IGAD Biodiversity Management Program

ANNEX VI Interim narrative report

Tana Kipini Laga Badana Bush-Bush land and seascapes

(8th

November 2013 – 7th

November 2014)

Submitted by ICRAF

9 March 2015

1

2

Table of contents

List of acronyms used in the report ................................................................................................. 3

1 Description of the action ................................................................................................................ 4

2 Assessment of implementation of action activities ....................................................................... 5 2.1 Executive summary of the action ............................................................................................... 5 2.2 Results and activities ................................................................................................................. 6 2.3 Progress of activities linked to project results ........................................................................ 11 2.4 Risk analysis ............................................................................................................................ 19 2.5 Project procurement ................................................................................................................ 22

3 Updated plan ............................................................................................................................. 23 3.1 Implementation plan 2013 – 2017 ........................................................................................... 23 3.2 Action plan 2015 – .................................................................................................................. 26

4 Beneficiaries/ affiliated entities and other cooperation ........................................................ 30 4.1 Relation between beneficiaries of the grant ............................................................................ 30 4.2 Relation with State Authorities ................................................................................................ 30 4.3 Relation to other implementing organizations ........................................................................ 30 4.4 Final beneficiaries ................................................................................................................... 32 4.5 Other third parties ................................................................................................................... 32 4.6 Synergies with other actions .................................................................................................... 32 4.7 Building on previous EU grants aimed at the same target group ........................................... 33

5 Visibility ........................................................................................................................................ 33

6 Annex 1 – revised log frame ........................................................................................................ 34

3

List of acronyms used in the report

ANAFE African Network for Agriculture, Agroforestry and Natural Resources

Education

ASDSP Agricultural Sector Development Support Programme

CABI

CBD

CDMP

COMMS

CORDIO

Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux International

Convention on Biological Diversity

Community Development and Management Plan

Community Conservation Monitoring System

Coastal Oceans Research and Development in the Indian Ocean

CSDP

DEMTAC

Cross-border Stakeholder Dialogue Platform

Disaster and Environmental Management Training and Consulting

EC European Commission

ER

FMNR

HoA

Expected Result

Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration

Horn of Africa

IGAD Intergovernmental Authority on Development

ICRAF World Agroforestry Centre

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Re-

sources

LAPSSET Lamu Port Southern Sudan-Ethiopia Transport

LFI

LUP

Log Frame Indicator

Land Use Planning

MoPMRE Ministry of Petroleum, Mineral Resources and Environment

MoLFR Ministry of Livestock, Forestry & Rangelands

NEMA National Environmental Management Authority

NCC North Coast Conservation Ltd.

NMK National Museums of Kenya

NRT Northern Rangelands Trust

PSC

RAAS

Project Steering Committee

Rainwater Association of Somalia

RWH

TAT

TKLBBB

Rain Water Harvesting

Technical Assistance Team

Tana Kipini Laga Badana Bush Bush

TSC

WWF

Trans-boundary Steering Committee

World Wide Fund for Nature

WRUA Water Resource Users Association

4

1 Description of the action

1.1 Name of Coordinator of the grant contract: World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF)

1.2 Name and title of contact person: Dr. Jan de Leeuw (interim project coordinator)

1.3 Name of beneficiaries and affiliated entities in the action: Local communities,

NGOs, local government, biodiversity managers and experts

1.4 Title of the action: Biodiversity Management Programme in the Horn of Africa

1.5 Contract number: FED/2013/330-231

1.6 Start date and end date of the reporting period: 8th

November 2013 – 7th

No-

vember 2014

1.7 Target countries or region: Kenya and Somalia in the the Tana-Kipini-

LagaBadana Bush Bush (TKLBBB) Land And Seascape

1.8 Final beneficiaries: National government, policy makers and civil society from lo-

cal to global scale

1.9 Countryies in which activities take place: Same as 1.7

5

2 Assessment of implementation of action activities

2.1 Executive summary of the action

The overall objective of the project is to reduce poverty by improving the social and eco-

nomic well-being of the population in the IGAD region through better regional integration

in environmental sector, with a specific objective of conservation and sustainable manage-

ment of ecosystems in the Tana-Kipini-Laga Badana Bush-Bush Land and Seascape in or-

der to contribute to lasting goods and services. The project was launched in November

2013 but actual implementation began when representatives of the BMP Technical Assis-

tance Team (TAT) visited ICRAF on 24th

of January 2014 for discussions on the grant im-

plementation. This was followed by a one-day workshop facilitated by the TAT to review

log frames and monitoring tools. An implementing partners meeting was held on the 21st of

March 2014 that brought together 20 participants from Kenya and Somalia to deliberate on

the programme. The discussion on Demonstration Site selection, and risk assessment was

initiated during this meeting. Two field visits to support the scoping and baseline study at

the project site in Lamu County (Kenya) were undertaken in May-June 2014, followed by

the stakeholders’ inception workshop on 16-17 July 2014 that brought together 54 stake-

holders from Kenya and Somalia. Discussions included the approval of the demonstration

sites, the risk assessment, findings of the scoping / baseline survey carried out in Lamu

County, priority areas for intervention, the implementation plan and the roles and responsi-

bilities of partners. Also the Trans-boundary Steering Committee (TSC) for the TKLBBB

was inaugurated during the inception workshop.

Following the inception meeting the log frame has been revised (See annex 1) and im-

proved, considering the output of the inception meeting and security issues at the demon-

stration sites, so as to make it SMARTer without changing the focus of the project. By the

end of the first year, four contracts had been signed (KFS, ANAFE, CORDIO, CABI).

Terms of reference for other partners and consultants were under discussion and contracts

in preparation. In Somalia, it has been difficult to identify relevant qualified government

institutions and / or partners and following advise from the MoPMRE ICRAF has ap-

proached consultants to support the implementation of the project.

The insecurity of the project area has limited the possibility to implement the action. The

situation in the southern part of Somalia was insecure throughout the year, thus limiting the

possibility for field visits and project interventions. Lamu County experienced several vio-

lent attacks just after the second scoping study in June 2014, and with the mainland of

Lamu County insecure the rest of the year it has been difficult to revisit the area of the

demonstration sites and complete the baseline study. Notwithstanding this, ICRAF fol-

lowed up on advise to work at pilot sites and changed its initial more risk adverse strategy

towards working explicitly with local communities in riskier pilot sites. To reduce expo-

sure to the risks associated to insecurity and following discussion during the third PSC

meeting (June 2014) ICRAF has decided to increase the level of implementation of the pro-

ject through partners with network and experience on the ground.

6

Table 1: Level of achievement of the indicators of the specific objective

Specific ob-

jective

Indicators Level of achievement

Conservation

and sustaina-

ble manage-

ment of eco-

systems in the

Tana-Kipini-

Laga Badana

Bush Land

and Seascape

in order to

contribute to

lasting goods

and services

1. Ecosystems goods and services and

protected areas are increasingly recog-

nised as viable sustainable develop-

ment options in the TKLBB Land and

Seascape by end of the program in

2017

No progress made; this is to be achieved

by end of the project. Target ecosystems to

provide goods and services identified with-

in the project area (pilot sites)

2. Stakeholders supported to attract in-

vestment in protected area manage-

ment, with at least one donor round-

table organized by the end of the pro-

gramme in 2017

None, this is planned for 2016 and 2017

3. Community assets of BMP target

communities / groups increased in

2017 compared to 2014 baseline

Assessment of baseline situation (2014)

on-going

2.2 Results and activities

Tables 2 and 3 provide a short narrative of the results achieved so far. Overall the table indicates a

low level of achievement in the first year. There are reasons for this including the insecurity in the

project area in 2014 and the lengthy process of identifying and engaging with partners to work with

at pilot sites. The departure of the ICRAF project coordinator further delayed implementation.

ICRAF has responded through nomination of an interim project coordinator who has now built up a

team to turn around the project and to mitigate the delays. This team is currently working to expe-

dite the remaining contracts with partners to be all signed by Q1 2015, develop and implement an

implementation plan that reflects the revised log frame and the goals in tables 2 and 3 and ensure

that the project will be on track by the end of Q4 2015. To achieve this ICRAF advertised the posi-

tion of a full time project coordinator who will start in April 2015. Besides ICRAF will recruit a

project officer to be based in Lamu to ensure implementation at the level of the project site. In addi-

tion ICRAF will implement an internal project M&E to keep track of progress against timelines and

deliverables and correct where necessary. With these changes, it is anticipated that the project will

be on track and earlier delays mitigated by the end of the second year.

What ICRAF has achieved in the first year includes the following: (1) inception stakeholders work-

shop held, (2) inauguration of Trans-boundary Steering Committee (TSC), (3) review of the pro-

jects log frame, (4) stakeholder consultations at the project sites and completion of a draft baseline

and scoping study in Kenya, (5) contracts with four partners signed and contracts with others dis-

cussed and in preparation.

Tables 2 and 3 review the level of achievement by the end of the first year against the revised out-

put indicators.

7

Result 1: Conservation of cross-border biodiversity land/seascapes strengthened and institutional capacities for management improved

Table 2 summarizes the work done and achievements made during the reporting period (8th

November 2013 to 7th

November 2014) as well as the pro-

spective for the coming period.

Table 2: Result 1 - output indicators progress analysis

Revised output indicators Cumulated progress achieved

(as at 7th

November 2014)

Estimate %

achievement

Progress explanation / comments Perspectives for next period

/ action required

1.1 Cross-Border Stakeholder Dialogue

Platform for Biodiversity Management es-

tablished for coastal zone by Q4 2015, and

regular meetings thereafter.

Implemented by ICRAF. Initial dis-

cussions have been held with Lamu

county government and other part-

ners who appreciate the opportunity

to develop a dialogue across the

border.

0 This activity is on track since the Cross-

border Stakeholder Dialogue Platform

(CSDP) needs to be established by Q4 2015.

