScountries.


#ofupdatedandratifiednationalmangroveactionplans


58|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators


#ofETPScountryupdatednationalplanssupportedbytheregionalmangrovestrategy.

agenciesandtailoredtotheneedsofthedifferentlocalpopulatedcenters/divisions.

EachETPScountryisworkingtodeveloptheirmangroveandwetlandstrategies.

CostaRica:Developingawetlandnationalstrategyinto2017whichincludesanupdatedinventoryofnationalmangroveareas.

Panama:DevelopinganationalmangrovestrategywhichhasyettobeimplementedandadjustedinthecontextofanewEnvironmentMinistryin2015.

Colombia:Alreadyprohibitsthedeforestationofmangroveresourcesandhasgrantedcertainconcessionaryrightstocommunitiesbuthasnotyetdevelopedaspecificnationalmangroveactionplan.

Ecuador:Currentlydraftingafirstnationalmangroveactionplan.MAEhasimplementedasuccessfulconcessionprogramknownas"sociomanglares"whichwouldbenefitfroma

groundconservationbyY2Q4.

CostaRicaincorporatesridge-to-reefprocessesasrelevantupstreamwatershedprocessesintotheirwetlandconservationstrategy.

PanamaANAMandARAPauthoritiescombineintoanewministrywherenewcompetenciesareestablishedthatimproveeffectivewetlandpolicydevelopment.

Colombia:ProjectinputssupportNationallaw1450tobeestablishedinto2015towardsimprovedmangroveconservationstrategies.

Ecuador:TheregionalactionplancontributestotheapplicationoftheEcuadorNationalPlanforWell-Being(Buenvivir).

(andindevelopment)byY2Q4.


59|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators

viablelongtermfinancingmechanism.

Outcome2.2.:

AtleasttwoETPScountrieshavepassedstrongerregulationsandincentivesconducivetomangroveconservation.


#ofcountrieswithstrongerregulationsorincentivesthatimprovemangroveconservationunderwayandestablishedatthenationallevelbyY2Q4.

Base-Line2.2.:

ExistingregulationsandtheireffectiveimplementationvarybetweenETPScountry:

CostaRica:ForestLaw7575(1996)outlawedallmangroveextractionandsuspendedalllicensingforadditionalshrimpaquaculture,butdoesnotyetconsiderland-usepracticeaffectingupstreamwatershedprocesses.Usesarerestrictedtotourism,educationandinvestigationcomplicatingmanagementinhistoricallyfishedareas.

Panamá:GeneralEnvironmentalLawNo.41(1998)andrecentresolutions(2008)requirespecialpermitswithfinesforanyusethatcouldaffectmangroves.Unfortunatelyurbandevelopmentapprovedin2011resultedinthedestructionofextensivemangroveareas,includinginRamsarlistedwetlands.

Target2.2.:

Nationalthreatassessmentexercisesandtrans-boundaryknowledgeexchangesleadtomoreeffectiveregulationsgoverningridge-to-reefprocessesimpactingmangroveareasinatleasttwooftheETPScountries.Changesinpolicyandnationalsustainabledevelopmentprogramsacttoreducethelikelihoodofcontinuedmangrovedegradation,encouraginginsteadreforestation.

Positiveeffectsofintegratedridge-to-reefplanningpropagatetolocalscales.Thisprovidesmoreeffectivenurseryhabitat,foodsecurity,waterqualityandcoastaldefensesarebolstered.Communitieswithinandaroundtheresourceshifttowardssustainablemangrovebasedlivelihoodswithsocialandeconomicbenefitsthatimprovecommunitywell-being.

Output2.2.1:

AnationalmangrovepolicyandthreatassessmentforeachETPScountrytoorienteconomicvaluationwork,informspolicygaps,andidentifiesoutreachneedsandprioritiesineachETPScountry,completedbyY1Q4.


#ofETPScountrieswithanupdated(postPPG)mangrovebase-line,nationalpolicyandthreatassessmentbyY1Q4.

Output2.2.2.:

LegislationpassedtostrengthentheprotectionofmangrovesinatleasttwoETPScountriescompletedbyY2Q4.


#ofneworupdatedpoliciescontainingelementsattributableto


60|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators

Colombia:AmendedResolution1602(1996)specificallyoutlawsmangrovedestructioninallnationalprovincesandrequirelicensesforanyactivitiesthatcouldnegativelyaffectmangroves.PracticalapplicationthoughislimitedacrosshighpovertycommunitiesalongthePacificcoastwheredeforestationratesarehighest.Law1450(2011)undertheNationalDevelopmentPlanlaterprohibitedminingandaquacultureindustriesinmangrovesystems.AfurthermangrovespecificresolutionisplannedbyMADSfor2015.

Ecuador:Resolution56establishesafineof$89,273USDperhectareformangrovedestruction.Concessionsagreementsacross~50Khaofmangrovehavebeengrantedtolocalcommunitiesoverthelast5years.

