mentoring and coaching programme lvempii tanzania on...

Mentoring and coaching programme LVEMPII Tanzania on Course Together with the strength of womanhood

2

EDITORIAL

The Lake Victoria Environmental Management Project Phase II (LVEMP II) is an East African Community (EAC) project under implementation in the five Partner States that share the Lake Victoria basin- Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. It will run for a period of eight years, from September 2009 to June 2017.

The East African Sustainability Watch Network runs a project known as the Civil Society Watch on LVEMP II that aims to lobby for efficient and effective implementation of this regional project among others. This fourth Issue of the East African Sus Watchdog Newsletter has a thematic focus on “Progress of LVEMP II in East Africa”. In this issue, read about the Community Demand Sub-projects that are already changing lives of many East Africans. We highlight a Women Self- help community group in Kenya that thrives on “women power” disregarding male dominance as a tool that holds women down. More encouraging is a story of another self-help group in Western Kenya whose members are affected by HIV but this has not watered down their zeal for development; in fact their hope to live drives them to strive for the best.

Did you know that In Tanzania there are more than 10 CDD sub-projects that have been implemented and complete? Rwanda and Burundi are taking strides in implementing APL2. Read about how communities in Burundi are ready to give up farm lands in the buffer zone to protect Lake Rweru eco-system.

You will also read about how component 3 of LVEMPII that focus on cleaner production technologies for industrial development has profound progress in industries in Uganda. In Uganda, communities in Masaka are not redundant either; they are implementing a waste management project as they await funds for their CDD sub-projects.We highlight new reforms in energy utilization at institutional level. A school in Siaya is saving money by using a bio-center that will provide them fuel for cooking.

At another institutional level a mentoring and coaching program where network partners go for exchange visits has helped community based organizations learn skills, approaches and implementation modalities of environmental sustainability projects in East Africa. This issue presents an exciting pictorial profile of LVEMP II work in Burundi. To compliment your new year up-dates, find a 2014 half-year planner (January to June 2014) with marked dates for global events.

Afforestation Takes Lead in LVEMPII CDD Implementation in Kenya

A School Bio Center in Siyaya set to transform lives

Mentoring and coaching stimulating Learning across communities in East Africa

LVEMPII Tanzania on Course with CDD sub-projects implementation

Litei Self Help Group benefitting from LVEMPII CDD Sub-Project

Utilizing Plastic Waste: A case of successful CDD without LVEMP II Interventions

LVEMPII Rwanda Communities apt with transboundary water management initiatives

Burundi Joins hands to protect Lake Rweru

Cleaner Production Centres to curb pollution in Lake Victoria

Sustainable Development still far from being achieved

LVEMP II makes headway amidst institutional and operational hitches

Managing Community Funds: CCD Money in Place, are we fit for funding?

Strides LVEMP II is undertaking to save Lake Victoria

Letters to the editor

Together with the strength of womanhood in Koru Hera Central

Renewed hope to live with CDD Sub-projects for Western Kenya

Pictorial profile of LVEMP II in Burundi

Pictorial file of EA Su Swatch at Mara Day celebrations in Mugumu Tanzania

2014 Half-year Planner

CONTENTS

2

3

5

9

10

12

13

15

18

19

22

23

26

27

29

31

30

33

1

COVER PHOTO:Plastic waste at MAPEWE collection centre in Masaka-Uganda

DEsign: salt Concepts

PUblisHER:The East African suswatch network c/o Uganda Coalition or sustainable DevelopmentP.O. box 27551 Kampala. Tel: +256414269461E-mail: [email protected]: www.easuswatch.org

EDiTORiAl TEAM:Richard Kimbowa UCsDEmily Arayo UCsDKen Oluoch UCsDDavid M.Mwayafu UCsDRebecca Kwagala UCsDnobert nyandire susWatch KenyaVelma Oseko susWatch Kenyasuleiman Okoth KenyaFrancis Kagolo Uganda Flavia lanyero Ugandagilbert ngendahabona burundi

DisClAiMER:This publication prepared by EA suswatch network, is supported by the government of sweden .The views and opinions expressed by the authors do not necessarily represent that of the government of sweden and the institution they represent.

Low laying areas prone to floods may have to derive new green technologies of disposing and managing human waste. In Siaya County in Western Kenya, a 14-unit toilet bio-center serving more than 300 people has been commissioned after works completion at Mbaga Girls Boarding Primary School. It was officially opened by Siaya Sub-County Director of Education, Jane A. Omogi, on November 9, 2013.

The bio center facility construction started in 2010 but the completion delayed due to lack of sufficient funds. Umande Trust, a rights-based agency implementing community-led initiatives provided the technical assistance of constructing the bio center. Other funds were provided by the Parent Teachers Association (PTA), Constituency Development Fund (CDF) and the community.

Bio-centers are sanitation facilities that provide multiple-pronged solutions to environmental challenges beyond sanitation, including biogas that can be harvested from human waste and the bio-slurry waste converted to fertilizer there by reducing the cost of fuel and contributing to a greener and cleaner environment. Currently, the school uses fire wood for cooking but envisages using bio-gas for cooking and lighting when the biogas digester has accumulated ample waste to generate the bio-gas.According to Sr. Cornelius Akinyi, the head teacher Mbaga Girls Primary School, her pupils are no longer at risk of using pit latrines that collapse due to poor drainage system in the school. The school is located in the low lying areas often flooded during heavy rains. “Pupils are now safe as the bio center has provided them with a more hygienic option. Though we are still in the process

A School Bio-Center in Siaya set to transform livesBy SuleimanOkoth

of constructing a post-treatment pit and still facing water challenges, the bio center has provided an alternative that is safe to the environment and the pupils. Initially we had toilets in the school but safety was a big issue.

“At the moment the bio centre is the only toilet facility in the school. Umande Trust has helped us in the completion of the project and providing raw materials used in the bio centre and also by helping us in hygiene promotion at Mbaga Girls Primary School. It is a big change as the pit latrines that were initially used posed a great danger as they often collapsed during the rainy season,” Said Sr. Akinyi. Bio centers are based on Ecosan principles of safe handling of waste through containment, sanitization and reuse. At the bio center are components of Human Biogas System which include the biogas plant sometimes referred to as the digester sometimes it is dome-shaped, toilets and bathrooms, slurry conveying channels, expansion chamber, the gas piping system and special designed burners and appliances. With regard to fear of collapsing pit latrines, Bio centers are built differently from pit latrines that were earlier used in the school; they are stronger with stable foundation and structure. With this new technology, the school no longer has to worry about collapsing latrines.

It is hoped that the construction of the bio center at the school will increase accessibility and adequate bio sanitation services to the school and build capacity of respective school and neighboring communities through the development of sanitation investment plans.

1

Constructed Bio-center at the school (picture by Suleiman Okoth)

Members of Wajane Pamoja Support Group- a LVEMP II Funded project at their tree nursery site

The implementation of the LVEMP II projects in Kenya has played a big role in the creation of awareness on environmental issues. From the Annual Studies to Establish Changes in Community Livelihood intervention areas, Most of the community groups that are implementing the LVEMP II CDD projects are carrying out activities in gully rehabilitation, afforestation, soil erosion control, protection of springs among other environmental conservation interventions. The communities living in the Lake basin region have not previously been taking serious steps to curb the environmental degradation of the areas they reside in. Heavy rains and flooding has contributed to erosion and this washes soil into the lake causing siltation, a contributor to the pollution of Lake Victoria.

According to study carried out by Emerald Consultants on behalf of Suswatch Kenya, community groups that have been funded by LVEMP II have taken to establishing tree nurseries and planting the tree seedlings in areas that have been badly affected by erosion. They have as well contributed to the participation of schools and churches in their communities in tree planting activities by donating some of the tree seedlings they have raised to them and ensuring the seedlings have been planted in the school or church compounds and that they are being taken care of. This is a good way of creating awareness on environmental conservation. With Kisumu and Siaya counties are the lowest ranked water tower regions in Kenya with 0.44% forest cover,

afforestation is taking the lead in most of the group’s project’s activities and this will improve the forest cover in the County and Kenya as a whole. However, the major problem affecting the tree nursery projects is the unpredictable weather patterns. Long rainy seasons have rendered project sites unfit for the planting of tree seedlings. In most cases, the rainy season is followed by a dry spell that leads to the withering of the tree seedlings. This has greatly affected the implementation of the tree nursery projects.

The problem of insufficient water for the tree seedlings growth has been curbed by community groups purchasing water tanks for the purpose of rain water harvesting. For instance, Wajane Pamoja Support Group has purchased a water tank and is using the rain water that has been harvested for the watering of their tree seedlings.

‘The other problem we are facing is the duration in which the seedlings take to germinate’, says Underit Group Chairman, Barnaba Limo. Tree seedlings are taking a very long time to germinate and this stalls the project’s implementation. Another group faced a problem with the owner of the land where the tree nursery was to be established this also slowed down their project’s implementation.

It is worth Noting that most groups began with tree planting in phase 1 of the project funds as an onset contribution to Environmental Conservation Activities. The other phase of funding will go in livelihoods improvement, thus from the graph below, Tree planting is the most commonly used intervention for environmental conservation in both Middle and Lower Nyando.

These tree nursery establishment projects have also contributed to the livelihood improvement of the community group members as they sell the tree seedlings that they have raised to earn some money for the group members. Measures are as well being put in place by LVEMP II to help the groups sell their seedlings to organizations such as the Kenya Forest Service, so as not to have a difficulty when it comes to getting customers for their seedlings.

Groups such as Upper North Kabodho Women Group from Nyakach, Kisumu, are already benefiting from their tree nursery

project. Through LVEMP II, they managed to expand their tree nursery establishment and increase the number of seedlings they raised. They have sold the tree seedlings that remained after they contributed some to the schools in their community and have earned quite a good amount of money from the sales. The money they get is saved in the group’s account and some of it is used for other project expenses.

LVEMP II in Kenya has helped in the improvement of the environment in the Lake Victoria Basin, as well as the improvement of the lives of the communities.

Afforestation Takes Lead in LVEMPII CDD Implementation in Kenya By Nobert Nyandire

2

Afforestation starts with tree nurseries Picture by Suswatch Kenya

Florence Chemurgor from Korosiot self-help group in Nandi county Kenya visited Bukananga orange growers association in Mityana - Uganda as a participant of the LVEMP II Civil Society Watch Project’s mentoring and coaching exchange programme has learnt a lot of sustainable environmental management which she is already sharing with her community back home in Nandi Kenya. Just as the saying goes “when the body travels, the mind travels too”. She notes that that the mentoring and coaching exchange programme helped her to learn that banana plants can be intercropped with other crops and boost the income of farmers. “A high demand for food due to an increase in the population in Nandi County has resulted in a need for diversification in food production” she further expressed.