Given insecurity on both sides of the border

the situation in 2014 has not been very condu-

cive for establishment of the CSDP.

ICRAF will develop a proto-

col and ToR for the CSDP

and ensure it will be estab-

lished in 2015.

1.2 One (1) proposal for establishment of a

cross-border network of biodiversity con-

servation areas prepared by the Cross-

Border Stakeholder Platform and transmit-

ted to the relevant national decision makers

by Q4_2016.

Implemented by ICRAF. No pro-

gress so far.

0 The development of the proposal will be one

of the outputs of the meetings of the CSDP. ICRAF will include the prep-

aration of the proposal in the

ToR for the CSDP and facili-

tate the CSDP to develop and

deliver the proposal.

1.3 Fourteen (14) people exchanged be-

tween at least two pairs of research and

training institutions of Kenya and Somalia

to build capacity for biodiversity conserva-

tion and natural resource management by

Q4_2017.

Implemented through ANAFE.

Contract signed on 4 November

2014.

0 ANAFE will deliver a work-

plan by end of Q1 2015

1.4 Biodiversity loss and its drivers are bet-

ter understood in the demonstration site,

better managed through targeted interven-

tions supported by BMP / IPs, and proposed

solutions communicated to decision makers,

by Q4_2017.

Implemented by ICRAF. Africover

2000 and 2008 databases collected

and archived.

0 The indicator will focus on assessing habitat

loss for the cross border area based on Afri-

cover data and detailed analysis for land use /

habitat change for demonstration sites. Analy-

sis of species level biodiversity loss is not part

of LFI 1.4: it will be undertaken under LFI

2.1.

ICRAF will deliver a report

estimating the rate of habitat

loss between 2000 and pre-

sent by Q 4 2015. ICRAF will

use this information to focus

BMP interventions to cope

with biodiversity loss and re-

view in its next interim report

possible further interventions.

8

Revised output indicators Cumulated progress achieved

(as at 7th

November 2014)

Estimate %

achievement

Progress explanation / comments Perspectives for next period

/ action required

1.5 At least 200 individuals in selected

demonstration sites are provided training

and support in developing / improving natu-

ral resource value chains by Q3_2017.

Implemented in Kenya through Ag-

ricultural Sector Development Sup-

port Programme (ASDSP). Possible

products for value chain develop-

ment were identified during the

scoping study in Lamu County.

Questionnaires have been prepared

to undertake market surveys and

prioritisation of products. Contract

with ADDSP not signed.

5

ICRAF faced difficulty to find affordable par-

ties to develop value chains in Somalia. The

expectations of consultants who expressed an

interest were beyond the financial possibilities

of the BMP project. Given this and the securi-

ty context, which may complicate value chain

development ICRAF proposes dropping the

ambition to develop value chains in Somalia.

Contract with ASDSP will be

signed before 28 February

2015. The draft contract spec-

ifies a strict time line with

training and support to im-

plementation of value chains

in 2015 and M&E of uptake

of the value chains in years

beyond.

1.6a Training and support provided on tree

planting and management, and rainwater

harvesting techniques to at least 1,000

community members by Q4_2015.

Implemented through Kenya Forest

Services (KFS) in Kenya and

RAAS in Somalia. KFS contract

signed on 4-11-2014 and workplan

received on 12-11-2014.

0 The contract with RAAS has been delayed

because expectations on financial support ex-

ceeded BMP budgetary possibilities by a fac-

tor ten.

KFS started. Contract RAAS

with strict time line will be

signed by 28 February 2015.

1.6b At least 500 farmers each plant and

manage an average 40 surviving trees on

their farms by Q3_2017.

Implemented through Kenya Forest

Services (KFS) in Kenya. KFS con-

tract signed on 4-11-2014 and

workplan received on 12-11-2014.

0 KFS started. Contract RAAS

with strict time line will be

signed by 28 February 2015.

1.7 Degraded sites in protected areas are en-

riched or naturally regenerated with at least

60,000 seedlings of indigenous tree species

with at least 40% survival by Q3_2017.

Implemented through Kenya Forest

Services (KFS) in Kenya and

RAAS in Somalia. KFS contract

signed on 4-11-2014 and workplan

received on 12-11-2014.

0 The contract with RAAS has been delayed

because expectations on financial support ex-

ceeded BMP budgetary possibilities by a fac-

tor ten.

KFS started. Contract RAAS

with strict time line will be

signed by 28 February 2015.

1.8 Communication strategy aligned with

project objectives drafted by ICRAF by Q4

2014. At least 5 packages of communica-

tion, educational and advocacy materials

distributed to relevant stakeholders between

Q2-Q4 2015

Implemented by ICRAF. By 7 No-

vember the following had been

achieved: communication strategy

drafted. Project web site developed.

One poster presented at ICRAF sci-

ence week. Two articles in ICRAF

news letter

5 Communication strategy will

shared with IGAD for ap-

proval on February 10. Pro-

posed communication pack-

ages to be developed in 2015

following approval strategy.

9

Results 2: Policies for sustainable ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation at both the national and regional level improved

Table 3 provides a summary of work done and achievements made during the reporting period (8th

November 2013 to 7th

November 2014) as well as

the perspectives over the coming period.

Table 3: Result 2 - Output indicators progress analysis

Revised output indicators Cumulated progress achieved

(November 2014)

Progress

status

Progress explanation / comments Perspectives for the incoming

period / action required

2.1 Biodiversity and socio-economic infor-

mation about the cross-border ecosystems is

collected, compiled and made accessible

and understandable to stakeholders and de-

cision makers by Q4 2015 so that biodiver-

sity is mainstreamed into ongoing planning

processes.

Implemented through CORDIO for

the seascape, contracts pending for

two consultants in Kenya and So-

malia for terrestrial systems. COR-

DIO contract signed on 7 Novem-

ber 2014.

0 Contracts with consultants will

be signed by 28 February 2015.

ICRAF will deliver the biodi-

versity assessment by Q4_2015.

In the 2015 interim report

ICRAF will propose activities

to mainstream this biodiversity

information in planning pro-

cesses.

2.2 Two (2) local planning units (Lamu &

Badhaadhe) supported with equipment and

training by Q2 2015.

Implemented by ICRAF through

NMK. Contract not signed.

0 It has been agreed with NMK (main partner

for LUP) that the Lamu County Governor’s

office (Ministry of Lands) will host the plan-

ning unit. Staffs are already available at the

office to manage the planning unit.

ICRAF considers the institutional context in

Somalia too weak for support to inclusion of

biodiversity in operational LUP; it proposes

to use this LFI to support building institu-

tional capacity in LUP in Somalia, with ex-

change visits to Kenya.

Contract will NMK will be

signed by February 28. In 2015

ICRAF and NMK will procure

equipment and provide training

and technical support for inclu-

sion of biodiversity in LUP.

ICRAF will work with the

MoPMR of Somalia to develop

a program to develop institu-

tional capacity in biodiversity

inclusive LUP in Somalia.

2.3 The ongoing Spatial Planning process

(LUP) for Lamu County being led by Coun-

ty Government is technically supported by

BMP to be more participatory and support-

ive of biodiversity, and draft Spatial Plan is

transmitted to relevant authorities by

Q3_2016.

Implemented by ICRAF through

NMK. Contract not signed.

0 Same as above

In 2015 ICRAF and NMK will

develop MOU with Lamu coun-

ty office, facilitate engagement

with stakeholders, providing

technical support for the devel-

opment of a concept note and

inclusion of biodiversity con-

servation in planning at Lamu

10

County level and thereby in-

form national policy.

2.4 Two (2) cross border exchange visits

(240 person days) are organized to strength-

en the skills of stakeholders from the select-

ed demonstration sites in collaborative bio-

diversity management by Q4_2015.

Implemented through ANAFE.

Contract signed on 4 November

2014.

0 Implementation plan being developed Capacity needs assessment and

identification of institutions and

participants to be completed by

Q1 2015

2.5a One (1) Plan for re-establishment of a

management system for Laga Badana Bush

Bushle National Reserve in Somalia pre-

pared with all stakeholders and submitted to

relevant Somali authorities for approval by

Q3_2017.

Implemented through consultant M.

Ibrahim. Contract drafted but not

signed.

0 ICRAF has compiled and reviewed literature

on past FAO/UNDP project aiming to sup-

port establishment of a National Park which

was never established due to conflicts and

insecurity, Following consideration of three

consultants, Dr Ibrahim has been recruited to

develop a plan and road map to establish a

protected area.

Somali consultant will develop

a plan and a road map to estab-

lish a protected area in the cross

border area considering stake-

holders, land tenure and securi-

ty. The insecure situation is not

favourable to the creation of a

PA within the lifespan of the

project.

2.5b One Management Plan for the Awer

Conservancy in Kenya prepared and submit-

ted for approval to relevant government

agencies by Q3_2016.

Implemented through Northern

Rangeland Trust (NRT) – Coast.

Contract not signed.

0 Discussions with former CEO of NCC were

problematic. NRT changed NCC into NRT

Coast, a subsidiary of NRT, which eased ne-

gotiation. The contract aims at support two

Community Development and Management

Plans (CDMP) and one Community Conser-

vation Monitoring System (COMMS). NRT

agreed to focus BMP activities in the con-

servancies and ICRAF will discuss this with

partners implementing other activities.

Contract with NCC will be

signed before February 28. By

the end of 2015 two CDPs and

one COMMS will have been

developed by Q4 2015. Possible

further support to conservancies

will be considered in the 2015

interim report.

2.6 Six (6) training sessions on integrating

biodiversity conservation & use at land-

scape scale into LUP for an average of 20

people / session from local governments,

communities, CSOs, NGOs & PA managers

carried out by Q2_2015.

Implemented through ANAFE. 0 Contract signed on 4 November does not

make reference to LFI 2.6, and ANAFE is

not aware that they are supposed to deliver

on this. ICRAF will inform ANAFE that LFI

2.6 will be a prime deliverable expected

from their work and include this in their

workplan. The approved time schedule will

be re-negociated to ensure timely delivery.

