Kalahari-Namib Project
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Terminal Evaluation of the UNEP/GEF project “Kalahari-Namib Project: Enhancing decision-making through Interactive Environmental Learning and Action in the Molopo- Nossob River Basin in Botswana, Namibia and South Africa" GEF ID: 3403 Evaluation Office of UN Environment Programme March 2020 Evaluation report, final, March 2020 Photos Credits: Front cover: photo by Elise Pinners, Surprise Farm fence for rotational grazing, South Africa, 28-12-2019 Page iii: photo by Elise Pinners, Prosopis control near BORAVAST area, Botswana, 03- 12-2019 Page 8: photo by Elise Pinners, Martha Isaacs showing the Propopis pod grinding machine in Bokspits, Botswana, 02-12-2019 Page 64: photo by Elise Pinners, Aminuis community, Namibia, 15-10-2019 @UNEP / Elise Pinners, UNEP Evaluation Mission (2020) This report has been prepared by an independent consultant evaluator and is a product of the Evaluation Office of UNEP. The findings and conclusions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of Member States or the UNEP Programme Senior Management. For further information on this report, please contact: Evaluation Office of UNEP GPO Box 30552 00100 Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 20 762 3389 Email: [email protected] Website: https://www.unenvironment.org/about-un-environment/evaluation Kalahari-Namib Project: Enhancing decision-making through Interactive Environmental Learning and Action in the Molopo-Nossob River Basin in Botswana, Namibia and South Africa Project number: GEF project ID 3403 Date: 5th March 2020 All rights reserved. © 2020 Evaluation Office of UNEP i Evaluation report, final, March 2020 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Terminal Evaluation was prepared for the Evaluation Office of UNEP by an independent evaluation consultant. The report benefits from a peer review conducted within Evaluation Office of UNEP. The Evaluation Office of UNEP would like to thank all Kalahari-Namib Project collaborators that contributed to the evaluation process, and especially those 'on the ground' who helped put together the itinerary: Mr. Rector Mbeha (consultant) and Ms. Betty Kauna Schroeder (Ministry of Environment and Tourism in Namibia, Mr. Joseph Lesenya (Department of Forestry and Range Resources, Ministry of Environment, Natural Resources Conservation and Tourism in Botswana) and Mr. Sonny Mokgwathi (Department of Forestry and Range Resources, Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and Tourism) in Botswana, and Mr. Wijnand Nel (Northern Cape Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development) in South Africa. Also, the evaluation consultant’s appreciation goes to Ms. Aluwani Ramugundo (IUCN) for joining in the long-distance field visit in South Africa and Botswana. Elise Pinners (MSc), evaluation expert. Ms Pinners has 30 years' experience, mostly in rural development, Natural Resource Management (rangelands, river basin, water resources and forest), often in semi-arid areas. Ms Pinners has worked as a consultant since 2005, for multi- and bilateral development agencies and programmes. Evaluation Team: Elise Pinners – Principal Evaluator Evaluation Office of UNEP: Martina Bennett and Janet Wildish – Evaluation Managers Mela Shah – Evaluation Programme Assistant ii Evaluation report, final, March 2020 ABOUT THE EVALUATION Joint Evaluation: No Report Language(s): English Evaluation Type: Terminal Project Evaluation Brief Description: This report covers the terminal evaluation of a UNEP-GEF project implemented between 2011 and 2019. The project's overall development goal was to support communities and policy makers in Botswana, Namibia and South Africa to effectively implement and upscale sustainable land management (SLM) in the Molopo-Nossob basin area and thereby contribute to improved livelihoods and the maintenance of the integrity and ecological functioning of the entire Kalahari-Namib ecosystem. The evaluation sought to assess project performance (in terms of relevance, effectiveness and efficiency), and determine outcomes and impacts (actual and potential) stemming from the project, including their sustainability. The evaluation has two primary purposes: i) to provide evidence of results to meet accountability requirements, and ii) to promote learning, feedback, and knowledge sharing through results and lessons learned among UNEP and IUCN ESARO, the Ministry of Environment, Wildlife & Tourism (Botswana), Ministry of Environment and Tourism (Namibia), Department of Environmental Affairs and Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (South Africa). Therefore, the evaluation identifies lessons of operational relevance for future project formulation and implementation. Key words: Sustainable Land Management; multi-country; Trans-boundary; Kalahari; Kalahari-Namib; Molopo-Nossob; River Basin; INRM; SLM; SWC; Livestock; rangeland management, herd management, rotational grazing, invasive species, water management, multi-disciplinary, Governance; land tenure, human rights, tenure gap, community empowerment, service development, Ecosystem management; ecological representativeness; Climate Change; SIP; IUCN ESARO, SADC, SRAP. iii Evaluation report, final, March 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................................................... II ABOUT THE EVALUATION .................................................................................................................................. III TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................ IV LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES AND MAPS................................................................................................................ V LIST OF ACCRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................... VII PROJECT IDENTIFICATION TABLE ...................................................................................................................... 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................ 2 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT OF THE PROJECT ................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 COVERAGE OF THE EVALUATION .................................................................................................................................... 8 1.3 LIMITATIONS OF THIS EVALUATION ................................................................................................................................ 9 2 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 11 3 THE PROJECT ............................................................................................................................................ 13 3.1 CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................................................... 13 3.2 OBJECTIVES AND COMPONENTS ................................................................................................................................. 14 3.3 STAKEHOLDERS ......................................................................................................................................................... 15 3.4 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION STRUCTURE AND PARTNERS .......................................................................................... 16 3.5 CHANGES IN DESIGN DURING IMPLEMENTATION ......................................................................................................... 17 3.6 PROJECT FINANCING .................................................................................................................................................. 17 4 THEORY OF CHANGE AT EVALUATION ..................................................................................................... 20 5 EVALUATION FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................ 24 5.1 STRATEGIC RELEVANCE .............................................................................................................................................. 24 i. Alignment to UNEP Medium Term Strategy, Programme of Work ......................................................... 24 Project Document and UNEP Medium-Term Strategies (MTS) ..............................................................................................24 Project implementation and UNEP Medium-Term Strategies (MTS) ....................................................................................24 ii. Alignment to the Bali Strategic Plan (BSP) ................................................................................................. 25 Project Document and BSP ............................................................................................................................................................25 Project implementation and BSP ..................................................................................................................................................26 iii. Alignment to GEF strategic