She is emphatic that she will encourage farmers in Nandi where she hails from to intercrop bananas with the locally grown crops to curb the food insecurity. Japheth Babu from Litei self- help group in Kericho-Kenya also benefited from the exchange program. He visited Lambu landing site in Masaka district in Uganda and notes that the mentoring and coaching programme gave him an opportunity to interact, share experience, information and challenges in ensuring sustainable development within the Lake Victoria basin. Japheth says “The exchange visit has enabled me to network and get more exposure on what goes on in other regions. I have been to most parts of Masaka –Lambu landing site and I have been inspired by the dedication, hard work, proper planning and use of proper skills and knowledge needed to continuously remove water hyacinth in the lake

Victoria and improve fishing activities, increase the fish caught and expand the market through value addition to enable the people living in the lake basin to earn more from fishing, to have more fish for food security and improve their livelihoods”.

Implemented by the East African Sustainability Watch (EA SusWatch) Network, one of the objectives of the LVEMP II Civil Society Watch project is to develop the Network’s institutional capacity for collective quality monitoring, advocacy and watchdog roles for LVEMP II and other interventions in the Lake Victoria Basin. In order to achieve this objective, EA Suswatch network undertakes capacity building for its members through a study exchange visits for mentoring and coaching. The mentoring and coaching programme involves EA Suswatch network members within the Lake

Mentoring and coaching programme stimulating Learning across communities in East AfricaBy Ken Oluoch

A farmer in Mityana manning a citrus tree nursery (Photo byUCSD)

3

Victoria Basin. This annual programme is on its second year, the first programme having taken place in July 2012 and has involved 12 participants to date and has involved 4 participants from Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda respectively. The coaching process enables learning and development to occur and offers opportunity for improved performance. Mentoring on the other hand enables grooming of members by experienced or senior persons which makes significant transitions in knowledge, work or thinking.

High-performance, organizations and networks are only as good as their employees or members. Such institutions often put in place strong emphasis on personal attributes in selecting and developing staff and recruiting members. However, this does not come without challenges, not least of which may be significant gaps in the experience, knowledge, attitudes, skills, aspirations, behaviours, or leadership required to perform demanding jobs. Currently, good coaching and mentoring schemes are deemed a highly effective way to help people, through talking, increase self-direction, self-esteem, efficacy, and accomplishments. Unlike conventional training, mentoring and coaching concentrates on the person, not the subject, they draw out rather than put in; they develop rather than impose; they reflect rather than direct, they are continuous—not one-time—events. Monitoring and coaching are thus a form of change facilitation.

The EA Suswatch Network’s mentoring and coaching programme is aimed at having community groups transformed into a high performance teams. The programme is therefore intended to inspire and empower the participants and thus build their commitment, increase their productivity, grow talent,

and promote success. Mentoring and coaching has become an essential element of modern managerial practice.The programme builds on the existing internal capacities within the host institutions so as to expose the mentoring and coaching participants to areas of their interest and thus ensure attainment of sustainable development in the Lake Victoria basin. The programme targets to benefit 18 participants drawn from Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda in the 3 year LVEMP II CS watch project period with 6 participants two per country being involved every year. The mentoring and coaching programme is designed to inspire change and learning through participatory processes - primarily at the institutional and community levels. The process also builds on existing experiences from like-minded regional CSO networks.

With the increasing emphasis on collective action for civil society across countries to harness and counter the effects of a globalized world, Community groups have no option but to put more emphasis on becoming coaches and mentors for their partners as a coping measure to the challenges and opportunities and challenges of development policies and practices.

A lot of interest has in the past been put on strengthening intellectual, knowledge and technical capabilities of organizations, based on their needs, to effectively undertake their various activities but these approaches have been found to have a lot of limitations. For example the classroom nature obscures the real world experiences with which organization interface on a daily basis and may sometimes hinder learning of appropriate and relevant tools and techniques for tackling particular situations.

The East African region and particularly the Lake Victoria basin still lack a critical mass of local experts to engage in high quality technical debates with the Government technocrats such as the East African Community (EAC) and other Lake Victoria related institutions on specific key sustainable development issues. This in part can be attributed to inadequate information, exposure and networking amongst like-minded CSO actors and thus mentoring and coaching programme has played a critical role in bridging this gap and stimulating information exchange and replication of good practice in the region. Further still, there is still poor information exchange between community groups in the region thus limiting knowledge exchange and replication of good practice.

Mentoring and coaching programme stimulating Learning across communities in East AfricaBy Ken Oluoch

4

It is never easy to reconstruct a degraded wetland and later on construct a dam from it where people and livestock obtain water for survival. This is a dream come true in Tanzania.

Community Demand Driven -CDD Sub-project grants commissioned and funded by LVEMPII in Tanzania are more than one hundred and so far the performance is good and there are good performance indicators of the CDD projects among communities benefiting. The National Project Coordinator Mr.Myanzi Omari says LVEMPII has approved up to 176 CDD for implementation in Tanzania. CDD are performing well and so far 19 CDD have been finalized. Most of them are above 50% of implementation while few of them have not started implementation. The indicators so far noticed are the changes in livelihood of the people, which is improving as seen through construction of houses and buyingcows. There is also increased farm

productivity for example an increase in grain harvest from 300kgper hectare to 1000kg per hectare

LVEMP II works with local government structures in Tanzania, which forms the District LVEMP II Facilitation Team (DLFT) under the Local Government Authorities which supervise all LVEMP II activities in the district. The team participate sin all processes of formulating supervision

LVEMPII Tanzania on Course with CDD Sub-projects ImplementationBy Emily Arayo and Agencies

and monitoring the CDDs. Communities are mobilized through community meetings and through these meetings, they identify and list problems related to Sustainable Land Management and find solutions to the problems identified. Below is a list of CDD sub-projects in the various operating areas of LVEMPII in Tanzania.

Colonized bee hives for a Bee keeping CDD Sub-Project in Busami –Tanzania (Photo by LVEMPII Tanzania)

Construction of water dams under LVEMPII –Tanzania (Photo by LVEMPII Tanzania)

5

1. Rehabilitation of Chaco dam, Shishiyu village2. Rehabilitation of Chaco dam, Sayusayu village3. Rainwater harvesting, Ipililo village4. Rainwater harvesting, Malekano village5. Poultry keeping, Mwabujiku village6. Dairy cattle keeping, Mwabayanda village7. Dairy cattle keeping, Kizungu village8. Dairy cattle keeping, Kadoto village9. Dairy cattle keeping, Malita village10. Improvement of farming practice by using Power Tiller, Mwashegeshi village11. Improvement of farming practice by using Power Tiller, Mwang’anda12. Improvement of farming practice by using Power Tiller, Mwamitumai village13. Improvement of farming practice by using Power Tiller at Dodoma14. Tree nursery establishment, Sola 15. Tree planting, Mwamgoba village16. Tree Planting at Salama village17. Tree Planting at Mwagindi village18. Tree planting and “Ngitili” conservation, Sayaka village19. On farm Soil and water Conservation, Lumeji village20. Rehabilitation of Chaco dam, Bubinza village21. Construction of Chacoal dam in Mwamkala Village22. Soil and Water Conservation in Shigala village23. Fish Farming, Ijinga village24. Fish Farming, Ijitu village25. Bee keeping, Busami village26. Bee keeping, Mwamgoba village27. Improved farming (fruits plantation) by using Power Tiller, Lumeji village28. Improved farming by using Power Tiller, Kabale village29. Improved farming by using Power Tiller, Jisesa village30. Poultry keeping, Ihale village31. Poultry keeping, Lutale village32. Kilimo cha kisasa - Kayenze B33. Ufugajiwasamaki - Nyakaboja34. Orchard and Wood Tree Planting, Maligisu village35. Tree nursery establishment, Mwabalatulu village36. Rehabilitation of Chaco Dam at Kadashi village village37. Rehabilitation of Chaco Dam at Nyashana village38. Environmental sanitation, Bugandando village39. Bee keeping, Bugandando village40. Bee keeping, Ng’wasweng’hele village41. Bee keeping, Nyanshana village42. Bee keeping, Icheja/Welamasonga village43. Bee keeping, at Mwabuchuma village

44. Ufugajiwanyukikikundi cha Mwamafululu - Mwabuchuma45. Kilimo cha kisasa - Icheja46. Horticulture, Mwabulutago village47. Gully Erosion Control and contour farming, Mwashata village48. Construction of Chaco dam in Mwabuma Village49. Bee keeping, Mwabuma village50. Bee keeping, Tujaribu Group at Mwakasumbi village51. Bee keeping, Tukomboe Group at Mwakasumbi village52. Bee keeping, Maendeleo Group at Mwaukoli village53. Dairy cattle keeping, Mkombozi Group at Mwashata village54. Dairy cattle keeping, Majimaji Group at Mwakasumbi village55. Dairy cattle keeping, Mazingira Group at MwanduKisesa56. Dairy cattle keeping, Mazingira Bora Group at Mwabulutago village57. Dairy cattle keeping, TutunzeMazingira Group at Ntobo village58. Horticulture, Baluli ‘B’ Group at Baluli59. Horticulture, Maendeleo Group at Kisesa village60. Horticulture, Malula Group at Baluli village61. Horticulture, Mwaukoli ‘A’ Group at Mwaukoli village62. Horticulture, Ushirika Group at Ng’ang’a village63. Horticulture, Kisimani Group at Baluli village64. Horticulture, Sayari Group at Kisesa village65. Horticulture, Tubadilike Group at Mwaukoli village66. Horticulture, Mwabulutago ‘A’ Group at Mwabulutago village67. Kilimo bora cha mazaoyachakulanabiashara - Mwasengela68. Kilimo bora cha mazaoyachakulanabiashara - Ng’hanga69. Kilimo cha bustaniyavitunguuKikundi cha Mabondeni - Kisesa70. Protection of Simiyu River catchment area at Ngeme village71. Tree nursery establishment and Tree planting, Ng’esha village72. Protection of Duma River catchment area at Mwamabu village73. Tree nursery and Tree Planting, Gilya village74. Madilana Village- Beekeeping75. Tree nursery and Tree Planting, Kasoli village76. Rehabilitation of chaco dam, Kinang’weli village77. Horticulture, Nkololo-Itilima village78. Bee keeping, Isengwa village