ANAFE will submit a detailed

workplan by end of Q1 2015.

ICRAF proposes to prepare

training materials in Q 2 2015

and schedule the six training

sessions between Q3 2015 and

Q2 2016.

11

2.3 Progress of activities linked to project results

During the reporting period, the logic of the project has been improved. Project activities have been

linked to the related expected result, to fill the gap of the original project document. Such reorganiza-

tion is reflected in the planning contained in chapter 3 of this report. However with this first interim

report we report on the activities according to the numbering and listing as in the original project doc-

ument.

Below is a review of the progress made on the various activities in view of what ICRAF proposed in

the original project proposal and proposed action for the future. The text provides the description of

the various activities as found on page 16 and 17 of the approved proposal, clarifies the link to the ex-

pected results of the revised log frame to which these activities contribute, reviews what has been

achieved and where we stand now and finally describes future activities and what change we want to

make.

Activity 1 – Baseline study. Description of the activity. “This activity will inventorize the physi-

cal and socio-economic conditions in the area and identify government / local communities develop-

ment priorities to allow proper embedding of further project activities in the setting of the area. These

activities will thus inform stakeholders on the status of their environment and be an input to guide the

development of other (BMP) project activities”. Link to LFIs - The activity consists of four sub-

activities listed here below. The remote sensing analysis and the baseline assessment will result in

LFI 1.4: “Biodiversity loss and its drivers are better understood in the demonstration site, better

managed through targeted interventions supported by BMP / IPs, and proposed solutions communi-

cated to decision makers, by Q4_2017”. Below is a detailed review for the four activities.

Baseline assessment. Progress and review. The baseline assessment is a preparatory action to identi-

fy with BMP stakeholders priority areas and actions. It started with the reaching of an agreement on

the project demonstration sites, which was done during the stakeholder consultation in March 2014.

On the Kenyan side this was followed in April to June 2014 by two field visits by ICRAF staff to en-

gage with stakeholders and collect data to use for compilation of the project baseline. Further field

visits to complete the baseline, including further stakeholder engagement and collection of infor-

mation on Aichi indicators was made impossible by the insecurity. A draft baseline report was shared

with the IGAD TA in September 2014 who requested to complete it including a review of the Aichi

indicators when security would allow. For Somalia ICRAF invited three consultants to submit a con-

cept note to carry out the baseline assessment and selected Dr. M. Ibrahim. The development of the

contract was delayed until ICRAF had worked out an approach how to compile the information on

Aichi indicators. Further action and proposed change: Following improved security in the Kenyan

part of the area early 2015, ICRAF reviewed how to complete the baseline assessment. ICRAF will

send a team to visit Lamu district in the last week of February 2015 to engage with stakeholders in the

two demonstration sites and to compile missing data and the information for review of the Aichi indi-

cators and completion of the baseline assessment report. The baseline report for Kenya will be sub-

mitted by 31 March 2015. ICRAF will finalize a contract for a baseline along similar lines with Dr.

Ibrahim by 28 February with a deadline for submission of the baseline for Somalia by June 30 2015.

Remote sensing analysis. Progress and review. ICRAF acquired the Africover 2000 and 2008 data-

bases. This activity aims at monitoring change in habitat with lower resolution imagery for the entire

cross-border area and with higher resolution imagery for the project pilot sites. LFI 1.4 is broader than

the original description of the remote sensing analysis; it also requests an analysis of drivers of

change, better management through targeted interventions supported by BMP / IPs, and proposed so-

lutions communicated to decision makers. Further action and proposed change: To address LFI 1.4

ICRAF will change and broaden the scope of this sub-activity to include (i) a remote sensing analysis

of habitat change of the terrestrial part of the cross border area, with higher resolution analysis of the

change at pilot sites level, (ii) following completion and reporting of the remote sensing studies to

compile existing evidence and survey the perspectives of stakeholders in the demonstration sites on

12

the drivers of change and (iii) following this ICRAF will review possible solutions within the BMP

project and through other actors and communicate these to decision makers. To start this activity

ICRAF has acquired the medium-resolution Africover maps for 2000 and 2008 and is currently ac-

quiring high-resolution satellite imagery for the pilot sites. Based on this ICRAF will develop maps

with emphasis on forest and tree cover, analyse habitat change and consult local stakeholders to re-

view their perspective on the drivers of change. A comprehensive report on habitat change analysis

and drivers of change will be completed and submitted to IGAD by the end of Q4 2015.

Invasive species assessment. Progress. CABI has been contracted to undertake this activity. ICRAF

has requested CABI to review indicators 14 to 18 of Aichi Target no 9, which pertains to invasive

species. The Aichi targets and indicators have been designed to allow contracting parties of the CBD

(Convention on Biological Diversity) to monitor their compliance to achieving goals of the conven-

tion. CABI recently expressed concern over insecurity impeding access to the field. Further action

and proposed change: ICRAF has approached NRT coast on the security issue, they are willing to

assist CABI in reviewing and mitigating security risks. Following this ICRAF has introduced CABI to

NRT Coast proposing to focus the invasive species assessment within the NRT conservancies, which

are at the core of the pilot sites in Kenya.

Project stakeholders inception meeting. Progress. The project inception meeting was held in July

2014 and the notes of this meeting have been shared with IGAD and project implementing partners.

The initial findings of the baseline assessment (scoping mission to project site) were presented and

discussed during this inception meeting. Further action and proposed change: The original proposal

proposed a stakeholder meeting to review the implications of the baseline for the execution of the pro-

ject. This review has been partly addressed during the inception stakeholders meeting. Given the de-

lay of the project and the restricted budget available for a second stakeholder meeting ICRAF propos-

es that it will (i) add one section to the baseline study to review the implications of the findings for the

execution of the project and (ii) put the baseline study and its review on the agenda of the first meet-

ing of the Trans-boundary Steering Committee.

Activity 2: Ecological review and biodiversity action plan. Description of the activity. “The ulti-

mate aim of this activity is to develop a stakeholder endorsed action plan for sustainable use and

management of the land- and seascape’s biodiversity. Two expected results are proposed to achieve

this. First a review and in situ assessment of the biodiversity, its benefits and use and the institutions

that govern this living capital. Second, support for stakeholders to identify and prioritize opportuni-

ties for sustainable development and develop a vision and an action plan to achieve sustainable man-

agement of the land- and seascapes’ biodiversity. These results will provide the various stakeholders

in the cross border area with information on the biodiversity and terrestrial and marine resources

and the benefits derived from these; and enable their understanding of threats and to appreciate bio-

diversity related opportunities; and develop an action plan to address these threats and opportuni-

ties”. Link to LFIs – Activity 2 will result in LFI 2.1: “Biodiversity and socio-economic information

about the cross-border ecosystems is collected, compiled and made accessible and understandable to

stakeholders and decision makers by Q4_2015 so that biodiversity is mainstreamed into on-going

planning processes”. Progress made. Activity 2, which contributes to LFI 2.1 has two sub-activities.

The first is the assessment, compilation, collection and review of existing and new biodiversity infor-

mation to feed biodiversity action plans. In November 2014 CORDIO was contracted to carry out bi-

odiversity assessment for marine ecosystems. The contract is currently ongoing. ICRAF had discussed

with Dr. O. Getu and Dr. Nyingi to undertake the biodiversity assessment for Somalia and Kenya re-

spectively. The biodiversity information collected will be made available for use in planning, which is

carried out under activities 3, 4 and 5 described in the following sections. The second activity entails

the development of a biodiversity action plan.

Further action and proposed change: ICRAF will mobilize partners and consultants to carry out bi-

odiversity assessments by March 2015; the work will be completed by Q4 2015. ICRAF proposes to

drop the initial ambition to develop a biodiversity action plan for the entire cross border area, includ-

ing land and seascapes. Instead ICRAF proposes to use the synthesized biodiversity information to

support three planning activities supported by the BMP. This includes use of the information in land

13

use planning (activity 3), the development of a proposal for development of a cross border conserva-

tion area (activity 4) and contribute to biodiversity action planning within the NRT conservancies (ac-

tivity 5). Therefore the biodiversity assessments will be used to develop proposals for subsequent ac-

tions to support these three planning activities.

Activity 3: Institutional support to planning. Description: This activity aims at “strengthening in-

stitutional capacity in land use planning and particularly the proper inclusion of biodiversity conser-

vation and ecosystem services in such planning. To achieve this the project will significantly invest in

the establishment and operation of two small planning small units to support implementation of land

use planning at county and district level, and support appropriate stakeholders to pilot land use plan-

ning in selected areas”.

The governments around the world widely apply the concept of land use planning in order to ensure

populations meet the competing demands for land without compromising the sustainable utilization

and conservation of natural resources. In this case, Land-use planning (LUP) is the systematic as-

sessment of both land and water potential (i.e. capability and suitability) to facilitate the selection and

adoption of the best land-use options. The selected options are to meet the social and economic needs

of the people while safeguarding biodiversity for the future.

The inclusion of biodiversity conservation into on-going land use planning activities in Kenya and

Somalia is an important output of the BMP project. During the reporting year, ICRAF engaged with

lead partners including the National Museums of Kenya (NMK) and the Ministry of Petroleum, Min-

eral Resources and Environment (MoPMRE) to dialogue on the implementation of the activity. The

discussions focused on the development of terms of reference, the work plan and budget for the activi-

ty. During the inception workshop, ICRAF also initiated discussions on the land use planning protocol

for implementing the activity.

Support to Planning in Kenya

The NMK is a main partner to the action. It has been involved in the project because through the

KENWEB (part of NMK) multidisciplinary team they are leading several projects in the Kenyan side

of the cross-boundary area, with proven expertise in land use planning and the inclusion of biodiversi-

ty information in the planning process. The role of the NMK into the Action is to support the ongoing

LUP process, regarding assessments, mapping, and community programs, including setting up of re-

sources centres.