TargetsfornationalplanningdiscussedwithlocalauthoritiesduringthePPGwillbeconfirmedduringprojectstart-up.Theseincluded:

• Clarifiedtenureanduserightsforlocalcommunities;

• Improvedupstreamwatershedmanagement;

• Stricterpollutioncontrols;

• MandatoryEnvironmentalImpactAssessments;

• Mangroveclimateadaptationcriteriainnationalplans;

• Nationalincentiveschemesforeffectivemanagement;

• Afinancialsustainabilitymechanismforconcessionprograms;

theprojectnationalassessmentexercises.


61|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators

• Strengtheningofmarineprotectednetworksandbiologicalcorridors;

• Morestringentfinesforillegalmangrovedestruction.

Component3:Localconservationaction.

Outcome3.1.:

Atleasttwokeymangroveecosystemshaveupdatedmanagementplansand/ornewlocaldevelopmentplansconsistentwithupdatednationalandregionalstrategies,takingintoaccounttheresultsofeconomicvaluationstudiesfromthisandrelatedprojectsandbuildingonincreasednationalcapacityandsupporttoprotectmangrovesinacomprehensiveridge-to-reefcontextbyY2Q4.


Base-Line3.1.:

Thedemonstrationsitesinthisprojectareadjacenttocommunitiesforwhichmanagementplansarebeingdevelopedorimproved:

Chira,GulfofNicoya(CostaRica)

Managementactionsarelargelyorganizedbyprivateenterprises(women'scollectiveswithinthecommunity).AResponsibleFishingMarineAreawasdesignatedandadoptedbythePalitocommunityAsopecupachiCooperativein2012.

David,GulfofChiriquí(Panamá);

Target3.1.:

LocalpolicyandmanagementplansarestrengthenedineachsiteandmadeconsistentwithnationalplansandtheregionalmangrovestrategyinatleasttwoofthelocalsitesofChira(CostaRica),David(Panama),BahiaMalaga(Colombia)and/orElMorro(Ecuador)thathavefieldconservationmeasuresunderwaytoreducedegradationandincreasemangrovecoveragethroughrestorationefforts.

Targetsforlocalplanningdiscussed

Output3.1.1.:

Atleasttwolocalmanagementplansand/orlocaldevelopmentplansforprioritymangrovesitesareformallyratifiedbylocalauthoritiesbyY2Q4.


#ofimprovedsitelevelmanagementplansorlocaldevelopmentplansineffectbyY2Q4and/or%completion.


62|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators

#ofsitelevelmanagementorlocaldevelopmentplansgeneratedwithstakeholdersdirectlyandindirectlyasaresultofprojectdevelopments.

CI-Panamahasbeenworkinginconsultationwithlocalauthoritiesandstakeholderssince2007towardsaneventualmanagementplaninDavid,andmorerecently(2013+)inMontijo.

Bazan-Bocana(Colombia);

Alocalmanagementplanwasdevelopedin2012withthecommunitycouncilofBazánBocanabyMADSandtheCVCwithsupportfromMarvivaforaSpecialNatureReservecovering800haofbaymangroves.

ElMorro,GulfofGuayaquil(Ecuador);

Amanagementplanhasbeenindevelopmentsince2008inrevisionbyMAEwithfinancingandtechnicaloversightfromCI-Ecuador.

withauthoritiesduringthePPGwillbeconfirmedduringprojectstart-up.Examplesincluded:

• Mangroveclimateadaptationcriteriainlocalplans(David,Panama);

• Inter-institutionalarrangementsthatregularizeno-takenurseryareaszonedbycommunitycouncils.

• Consolidatenewconcessionagreementswithinmanagementplans(ElMorro,Ecuador).

Outcome3.2.:

EconomicevaluationtoolsandmethodologiesdevelopedthroughtheGEF-UNEPBlueForestsandotherrelated

Base-Line3.2.:

TheGEF-UNEPBlueForestsinitiativeiscurrentlyunderwaytodevelopmarinecarbonaccounting

Target3.2.:

TheGEF-UNEPBlueForestProjectandWAVESmethodologyissuccessfullyappliedandevaluatedinthe

Output3.2.1.:

Finalreportontheeconomicvaluationofecosystemgoodsandservicesprovidedbymangrovesinatleast


63|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators

projectsaretestedinatleasttwoETPScountriesduringtheirdevelopmentphasestomaximizeapplicabilitytopolicyandmanagementatlocaltonationalscalesbyY2Q3.


#ofGEF-UNEPBlueForestsmethodand/oranalogouseconomicevaluationsandtoolsdevelopedandpresentedtoprojectstakeholders

methodologiesandecosystemservicesevaluationsthathelpquantifycarboncreditasapotentialmanagementaswellasfinancingtool.

Theinitiativethatranfrom2010-2014envisagedsmallscaleinterventionsatpilotsitestohelpresourcemanagersbetterrepresenttheoftenunderestimatedvalueofmangrovesystems(e.g.forcarbonandemissionsscenarios,fisheriesenhancementzonesetc.)innationalpolicies.Thiswouldbetterreflecttheirlatentresourcepotentialinemergingeconomiessuchasclimatechange,conservation,biodiversityandsustainabledevelopmentfortourismetc.