6

79. Bee keeping, Mwanhunda village80. Bee keeping, Ntagwasa village81. Grains milling machine - Mkuyuni village82. Irrigation farming, Mwakibuga village83. Improved farming practice by using Power tillers, Mwamondi village84. Improved farming practice by using Power Tiller, Ng’homango village85. Kilimo bora cha alizetinakukamuamafutayaalizeti - Kilulu86. Kilimo cha kisasa - Ngeme87. Water hyacinth control at Nyamkazi Beach88. Udhibitiwagugumaji Mto Kagera nauanzishwajiwa vitaluvyamiti - Kyaka89. Weevils rearing and release for control of water hyacinth, Chato Beach90. Water hyacinth Control at Mlila Beach, Chato91. Uhifadhimazingirakatikavyanzovyamajinaardhioevu - Kagondokaifo92. Udhibitiwagugumajinakuanzishakitalu cha miti - Forodhani93. Udhibitiwagugumajinaufugajiwasamaki - Kifungu94. Udhibitiwagugumaji Mto Kagera nauanzishwajiwavitaluvyamiti - Murongo95. Udhibitiwagugumaji Mto Kagera nauanzishwajiwavitaluvyamiti - Kijumbura96. Water hyacinth Control in Suguti Beach97. Dagaa processing, Nyarusurya BMU 98. Removal of Water hyacinth from LV, Nyarusurya Beach99. Udhibitiwagugumajinaujenziwachoo cha kisasa - MwalowaRwang’enyi100. Udhibitiwagugumajinaufugajiwasamaki - Bwawa la Baraki Sisters101. Udhibitigugumajinaufugajisamaki - Kyamwame102. Hifadhiyamazalioyasamakinaufugajinyuki - Radienya103. Udhibitiwagugumajinaujenziwasoko la samaki - Mugara104. Udhibitiwagugumajinaujenziwasoko la samaki - Kisorya105. Ukarabatiardhioevunaufugajinyuki - Tamau106. Udhibitiwagugumajinakilimo bora cha nyanya - Nyabisarye107. Ujenziwachoo cha kisasanakuchakatadagaa - MtaawaZiwaniMakoko108. Weevils rearing and release for control of water hyacinth, Nyahiti Beach109. Fish Farming and water hyacinth control, Mbarika BMU

110. Fish Farming, Nyahiti BMU at Mwajombo village111. Udhibitiwagugumajinaufugajimsetowasamaki - Ilalambogo112. Udhibitiwagugumajinaufugajimsetowasamaki - Isesa113. Udibitiwagugumajinaufugajimsetowasamaki - Mwalogwabagole114. UzalishajiwaVifarangavyaSamaki - Mwalogwabagole115. Ujenziwachoo cha kisasa, udhibitiwagugumajina kuchakatadagaa - MwalowaIgalagala116. Udhibitiwagugumajinauchakatajiwadagaa - Sweya117. Udhibitiwagugumajinaujenziwachoo cha kisasa - Kirumba Kati118. Uopoajigugumajinauvuviendelevu - Katunguru119. Uopoajigugumajinauvuviendelevu - Buyagu120. Uopoajigugumajinauvuviendelevu - Karumo121. Ufugajiwasamaki - Bugula122. Uhifadhimazingiranauchakatajiwadagaa - MwalowaKamasi, Izinga123. Tree planting and “Ngitili” conservation, Sayaka village124. Tree nursery establishment, Kalemela village125. Horticulture, Azimio Group at Kisesa village126. Udhibitigugumajinakilimo cha kisasa - Bugwema127. Tree Planting and Beekeeping - Malili128. Beekeeping - Sanga129. Water Hyacinth control and construction of latrines - Lamadi130. Beekeeping - Ngogote131. Beekeeping - Sanungu132. Horticulture (vegetable gardens) - Gilya133. Improved Farming - Gambosi134. Beekeeping - Gibeshi135. Horticultural Production - Ipililo136. Beekeeping - Inenwa137. Horticultural Production - Malita138. Horticultural Production and Fish Farming - Mwabujiku139. Horticultural Production - Changambuli140. Small Scale Irrigation in Horticultural Production - Jija141. Horticulture (vegetable gardens) - Jija142. Beekeeping - Ipililo143. Beekeeping and sunflower production - Bugandando144. Beekeeping and sunflower production - Maligisu145. Beekeeping and Horticultural Production - Gukwa146. Fish Farming and Beekeeping - Mwagimagi147. Integrated Fish Farming, Bee and Poultry keeping - Nyang’homango148. Contour Farming - Chole149. Layers keeping - Mwogobero


7

150. Fish Processing (Dagaa and Furu) - Chato Beach151. Conservation/Protection of fish breeding sites and poultry keeping - Muungano152. Conservation/Protection of fish breeding sites and Fish farming - Nyamirembe153. Water Hyacinth control and tree planting - Chitare154. Beekeeping - Nyabange155. Beekeeping - Mwasengela156. Water Hyacinth control at Rubafu Gulf and Poultry Keeping - Rubafu( Ushirikiano)157. Conservation of breeding site and wetland rehabilitation - Kinesi158. Conservation of breeding site and wetland rehabilitation - Baraki159. Conservation of Fish breeding site and Tree planting - Bwasa160. Conservation of Breeding site and Beekeeping - Nantare( Bukimwi)161. Construction of latrines and bathrooms - Malelema Landing site( Chifule)162. Water Hyacinth control and rehabilitation of wetland - Nyatwali

163. Water Hyacinth Control - Kisangwa Dam164. Water Hyacinth Control - Kibainja Dam165. Water Hyacinth control and improvement of landing site - Kaishebo( Bushago)166. Water Hyacinth control and Dagaa processing - Kabindi( Kashenye)167. Water Hyacinth Control and Beekeeping - Kafunjo168. Water Hyacinth control and Tree Planting - Kitoma169. Wetland and Landing Site Conservation - Kasisa170. Water Hyacinth Control and Beekeeping - Nyakaliro171. Conservation/Protection of fish breeding sites – Nungwe Bay172. Conservation/Protection of fish breeding sites Kasamwa Bay173. Restoration of vegetation cover along Lake Victoria and dagaa processing - Rwazi174. Restoration of vegetation cover along Lake Victoria and Fish farming - Kihunge(Ushikiano)175. Construction of latrines and bathrooms - Bezi Landing site176. Construction of latrines and bathrooms - TEFU Landing site


8

Signpost for LVEMPII Projects in Tanzania

Approximately 50 Km from Kisumu Town is Nandi County that is blessed with fertile land for agriculture and enjoys a year -long cool climate. The county is home to several rivers and streams that drain into Lake Victoria. Litei Self Help Group - a community based organization- is based in Nandi South in Kaptebengwo Village. It is one of the community groups that has benefitted from the funding towards Community Driven Development sub- projects provided by LVEMP II. It was formed in 2003 to address environmental and health issues, as well as poverty reduction within its community.

Litei is one of the first groups to be funded by LVEMP II during the first disbursement of funds to community groups in Kenya. Using the LVEMP II Project funds, the group has carried out sub-projects projects in spring protection, water harvesting and improvement of the quality of the livestock breeds within their community through artificial insemination. This group has so far protected a 400m2 area of Chebanganga stream, which is the community’s main water source, constructed a 950m3 storage water tanks, a 25m3 collection tank, installed a hydraulic ram pump, laid pipes for the supply of water to the community and planted 1000 tree seedlings along the stream so as to discourage agricultural activities along it. This will contribute to the lowering of the quality of the stream’s water through pollution. The trees are bound to also increase the level of water in the stream.

The group boasts of achievements including successfully constructed storage and collection tanks, installed the hydraulic ram pump and supplied 50 households with water and they are working their way up to 200 households, which is their target. They have also planted 1000 tree seedlings along Chebang’ang’a stream.

Litei Self Help Group benefitting from LVEMPII CDD Sub-Project By Velma Oseko

Challenges• The high demand for water requires an increase in the capacity of the tanks and the group doesn’t have the financial capacity to purchase the bigger tanks.• The hydraulic ram water pump pumps very little water therefore it doesn’t fill the tank in the required time. The District Water surveyor advised them to buy an electric water pump but they cannot afford electricity connection as the members are from a poor community and survive from meager earnings.• Reporting to LVEMP II requires the submission of many documents and if one is missing the report is dismissed.• Reporting also requires the attaching of photos and if they are missing, it creates a problem.• The project funds have no allocation for administrative costs and this has posed a problem in the project’s implementation.• The group had to open a current account at the bank and they are responsible for the payment of the bank charges as the project funds are not used in the payment of the charges.• The project took a while to take off as many individuals needed to be consulted i.e. the community members, the technicians, the LVEMP II officials and the group members.

Future plansThe group has successfully completed the first and second phase of their CDD project, what remains is the upgrading of their livestock through artificial insemination and the introduction of dairy goats into their community in Kaptebengwo.The group hopes to get financial assistance to implement, a biogas project, as they have the livestock for the production of dung; construct dairy units; purchase dairy goats for the community’s livelihood improvement and a solar energy project as solar power is under-utilized in Nandi County.

A community member fetching water at the protected spring- a LVEMP II project implemented by Litei Self Help Group (Photo by Suswatch Kenya)

9

The Waste Plastics to Economic Wealth (WAPEWE) Project in Masaka district in Uganda has become a catalyst for income generation and employment to persons with disabilities and as a point for environmental conservation. The project is based on a participatory approach to improve implementation of activities and enhance productivity of Masaka District Union of Persons with Disabilities (MADIPU), a community Based Organization. WAPEWE Project collects plastic waste and recycles plastics in Masaka Municipality and its adjacent rural communities in areas of Kyanamukaka, Kyasiga, Bukakata, Mukungwe. The community has supported the project by identifying and willingly offering premises from which waste is recycled.

Masaka town just like many urban centres around Lake Victoria faces a challenge of waste management. It is estimated that in Masaka Municipality alone, over 900,000 plastic mineral water and soda bottles are lilted daily from hotels, restaurants, bars, moving cars, homes, schools and hospitals and nearly eight out of ten bottles end up in

a land fill and Namajjuzi river wetland, which is a RAMSAR site and an inlet to Lake Victoria.

The project was approved by Lake Victoria Environment Management Project Phase II –LVEMPII as a strategic intervention project, which was to be funded in 2011 but since then no funds have been remitted to the project. In spite of the delayed funds from LVEMP II, the project received alternative funding from Century Bottling Co. Ltd.

(Coca-Cola company) that has supported the construction of a waste collection container, 5 bicycles, fencing materials, weighing scale, banner, and protective gears (rubber boots and gloves). On the other hand, Masaka Municipality provided land for waste collection centre.