It took time to start up the support to planning in Kenya. First of all because the dialogue between

ICRAF and local authorities and stakeholders took up considerable time given that NMK is not a

mainstream actor in land use planning. This dialogue eventually led to an agreement that the planning

will be conducted by the Lamu county local authority with support from NMK experts in biodiversity

and participatory planning approaches. The planning process that the BMP intends to support was fur-

ther delayed due to decentralization. The funds initially allocated through the national budget were re-

leased late in 2014. Now that central government funds have been made available the Lamu county

planning unit will embark on the preparation of the spatial plan in January 2015. A final factor requir-

ing time was the necessity to re-formulate the overall approach in collaboration with the NMK and

Kenyan stakeholders. Therefore the first year was dedicated to establish a proper framework of im-

plementation and exploration of possibilities to embed the activities supported by the BMP in the

county government planning process. Given the start of the planning process in early 2015, the timing

of the start of the activities of NMK in March 2015 matches the emerging planning activities of the

county.

The activity to be performed by NMK will contribute to the achievement of the expected project re-

sult number two on 'Institutional capacities for management improved'. The activity will aim at

strengthening the institutional capacity of Lamu County and other relevant government institutions in

land use planning and particularly the proper inclusion of biodiversity conservation and ecosystem

services in such planning. The project will support the Lamu County Government planning unit to

generate participatory land use plans, and encourage and support appropriate stakeholders including

14

local communities to implement these plans. There is a slight diversion from the original plan, which

aimed at establishment of a separate resource unit hosted by NMK. This change was deemed appro-

priate by ICRAF and NMK all local authorities and stakeholders who consider that more traction can

be achieved when working from within the land-use planning unit of the county government.

At the demonstration sites, the NMK will facilitate several public meetings mainly for stakeholder

consultation. The meetings will also serve to create awareness of the on-going preparation of the

Lamu spatial plan and find ways in which the communities can actively participate and contribute to

the plan. The NMK shall lead the establishment and support a technical land use committee compris-

ing selected members in the demonstration sites. These members will regularly meet to discuss and

represent the interests of the local stakeholders and beneficiaries with the on-going project initiatives.

The NMK shall apply their strong expertise to mainstream biodiversity management aspects into on-

going LUP processes at the County level. The lessons learnt shall inform and reinforce national and

IGAD policies.

ICRAF has plans to build the capacity of the Lamu County through training in the application of GIS

in planning. ICRAF shall organise such training for at least three staff members involved in produc-

ing the County spatial plan. The ultimate expected output is a detailed LUP plan and implementation

strategy. The NMK shall work with the County authorities and LUP committee to produce this plan,

and ensure that there is buy-in from the community to implement the plan.

NMK shall provide ICRAF some background information on LUP in Kenya including the conducting

an assessment of key policies and institutions relevant to the activity. Given that NMK strength lies

in the conservation of biodiversity, a clarification of the role of NMK in LUP is necessary to avoid

conflict of interest with other stakeholders in Kenya. The County of Lamu has recently experienced

land disputes and conflicts arising from land allocation by the Government of Kenya. The NMK will

provide a synopsis of this occurrence and provide a clear roadmap for the implementation of the activ-

ity with other stakeholders. For this reason a stakeholder workshop to prepare the road map will take

place in February 2015.

Schedule of the Activity in 2015 and beyond (See figure)

The public meetings for stakeholder consultation will take place during the first quarter of 2015. In

the month of March 2015, ICRAF and NMK will have constituted the technical committee compris-

ing of community representatives who will be fully aware of the County spatial plan and their partici-

pation in the development of the plan. ICRAF intends to conduct GIS training for County staff, pro-

curement of equipment and software to strengthen the planning unit in the Lamu county government

during the first six months of 2015. The LUP strategy is an important tool that ICRAF aims to devel-

op from the second quarter to the end of September 2015. The mainstreaming of the biodiversity as-

pects into planning will start from June 2015 up to the end of the third quarter in 2016. The stake-

holder and beneficiaries will start implementation of the plan during the last quarter of 2016 right up

to the end of 2017.

Figure

Support to Planning in Somalia

During the project preparations, ICRAF signed an associate partnership agreement with Badhaadhe

District Commissioner with a view to fostering biodiversity within the district's jurisdiction. At that

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

ACTIVITY

Publicmeetingsforstakeholderconsultation

Establishandsupportatechnicallandusecommittee

StrenghtenLUPCentreatLamuCountyoffice

MainstreamLUPatCountylevel.

DevelopaLUPimplementationstrategyfortheLamuCounty

SupportstakeholdersinLUPdevelopmentandimplementation

2015 2016 2017TIME (YR/MONTH/QR)

15

time, ICRAF invited the District Commissioner to Nairobi to consult further on this matter. ICRAF

also signed an agreement with the Ministry of Environment as the focal ministry at the federal state

level. However, following the split of the Ministry of Environment into four other Ministries, the fo-

cal ministry changed to the Ministry of Petroleum, Mineral Resources and Environment (MoPMRE).

ICRAF has deliberated the implementation of the activity with MoPMRE and concluded that working

with the Badhaadhe District authorities would be difficult given that change had occurred in the dis-

trict since the signing of the associate partnership agreement. The MoPMRE proposed possible col-

laboration with the Kismayo Provincial Administration, which is outside and far away from the pro-

ject demonstration site. The lack of institutions responsible for land use planning in the demonstration

site inhibits the performance of the action. In short, despite having developed the ToR for a possible

planning process in Somalia, the parties have not reached any concrete arrangement regarding LUP in

the demonstration site Somalia.

However, despite the postponement of the action to get further clarification, ICRAF is planning to use

the cross-border collaboration (activity 5 see below) to foster learning between Kenya and Somalia.

As the platform shall congregate participants from both countries, cross-border learning will be sup-

ported.

Activity 4 Institutional support to PA planning and management. Description: This activity aims

at “supporting the management authorities of protected areas in the cross border region (government

and community based institutions) to improve the effectiveness of the management of their protected

areas. Given the high fraction of land already under conservation and the challenges to increase the

effectiveness of the management of the current protected areas, this project will focus on support to

improve the management of the current protected areas and adjacent community conservation areas”.

Link to LFIs: This activity shall result in LFI 2.5a One (1) Plan for re-establishment of a manage-

ment system for Laga Badana Bush Bush National Reserve in Somalia prepared with all stakeholders

and submitted to relevant Somali authorities for approval by Q3_2017 AND LFI 2.5b One Manage-

ment Plan for the Awer Conservancy in Kenya prepared and submitted to relevant government agen-

cies for approval by Q3_2016. Progress and review: Consultant recruited for Somalia in November

2014 to propose a report (due Q 4 2015) with a plan and roadmap for the re-establishment of the Laga

Badana Bush Bush National Reserve. The activity in Kenya has not yet commenced and the contract

NRT was pending. In Kenya the BMP will support the development of plans for two wildlife conserv-

ancies and the set up of a community based wildlife monitoring system (COMMS). The contracting in

Kenya with NRT was delayed because ICRAF needed to collect more information from the contractor

in order to finalize the contract. Discussion with IGAD TAT in April 2014 revealed a desire to sup-

port both planning of a community conservancy and the development of a wildlife monitoring system.

The first (the management plan) was not foreseen in the original proposal but is key to LFI 2.5b. Fur-

ther action and changes proposed: ICRAF proposes to change activity 4b (Aweer conservancy) to

allow broadening the scope and support the development of a Community Development and Man-

agement Plan and community based wildlife monitoring system (COMMS. ICRAF will sign the con-

tract with NRT Coast by February 28, 2015. With this ICRAF foresees completing the activities in

2015. At the end of the second year ICRAF will review progress made and decide on actions that mer-

it further support.

Activity 5. Cross border cooperation. Description. This activity aims at “promoting cross-border

cooperation in NRM and to facilitate the establishment of a trans-boundary protected area. The re-

sults from activities 1 and 2 will serve as inputs to this activity”. Link to LFIs. This activity shall re-

sult in LFI 1.1 “Cross-Border Stakeholder Dialogue Platform for biodiversity management estab-

lished for coastal zone by Q4_2015, and regular meetings thereafter”, LFI 1.2 “One (1) proposal for

establishment of a cross-border network of biodiversity conservation areas prepared by the Cross-

Border Stakeholder Platform and transmitted to the relevant national decision makers by Q4_2016”

and LFI 2.4 Two (2) cross border exchange visits (240 person days) are organized to strengthen the

skills of stakeholders from the selected demonstration sites in collaborative biodiversity management

by Q4_2015.

16

Status and review. The original plan has four cross-border meetings with national and local stake-

holder from Kenya and Somalia to dialogue on cross-border NRM. In each workshop, ten participants

will be drawn from each of the two countries to dialogue on the possibility of establishing a cross-

border conservation area. ICRAF will use these meetings to work with these stakeholders to prepare a

plan as proposed under LFI 1.2. In 2014, ICRAF arranged three consultation meetings with the Lamu

County Commissioner to learn from the on-going cross-border security committee operating between

the Kenya and Somalia border. As an associate partner in this project, the Lamu County Commission-

er is positive this activity will succeed with their guidance and support. Further action and proposed

approach: ICRAF proposes to implement this activity, such as make cross border exchange meetings

(LFI 1.1) and exchange visits (LFI 2.4) work, to facilitate the establishment of a cross border network

of biodiversity conservation areas, and to achieve the LFI 1.2, as in the revised project logframe.