BothCostaRica(Cifuentesetal,2014),andEcuador(Hamilton&Lovette,2015)haveundertakenrecentcarbonassessments/valuationestimatingandcorrectingmangrovelossestimationsfromthe1960sonwards.STRIworkingwiththe

ETPScountrydemonstrationsitesofEcuador(GulfofGuayaquil)andCostaRica(GulfofNicoya).

Thiswillprovideimportanteconomicevaluationtoolsandbase-linereferencedataofdirectrelevanceforbothlocalresourcemanagersandnationalplanningagencies,helpingtovaluetheresourceandjustifystepsinnationalpolicyrevisionsandimprovedsitelevelmanagement(e.g.creationofnewmangroveconcessionsetc.).

Aknowledgesharingplatformiscreateddrawinguponexperiencesandexamplesacrosstheproject,andintegratedbetweentheoutreachplatformsofeachprojectpartner.

Theresultsoftheprojectarewidelycommunicatedinnational,regionalandglobalconservation,science,policyandrelatedfora.

twoprojectsites,includinga)fisheries,b)nature-basedtourism,c)coastalprotection,d)maintainingwaterqualityandbioremediation,ande)carbonstoragecompletedbyY2Q1.


#ofcompletedsitestudiespresentedtostakeholdersbyY2Q1.

Output3.2.2:

Summaryoutreachdocumentandassociatedstrategyformakingitmostrelevanttodecision-makersonthemethodology(ies)andtoolkit(s)assessedandusedtoguidetheimplementationandpolicyapplicationofeconomicvaluationofmangroveecosystemservicesthatincludecost-benefitanalysesofalternativemanagementoptions,basedonexistinginitiativesincludingtheGEF-UNEPBlueForestprojectandWAVES,completedbyY2Q4.


64|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators

CarnegieInstituteofsciencehavedevelopedLIDARbasedmethodsforafirsthighfidelitycarbonmapforPanama(2013).ColombiahassomeinformationfortheCaribbeancoast,butrequiresmoresupportincarbontechnologies,GISskills(withCVC)andvaluationofecosystemgoodsandservices.


%completionandpresentationofoutreachdocumentwithdecisionsupportstrategypresentedtoETPSdecisionmakersbyY2Q4.

Output3.2.3.:

Mangrovevaluation,policyanddevelopmentplanningoutcomesandfieldconservationcommunicatedbroadly,includingthrough:distributionofcommunicationsmaterials;aninteractiveknowledge-sharingplatform;presentationinatleastthreenational,regionalandglobalconservation,science,policyandrelatedfora(e.g.:Ramsar,CBD,IMPAC,BlueCarbonWorkingGroup,ITTO);participatingintheIWLearnmechanism(includingallocationof1%ofprojectbudgetforthispurpose),andpresentationtopolicymakersinothermangroverelevantcountriesbyY2Q4.


65|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators


#ofoutreachandcommunicationmedia/platforms/packagesgenerated,aimedatnational,regionalandglobalmangroveconservation,scienceandpolicyforabyY2Q4.

Outcome3.3.:

Outreachandcapacitybuildingforatleast30localpolicymakersandstakeholdersfinalizedbyY2Q4.


#PolicymakersandstakeholderstrainedperETPScountry.

Base-Line3.3.:

Theprojectpartnersdonothaveexistingoutreachandtrainingunderwayformangroveconservationattheselectedprojectsites.

Target3.3.:

Localpolicymakersandstakeholdersreceivedirectedtraininginfieldconservationskillsandmangroverestorationscenarios.

Stakeholdersareasaresultbetterequippedtodeveloplocalpolicyandactionplans,runin-housethreatassessmentsandevaluatetheirresourceusescenarios.Thisencouragesinformeddecisionswhendevelopingalternativesthatfavorthesustainableuseandrecoveryoftheirmangroveresources.

Output3.3.1.:

AtleasttwotrainingeventsareconductedperETPScountrywithatleast15participantseachtobuildskillsrelatingtofieldconservationmeasuresandrestorationofmangrovesbyY2Q4.


#ofeventsandtraininghoursreceivedperstakeholderineachETPScountrybyY2Q4.

Outcome3.4.: Base-Line3.4.: Target3.4.: Output3.4.1.:


66|P a g e

ExpectedOutcomes


ExpectedOutputs

andIndicators

Atleasttwodemonstrationprojectsthatprovideincentivesand/orthatcreatebusinessopportunitiesassociatedwiththeconservationandsustainableuseofmangrovesinitiatedinatleasttwoselectedsitesbyY2Q4.


#ofdemonstrationprojectsprovidingincentivesand/orbusinessopportunitiessuccessfullyinitiatedand/orsupportedbytheprojectinhighprioritymangroveconservationareas.

Theprojectpartnersdonothaveexistingdemonstrationprojectsformangrovesustainableuseandconservationattheselectedprojectsites.