The WAPEWE project aims to be instrumental in saving and conserving Masaka’s environment by managing, collecting, sorting, recycling all plastic waste for re-use. The project’s objectives is to create direct and indirect employment to persons with disabilities and their families through collection, transportation, sorting, washing and processing of plastic waste, adding value and qualifying from plastic waste to certified recycled plastics which can obtain market globally.

The project also aims at maintaining environmental sanitation, and to strengthen MADIPU capacity to coordinate, and evaluate progress of the project. Enhanced capacity among local authorities to engage in public-private partnership, particularly involving less formal private sector is one of the benefits of this project.

Utilizing Plastic Waste in Masaka District:A case of successful CDD without LVEMP II InterventionsBy David Mwayafu

Members of WAPEWE at the collection site (Photo by UCSD)

A notice at the plastic waste collection site (Photo by UCSD)

10

In Burundi, the protection of Lake Rweru is among the priorities of the Lake Victoria Environmental Management Project, Phase II (LVEMPII).Currently Lake Rweru is dangerously threatened by human activities from within the Lake and at its buffer zones. Destructive habits include cropping at the shores of the and using illegal fishing gear on the Lake.

In the Bugesera region, in Burundi, part of Lake Rweru eco-system, communities are experiencing effects of climate change like prolonged drought spells, which is forcing them to seek farming land closer to water sources hence degradation of Lake shores of Rweru. They farm vegetable crops, cereals, tubers and pulses whose production is not possible in hilly areas in the dry spells.

Burundi Joins hands to protect the Lake Rweru Eco-systemBy Gilbert Ngendahabona

LVEMP II Burundi officials .In the back ground is Lake Rweru(Photo by LVEMP II Burundi)

Community sensitization meetings by LVEMP II (Photo by LVEMPII Burundi)

11

LVEMP II in Burundi is convincing these communities to conserve the Lake shores and buffer zones; through sensitization activities. The area targeted by the LVEMPII around Lake Rweru has a length of 32 km to be protected.

According to the Water Code in Burundi, issued in March 2012 the protected zone will stretch to fifty meters.For the year 2013, the LVEMPII Burundi selected an area of 160 km ² around the lake to be restored and protected as pilot sites of intervention in Gatare and Nyagisozi. The areas to be covered by the pilot are in the Commune of Busoni. The purpose is to create a buffer zone to prevent farming on the shores of Lake Rweru. Tree and grass planting projects have been targeted for this area.

To kick start this projects, LVEMPII organized meetings to sensitize local authorities and communities around the lake .The meetings enabled LVEMPII to realize that the local population will play an important role in the implementation

of several activities related to protecting the lake. LVEMPII promised to assist them in acquiring the necessary equipment to enable them plant trees and grass as embankments in the buffer zone. The project implementation team will also finance activities to reduce the water hyacinth proliferation in this lake and fight illegal fishing habits. LVEMPII encourages fishermen to organize as registered groups to benefit from project.

Protection of the buffer zone of Lake Rweru and the control and monitoring of hyacinth proliferation are among the urgent actions planned by LVEMPII in Burundi. The clauses of the Water Code give guidance on the respect and protection of River banks and buffer zone of Lakes in Burundi. The goal is to create a buffer zone of 50 meters away from the Lake.

Activities will be done by the riparian communities of the lake under the supervision of administrative officials

and technical staff of specialized institutions in the region. During the sensitization meetings organized in the region around Lake Rweru, beneficiaries have been involved in the identification of the sites and planning of activities in each of the sites. Beneficiaries have welcomed the project and promised to participate in all activities planned

The awareness meetings in Nyagisozi and Gatare (Kirundo) areas have been an opportunity to learn about the farmers in the buffer zone of the lake Rweru. By mutual agreement, famers have realized that farm activities in this area are an obstacle in the conservation of the biodiversity of Lake Rweru. They agreed to abandon the buffer zone and remove the palm oil trees they had planted because they understood that that plants absorbs a great quantity of water if planted close to the Lake.

Farms close to Lake Rweru before LVEMP II intervention (Photo by LVEMPII Burundi)

Burundi Joins hands to protect the Lake Rweru Eco-systemBy Gilbert Ngendahabona

12

Rehabilitating and protecting water bodies in the Lake Victoria catchment could be thought to be the responsibility of Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda because they occupy the shore line of Lake Victoria.Interestingly, Rwanda and Burundi hold the Lake Victoria catchment that has rivers and wetlands that support the Lake Eco-system. The Akagera River flows directly into Lake Victoria while Lake Rweru is shared by both Rwanda and Burundi; which makes the trans-boundary water catchment mixclearly connected to the shared waters of Lake Victoria.

LVEMPII in Rwanda is rehabilitating Rweru-Akagerawetland sub- project. To have a strong ownership of the

project, the project begun with signing a Memorandum of Understanding with stakeholders in Bugesera and Ngoma Districts which share Lake Rweru.The implementation of co-management sub-projects in Bugesera and Ngoma District to rehabilitate the Lake shores and wetland of Rweru started in March 2013. The activities are being implemented by communities, through community committees established by LVEMPII.

50% of the total budget was worth 149,844,320Rwanda Francs for Ngomaand 49,789,750 Rwanda Francs for Bugesera were given to community committees respectively. To date, 155 ha of the land has beendemarcated, 70

ha of water hyacinth removed manually from the Lake and the wetland .Which water hyacinth is being composted for soil fertility enhancement by the communities.The tree nursery production has also started. 600,000 tree seedlings are ready to be planted in November 2013.The project is also carrying out mass sensitization and mobilizing riparian communities with in the Lake Victoria Basin catchment in Rwanda.

From a credit worth£ 15,000,000 US Dollars for a period of 7 years (2011 to 2017), LVEMP II activities are operating in 13 districts. Implementation support mission recommends that particular attention be given to initiating lakeshore restoration activities.

LVEMPII Rwanda Communities apt with trans-boundary water management initiatives Emily Arayo and Agencies

The community development officer in Land Husbandry , hill- side irrigation and rain water harvesting(LWH) explaining about terrace activity to the Community Committees from Jarama sector, Ngoma district during the study tour organized by LVEMPII (Photo by LVEMPII Rwanda)

13

From July 2012 to October 2013, several activities were implemented under four project components including strengthening institutional Capacity for Managing Shared Water Fisheries resources, Point Sources pollution control and prevention, Watershed managementand Project Coordination and Management. Watershed management plans are under way to develop sub catchment management plans for Gikondo and Nyabugogo wetland system, where a 42hectare a of terraces were established in the watershed onLake Rweru, JaramaSector,Ngoma District.

Design of seven more co-management sub-projects for rehabilitation of Nyabarongo sub-catchment in Districts of Karongi, Nyamagabe, Huye, Muhanga, Kamonyi, Gakenke and Rulindo were designed in collaboration with local leaders and community and implementationis at its initial stage.

Consistent with the LVEMPII APLIIparticipatory and community involvement in project activities, local leaders and communities in Bugesera and Ngomawere trained in Organic law determining modalities of protection, conservation and promotion of environment in Rwanda ( No 04/2015 of 08/04/2005); Law determining the establishment , organization and functioning of cooperative organizations in Rwanda ( No 50/2007 of 18/09/2007); and two study tours were organized for selected community representative in Kayonza and Rwamagana to witness the achievements related to radical terraces and lakeshores. 66 local leaders and community representatives were trained and 45 local leaders and community representatives participated in the study tour. This capacity building focused only in the Districts of Bugesera and Ngoma where the project started

implementing watershed management related activities.

300 community representatives were trained in Integrated Pest management has been helpful and so far there are 9 demonstration plots -4 in Bugesera and 5 in Ngoma. 300 people have been trained. So far, the project has 1,878 beneficiaries of which 35% are female and 65 % are male.A sanitation Master plan for Huye, Muhanga and Rwamagana Districts has been developed and a feasibility study, detailed design of the Environment Impact. Assessment for a centralized sewerage system in Kicukiro, Gasabo, Muhanga ,Huye and Musanze Districts has been done and pollution level assessment and pollution control plans for 5 Districts of Huye, Muhanga, Gasabo, Kicukiro and Musanze have been done as part of the component on Point Sources pollution control and prevention.The promotion of cleaner technologies has seen 72 industries mapped and sampling of industrial effluents is on-going and a final industrial pollution intensity GIS map will be available before the end of 2013.

Having commenced at phase two of LVEMP II-APL 2, Rwanda is learning from the project counterparts in

Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda who are implementing APL1. Lessons that are cherished include afforestation of the Lake Victoria Basin catchment, production of tree seedlings, establishment of terraces, sensitization of communities about LVEMPII and setting up good monitoring and evaluation systems.

Under the catchment afforestation LVEMP II Rwanda has embarked on the Production of seedlings to plant woodlots on the steep slopes of which most of Rwandan rivers flow beneath. This is done with contractors of tree nurseries hired by the Project. LVEMP II through the contractor also trains groups on nursery establishment and management before the nursery work commences the project buys seedlings from the group beneficiaries and distributes to communities. The species planted include Grevillea, Robusta, Eucalyptus saligna and Calliandraspp.Similarly, awareness raising and dissemination is a lesson being learnt from the three countries. Workshops have been organised and Conducted to all district leaders’ technicians and politicians of the 13 districts where LVEMP is operating. For this there is support by many stakeholders in the districts.

LVEMPII Rwanda Communities apt with trans-boundary water management initiatives Emily Arayo and Agencies

14

Humans sharing water resources with live stock


Q. What is the role of Cleaner Production in reducing point source pollution into Lake Victoria?

Cleaner Production (CP) involves continuous application of an integrated, preventive environmental strategy towards processes, products and services in order to increase overall efficiency and reduce damage and risks for humans and the environment. It leads to increased overall efficiency, especially in the use of materials and energy, thus reducing generation of waste and resultant environmental impacts. This ultimately contributes to reduction of the pollution loading into Lake Victoria.

Q. How is Cleaner Production integrated in the LVEMP II project?

Within LVEMP Phase II, CP is taken care of by Sub-component 2.2 that deals with promoting Cleaner Production technologies in enterprises. The sub-component is designed to address the industrial pollution challenges and unsustainable resource consumption patterns within the Lake Victoria Basin. In view of this application of Cleaner Production technologies and techniques contributes to increased competitiveness of the enterprises by promoting waste reduction and negative impacts as well as optimizing material, water and energy utilization.

Q. As part of LVEMPII in the region what successes have you achieved so far and what is the most remarkable impact you have towards saving Lake Victoria?