ICRAF will further make use of the exchange between research and training institutes (see LFI 1.3,

discussed under activity 11) to support the development of a proposal for a cross border network of

conservation areas. ANAFE will be involved to assist such approach. During 2015, ICRAF is plan-

ning to conduct at least two meetings. In the first meeting, the participants will review and endorse the

terms of reference for the cross-border platform and set a protocol for its operation and an agenda for

the remaining project period. ICRAF is planning to hold the first meeting during the second quarter of

2015. The second meeting will be in the fourth quarter of 2015. The results of the baseline studies and

the stakeholder analysis and the candidate’s potential to be a member of the Cross- Border Stakehold-

er Platform will form the basis for the selection of participants to the meetings.

Activity 6: Biodiversity related ecosystem goods and services value chains. Description: “This

activity will support the development of value chains which are based on biodiversity related ecosys-

tem services and goods, including a plan and an investment agenda to develop markets and value

chains for one or more biodiversity related ecosystem services or goods”. Link to LFIs. This activity

shall result in LFI 1.5. “At least 200 individuals in selected demonstration sites are trained and sup-

ported in developing / improving natural resource value chains by Q3_2017”. Progress and review:

Activities undertaken in the first year include consultation in June 2014 with stakeholder in Lamu to

select priority products for piloting. Next data collection tools were designed, survey teams trained

and a MoU established and signed between ICRAF and ASDSP based in Lamu to collaborate on the

value chain work. Further activity was delayed by insecurity on the main land. In Somalia activities

were delayed by lack of affordable professionals in value chain development; two consultants de-

clined because their demands exceeded our budgets. Given this and the security context, which may

limit markets and complicate value chain development ICRAF is not convinced that it will be possible

to develop biodiversity based value chains in Somalia. Further action and proposed change: The

contract with ASDSP will be signed during Q1 2015. Recent consultation with NRT revealed that

honey and mats are promising biodiversity based value chains for the Aweer community and ICRAF

will request ASDSP to consider these for training and support. ICRAF will try once more to find ca-

pable and affordable consultants to identify and develop value chains in southern Somalia. In the next

interim report we will review whether this is feasible or what else to do in case it is not.

Activity 7: Forestry and agroforestry programme. Description. This activity will develop a pro-

gram in forest restoration within and agroforestry outside the protected area systems. The main ap-

proaches include tree species enrichment and encouragement of vegetation re-growth in protected

areas, the promotion of agroforestry in agricultural landscapes adjacent to protected areas as well as

rainwater harvesting and improved watershed management. Link to LFI. This activity shall result in

LFI 1.6.a Training and support provided on tree planting and management, and rainwater harvesting

techniques to at least 1,000 community members by Q4_2015. LFI 1.6.b At least 500 farmers each

plant and manage an average 40 surviving trees on farms by Q3_2017. LFI 1.7 Degraded sites in

protected areas are enriched or naturally regenerated with at 60,000 seedlings of indigenous tree

species with at least 40% survival by Q3_2017. Progress made: KFS was contracted to implement

the various activities leading to LFI 1.6 (a&b) and LFI 1.7. For Somalia a ToR has been developed

for RAAS who will be contracted to support assisted natural regeneration and sustainable water man-

agement. Future action: Implementation as foreseen in Kenya, KFS will start in Q1 2015. ICRAF

will complete the contract with RAAS and implement as foreseen in Somalia.

17

Activity 8. Communication. Description: “This activity aims at developing capacity in biodiversity

conservation at regional, national and local level, and providing training in ecosystem management

to stakeholders from the cross border areas. It will involve development and dissemination of promo-

tional, educational and awareness creation materials in order to raise awareness and to advocate in

the project area”. Link to LFIs: This activity shall result in LFI 1.8 “Communication strategy

aligned with project objectives drafted by ICRAF by Q4_2014 AND At least five (5) communication,

educational and advocacy products distributed to relevant stakeholders by Q2 to Q4_2015”. Pro-

gress and review: This activity is on schedule; a draft communication strategy is ready and will be

shared with IGAD TAT for advice and approval. Further a project web site page has been developed

within ICRAF website, One poster has been presented at the ICRAF science week, and two articles

have appeared in the ICRAF newsletter. Development of the communication products will be started

upon approval of the strategy. Further action: The draft communication plan will be submitted to the

IGAD TAT for review.

Activity 9. Support to fund raising and increased sustainability of PA management. Description:

This activity aims at supporting a fund raising strategy, organize a round table with potential funders

and support the development of four concept notes for raising funds to support protected area man-

agement. Progress made: None. Future action: This activity is scheduled for 2016 and 2017.

Activity 10: Biodiversity conservation capacity building. Description: “This activity aims at build-

ing capacity in biodiversity conservation at local level, and more specifically providing training in

agroforestry and reforestation techniques for ecosystem management to stakeholders from the cross

border area”. Link to LFIs: This activity shall result in LFI 2.6. “Six (6) training sessions on inte-

grating biodiversity conservation & use at landscape scale into LUP for an average of 20 people /

session from local governments, communities, CSOs, NGOs & protected area managers carried out

by Q2_2015”. Progress made and review: Contract was signed with ANAFE in November 2014.

The contract focuses on capacity building in agroforestry and reforestation techniques for ecosystem

management whereas LFI 2.6 to which the capacity building shall deliver focuses on integrating bio-

diversity conservation & use at landscape scale into LUP. Further action and proposed change:

First, ICRAF will ensure that LFI 2.6 will be the prime deliverable from activity 10. Second, ICRAF

proposes to change the deadline for LFI 2.6 to Q2 2016 with the following time schedule. Submission

of the workplan by Q1 2015, capacity needs assessment and detailed training plan by beginning Q2

2015, training materials prepared and developed by end Q2 2015 and delivery of the training between

Q3 2015 and Q2 2016. ICRAF will work closely with ANAFE to implement the above changes and

expedite the process, ensuring that the planning will be lean and efficient leaving enough resources

for the ultimate purpose for their engagement, the preparation and facilitation of training.

Activity 11: Cooperation between research and training institutes. Description: “A number of re-

search and training institutes have been working in the area or have an interest to do so. Execution of

this activity will result in exchange of their knowledge and experiences relevant for stakeholders. This

activity, which will be led jointly by IGAD and ICRAF through ANAFE, will review interest and pos-

sibilities and develop modalities to promote such exchange”. Link to LFIs. Activity 11 shall result in

LFI 1.3: “Fourteen (14) people exchanged between at least two pairs of research and training institu-

tions of Kenya and Somalia to build capacity for biodiversity conservation and natural resource man-

agement by Q4_2017”. Progress and review: Contract was signed with ANAFE in November 2014

to lead this activity in both Kenya and Somalia. Activity 11 has significant potential for synergies

with other BMP activities, liberating these synergies requires brainstorming how to match the oppor-

tunities within the project with the interests of research and training institutes. So far, potential stake-

holders in Kenya have been reviewed but not in Somalia. Also, there has been no assessment how ex-

change between research and training institutes might contribute to the various activities of the BMP.

Further action and proposed change: ANAFE will deliver a detailed workplan with proposed topics

and partners and modalities for exchange and release a call of interest to apply for the exchange pro-

gram by end of Q2 2015; ICRAF will facilitate the exchange of the seven candidates in Q3 and Q4

2015. At the end of year two ICRAF will review progress and decide on further exchange in 2016 and

2017.

18

Activity 12. Monitoring and evaluation. Description. “This activity will develop a dedicated moni-

toring and evaluation program to serve the internal management of the program and allow external

evaluation of its performance”. Progress made. The Trans-boundary Steering Committee (PSC) has

been established in July 2014 to meet bi-annually to review project progress. Future action: ICRAF

will develop a project implementation plan, a ME framework and a plan for establishing the baseline

for those indicators that require a baseline for assessing achieving the expected result.

19

2.4 Risk analysis

The risks associated with the project have been reviewed according to four categories: operational, fi-

nancial, developmental and reputational risk. The IGAD TAT MEIA expert, partners and ICRAF staff

present during the meeting at ICRAF on the 8 December 2014 reviewed the various risks. The result

of this risk analysis is summarised in Table 4.

20

Table 4: Risk analysis and mitigation measures, level 1 = highly unlikely; 2 = unlikely but might happen; 3 = likely; 4 = very likely.

Risk definition Risk level How have risks been tackled in the past reporting period (Y1)?

What more mitigation is required (Y2)?

Risk owner

1 2 3 4

Operational

1 Support to the project may not be forth com-

ing from relevant governments and local

bodies, and key stakeholders

3 Y1 / Y2 Regular contacts/ communication with stakeholders to

strengthen partnerships

ICRAF and imple-

menting partners

2 Weak or non-existent institutions and lack

of functioning systems at local or central

levels in Somalia delaying or impeding the

project at all stages

3 Y1 / Y2 Use available historical data from literature.

Y1 / Y2 Hire consultants

Y 2 IGAD support to liaise with national institutions.

Y2 Link to IGAD BMP level capacity building efforts (e.g. on Bi-

odiversity Database / Policy process)

Y2 Through exchange experiences, link key stakeholders in Soma-

lia, with appropriate institutions in Kenya

Y1 / Y2 Work with local traditional authorities (which are quite

strong in project area).

Y 2 Work with Local Authorities (Kismayo / Badhaadhe) in priori-

ty over national.

Implementing part-

ners

3 Capacity of Lamu County Staff in spatial

planning and biodiversity

2 Y2 Provide training in spatial planning and biodiversity to Lamu

county staff

ICRAF, IGAD

4 Lack of seed stock for tree planting program 2 Y2 Review problem, if necessary undertake local seed collection. ICRAF, KFS

5 Traditional players in LUP contesting role

and mandate of NMK in the LUP process 3 Y1 / Y2 Build consensus that Lamu County leads the LUP process,

BMP will provide technical support and NMK will support inclu-

sion of biodiversity in the LUP process

ICRAF, NMK

6 Lack of institutions and sensitivity of land

tenure issues making land use planning im-

possible in Somalia

4 Y 1 Explore possibility to cooperate with actors and institutions

active in land use planning within the demonstration site

Y 2 Reconsider the ambition to support ongoing land use planning

and instead support capacity building in land use planning among

Somali partners through exchange visits and other modalities

ICRAF, MoPMRE

7 Risk of fragmentation of activities in the

ICRAF managed project 3 Y2 Recruitment of project manager overseeing the entire project

using coherence perspective in the M&E of the project

Y2 Inform the TSC on project biannual progress and engage the

TSC to advise on focus of the project

Y1/ Y2 Seek synergies between activities within the BMP project

and with other ongoing projects (see section 4.6 of this report)

Y1 / Y2 Clarify roles and responsibility to all implementing part-

ICRAF, IPs

21

ners and ensure regular coordination meetings

Financial

1 Financial controls required to ensure proper

fiscal management of funds amongst all pro-

ject partners

2 Y1 / Y2 Checking institutional capacity and reputation of imple-

menting partners before contracting

Y2 Strict financial management controls for disbursement and use

of funds to be put in place according to EU/EDF rules.