Thecountrylevelexchangeofexperiencesandtechnicalforadevelopedintheproject(e.g.theecosystemservicesevaluations,BlueForestsmethodologiesetc.)stimulateatleast2demonstrationprojectsdesignedtopromotetheconservationandsustainableuseofmangroveresources.Atleasttwositesareselectedfortheseprojectsonthebasisoffeasibilityforimplementationandtheirpotentialreturnforconservationandassociatedsocieties.

Successfulexamplesimprovethegrass-rootsadvocacyforsustainablelivelihoodslocallyandpotentiallyamplifythebenefitsofsimilarpracticeswhenadaptedtoadjacentareasandregions.AlistofpotentialdemonstrationprojectsconsideredforeachofthefourlocalsitesisgiveninSection4B.

LocalassociationsinatleasttwositesactivelyparticipateandcommittodemonstrationprojectsbyY1Q4.


MOUswithlocalassociationsthatoutlinecommitmentstoparticipateinmangroveconservationandrestorationactivitiessignedbyY1Q3.

Output3.4.2.:

Localstakeholdersparticipatingindemonstrationprojectsincreasedby20%overtheprojectstart-upbaselinebyY2Q4.


%ofinitiativeswherestakeholdersleadactivitiesandactivelyparticipateateachlocalprojectsitebetweenY1Q4andY2Q4.


67|P a g e

8 AnnexCItineraryofTE(PMUandfieldvisits)

ThefollowingistheMissionitineraryMarch2019.

Dates Site Logisitics Stakeholders RelevancetoprojectThurs,

7th

March

Guayaquil

Ecuador

MeetingswithCPPS(confirmed),projectco-implementorsand

MAE.

(Glen,Rachel,Stuart,

XavierChalen)

MAE-marineand

coastssub

secretary

CPPS

CI-Ecuador

(marineteam)

C1(allcountriesCPPS

regionalplanand

capacitybuilding)

Fri,8th

March

Guayaquil

Ecuadorto

Bogotá,

ColombiaPM

FieldvisittoElMorro

(AM).

Returnby6PMfor

eveningflightto

Bogota

(Glen,Rachel,Stuart,

XavierChalen)

ElMorroWildlife

Refugemangrove

concessionary

community

Blackclam

(piangua)fishery

collectives.

ElMorroNational

ParkManagers.

C2andC3National

MangrovePlan,

Mangrovesin

EnvironmentOrganic

Code(COA)andEL

Morroconcessionary

communities.

Sat,9th

march

Bogotato

Buenaventura

(direct)

Buenaventura/

GulfofTortugas,

Colombia

Directinternalflight

(AM)fromBogotato

BV.

AfternoonwithBazan

Bocanacommunityand

mangroveplotsite

visit.Accompaniedby

LauraJaramillo(CI-

Marine)andLuis

Arroyo(WWF-Cali)

MeetingwithCVClocal

authority.

BazanBocana

community

leaders

Corporacion

AutonomoValle

deCauca(CVC)

environmental

authority

C3localsiteactivities

BazanBocanaand

EPA/CVCin

Buenaventura.

Sunday

10th

March

Cali AMreturntoCaliby

car(4hours).

PMPoss.Meetings

WWF

Suggestion:Evening

flighttoBogota

Possiblemeetings

WWFColombia/

Cali

Mon,

11-03-

2019

Bogota Poss.AMflightto

Bogota(ifnotleaving

Sundayevening).

CVC(CorpValle

Cauca)in

Buenaventura

C3consultancywork.


68|P a g e

AM:Skypemeetings

fromCI-Colombia

OfficewithCRC(SiaIP

communityoutreach

mangroveguide)and

consultantJesus(EPA/

CVCcollaborator)

PM:Meetingswith

14:00MADS-DAMCRA/

Officeofinternational

affairsandCI-

Colombia.

CRC(probablyby

skypeorphone)

MADS–DAMCRA.

CI-Colombia

ParticipationinC1

experience

interchanges(CRC)

Indigenouspeoples

restorationguide

(CRC).

C1–CPPS-GEM

secretary(MADS);C2

nationalmangrove

workshops

Bilateralinterchanges

withEcuador.

Tues,

12th

March

Returnflights


69|P a g e

9 AnnexEListofpersonsinterviewed

Name Position&Contact Date Comments

StuartBanks ProjectManager

ConservationInternational

7-8Mar ContinualContactover

MTR:Callsandmultiple

emails.Interviews

RachelKaplan ProgramOfficer

WorldWildlifeFund

7-12

Mar

Continualcontactthrough

emailandskypecalls.

Anushika

Karunarate

SafeguardsOfficer

WorldWildlifeFund

9-12

Mar

Participatdinthefield

visittoBocana,Colombia

XavierChalan FieldOfficerGuayaquil


7Mar Organisedand

participatedinsitevisitto

Morro.

FernandoFélix ComisiónPermanentedel

PacíficoSur

CoordinadorTecnico

ffelix@cpps-int-org

7Mar HeadofCPPSSouthEast

PacificActionPlan.SC

member,EWGmember

XavierSantillán

Lara

DireccióndeNormativa

MinisteriodelAmbiente

Xavier.santillian@ambiente

.gob.ec

7Mar Directorofpolicyandthe

coastalprojects;SC

member,EWGmember.