The implementation progress so far has demonstrated that enterprises in the Lake Victoria Basin have a high potential to reduce the pollution loading on the lake. A number of issues have successfully been addressed including:

• A total of 158 industries mapped and categorized into 28 sectors out of which 12 priority sectors have been selected for Resource Efficient and Cleaner Production (RECP) intervention. These include Sugar, Tea, Fish, Brewery, Soft drinks, Dairy, Food processing, Textile, Pulp and Paper, Petroleum, leather (tanneries) and Hotels.

• Awareness has been done for company Chief Executive Officers (CEOs)s and industrialists through training workshops at enterprise level. Over 250 technical personnel from 75 enterprises have been trained as part of capacity building initiative within the enterprises.

• Regional sector specific Resource Efficient and Cleaner Production quick reference manuals for 5 sectors have been developed. We have manuals for Sugar, Tea, Fish, Dairy, and Textiles. However, there is a gap to develop 7 more reference manuals for the other of the identified 12 sectors.

• A total of 24 in-plant assessments have been completed through which over 638 improvement measures were identified under different categories. Out of the measures identified, good housekeeping had 57.8%, technology change 6.1%, re-use/recycle 1.6%, equipment modification 27.4%, process control 0.5% and input substitution 6.6%. The total investment required to implement the measures identified is about US Dollars 2,373,783 which would result in a saving of over 3,465,402 US Dollars per year.

Cleaner Production Technology is a sub-component of LVEMPII, working through the Ministries of industries in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. Francis Kagolo had an interview with Mr. Silver Sebaggala, the head of Uganda Cleaner Production Centre (UCPC). Below are the excerpts.

15

• There has been dissemination of good results from the implementation of the project by recognizing enterprises that have performed well through a RECP Award. A total of 10 enterprises participated in the RECP Award.

i. From the results so far obtained, some companies have already achieved significant results from implementation of the options identified during Assessments. For example, Kakira Sugar Works has reduced its BOD loading by 74% COD by 79% The water consumption has reduced from 10000m3 to 5000 m3 per day representing a reduction by 50% with an established reduction target to 3000 m3.

ii. There has been significant reduction of BOD and COD levels from Leather Industries of Uganda Ltd, BOD loading by 47% and COD by 37%. The water consumption reduced from 600m3/day to 200m3 /day (i.e. 24Hrs) equivalent to 66.6% reduction. The water discharge volume of effluent of the tannery has reduced by 30% of 196 m3 generated as effluent 20.4% (40m3) is generated as Chromium Effluent and is carefully collected and separated in the Chrome Recovery and Recycling for reuse and energy efficiency has improved by 11%.iii. Crown Beverage Limited water productivity improved by 18% and waste water intensity reduced by 17%.

Q. Exactly how do enterprises benefit from cleaner production?

Through adoption of Cleaner Production enterprises can reduce their operating costs through increased overall efficiency, especially in the use of materials and energy. By reducing environmental impacts and prevention generation of waste, businesses especially SMEs, can improve their productivity, save money and remain competitive especially in global markets where growing consumer concerns about social and environmental aspects is already being reflected in purchases of goods and services.

Q. In promoting local industry in the East African region how does Cleaner Production improve competitiveness and Economies of Scale among industries?

Cleaner Production helps to achieve more with less input. By reducing input materials while optimizing the out, productivity is enhanced and therefore profitability leading to a competitive business. Through improved productivity industries have room for expansion given that they progressively increase their

profitability. A profitable business is a sustainable business. Some examples of improved productivity through application of Cleaner Production include:

• Reduced water consumption in fish factories from 14 m3 to 8 m3 per ton of processed fish • Reduced Energy consumption in fish processing from 120 kWh to 45kWhper ton of fish equivalent to 62.5%

• Improved Fuel Wood consumption in Tea Processing from 358 kg of made tea to 680Kg of made tea per m3of wood

• Reduced Annual Water consumption in a dairy by 17% • Reduced Water consumption in sugar factories by 36% • Improved Environmental Performance on average (e.g. BOD and COD reduced by 77% and 79% respectively in sugar factories)

• Reduced energy consumption of tannery operations by 11%

Q. How are the cleaner production centres in East Africa relevant to the EAC Strategy on livelihood improvement?

One of the objectives of the LVEMP II is to boost the basin’s cultural and economic values by involving communities in natural resources management, balancing environmental protection and economic growth demands and improving economic growth and equity among riparian communities. Cleaner Production is one of the tools to achieve a multi-pronged approach to providing solutions that contribute to economic, environmental and social benefits. Cleaner production centres are mandated to build the capacity of industries through education, professional training “learning-by-doing” and cleaner production audits. This is in line with the region’s Vision Strategy that is looking at shifting industrial transformation from regulatory intervention to promotion of voluntary initiatives.

The cleaner production techniques can lead to better standards of living, clean environment, reduced pollution loading into water bodies and air, better management of chemicals, good health and safety of people and guaranteed employment which relate directly to household incomes and reduction in poverty levels.


16

Q. How do the Cleaner Production centres in the EAC region integrate with other sectors of livelihood apart from the Industrial sector?

The concept of Cleaner Production cuts across all sectors of the economy. At the moment the Centres at targeting industries but the concept can be applied to all other sectors.

Q. Do you envisage an expansion of roles of the Cleaner Production Centres in APL3?

The sub-component 2.2 results are quite impressive in the EAC both nationally and regionally. It is quite important that the activities are scaled up in APL3 to take care of the following issues:

• In the case of Uganda only 158 enterprises were mapped of which only 75 have been trained in RECP, 24 have complemented RECP assessments and are now at different levels of implementation. There is still a lot of work that needs to be done during APL 3- Upscaling.

• In the APL3 the service sector needs to be considered as a holistic approach to solving the problem of pollution loading into the lake.

• The municipalities and local governments need to be part of the drive given the huge task of solid waste management which is not very effective!

• There is need to replicate and disseminate information about the success achieved during APL 1.

Q. What measures have you put in place to sustain your efforts after the LVEMP II project?

Implementation of RECP is a journey not a destination. We need to always assess our performance as there is always room for improvement. In order to do this we need to have sustainable resources and good policy framework to support investments in cleaner production initiatives at all levels. There is need to mainstream cleaner production in different sectors so that each sector can budget for its implementation. There is also need to strengthen enforcement of environmental regulations in order to enhance demand for cleaner production as a tool for achieving compliance.

UCPC is in the process of publishing success stories of APL 1 which will help to create awareness about the benefits of adopting cleaner production and therefore enhance demand for it at the enterprise level.


17

Cleaner production center: water treatment and recycling plant of softdrink industry in Mwanza - Tanzania

Not so long ago in 2007, Mabira Forest in Uganda was at the verge of being given away to an investor to grow sugarcane but thanks to a fierce fight by the civil society, the forest was saved although the matter still weighs in balance. Several wetlands in Kampala and along major highways to Jinja or Gulu have lately been built up with factories with government arguing that development is economically more viable than natural resources.Experts are now fearful as to whether Ugandans who will be living 50 years from now will have anything to enjoy other than natural disasters and calamity arising from unsustainable exploitation of natural resources including forests, wetlands, land and wildlife.

What is also bothering is whether government is making the right decisions in choosing development over natural resources considering that the future Ugandans also have only the natural resources to make a living. The United Nations has defined Sustainable development as development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. In its Sustainable Development goals dubbed ‘the future we want’, the UN lays out components of sustainable development which include: population dynamics, health, education and culture, water and sanitation, employment and decent work, desertification, land degradation and drought, food security, nutrition and poverty eradication.

According to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) - National Performance from 2000 to 2011 of the Population Secretariat, Uganda has made strides in ensuring environment sustainability. Uganda scored 69.5 percent on sustainable development nearly meeting its goal of 70 percent by 2015 but the question now is how to ensure that the post-2015 agenda and the sustainable development goals (SDGs), which are expected to replace the MDGs on 1st January 2016, will have the same effect.

According to Mr OnesmusMugyenyi, a Public Policy analyst with Advocates Coalition for Development and Environment, Uganda is now stuck on sustainable development despite having in place policies that can help achieve it.Mr Mugyenyi says that already there are indicators that show that Uganda is growing unsustainably which include a sharp decline in natural resources, failure to manage population growth, poor education service delivery, poor Health care delivery and government’s lack of transparency.

“Wetlands have been decimated, forest cover has reduced tremendously, rivers are drying, poaching is still a big problem within the protected areas, climate change is threatening the current and future generation, agriculture may be impossible in the near future in many areas dues to soil mismanagement. We are not on the path we are now trapped”

Mr Mugyenyi says.Statistics from the National Forestry Authority shows that Uganda loses about 90,000 ha of forest a year whereas over 500 ha of wetlands have been lost in the past 15 years.

Richard Kimbowa, the Programme Manager for Uganda Coalition for Sustainable Devilment, says that the challenge at the moment is that:

“we are having different sustainable development visions due to lack of cooperation, short-termism and outright greed propelled by the market-based growth model that we unquestionably pursue.”

Mr Kimbowa says that all this has left no options for the poor but to remain dependent on nature for a living.“In essence the poor are looking for immediate fulfilment, of food, water, energy, such that long term goals come secondary or not at all,” says Mr Kimbowa adding: “Policy implementation needs to be seen to work from sustainable use and management of resources, districts added more money to monitor resource use and to coordinate local governments, in sum we still have substantive work to do as a country much as the international community is obliged to come in.”

The Public Relations Officer for NEMA, Naomi Karekaho says that they are making strides in the right directions.She says the institution is implementing the a municipal solid waste management project meant to support extensive agriculture by providing homemade manure which would improve crop yields for farmers who will in turn not have to exploit other resources in addition to having laws that protect forest and wetland use. But, at the helm of this Ms Karekaho says the population must be controlled as it almost entirely depends on natural resources for basic survival.

Sustainable Development still far from being achievedBy Flavia Lanyero

Deforestation: Cutting down trees for farm land (Photo by UCSD)

18

The Lake Victoria Environmental Management Project Phase II (LVEMP II) is an East African Community project under implementation in the five countries that share the Lake Victoria basin: Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda for eight years (September 2009 - June 2017)

LVEMP II is a transboundary Project that is designed to achieve two development / global environmental objectives: improve collaborative management of transboundary natural resources of Lake Victoria Basin and to reduce environmental stress in the targeted pollution hotspots and selected degraded sub catchments as a means of improving the livelihoods of communities who depend on the natural resources of the basin. It works under 4 main components of Strengthening Institutional capacity for managing shared water and fisheries resources, Point source pollution control and prevention, Watershed management and Project coordination and management.

Three ‘phases’ for LVEMP II

LVEMPII is implemented in 3 phases referred to as Adjustable Program Lending (APL). APL1 (2009 – 2013) currently in a ‘No cost extension’ period that has involved Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda, is financed by IDA USD 90 million, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) USD l0 million, GEF USD 7 million, and Borrowers USD 7.8 million equivalent.