Y2 All partners and consultants to sign contracts, submit concept

notes with timelines and budget before disbursement of funds.

Y2 All funds used to be accounted with receipts.

Y2 Funds will be disbursed in instalments upon submission of ap-

proved progress report as detailed in the contracts with partners.

Y2 Use of electronic transfer of cash to beneficiaries in remote ar-

eas (e.g. M-Pesa)

ICRAF

Developmental

1 Political instability and insecurity in all pro-

ject areas

4 Y1 / Y2 Regularly consult with security agencies and local gov-

ernments on security and ensure that teams are well informed

Y1/ Y2 Request the County Commissioner for security escorts

when necessary (this has budget implications – allowances for se-

curity personnel and additional space in vehicles),

Y1 / Y2 Request flexibility from donor to allow adjustments in ac-

tivities and timelines in response to insecurity in the project site

Y1 / Y2 Insure staff visiting the area.

IGAD and IPs

2 Complexity and sensitivity around land ten-

ure and land use planning. Land tenure is

one of the key sources of conflict in the pilot

areas on both sides of the border. Discussion

about future land use is likely to elicit strong

opinions and reactions.

4 Y2 Review land tenure in pilot sites on both sides of the border

Y1 / Y2 Adhere to existing institutional and legal framework for

land use planning and partner with mandated organizations

Y2 NMK to stick to its mandate of biodiversity and avoid diver-

sions onto other topics that are outside their remit.

Explore how community conservancies can address land tenure

concerns and prepare arguments carefully before any dialogue.

ICRAF, IGAD

3 Risk of local resistance to concepts of “State

Owned Protected Areas” in both countries

3 Y2 Review this risk and explore community friendly models of

ownership and management of conservation areas

ICRAF, NRT

4 LAPSSET (Lamu Port and South Sudan

Transport Corridor) project – high threats

due to project and induced in-migration.

Rapid settlement of the area.

3 Y1 / Y2 Migration and settlement is beyond control of the project

and we will adapt to this.

Y2 Project staff to compile and review information on the LAPS-

SET and support dialogue where possible

ICRAF

5 2017 elections (Kenya) can politicise the ac-

tions of local political leaders

2 Y 3 / Y4 Strategy is to try to get everybody on board, especially

the political class, to share the common idea of the value of a spa-

tial plan. Consult / involve everybody.

ICRAF

22

6 Cultural differences and language barriers

may hinder the work.

2 Y1 / Y2 Brief teams on local customs and develop sensitivity to

cultural diversities.

Y1 / Y2 Involve local resource persons / guides.

ICRAF and partners

7 Risk of lack of rains to support survival of

newly planted trees.

3 Y2 ICRAF will abstain from planting trees in drier areas and pro-

mote natural regeneration instead, elsewhere it will support crea-

tion of water buffers through RWH to enhance seedling survival

ICRAF, KFS,

RAAS

8 Unclear ownership of trees in agricultural

lands

3 Y2 Review risks imposed by unclear tenure. Clarify farmers per-

spectives on land and tree tenure and promote tree planting in areas

where farmers feel tenure secure

ICRAF, KFS

9 Weak embedding of project in local political

framework / context 2 Y1 / Y2 Analyse national and local context and governance struc-

tures before initiating project activities and diplomatically align

project interventions with national and local structures.

ICRAF, IGAD

Reputational

1 Complexity of the project damaging

ICRAFs reputation in project management

Unrealistic expectations regarding quick in-

come increases from value chain activities

damaging ICRAF’s reputation in value

chain development

3 Y2 Enhance and simplify ICRAF management structure with a

project coordinator and a Lamu based project officer

Y2 Monitor project progress continuously (M&E) and act accord-

ingly

Y2 Review of project status undertaken in this report with pro-

posals to adjust in year 2

Y1 ICRAF with support of IGAD TAT modified the indicator LFI

1.5 to be more neutral and described indicator 3 of the specific ob-

jectives in terms of assets rather than income

ICRAF, IPs

2.5 Project procurement

No contract was awarded that exceeds €60,000

23

3 Updated plan

3.1 Implementation plan 2013 – 2017

The table below provides an overview of the activities, actions, actors, log frame indicators and time schedule for the entire duration of the BMP project. It

reorganizes the activities of the original project document according to the structure of the revised logical framework, which was approved by the Contracting

Authority through a letter to the Director General of ICRAF dated 7 October 2014. The table also indicates to the relation between the activities and the indi-

cators in the revised log frame. Each activity is broken down in actions. Part of these actions follow the actions described in the original project proposal, in

other cases the actions have been modified following review of what was feasible given the local situation.

Table 5. Implementation plan 2013 – 2017.

Activities Actions Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Actor(s) Comments and revised log-frame in-

dicators (LFI) reference 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2

LFI 1: Cross-border biodiversity conservation in land/seascapes strengthened

1.1 Baseline study

(former activity 1)

1.1.1 Inventory and stakeholder analysis ICRAF This activity is not related to log frame indicators. Provide documents as source of verification for

what has been achieved in year one. Delayed ac-

tivities must be completed in the first quarter of year 2

1.1.2 Review status of invasive species CABI

1.1.3 Organize cross-border stakeholder inception

workshop

ICRAF

1.1.4 Deliver baseline report ICRAF and

consultant

1.2 Strengthened

cross-border coop-

eration (joined ac-

tivity 5 and 11)

1.2.1 Establish and support a Cross-border Stake-

holder Dialogue Platform (CSDP) to enhance cross-

border cooperation

ICRAF LFI 1.1 Cross-Border Stakeholder Dialogue Plat-

form for biodiversity management established for

coastal zone by Q4_2015, and regular meetings thereafter.

1.2.2 Develop a proposal for establishment of cross-

border network of biodiversity conservation areas

ICRAF and

CSDP

LFI 1.2 One (1) proposal for establishment of a

cross-border network of biodiversity conservation areas prepared by the Cross- Border Stakeholder

Platform and transmitted to the relevant national

decision makers by Q4_2016

1.2.3 Organize cross border research and training

exchange

ANAFE LFI 1.3 Fourteen (14) people exchanged between at least two pairs of research and training institu-

tions of Kenya and Somalia to build capacity for

biodiversity conservation and natural resource

management by Q4_2017

1.2.4 Organize Cross border Exchange visits ICRAF LFI 2.4 Two (2) cross border exchange visits (240

person days) are organized to strengthen the skills of stakeholders from the selected demon-

stration sites in collaborative biodiversity man-

24

agement by Q4_2015.

1.3.Support biodi-

versity value

chains (former ac-

tivity 6)

1.3.1 Consult stakeholders and experts ASDSP

LFI 1.5 At least 200 individuals in selected

demonstration sites are trained and supported in developing / improving natural resource value

chains by Q3_2017

1.3.2 Market surveys for potential products

1.3.3 Organize training

1.3.4 Support to piloting value chains

1.3.5 Monitor use of training and support

1.4 Forestry and

agro-forestry pro-

gram (former activ-

ity 7)

1.4.1 Consult communities and conservationists on

preferred tree species

KFS LFI 1.6.a Training and support provided on tree

planting and management, and rainwater harvest-ing techniques to at least 1,000 community mem-

bers by Q4_2015.

1.4.2 Training and establishment two nurseries

1.4.3 Production of 170,000 planting stock

1.4.4 Provide training in tree management and

rainwater harvesting

1.4.5 Support planting trees on farm KFS LFI 1.6.b At least 500 farmers each plant and manage an average 40 surviving trees on farms

by Q3_2017. 1.4.6 Monitor planted trees on farm

1.4.7 Map degraded areas in protected areas, list

and select native species and plan forest restoration

KFS (Kenya)

and RAAS

(Somalia)

LFI 1.7 Degraded sites in protected areas are en-

riched or naturally regenerated with at 60,000 seedlings of indigenous tree species with at least

40% survival by Q3_2017. 1.4.8 Support planting trees in forests in Kenya

1.4.9 Community sensitization in Somalia

1.4.10 Site selection and training in RWH and

FMNR in Somalia

1.4.11 Support to FMNR in Somalia

1.4.12 Monitor trees planted and in FMNR sites

1.5 Habitat change

monitoring (Activi-

ty 1b)

1.5.1 Remote sensing habitat change analysis ICRAF LFI 1.4 Biodiversity loss and its drivers are better understood in the demonstration site, better man-

aged through targeted interventions supported by

BMP / IPs, and proposed solutions communicated to decision makers, by Q4_2017

1.5.2 Participatory review of drivers of change

1.5.3 Findings and possible solutions by BMP and

other actors communicated to decision makers

1.6 Communica-

tion (former act 8)

1.6.1 Communication strategy development ICRAF LFI 1.8 Communication strategy aligned with

project objectives drafted by ICRAF by Q4_2014.