IbetteVera FieldOperationsOfficer

MinistrydelAmbiente,Morro

[email protected]

8Mar FieldofficerinMorro

NationalPark,headof

dataandregistry

JuanCarlos

Medina

Staff

NazcaONG

8Mar Providingtechnical

supportforthe

fishermansregistryand

catchregistry.

Santiago

Morales

PresidentofPescadoresMarines,

Fisherman’sassociation

8Mar Headofassociation,one

oftheleaders

spearheadingthefisheries

managementplan.

AdolfoAbila HeadofManglaresCostenas



oftheleaders


managementplan

DonPablo ForeadoresdelFuturo



oftheleaders


managementplan


70|P a g e


LuciMorales MorroWoman’sAssociation 8Mar Headofthelocalwoman’s

associationinvolvedin

developingthe

managementagreement

LauraJaramillo Projectofficer,


Colombia

9-11

Mar

Organisedand

participatedinthesite

visittoBocana

HéctorTavera DAMARCA

MinistriodeAmbiente

Colombia

9-11

Mar

Biologistandmangrove

expertwithMinofEnv.

ParticipatedinSitevisitto

Bocana

Laura

Bermudez

AsuntosInternatciónales

MinistriodeAmbiente

Colombia

11Mar Dealswithall

internationalrelations,

includingBiodiv,

internationalwaters.Etc.

HugoBarona: Representantelegalconsejola

Bocana

9Mar Heisthelegal

representativeofthe

communityforLaw#70

NidiaPatricia PresidentadelConsejo 9Mar Presidentofthe

CommunityCouncil

SiberCambindo VicePresidentedelaBocana 9Mar VicePresidentof

CommunityCouncil–

conductedpresentation

forcommunityvisit.

Margarita Pianguera–LocalClamFisherer 9Mar Headoftheclamfisher

womeninBocana

JilioPeláez CRCCauca 11Mar Responsibleforworking

withEperaalaSiapidaara

community

PaulaSaenz DAMARCA

MinistriodeAmbiente

Colombia

11Mar Leadbiologistfor

mangroveconservation

withMinofEnv.Member

ofGEMonmangroves

YaisaBejaino OAI

MinistriodeAmbiente

Colombia

11Mar DealswithallGEFprojects

inMinofEnv.Colombia

KellyMoreno OAI

MinistriodeAmbiente

Colombia

11Mar DealswithallGEFprojects

inMinofEnv.Colombia

EdwardSevilla CoordinadordecuencaUramba

CVC

9Mar Participatedinsitevisitto

Bocana


71|P a g e


JorgeViveros ExpertomanglaresCVC 9Mar Participatedinsitevisitto

Bocana

LuisZapata Coordinadordeprograma

marinoWWF

9Mar GoodcontactwithCIfield

staff

JorgeEliasJaén MiAmbiente,Panama

Technicallead

12April ParticipatedasSC

memberfortheproject

JackylnRivera

Wong

MINAE/SINACCostaRica

8April


72|P a g e

10 AnnexGListofdocumentsreviewed

AcuerdodeusoSustentableyCustodiadeManglaraFavordelaAcociacióndePescadoresArtesnalesMarine“Asopesarmar”,Guayaquil,11abril,2018.

AcuerdodeusoSustentableyCustodiadeManglaraFavordelaAcociacióndePescadoresArtesnalesManglaresPorteños,Guayaquil,11abril,2018

AcuerdodeusoSustentableyCustodiadeManglaraFavordelaAcociacióndePescadoresArtesnalesForjadoresdelFuturo,Guayaquil,11abril,2018

Biotica(2017)PlandeManejoParaelUsoCustodiade1.843,00HectáresdeManglarSolicitadaspor

laAsociacióndePescadoresArtesanalesForjadoresdelFuturoenelSectordePuertoelMorro,

MinisteriodelAmbientedeEcuador,ConservaciónInternacionalEcuador,InstitutoHumanista

paralaCooperaciónconlosPaísesenDesarrollo,OrganizacióndelasNacionesUnidasparala

AlimentaciónylaAgriculturayFondoparaelMedioAmbienteMundial.Guayaquil,Ecuador,30

August,2017.

CostaRica(2017)PolíticaNacionaldeHumedales2017-2030,febrero2017.

CI(2014)ProjectInformationForm(PIF)for“ImprovingmangroveconservationacrosstheEastern

TropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)throughcoordinatedregionalandnationalstrategydevelopment

andimplementation,”16April2016.Availablefrom

https://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/project_documents/04-16-

14_PIF_and_PPG_document_revised.pdf

CI(2017)ReportoftheInceptionPhasefortheGEF-IW-ETPSMangroveProject[PIMS5771],(includes

the1stPSCmeeting(13

thOctober,2016),andExtraordinaryPSCmeeting(13

thJanuary2017).

CI(2017)2ndPSCMeetingReport1-2November,2017.