APL2 involves Burundi and Rwanda since 2012, with additional IDA financing of USD 30 million. APL3, with indicative IDA financing of another USD 90 million, Sida USD 10 million (or SEK62.5 million equivalent), and Borrowers USD 7.9 million equivalent, may be considered to

further scale up interventions by Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda, subject to the implementation performance of APLl and availability of funding from IDA and other sources

Transformation from LVEMP I to LVEMP II

LVEMP II is a follow up of LVEMP I, a major intervention to improve transboundary management of Lake Victoria financed by the World Bank/GEF financed. The objectives of LVEMP I, implemented from March 1997 to December 2005, were to: provide the necessary information to improve management of the Lake ecosystem; establish mechanisms of cooperative management by the three riparian states; identify and demonstrate practical, self-sustaining remedies; and build capacity for ecosystem management. During its implementation, LVEMP I was placed on the list of high Corporate Risk projects after an NGO filed a complaint with the Inspection Panel (World Bank, 2009).

According to the World Bank, the NGO claimed that it had failed to ensure that adequate environmental assessment of the impact of leaving mechanically harvested water hyacinth to sink to the bottom of the lake is undertaken by the Borrowers. To mitigate the adverse environmental impact, mechanical harvesting was stopped, except at the intakes for water supply and power generation. In the latter case, the mechanically harvested water hyacinth were transported and safely disposed off at the dump sites.

At closing of LVEMP I, both the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) and the Implementation Completion Reports (ICRs) rated the achievement of development objectives of LVEMP I as ‘marginally satisfactory’. This was mainly

because the harmonization of policies, pollution and erosion control, improved water quality, and translation of research results into strategic resources’ management plans were not achieved. These problems prompted the design of LVEMP I1 project.

‘Who is involved’ in LVEMP II implementation?

The implementation structure for LVEMP II, according to the World Bank, took into consideration the experience and lessons learnt under LVEMP I, and the inherent potential risks, given that it is a transboundary shared resources intervention that need to fulfil certain aspects.

Lake Victoria Basin Commission (LVBC) under the East African Community was a broad consensus institution amongst the Partner States, as an appropriate regional coordination setting for the LVEMP 11 under the assumption that institutional strengthening and capacity building activities will be provided to LVBC under the project, as required.

The project implementation arrangements is based on a two-prong institutional set up provided in the Protocol on the Sustainable Development of the LVB, that is, at the EAC regional and at national levels. At the EAC regional level, the Protocol establishes LVBC, Coordination Committee on LVB, and the Sectoral Council of Ministers. The Council of Ministers reports to the EAC Summit of Heads of State. At the national level, the Protocol provides for the designation of the National Focal Point Ministry (NFPM), and the National Focal Point Officer (NFPO).

Overall, the LVEMP I1 project design embraces the “subsidiarity principle”, whereby most of the interventions will be

LVEMPII makes headway amidst institutional and operational hitches By Kimbowa Richard

19

implemented at the national level. Under this principle, the national institutions are responsible for implementing the project, through the key line ministries, local government authorities, and participating communities. The regional institutions are responsible for coordinating project implementation by individual countries, and implementing limited regional activities.

What are the key LVEMP II accomplishments to date?

According to the LVBC, as at November 2013, many regional level outputs from the 4 components remained at different level of implementation. Out of the 20 expected outputs at this level,only 4 have been done, while 12are on-going and 4 were not done by then.

One of the key regional products include the Basin Wide Strategy SLM in LVB that was finalized, approved by both Regional Project Steering Committee (RPSC) and the 10th Sectoral Council of Ministers for LVB that has been followed by development of regional guidelines for sustainable land management.

Another key product has been development of options for establishing the Lake Victoria Environmental Fund (LVEF) and identification of sources of financing, which has been approved by RPSC and Sectoral Council of Ministers for LVB. Following this, Partner states are expected to meet and chose one option for implementation.

Also the Water hyacinth control and management Strategy was approved by the by 6th Regional Project Steering Committee and adopted by the Sectoral Council of Ministers for LVB. Following this, national action plans for implementation are underway.

At the national level, achievement has been made under the 4 components mainly in setting the scene – consultancies; site surveys feasibility studies, design preparations in relation to rehabilitation of waste water treatment facilities. A lot more remains to be done as evidenced by the cumulative expenditure with APLI countries: Kenya at 36.6%; Tanzania at 39.9%; Uganda at 19.5%. Burundi and Rwanda were at 4.6% and 3.7 % respectively (LBVC, September 2013). This translated to only 29.7% overall, that is still low to warrant scaling up of interventions by Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda in APL3.

In relation to promotion of cleaner production technology, regionally coordinated by the Kenya Cleaner Production Centre, substantive progress has been made in terms of preparation of resource efficient and cleaner production manuals, sensitization and awareness creation for regulatory agencies, industry training and sensitization on cleaner production, in plant assessments. Overall 77.35% of targeted industries have been trained on cleaner production technologies, while 101.23% of targeted industries are adopting cleaner production in-plant assessments and / or generated cleaner production options (in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda). In Rwanda and Burundi, field inventories have been carried out ahead of the expected training and other activities.

In relation to watershed management (Component 3), there has been a marked delay in implementation of CDD-type subprojects aimed at reducing non-point sources of pollution, through control of soil erosion by adopting sustainable water and soil management practices. Moreover this is one of the key direct opportunities for communities across the LVB to

participate in LVEMP II. Uganda remains laggard as its 66 approved projects have not been implemented to a freeze on use of the funds by the World Bank for close to 2 years. Kenya has 129 projects approved with a bulk of these (90) below 50% implementation. Tanzania has 10 projects completed and await post completion evaluation, 26 of them above 50% of implementation, while 86 are below 50% of implementation. From the grassroot level this state of affairs has resulted in frustration, disappointed communities together with mistrust and suspicion between communities on one hand and Local Government frontline staff and LVEMPII National secretariat on the other hand. This has been much more pronounced in Uganda.

What are the key challenges to LVEMP II execution?

According to LVBC, the limitations to better performance include the lengthy Community-Driven Development (CDD) sub-projects cycle where a lot of time was taken up by sensitization and trainings; freezing of disbursement to Uganda project team; inadequate capacity of community groups to prepare and submit quality and innovative proposals; over-engaged district project teams; technicalities in the procurement process including unresponsiveness, over-priced bids and so on; effects of the staff mainstreaming process including staff changes in some project teams; capacity gaps in the application of GISand dwindling funds for regionally coordinated activities.

The lengthy EAC approval processes and requirements for regionally coordinated activities/consultancies feature prominently. For example, on the recognition that uncoordinated water release and abstraction is a potential source of conflict, the


20

nineteenth Extraordinary Meeting of the EAC Council of Ministers directed LVBC to finalize the Water Release and Abstraction Policy and develop a legal mechanism to ensure compliance with the Agreed Curve Limit; and abstractions from the Basin that are equitable and reasonable. Partner States further agree that the envisaged legal mechanisms shall include dispute resolution procedures as already provided under the Treaty for the Establishment of the East Africa Community, given the potential. This was linked to the time frame of the coming into force of LVEMP II. Unfortunately, while the adoption of this important policy is reportedly ‘finalised’, a last minute ‘request’ from one of the Partner states that need to be taken into account, is the cause of this delay.

At the national level a number of operational and institutional related constraints were put forward to the Regional Project Steering Committee (September, 2013). These include the delay in obtaining the ‘NO objection’ from the World Bank on work plan and procurement plan for 2013; the ‘freeze’ on funds disbursement to LVEMP II Uganda means the achievement of some regional targets in the project results framework will lag behind in terms of delivery.

The procurement of various consultancies at both has also been taking more time than had been expected while the absorption capacity of funds in particular at NPCTs on component 2 (Point Sources pollution control and prevention) and component 3 (watershed management) pose a major challenge to implementation and could in the long run affect entry into APL3. Also procurement delays for approved items under component 2 and 3 were highlighted.

Furthermore, the limited capacity of districts to effectively coordinate the implementation of both CDD subprojects and Co-Management Interventions running concurrently coupled with limited capacity of the NPCT members to undertake many activities given that most of them cut across most sectors and can only be conclusive with their participation pose a challenge.

There is limited technicalbackstopping at different levels. For example, CDD subprojects that have commenced have no adequate tech backstopping due to logistical challenges, while World Bank backstopping for APL2 countries has been inadequate.

Communication and information flow is another challenge that has manifested itself in misinterpretation and distortion of information about project activities particularly water hyacinth management and CDD subprojects. This has resulted in frustration bordering to conflict between communities and other stakeholders. In the same way, communication between LVBC and National Ministries and other actors needs to be scaled up and in some cases developed.

Climate change and variability is also negatively impacting on rural livelihoods and could undo the project interventions if not taken into consideration in future.

What could be done to overcome these challenges?

There is an acute need to scale up learning platform to enable communities to provide feedback, share experiences and to network with each other at national and regional levels. The East African Sustainability Watch Network has put forward a Client Service Charter for LVEMPII as one step in this regard

There is need for more responsive implementation teams to the issues raised in the media in real time and at regular intervals. One way would be to scale up electronic information sharing using social media options, preparation of periodic newsletters, that we could help share with CSOs, media throughout East Africa and taking advantage of observance of thematic days and other events at the national levels.

There is an urgent need to provide technical backstopping in varied areas, to CDD-type projects by support to District Project Coordination Teams and specialised NGOs that are closer to the beneficiary groups.

In addition, mechanisms have to be sought to overcome procurement delays and hitches as they further delay project implementation due to delayed decision making from the World Bank to the local level.

In the same way measures need to be put in place to avoid what has befallen Uganda, and that this is detected in time given that this delays regional project benefits to be enjoyed fairly and equitably by the targeted communities in the Lake Victoria basin. This might call for a review of project oversight with more ‘clout’ given to LVBC as part of institutional strengthening to undertake successful regional projects.


21

Managing Community Funds: With Community Driven Development Project Money in Place, how ready are CBOs and Community groups fit to access it?

Communities need to have skills, knowledge and support required for them to be able to effectively utilise and manage the LVEMP II funds in order to achievetheir set objectives. Management of funds is very crucial for the success of any initiative since it acts as an engine of the entire project.

What to note when handling funds for community projects

• Legality: Does the Community group managing the funds have the power to do so in order to comply with any legal and regulatory requirements?