At least five (5) communication, educational and advocacy products distributed to relevant stake-

holders by Q2 to Q4_2015

1.6.2 Communication products development

25

Table 5 continued

Activities Actions Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Actor(s) Comments and revised log-frame in-

dicators (LFI) reference LFI 2: Institutional capacities for management improved

2.1 Biodiversity

assessment and

mainstreaming in

planning (former

Activity 2)

2.1.1 Landscape assessment and information Consultants LFI 2.1 Biodiversity and socio-economic infor-

mation about the cross-border ecosystems is col-

lected, compiled and made accessible and under-standable to stakeholders and decision makers by

Q4_2015 so that biodiversity is mainstreamed in-

to on-going planning processes.

2.1.2 Seascape assessment and information CORDIO

2.1.3 Workshop on mainstreaming biodiversity into

planning

ICRAF

2.2 Develop and

implement land use

planning (LUP)

(former Act 3)

2.2.1 Public meetings for community sensitization NMK No indicators In the log frame

2.2.2 Establish LUP units and develop capacity of

communities and other actors in LUP

NMK and

ICRAF

LFI 2.2 Two (2) local planning units (Lamu & Badhaadhe) supported with equipment and train-

ing by Q2_2015

2.2.3 Develop biodiversity inclusive land use plans,

which engage communities and submit to relevant

authorities

NMK LFI 2.3 The ongoing Spatial Planning process (LUP) for Lamu County being led by County

Government is technically supported by BMP to

be more participatory and supportive of biodiver-sity, and draft Spatial Plan is transmitted to rele-

vant authorities by Q3_2016

2.3 Support pro-

tected area man-

agement (former

act 4)

2.3.1 Develop a plan and road map for development

of a protected area in the Laga Badana area

Consultant LFI 2.5a One (1) Plan for re-establishment of a

management system for Laga Badana Bush Bush National Reserve in Somalia prepared with all

stakeholders and submitted to relevant Somali au-

thorities for approval by Q3_2017

2.3.2 Develop two Community Development and

Management Plans and one Community Conserva-

tion Monitoring System (COMMS) for NRT con-

servancies

NRT Coast LFI 2.5b One Management Plan for the Awer

Conservancy in Kenya prepared and submitted to

relevant government agencies for approval by Q3_2016

2.4 Capacity build-

ing (former Act 10)

2.4.1 Training needs assessment & training plan ANAFE No indicators in the log frame. Training plan will

be finalized with the assistance of TAT

2.4.2 Provide trainings on landscape level biodiver-

sity conservation and use in LUP

ANAFE LFI 2.6 Six (6) training sessions on integrating

biodiversity conservation & use at landscape

scale into LUP for an average of 20 people / ses-sion from local governments, communities, CSOs,

NGOs & protected area managers carried out by

Q2_2015 (not realistic).

2.5 Protected area

management fund

raising (former act

9)

2.5.1 Review fund raising needs and opportunities Consultant Relates to Specific Objective Indicator 2. Stake-

holders supported to attract investment in pro-

tected area management, with at least one donor round-table organized by the end of the pro-

gramme in 2017

2.5.2 Organize round table of funders, PA manage-

ment and conservation NGOs

ICRAF

2.5.3 Deliver report with two concept notes Consultant

26

3.2 Action plan 2015

Table 6. Time line for action and outputs arranged by activities with actors and log frame indicators Activities J F M A M J J A S O N D Action / expected outputs / product Actor(s) Log Frame Indicator (LFI) and

Remarks

ER 1: Cross-border biodiversity conservation in land/seascapes strengthened

1.1 Baseline study

(former activity 1)

1.1 Baseline study

1.1.2 Invasive species assessment / report CABI

1.1.4 Baseline / report Kenya ICRAF

1.1.4 Baseline / report Somalia Consultant

1.2 Strengthened cross-

border cooperation

(joined activity 5 and

11)

1.2.1 Cross-border Stakeholder Dialogue Platform (CSDP) established and supported

ICRAF, reps. of local communities, local

govt, PSC national fo-

cal point, PSC MS representative

LFI 1.1 Cross-Border Stakeholder Dialogue

Platform for biodiversity management estab-lished for coastal zone by Q4_2015, and reg-

ular meetings thereafter.

Concept for Platform prepared by ICRAF team

National, County and Community representation agreed and

members nominated by their institutions

First CSDP Platform meeting

Code of conduct and procedures for cross border stakeholder

dialogue adopted by members

Agreement on a cross border collaboration action plan in-

cluding cross border exchange visits (see 1.2.4)

Progress reports from subsequent meetings every 6 months.

1.2.2 Develop a proposal for establishment of cross-border network of biodiversity con-

servation areas

ICRAF and CSDP LFI 1.2 One (1) proposal for establishment

of a cross-border network of biodiversity

conservation areas prepared by the Cross-

Border Stakeholder Platform and transmitted

to the relevant national decision makers by

Q4_2016

CSDP identifies options and develops a plan to develop this

proposal

First phase execution of above plan

CSDP reviews progress and recommends further action

1.2.3 Organize cross border research and training exchange ANAFE LFI 1.3 Fourteen (14) people exchanged be-tween at least two pairs of research and train-

ing institutions of Kenya and Somalia to

build capacity for biodiversity conservation and natural resource management by

Q4_2017

Requires enabling immigration procedures

between the countries.

Target groups identified and needs assessment for each target group agreed and relevant institutions that can provide train-

ing / research identified by end Q1 2015

MOUs established between at least 4 organisations by end

Q2 2015 (facilitated by ICRAF and ANAFE).

Capacity building in biodiversity conservation and natural

resource management by selected institutions to target

groups started by Q3 2015.

1st 6 month training report by Q4 2015.

1.2.4 Organize Cross border Exchange visits / report ICRAF, CSDP LFI 2.4 Two (2) cross border exchange visits

(240 person days) are organized to strength-

en the skills of stakeholders from the selected demonstration sites in collaborative biodiver-

sity management by Q4_2015.

CSDP develops ToR of the exchange visit

Preparation first exchange visit

Exchange visit organized and report delivered

27

Requires enabling immigration procedures between the countries

1.3.Support biodiversi-

ty value chains (former

activity 6)

1.3.1 to 1.3.5 Support to biodiversity value chains ASDSP

LFI 1.5 At least 200 individuals in selected

demonstration sites are trained and supported

in developing / improving natural resource value chains by Q3_2017

1.3.1 Consult stakeholders to identify value chains / report

1.3.2 Market surveys to prioritize products and VCs and

briefing of stakeholders / report

1.3.3 Organize training / training report

1.3.4 Support to piloting value chains / report

1.3.5 Monitor use of training and support / ME report

1.4 Forestry and agro-

forestry program (for-

mer activity 7)

Support to tree planting and rain water harvesting KFS LFI 1.6.a Training and support provided on tree planting and management, and rainwater

harvesting techniques to at least 1,000 com-

munity members by Q4_2015.

1.4.1 Consult communities and conservationists on preferred

tree species / report

1.4.2 Training and establishment two nurseries / report

1.4.3 Production of 170,000 planting stock / report

1.4.4 Provide training in tree management and rainwater har-

vesting / report

Farmers plant trees that survive on their farm KFS LFI 1.6.b At least 500 farmers each plant and manage an average 40 surviving trees on

farms by Q3_2017. 1.4.5 Support planting trees on farm / report

1.4.6 Monitor planted trees on farm / report

Degraded areas in PA’s enriched or regenerated with indigenous tree species KFS (Kenya) and RAAS (Somalia)

LFI 1.7 Degraded sites in protected areas are enriched or naturally regenerated with at

60,000 seedlings of indigenous tree species

with at least 40% survival by Q3_2017.

1.4.7 Map degraded areas in protected areas, list and select native species and plan forest restoration / report

1.4.8 Support planting trees in forests in Kenya / report

1.4.9 Community sensitization in Somalia / report

1.4.10 Site selection and training in RWH and FMNR in

Somalia / report

1.4.11 Support to FMNR in Somalia / report

1.4.12 Monitor trees planted and in FMNR sites / report

1.5 Habitat change

monitoring (Activity

1b)

Habitat change analysis ICRAF LFI 1.4 Biodiversity loss and its drivers are better understood in the demonstration site,

better managed through targeted interven-

tions supported by BMP / IPs, and proposed solutions communicated to decision makers,

by Q4_2017

1.5.1 Remote sensing habitat change analysis / report

1.5.2 Participatory review of drivers of change / report

1.5.3 Findings and solutions communicated to decision mak-ers

1.6 Communication

(former act 8)

Communication ICRAF LFI 1.8 Communication strategy aligned with project objectives drafted by ICRAF by

Q4_2014. At least five (5) communication,

educational and advocacy products distribut-ed to relevant stakeholders by Q2 to

Q4_2015

1.6.1 Communication strategy development/ strategy report

1.6.2 Communication products development / communica-tion products and report

28

Table 6 continued

Activities J F M A M J J A S O N D Action / expected outputs / product Actor(s) Log Frame Indicator (LFI) and

Remarks

ER 2: Institutional capacities for management improved

2.1 Biodiversity as-

sessment and main-

streaming in planning

(former Activity 2)

Biodiversity assessment LFI 2.1 Biodiversity and socio-economic in-formation about the cross-border ecosystems

is collected, compiled and made accessible

and understandable to stakeholders and deci-sion makers by Q4_2015 so that biodiversity

is mainstreamed into on-going planning pro-

cesses.