CI(2018)ETPSProjectTrackingsheetstoY2Q4

CI(2019)3rdPSCMeetingReport,22January2019.

CPPS(2017)SegundaReuinóndelGropodeExpertosenManglares(GEM)yCursodeOrdenamiento

EspecialMarino23-25dejulio2017,CiudaddePanamá,Panamá

CPPS(2016)Plandeacciónregionalparalaconservacióndelosmanglares,GuayaquilEcuador2016.

CPPS(2018)InformedelaTerceraReuinóndelGropodeExpertosenManglares(GEM)ydeltaller

RegionalsobreindicadoresrelacionadosconelPlandeAcciónregionalparalaconservationdelos

manglaresenPacíficoSudeste.18-20deabrilde2018Guayaquil,Ecuador

CPPS(2018)CuartaReuniondelGrupodeespecialistasenManglares(GEMIV),SanJoséCostaRica,

30noviembre,2017

GEF(2016)CEOendorsementfor“ImprovingmangroveconservationacrosstheEasternTropical

PacificSeascape(ETPS)throughcoordinatedregionalandnationalstrategydevelopmentand

implementation”,18July2016,Availablefrom

https://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/project_documents/07-18-

16_MSP_Approved_Letter_1.pdf


73|P a g e

GEF(2016)GEF6ProgrammingDirections(WWF-GEFProjectAgencySafeguardsIntegratedPolicies

andProcedures)availablefromhttps://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/documents/GEF-

6%20Programming%20Directions.pdf

GEF(2017)GEFPolicyonStakeholderEngagement,GEFPolicySeries,10November,2017.Available

from

https://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/publications/GEFPolicySeries_StakeholderEngagement_r4

.pdf

GEF(2017),GuidelinesforGEFAgenciesinConductingTerminalEvaluationforFullSizedProjects,

GlobalEnvironmentalFacilityEvaluationOffice,availableat

https://www.gefieo.org/sites/default/files/ieo/evaluations/files/gef-guidelines-te-fsp-2017.pdf

GEF(2018)GuidancetoAdvanceGenderEquityinGEFProjectandPrograms,TheGEF,December

2018.

FEG(2018)GEF7ProgrammingDirectionsavailablefrom

www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/publications

Gross(2015),SAFEGUARDPOLICIESASAPPLIEDTOTHEPROJECT:Improvingmangroveconservation

acrosstheEasternTropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)throughcoordinatedregionalandnational

strategydevelopmentandimplementation,DanielGoss,24December,2015

Viterietal(2018)ScopingReport:ArapidviabilityevaluationforapplicationofExperimental

EcosystemAccountsforMangrovesintheETPS+countriesofCostaRica,Panamá,Colombia,

EcuadorandPerú,CésarViteri,MahbubulAlam,MontserratAlbán,CeciliaGutiérrez,Daniela

Masís,RicardoMontenegro,YahairaOrellana,GabrielaPaige,MarcoQuesada,JorgeRamos,

AngelaRojas,CésarRuiz,April2018availableathttp://par-

manglares.net/images/docs/informes/Draft_Region_Scoping_Report_Ver_06052018_SB_CG_CV.p

df

MachucayFelix(2017)Informederesultadosdelaencuestasobrenecesidadesdecapacitación,

ComisiónPermanentedelPacíficoSur,11octubre2017.

MADS(2018),Resolución1263de2018,MinsteriodeAmbienteyDesarolloSostentible,“Proteción

deManglares”,18juliode2018.

Nazca(2019)Propuestadeplandeordenamientopesqueroenalrefugiodevidasilvestremanglares

ElMorro,NazcayCI,28Febrerodel2019.

WWF(2011).GlobalNetworkPolicy:GenderPolicyStatement.Availableat

https://c402277.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/publications/9/files/original/9_WWF_Gender_Policy.pdf?134

2687922

WWF(2016)RequestforCEOEndorsement,23May2016

WWF(2017)EnvironmentalandSocialSafeguards,IntegratedPoliciesandProcedures,availablefrom

https://c402277.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/publications/807/files/original/17_432_Safeguards_Manual_Up

date_FINAL.pdf?1503932363


74|P a g e

WWF-GEF(2016)ProjectDocumentfor“ImprovingmangroveconservationacrosstheEastern

TropicalPacificSeascape(ETPS)throughcoordinatedregionalandnationalstrategydevelopment

andimplementation,”12May2016

WWF(2017)ProjectProgressReport(PPR)1stOctober2016–30

stSeptember2017(Yr1Q1–Q4)

WWF-GEF(2017)WWFGEFProjectImplementationSupportMission(PrISM)Report,22December,

2017.

WWF(2018)ProjectImplementationReporting(PIR)Oct2016toDecember2017,January2018.

WWF(2018)WWF-GEFAgencyMemo-PPRReference:1Year6monthPPR

WWF(2018)ProjectProgressReport(PPR)1stOctober2017–31

stMarch2018(Y2Q1-Q2),26April

2018.