• Effectiveness: The arrangements must enable use of funds for the set objectives for which they were received

• Accountability: The arrangements in place should include clear governance and accountability for managing the funds

• Transparency: the system should be clear in order for fellow community members to see and know what income has been received and how it has been spent • Effectiveness: The system should be cost effective such that the funds received benefit the local community as much as possible

By Rebecca Kwagala

What do we need to have in place?• A system for recording funds coming to support the project and how the money is spent

• Proper documentation of all financial transactions by at least a bookkeeper (A person with knowledge of accounts)

• These transactions should be numbered in a chorological manner and filed for easy access.

• The system should be well organized in order to prevent misuse of funds and ensure efficient spending for programmes.

• Ensure that there are internal controls in place to guard against misuse of community funds like having two signatories to sign a cheque, authorization of all payments among others.

• Preparation of periodical reports detailing what the community groupproject received andhow it was spent and should show any balance available.

• These reports should be regularly presented to the relevant stakeholders for transparency and accountability purposes.

22

Community Members in Kenya (Photo by Suswatch Kenya)

EA Sus watchdog Newsletter’s Editor - Emily Arayo spoke with Dr. Raymond Mngodo, the Regional Coordinator for Lake Victoria Environment Management Project (LVEMPII).The discussion starts with an explanation of the context of the Lake Victoria Basin (LVBC) within the East African Community (EAC) setting.

Lake Victoria Basin Commission –LVBC is an institution of the EAC based in the basin of Lake Victoria in Kisumu Kenya. It is mandated to deal with all environment issues and investment issues with in Lake Victoria Basin under the Protocol for SustainableDevelopment of Lake Victoria.

What is LVEMP and how is LVEMPI project liked to LVEMPII project?

The link isin addressing trivial issues of environmental degradation with in the LakeVictoria basin. LVEMP I project begun in 1997 and concluded in 2005 December .It dwelled on understanding the Lake basin, learning environment issues and building capacity. From the lessons learnt LVEMP II was prepared for 3 years from 2006 to 2008, LVEMP II has 2 objectives of improving collaborative management of trans-boundary natural resources of Lake Victoria Basin and secondly reducing environmental stress in the targeted pollution hotspots and selected degraded sub-catchments as a means of improving the livelihoods of communities who depend on the natural resources of the Basin.We have noticed several stresses

in the Basin coming from land area,literal zones, directly upon the water body and stresses fromoutside the basin through atmospheric deposition from phosphates and nitrates deposits, which are all affecting the environmental situation in the Lake;we are trying to mitigate the stresses.

What is APL1 APL2, APL3 are they the same?

These are financial phases with in the same project. APL is Adaptable Programme Loan. Whenever a group of people areready they join the project. When the countries areready theyjoin so Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya joined earlier and then Rwanda and Burundi joined later as APL2. They joined as APL 2 their loan arrangement was different.In the beginning when the three countries were ready the loan was availed to them as APL1.APL3 is the next, the project runs for 8 year we are in APL1, APL2 has joined APL1 will go on till the three countries start the APL3. As we move on with APL2 we continue with APL2 countries to conclude. The first for the 3 countries, the second for the two countries and the third for the three countries.

What interventions will APL3 deal with?

APL3 will consist of up-scaling activities done under APL1 phase that focused onone pilot project area per country. APL3 is under planning but it will consist of up-scaling activities of APL1 that focused on pilot projects which will be up-scaled to other river catchments with in the basin. In APL1 Uganda did pilots around

Lake Victoria Environment Project – LVEMP II is an East African Community project under implementation in the five countries that share the Lake Victoria Basin: Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. The project comprises components of strengthening institutional capacity for managing shared water and fisheries resources, point source pollution control and prevention, and watershed management among others.

LVEMP II making strides, but Communities should participate to add value to save L.Victoria – LVEMP II Regional Coordinator

23

Dr. Raymond Mngodo (Photo by UCSD)

River Katonga, Kenya piloted projects around River Nyando and Tanzania around River Simiyu. These will be up-scaled although there are some interventions that were beyond the plan like the water Hyacinth removal and fisheries which were outside the prescribed areas.

What is the budget for the LVEMPII project?

For APL1the 3 countries (Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda) had an IDA of 90 million US Dollars. Specifically Tanzania had 32, Million US Dollars, Uganda had 27.5 Million US Dollars and Kenya had 20 Million US Dollars. The LVBC, which is the Regional coordinating agency receivedgrants fromGEF to a tune of 7 Million US Dollar, 10 Million US Dollar from the Swedish International Agency for Development –SIDA.APL 2 has a total of 30 Million US Dollar, Rwanda has 15 Million US Dollar IDA credit, and Burundi has 15 Million US Dollar IDA grant.Countries are also supposed to contribute IN APL1 to a tune of 7.8 Million US Dollars, APL2, the borrowers also contributed 3 Million US Dollars as counterpart contribution.

At what levels are the Communities contributing towards the project?

The distribution of funding was directed by the Council of Ministers of the EAC as the project was being designed that at least 50% of the credit should be towards water shed management which directly affect majority livelihoods of people in the Lake Basin. Other activities such as pollution control and harmonization of policies othermanagementactivities 12 %. The percentage of the local contribution by communities depends on the design by each individual country. Some have 10% to 20%but also thecapacity of the technical team to engage the communities in the CDDs .Some countries has more others have less depending on when they started. CDDs take long to be developed, whichwas costing us a lot of time so we havenow adapted another model of Co-management working along with the CDDs.

What is the progress of the LVEMPII Implementation?

In Tanzania has already completed 19 CDDS and 197 more with most ofthem on going whichwillbecompleted at different times. Kenya has on going CDDs.Co-management has 12projectsin Kenya on going. Uganda has someproblems so all project activities were suspended but resumed in November 2013, they had prepare andgone through all the processes. They have to revive the system and start on a fresh. Rwanda and Burundi started last year and are in the process of creating awareness and training communities of formulating CDD sub-projects.

How are the communities taking up the CDDS?

We made some corrections for example in Simiyu river catchment in Tanzania for a riverprotection on one side of the bank so it was halted after realizing that the impact would not be good andstared the protection on the opposite side of the river. But of course this takes time to convince communities. But once they accept it they all benefit. Again at the Charcoal dam in Tanzania, a CDD was well done. We visited that with the Ministers and it was appreciated .Ithas an out let for cattle, for people, so there isno disruption of water and it is not contaminated, it is an example that should bereplicated elsewhere. Beekeeping, treeplanting,economic sub-projects like dairycows etc.National teams have engaged NGOsto supervise interms of monitoring and evaluations,financial performance, procurement and oversee specific activities that the country offices may not effectively do yet NGOs could offer support.

What are the benefits so far?

The outcome of the CDD may take a little bit for those that have been completed will be evaluated. The communities are appreciating tree have grown, water supply projects have the water now within reach and are assured of availability of water. the long run they will benefit more and change their behaviour within their vicinity. They understand more how to maintain and protect the environment. Communities now know that they should restrain cattle form grazing on riverbanks in Simiyu.

Can a single community benefit form more CDD?

A community group with a sub-project receives funding for a CDD sub-project they have agreed to undertake at a time with common values. There are many communities and all of them are asking for a CDD funding. In case they have issues of different nature or extension of what has been done, they can have another CDD; such as a River bank protection that stretches to cover the longer extent of the river that runs through a cross section of communities.

How do you manage to work with various countries and stakeholders?

It is a regional project with national teams that have experts in each country. Theregional coordination agency which is LVBC /LVEMP II regional office coordinates, organizes, monitors andevaluates,follows up andseeks solutions and suggestionstoimprovethe implementation process.


24

We do the supervisionthereare five countries so we set programmes to communicate and visit them. The structureis from the Regional to the National.Within the national there is a steering committee with the Permanent Secretaries of the line ministries on policy issues who give policy direction to the project and also work with a technical advisory committee with directors form different sectors. Who go through issues of the project before bringing to the Permanent Secretaries .As Regional coordination we have Regional Steering Committee comprising of two Permanent Secretaries who come to give policy guidance to the project.At the national to the community groups, structures are down to district with district implementation teams who link with the local governments and to the communities.

Do Co-management activities Conflict with CDD sub-project activities?

Co-management activities are focused on water shed management because the extent is very big for CDD and it is done in collaborationwith nationalinstitutions that can participate directly like the Forestry departments in supportingafforestation. Thetwo approaches arecomplementing each other for example a CDD on river protectionyet a co-management could cover more than a CDD there are no conflicting issues so far. Communities are engaged to plant the trees and ensure they grow.

As a regional manager what are theoutcomes and impact of the idealof LVEMPII?

There are stresses in the basin and our aim is to mitigate on the stresses. To see actual changes in a big system like this takes some time but of coursewe need to start from somewhere. Since we haveagreedto work together for a common cause, the benefitscan be realized. In years to come wewill see the quality of water improving, diseases reducing and the livelihood of people improving. The quality of water on the lake is not uniform, where there is more industrialization, there is more pollution. We havethe Cleaner Production Centres where many industries have been sensitized and exposed to Cleaner Production which aims at reducing pollution andatthe same time the industries arebenefiting from using cleaner and better resource management practices of production.

Message to people living around Lake Victoria Basin

For the people living in the Lake basin they must know that the environment is not verysound due to increased population, to reverse itwill needtheir involvement. It is not the government and commission alone; they need the cooperation of the communities because it is for the communities andnot the govt. The government will do its part but at the same time people should alsoberesponsiblelike having proper sanitation facilities not to discharge to the lake. They should be part the solutionand beeager to participate andaddingvalue to the process.


25

Foot prints of LVEMPI sub-project inRakai Uganda

comprehensive and an eye-opener. This photo was taken during a field visit to Nyakach, Kisumu; the little boy was getting water from a stagnant pool of water, oblivious to the implications of the use of the dirty water for domestic purposes. Kudos to the EA SusWatch team for highlighting this issue as the poor- who are most affected- need to be equipped with this information.Velma Oseko-Kisumu, Kenya

5. Dear Editor,I received a copy of the SuswatchdogNewsleter issue 3 and I was particularly impressed with the information I read concerning the Post 2015 Development Agenda and the global Sustainable Development goals. The article on Water and Sanitation also caught my attention. Sanitation surely is an issue that needs urgent addressing by all the countries within the East Africa region as it has severe economic implications. The use of Eco-san toilets should be encouraged and the poor facilitated for the production of biogas from human waste (investment as stated by Mr. Adongo in the article). I really appreciated the newsletter. Thank you!Japheth Babu, Secretary-Litei Self Help Group, Nandi, Kenya

1. Dear Editor,Thank you for the EA Suswatchdog Newsletter. I like the pictures and enjoy reading the articles. I wish you could include pictures of the writers along with their articles so that we know the faces of the Suswatchdog writer IsaKundu, Kenya

2. Dear Editor,Thank you for the year planner. It helps me a lot to plan my activities. In fact I pull it out and glue it on my wall as a calendar. Hope you provide another one for 2014.Anonymous, Mwanza-Tanzania

3. Dear Editor,I enjoy reading this Newsletter and would like to know more about EASUSWATCH. What other information products do you have that you can share out.Atugonza Amos- Masaka-Uganda

4. Dear Editor,Greetings!The EA Suswatchdog Issue no.3 was very informative. The article on ‘The Economic pangs of Poor sanitation in East Africa’ was quite

Letters to the editor

26

Together with the strength of womanhood in Koru Hera Central By Emily Arayo

Diane Marie child is quoted saying that “A woman is the full circle. Within her is the power to create, nurture and transform.” This saying befits the zeal and enthusiasm of a community self-help group in Muhoroni, Western Kenya, thathas membershipof twenty five (25) women undertaking a project of integratingafforestation and dairy development. The group is Koru Hera Central.