2.1.1 Landscape assessment and information / report Consultants

2.1.2 Seascape assessment and information report CORDIO

2.1.3 Workshop on mainstreaming biodiversity into planning / workshop report

ICRAF

2.2 Develop and im-

plement land use plan-

ning (LUP) (former

Act 3)

Land use planning

2.2.1 Public meetings for community sensitization / report NMK Not related to LFI

2.2.2 Establish LUP units and develop capacity of communi-

ties and other actors in LUP / reports

NMK and ICRAF LFI 2.2 Two (2) local planning units (Lamu

& Badhaadhe) supported with equipment and

training by Q2_2015

2.2.3 Develop biodiversity inclusive land use plans, which engage communities and submit to relevant authorities / re-

ports

NMK LFI 2.3 The ongoing Spatial Planning pro-cess (LUP) for Lamu County being led by

County Government is technically supported

by BMP to be more participatory and sup-portive of biodiversity, and draft Spatial Plan

is transmitted to relevant authorities by

Q3_2016

2.3 Support protected

area management

(former act 4)

2.3.1 Develop a plan and road map for development of a protected area in the Laga Bada-

na area / report

Consultant LFI 2.5a One (1) Plan for re-establishment

of a management system for Laga Badana

Bush Bush National Reserve in Somalia pre-pared with all stakeholders and submitted to

relevant Somali authorities for approval by

Q3_2017

Review literature, identify and consult stakeholders and out-

line a plan / report

Organize a workshop to consult stakeholders / report

Finalize and submit report to ICRAF

Submit plan and road map to authorities

2.3.2 Develop two Community Development and Management Plans and one Community

Conservation Monitoring System (COMMS) for NRT conservancies / plans and report

NRT Coast LFI 2.5b One Management Plan for the Awer Conservancy in Kenya prepared and

submitted to relevant government agencies

for approval by Q3_2016 Develop community Development and Management Plans

Develop Community Conservation and Monitoring System

2.4 Capacity building

(former Act 10)

Capacity building

2.4.1 Training needs assessment & training plan / report with

plan

ANAFE No indicators in the log frame. Training plan

will be finalized with the assistance of TAT

29

2.4.2 Provide trainings on landscape level biodiversity con-

servation and use in LUP / plan and training report

ANAFE LFI 2.6 Six (6) training sessions on integrat-

ing biodiversity conservation & use at land-scape scale into LUP for an average of 20

people / session from local governments,

communities, CSOs, NGOs & protected area managers carried out by Q2_2015 (not real-

istic).

2.5 Protected area

management fund rais-

ing (former act 9)

Protected area management fund raising support

2.5.1 Review fund raising needs and opportunities / report Consultant Relates to Specific Objective Indicator 2.

Stakeholders supported to attract investment in protected area management, with at least

one donor round-table organized by the end

of the programme in 2017

2.5.2 Organize round table of funders, PA management and

conservation NGOs / report

ICRAF

2.5.3 Deliver report with two concept notes / concept notes Consultant

30

4 Beneficiaries/ affiliated entities and other cooperation

4.1 Relation between beneficiaries of the grant

Local communities, NGOs, local government, biodiversity managers and experts are the direct bene-

ficiaries from the grant. ICRAF interacted with representatives of these beneficiaries in the stakehold-

er meeting held during preparation of the proposal (June 2013), as well as during the field visits held

in April to June 2014 and during the inception meeting July 2014. Further engagement between

ICRAF and the direct beneficiaries in 2015 is foreseen during the fieldwork to complete the baseline

assessment in Kenya and in Somalia. Insecurity and violence complicates access to and contact with

the direct beneficiaries. ICRAF has adopted an approach to manage these risks while linking with the

direct beneficiaries and implementing part of its activities through local partners, consultants and or-

ganizations that have easier access to the target communities.

4.2 Relation with State Authorities

ICRAF has a good working relation with state authorities in Kenya and Somalia. Initially this relation

was complicated while some state authorities misinterpreted their role in the project. There were ex-

pectations that the BMP would financially support government and even that government would man-

age budgets and implement the action. The IGAD TAT made it clear that the BMP implements its ac-

tivities through civil society, with a facilitating role of government. Following this clarification of

roles and responsibilities ICRAF has been working closely with the MoPMRE in the prioritisation of

interventions, site selection and selection of institutions, NGOs and consultants for implementation of

the action. In Kenya ICRAF works with KFS and NMK, who implement specific activities. At county

level the Lamu governor’s office will be hosting the LUP unit and ICRAF and NMK will be working

in close collaboration with the Ministry of Lands. The office will also be hosting the project officer of

BMP. Representatives of NEMA and the Ministry of Environment, Water and Natural Resources have

been appointed as members of the Trans-boundary Steering Committee.

4.3 Relation to other implementing organizations

a. Partners

ICRAF currently enjoys cordial relationships with the two main partners, NMK and IUCN. Although

the contract between ICRAF and NMK was not signed in the first year, the two organizations contin-

ued dialogue on the best way of implementing the activity. Initially it was envisaged that NMK would

host a resource centre, with further ambitions to lead biodiversity assessments and coordinate the oth-

er stakeholders. After discussion it was decided to restrict the role of NMK to leading activity 2.2,

which aims at developing and implementing holistic and integrated panning for the landscape and

seascape an implementation strategy. To achieve this, NMK and ICRAF will support the LUP office

in the Office of Governor and the ongoing land use planning process in the Lamu County. This sup-

port consists of purchase of technical infrastructure, training in spatial planning as well as main-

streaming biodiversity in spatial planning and application of participatory planning approaches. To-

wards the end of the reporting period ICRAF and NMK had reached an agreement on the ToR, work-

plan and budget to be executed in year 2. The synchrony between the activities commissioned to

31

NMK and the land use planning by Lamu County, starting in January 2015, places the BMP in a fa-

vourable position to provide support at the right time.

IUCN will support three activities (see table 5), namely: Activity 2.1 - Biodiversity assessment and

mainstreaming in Planning, Activity 2.3 – Support protected area management and Indicator 2 of the

Specific Objective (see Table 1) – Stakeholders supported to attract investment in protected area man-

agement. The role of IUCN is to provide advise and other support to ICRAF and other implementing

partners and the contract with IUCN has been held back until agreements with implementing partners

are reached on activities 2.1, 2.3 and the activity resulting in indicator 2 of the specific objective. In the implementation of the BMP ICRAF is further working with associate partners and consultants.

ICRAF underestimated the reach of having several partners and consultants to be engaged in the pro-

ject as implementing actors. The negotiation of contracts and agreement with those partners and con-

sultants took more time than expected leading to a delay of the activities. The insecurity (terror at-

tacks) in the project site further delayed the project. Nevertheless, the relation with these partners and

consultants is good, notwithstanding the delay of the project. Below we review the status of contract-

ing associate partners and consultants by the end of the first year (7 November 2014).

b. Associate partners

Partner Activity Description of activity Status of agreement and implemen-

tation

CABI 1.1.2 Review status of invasive species. Contract signed 4 November 2014

CORDIO 2.1.2 Biodiversity assessment and mainstreaming in

planning - Seascape assessment and infor-

mation

Contract signed 7 November 2014

KFS 1.4 Forestry and agroforestry program, with 12 ac-

tions

Contract signed 4 November 2014.

Workplan submitted 9 November

ANAFE 1.2.3

2.4

Strengthened cross border cooperation - Or-

ganize cross border research and training ex-

change – Capacity needs assessment and ex-

change plan

Capacity building – Training needs assessment

and training plan

Contract signed 4 November 2014

NRT Coast 2.3.2 Support protected area management – develop

two community development and management

plans and one community conservation moni-

toring system in NRT conservancies

By end of year 1 contract being nego-

tiated

RAAS 1.4 Forestry and Agroforestry Program in Somalia Contract in revision, to be signed by

Q1 2015

IUCN Various Support IcRAF and other partners in imple-

menting activity 2.1 - Biodiversity assessment

and mainstreaming in Planning, Activity 2.3 –

Support protected area management and Indi-

cator 2 of the Specific Objective (see Table 1)

– Stakeholders supported to attract investment

in protected area management.

Contract to be signed by Q1 2015

32

c. Contractors

Partner Activity Description of activity Status of agreement

Dr. D.

Nyingi

2.1.1 Biodiversity Assessment and Mainstreaming in

Planning – Landscape Asessment and

Information in Kenya

Contract under discussion

Dr. M.

Ibrahim

1.1.4 Baseline study – deliver baseline report for

Somalia

Contract under discussion

Dr. Osman

Gedow

Amir

2.1.1 Biodiversity Assessment and Mainstreaming in

Planning – Landscape Asessment and

Information in Somalia

Contract under discussion

Dr. M.

Ibrahim

2.3.1 Support to Protected Area Management - Plan

and Roadmap for Establishment of Protected

Area in the Laga Badana Area

Contract under discussion

ASDSP 1.3 Support Biodiversity Value Chains Contract under discussion

4.4 Final beneficiaries

National government, policy makers and civil society from local to global scale are the final benefi-

ciaries of the BMP project. In year 1 there has been no engagement with these groups, but in the fol-

lowing years ICRAF will involve and promote the participation of the final beneficiaries on the im-

plementation of the Action.

4.5 Other third parties

In Kenya, linkages have been made with the Lamu County office (Commissioner and governor’s of-

fice), Rural Water Users Association, World Wildlife Fund and the NRT. In Somalia the MoPMRE

and DEMTAC have been strongly engaged in terms of site selection, risk analysis, design of action

and implementation.

4.6 Synergies with other actions

ICRAF and its partners have developed the following links and synergies between activities and ac-

tions of the BMP (see table 5) and other actions:

Activity 2.1 action 2.1.1 – CORDIO the organization undertaking the biodiversity assessment for

the coastal marine area has created synergy with a TNC funded project that surveys biodiversity

in the coastal and marine environment. TNC has requested the implementing partners to avail this

information to the IGAD BMP project.

Activity 2.2 - The support to land use planning foreseen by the BMP project will be working with

ongoing activities in land use planning carried out by Lamu County

Activity 2.3 – the support to protected area management foreseen by the BMP project has synergy

with ongoing efforts of NCC and NRT to establish and support community based wildlife con-

servancies which are supported by the Nature Conservancy

Activity 1.3 The value chain development activities foreseen by the BMP project has synergy

with other ongoing value chain activities supported by ASDSP

In the forthcoming year ICRAF will further explore possibilities to create synergies and leverage

greater impact.

34

6 Annex 1 – revised log frame

The revised log frame is sent along with the 2014 interim report as a separate file.