WWF(2019)ProjectImplementationReporting(PIR)December2017toDecember2018,January

2019

Website Comments

CPPSsite

http://par-manglares.net/

HaslinkstoreportsforEWGmeetings,

mostproducts,

IW:LEARN

https://iwlearn.net/iw-projects/5771

Theprojectinformationisnotaccurate.

StartdateSep2016,enddateJune2016,

totalprojectcosts8.6M$,

Video – https://iwlearn.net/media/videos/29450

GoodvideoonGulfofNicoyawork..no

mentionofGEFsupportortheproject,just

CI.

CI

https://www.conservation.org/where/Pages/Eastern-

Tropical-Pacific-Seascape.aspx

CIprojectwebpage-nomentionofGEF

funding,nolinktoIW:LEARN,nolinkto

CPPSwebsite,Doesmentionotherdonors

(Ocean5)understrengtheningfisheries

management.

http://panamanglar.org/en/learn/ Sitetoestablishjointmanagementof

Panamamangroves,

http://thebluecarboninitiative.org WebsiteforBlueCarbonInitiative.

Materialsavailable.


75|P a g e

11 AnnexHPhotosandMapofProjectSites

MuralAwarenessbuildingprojectinBocanavillage,

Colombia

Marguerite(right),headof“Piangueras”–blackclam

harvesters,inBocana,Colombia.

AdolfoAbila,HeadofManglaresCostenas

Fisherman’sassociation,withblackclams.ElMorro,

Ecuador

Dolphininprotectedmangroves,ElMorro,Ecuador


76|P a g e

Figure2DemonstrationProjectSitesforGEF-ETPS-notethatthetransboundarymangroveareawasnotundertakenduringtheprojectduetologisticaldifficulties.


77|P a g e

12 AnnexIQuestionnaireused

1. ProjectStrategy

WastheprojectstrategyforETPSwelllaidoutforachievinga“ratified”regionalstrategy?

Whatwereitsdrawbacks,whatcouldhavebeendonedifferently?

Hastheprojectachieveditsgoalsofdevelopingaregionalstrategy,havingimproved

legislation,andcreatedofexamplesofprivateand/orcommunitybasedmangrove

initiativesthatstrengthenlocalplanningetc.?

1. ProgresstowardsResults:

Whereallexpectedoutputsandactivitiesoftheproject(whichyouwereinvolvedwith)

deliveredasprogrammedtodate,ontimeandonbudget?Ifnotwhy?

Doyoufeeltheoutputsandtargetswhereachievable?

Doyoufeeltheindicatorsusedfor“measuringsuccess”wereSMART?Couldtheybe

improved??

Werethemethodsusedtodeveloptechnicaldocuments(synthesisdocuments,toolkits)

soundandeffectivetodate?

Dothetechnicalproductshavethescientificweightandauthoritytoinfluencedecision

makers,nationallevel-internationallevel?

Doyoubelievethatthetechnicalproductswillbeusedbydecisionmakers?

project?

2.Projectcompletionandsustainability

Arethereanyrisks(financial,social-political,institutional,technicalorenvironmental)

whichjeopardizeachievetheprojectobjectives

Toensurethatthereiscontinuityandthattheintendedimpactsoftheprojectare

realizedwhatadditionalmeasuresneedtotakeplace,orwhatneedstochange?(for

example:improvecommitmentofagenciesetc.)

2ManagementandCoordination

HasthePMUappliedmanagementandcoordinationduties?

HowhasthePMUassistedorhinderedyourparticipationintheProject?(forpartners,

institutions,etc).

Hasthemanagementandcoordinationattheactivitylevelbeeneffective?

CouldthePMUandWWF-GEFdoanymoretoenhancemanagementfortheremainderof

theproject?Ifsowhat?

3. FinancialManagement

Havefinancialcontrols,includingreporting,andplanningallowedtheproject

managementtomakeinformeddecisionsregardingthebudgetandallowforaproperand

timelyflowoffundsforthepaymentofsatisfactoryprojectdeliverables?Actualprojectcosts(andsub-componentcosts)comparedtobudged–aretheydifferent,

ifso,howhavetheydifferedandwhy?

Whatco-financingbeenachievedtodate?

Wasbudgetingandfundingbothadequateandtimely?

4.InstitutionalArrangements


78|P a g e

Whatinstitutionalfactorsarepresenttohelpachieveorunderminetheprojectgoals?

Howcanthesebeimprovedupon?

6. AssessmentofMonitoringandEvaluationSystems

Hasmonitoringandevaluationtoolsbeeneffective(Reporting.SCmeetingsetc.)bothfor

PCUandatthepartnerlevel?

7. Adaptability

Hastheimplementationoftheproject(s)displayedadaptivemanagementintermsof

changingcircumstances?

8. Stakeholderparticipation

Hastheprojectachieveditsgoalswithrespecttostakeholderparticipationand

engagementwithalltherelevantpartnersandprojects?Werecollaboration/interactionsbetweenthevariousprojectpartnersandinstitutions

duringthecourseofimplementationoftheprojecteffective?Werecollaboration/interactionsbetweenthevariousprojectpartnersandinstitutionsto

datebeeneffectiveandconstructive?Havenewrelationshipsbeendevelopedbetween

partners?9. RecommendationsArethereanyrecommendationsyouwouldhavefortherestoftheproject?