Members of this group find the reasons for their existence in the inherent strength of a woman. They indicate that they do not want the disturbance of men as witnessed in their homes to spill over in the group management.

With the need to generate income for group members, Koru Hera Central was registered in March 2011 and built from the interventions initiated of Koru Hera group. It was formed with the objectives of undertaking dairy cows, poultry and horticulture farming .Undertaking

“Ogwethi Integrated afforestation and Dairy Improvement” CDD Sub-project supported by Lake Victoria Environment Management Project –LVEMP II,the peculiar trait of this group is its systemized categorization of roles and responsibilities according to committees. It has a management Committee, Monitoring and Evaluation committee, and procurement and Conflict resolution committee.

It is perhaps one of the few groups with conflict resolution committee anchored in its organizational structure. The composition of the committees includes members of the management and each member may be in more than one committee. For instance procurement committee has five (5) members with two of its members being members of the management committee.Understanding what keeps a group together is best when aiming for a defined livelihood objective. These women’s organization is glued together

with the belief that men are a hindrance to development. The work performed is based on duty rooster which indicates who what works on particular days, although some members do not attend to their work according to the duty rooster. Transparency and communication are traits that keep the women going and working together in their group. They hold meetings once and week and sometimes thrice a week depending on the height of project activity. Activities of the sub-project include establishment of tree nursery, fencing the area, construction of shade, establishment of seed beds, construction of a store and construction of water tank.

Community challenges are experienced by women and men differently but the implementation could have a general objective that serves all people in the community.Rose A. Mjema a community development specialist from Tanzania

Women farming together

27

says that there are many CDD sub-projects are implemented by youth, women and men in various locations in East Africa.She notes however that some women are timid and shy away from expressing their concerns during community meetings. This she says is a challenge because communities should air out their views according to what they think is most challenging and suggest solutions that they think can help them best. ”You find a situation where women are quiet during community meetings, leaving men to dominate the discussions then they follow up with a telephone call expressing their issues long after the meeting ended”.Women activists maintain that speaking out is good because it allows freedom of expression and you could be the woman voice for other voiceless women. Community projects are meant to serve

all so if women do not speak out then their issues will not be addressed.AudreLorde says that “When we speak we are afraid our words will not be heard or welcomed. But when we are silent, we are still afraid. So it is better to speak.”

EMPOWERMENT QUOTATION• “It doesn’t matter who you are, or where you came from. The ability to triumph begins with you. Always.” ~Oprah Winfrey• “The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don’t have any.” ~Alice Walker• “Courage is like a muscle. We strengthen it with use.” Ruth Gordon• “There came a time when the risk to remain tight in the bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom.” Anais Nin• “You may be disappointed if you fail, but you are doomed if you don’t try.” Beverly Sills• “You take your life in your own hands, and what happens? A terrible thing: no one to blame.” Erica Jong• “Our deepest wishes are whispers of our authentic selves. We must learn to respect them. We must learn to listen.” Sarah Ban Breathnach• “The question isn’t who’s going to let me; it’s who is going to stop me.” Ayn Rand• “Remember, no one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”~Eleanor Roosevelt• “The thing women have yet to learn is nobody gives you power. You just take it.” Roseanne Barr• “I do not wish [women] to have power over men; but over themselves.” Mary Wollstonecraft

28

Together with the strength of womanhood in Koru Hera Central By Emily Arayo

Establishment of a tree nursery at Koru Hera Central community group

29

Not so long ago, living with HIV affected or infected persons were considered a bad ordeal and the stigmatization was fiercer than the AIDS disease itself.

This condition is fast changing in Western Kenya where communities

Renewed hope to live with CDD Sub-projects for Western KenyaBy Emily Arayo

A meeting with Siatok Women Group, Nyakach

affected with HIV/AIDS are coming on with sub-projects aided by the Lake Victoria Environment Management Project –LVEMPII.

Suswatchdog is profiling two community self-help groups in Nyakach district that

are profiting from sub-projects integrated with environmental sustainability and livelihood enhancement activities.One is the Agoro West Afforestation and dairy production sub-project and the other is Kewere afforestation and green house sub-project.

Wajane Pamoja Support Group

“WajanePamoja”literally means widows united in Kiswahili. This self- help group that has been inspired by an idea of working together, which to them seems to makes more sense than sulking from sympathises hurled by their community.The group was initiated with a mission to promote collaboration and facilitate community members towards identifying and managing economic resources in order to reduce social-economic impact of HIV-Aids. It envisions a community in which each and every citizen is equally catered for to reduce poverty resulting from HIV/Aids pandemic.

The group is a selected beneficiary group supported under the Community Driven Development (CDD-type) subprojects implemented under the Natural Resources Conservation and livelihoods improvement sub-component under Component 3 of LVEMP II. The group was started in 2009 as a merry go- round organization (gify circle).

With 30 members, the group located in Agoro East sub location, North West Nyakach in Nyakach district has generated interest from their saving and loaned members for use in various economic and social activities.

WajanePamoja Support Group’s organogram has at the upper pillar of the organization its Annual General Meeting, AGM which oversees all their community projects. The management committee and sub committees are formed around four (4) key program areas. These include Orphans and Vulnerable Children -OVC, HIV/Aids, Income Generation Activity, Income generating activities andenvironmental conservation. The AGM also collaborates with Government of Kenya , Non-Government Organizations and Faith Based Organizations to implement the four key program areas. Volunteers and community members are at the base of

30

the organogram. Community members are employed as casual labourers providing links and spreading benefits across the board.

The group holds meetings after every two (2) weeks. The LVEMP II project is built on the experiences of savings and loaning scheme started earlier by the group, localy known as “HologiKungo”.To date the beneficiaries fenced their treenursery site, constructed a store house, established a pricking shade for the tree seedlings and haveconstructed and installed a 10,000 litres plastic water tank. They have also established woodlots at Katito Health Centre, Hope hospital, Katito Polytechnic, Magunga Primary Schooland within the adjacent communities.

Group members attest to new developments in their community and their individual self-empowerment like learning new ideas , new survival and business opportunities for income

generation, environmental conservation and protection, . They say the project has improved their social status and living standards since they are now self-reliant.

They have also learnt to be creative and utilize available resources. They do nothave a community land to operate their project work but their group chair lady has offered her personal land.

Siatok Widows and Orphans Group

Comprising of members of four clans who make the acronym of their group name SIATOK- Sinino, Angango, Tolo and Oketch. It was started in 2004 with the aimof supportingwidows and orphans within the sub location. The group has management committee which performs the executive roles, the procurement, Implementation committees enabling it to currently implement the afforestation unit of the natural resource management

and livelihood improvement sub project. Siatok Widows and Orphans group has the necessary capacity and knowledge to sustainably manage the project. For instance they have in place monitoring, financial and management committee taking responsibility of running the organization. The group has learnt to involve technical persons in their activities, especially guidance from the government. They have strong participation of county administration and involves the assistant chief in its activities.Membership of the group has been gradually increasing from the initial 12 members in 2004 to 42 members in 2011. This group has learnt that for them to stick together and run efficiently, they need to maintain a strong leadership that steers affairs of the group.

From experiences of severe drought in the dry seasons, group members realized the need to save water in times of scarcity but also to reclaim the environment through planting trees to retain moisture and keep water sources wet, they wrote a proposal seeking support from government.

Support came in through the Lake Vitoria Environment Management project –LVEMPII, they have constructed a store, a water tank and have purchased farming implements used to establish a tree nursery complete with a seed bad, transplanting sections of the Gravelia, Lucerna and Pine trees. The tree seedlings are sold to the community and this is just one source of income for the group.

For any group to survive, membership contribution is vital and for Siatok Widows and Orphans group their contribution is both in cashand in-kind. Seven tons of sand, a lorry of manure and labourare some of the contributions in –kind.

Water tank constructed as part of CDD Sub-project (Photos by Suswatch Kenya)

Renewed hope to live with CDD Sub-projects for Western KenyaBy Emily Arayo

Pictorial file of LVEMP II work in Burundi (Photos courtesy of LVEMPII Burundi)

A sensitization meeting in Burundi Nyagisozicommunity meeting (Photos by LVEMPII Burundi)

Left is LVEMPII NPC Mr. LiberatNihayimana at a project siteAquatic weeds on Lake Rweru

LVEMP II Officials at a community sensitization meeting Field excursion of Lake Rweru Eco-system

31

EA SuSwatch in Mugumu celebrating Mara day

Pictures 4 and 6 : School Essay competition winners with their teachers and EASUSWATCH Staff

Picture 2: Sharing publications at the EASUSWATCH stall

Picture 1: Tanzania Premier MizengoPinda& other officials arrive at the function

Picture 5: A procession band marching.

Picture 3: Aprocession marching during Mara day celebrations

1

2

3

4 5

6

Pictures

32

33

Ja

nu

ary

1234567891011

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

2021

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

3031

Fe

bru

ary

1234567891011

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

2021

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Ma

rch

1234567891011

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

2021

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

3031

Ap

ril

1234567891011

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

2021

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

Ma

y

1234567891011

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

2021

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

3031

Ju

ne

1234567891011

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

2021

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

YE

AR

PL

AN

NE

R J

AN

UA

RY

- JU

NE

2014

New

Year's D

ay

World

Wetlands D

ay

World W

ildlife Day

World W

omen's D

ay

World F

orestry Day

World W

ater Day

World M

eteorological Day

World H

ealth Day

World E

arth Day

International Labour D

ay

World T

elecom D

ay

World B

iodiversity Day

World N

o-Tobacco D

ay

World E

nvironment D

ay

mentoring and coaching programme lvempii tanzania on...

Documents