79|P a g e

13 AnnexJAuditTrail

Author # Location Comment/Feedback on the DRAFT Report Evaluator response/actions taken

Rachel Kaplan

1 Cover page Report is to be sent to Rachel Kaplan, and primary contact information changed Changes accepted and incorporated

Amelia Kissick (AKiss)

2 P v The Assessment of Project Objectives & Outcomes should be focused on outcomes, not output targets.

Text changed accordingly to reflect outcome targets.

SB 3 Piv Include comments UNESCO-Quito along with CPPS as partner; include comment related to inclusion of Gulf of Tortugas in Colombia in the project due to its being the most bio-diverse mangrove area in the ETPS region. Despite logistical difficulty in working there

Accepted

RK 4 P v Discussion of “satisfactory” rating instead of “highly satisfactory” for M&E. No major shortcomings, but SC did not meet for over 12 months, and the project did not exceed expectations as needed to achieve “highly satisfactory”.

Anushika Karunarante (AKar)

5 P ix Remove reference to not needing an IPP in the future. Rather just for this project. Done

RK 6 Px Recommendation 3 – has example of UNEP and Grid-Arendal administering component s under IW:LEARN. Please remove example as not something that WWF would do. Recommend 6 – the project did send people to IWC9 as part of IW:LEARN exchange.

Recomm 3- Example removed. Recomm 6- While this is true, it is a minimum of involvement with IW:LEARN, no experience notes written, not efficient use of IW:LEARN website.

RK 7 P 28 Change “CI-Panama observed an opportunity to conduct workshops and capacity building with a local community and requested funds to be switched to do so. Ultimately, WWF-GEF deemed it not possible “ to “to implement community economic alternatives to the cutting of David mangroves. This wasn’t possible, so they decided to do training/capacity building instead”

Paragraph removed as it does not support the adjoining text.

AK 8 P 5 Did the theory of change of approach alter during the course of the project? ; Included under. Change, Under 4.1.1.


80|P a g e

Author # Location Comment/Feedback on the DRAFT Report Evaluator response/actions taken Address if ToC help to develop better project design Clarify if it is lack of political ill or lack of enforcement that is the main barrier.

Added points on relationship between how the theory of change is reflected in the results framework and project activities Clarification that lack of enforcement is a key barrier, But is related and influenced by political will, capacity, finance etc.

RK & AK 9 P5

RK 10 P 7 Use revised Framework as per PIR #1, and mention update to outcome indicator. Update noted in text. No other changes needed to text relating to output indicators.

RK 11 P 8 Clarify what adjustments were made to year 2 planning. Clarified in text.

RK and AKar

12 P 8 The possibility of needing an ISPP is not a “risk” it was addressed through a screening process. It should be removed as a risk.

Agreed. Removed. Add as a risk logistical problems in working in certain areas of Colombia.

RK 13 P 12 Clarify that” WWF GEF said it would require a fair amount of funds/time under SIPP, so CI and Panama decided not to pursue”

Clarified in text.

14 P 14 Note that a change was made to RFramwork in year 1 Noted and referred to section 4.1.1

RK 15 P 18 Clarify Costa Rican new wetland policy under GEF-UNDP GEF-ETPS supported Costa Rica with workshops and regional level discussions. But it is the GEF-UNDP project which spearheaded the wetlands policy.

RK 16 P 21 Use same wording for indicators for outputs as in RF. Exact wording used.

AK 17 P 25 Who do the risks to sustainability affect the Theoray of Change of the project. There is no change to the T o C, rather an emphasis that the risk of financial sustainability is perhaps more important. T o C does not “rate” or prioritize risks…

AK 18 P 25 Merge adaptive management and adaptive capacity Done.

Anushika Karunarante (AKar)

19 P 29 – sec 4.6.2

Consider clarification of the section to underscore that the GEF project assisted ith the development of the Fisheries Management Plans as a pre requisite of the “Fishing Agreements” – which are between the government and the associations.

Rewording has been suggested

AK 20 Annex H Please include geo referenced maps. Included in Annex H

AK 21 Exec Summ Please include implementation and execution ratings. Added in the executive summary table 4.


81|P a g e

Author # Location Comment/Feedback on the DRAFT Report Evaluator response/actions taken

AK 22 Exec summ Mention Env stress reduction as a result of the project. Added in the conclusions.

AK 23 Exec Summ Include relevant good practices in the executive summary alongside the conclusions and recommendations

Separate section on good practices has been added to the Executive summary.


82|P a g e

14 AnnexKEvaluationReportAcceptanceForm

EvaluationReportReviewedandAcceptedby:

WWFUS(GEFProjectAgency)

Name:JohnMorrison,DirectorforConservationStrategies&Measures

Signature:______________________________Date:_________________________________

Name:

Signature:______________________________Date:_________________________________

Documents

Terminal Evaluation for WWF -GEF