Management of Natural Resources Programme, Tanzania TAN-0092 Final Evaluation NORAD COLLECTED REVIEWS 1/2007 Dr Brian Cooksey (Team Leader), Mr Leonce Anthony, Dr Jim Egoe, Ms Kate Forrester, Professor George Kajembe, Mr Bakari Mbano, Ms Isabell von Oertzen, Dr Sibylle Riedmiller Commissioned by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Tanzania, and the Royal Norwegian Embassy, Dar es Salaam Norad collected reviews The report is presented in a series, compiled by Norad to disseminate and share analyses of development cooperation. The views and interpretations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation. Norad Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation P.O. Box 8034 Dep, NO- 0030 OSLO Ruseløkkveien 26, Oslo, Norway Phone: +47 22 24 20 30 Fax: +47 22 24 20 31 ISBN 978-82-7548-188-5 Management of Natural Resources Programme, Tanzania TAN-0092 Final Evaluation VOLUME 1: Main Report Summary of Main Findings and Recommendations REVISED FINAL REPORT Dr Brian COOKSEY (Team Leader) Mr Leonce ANTHONY Dr Jim EGOE Ms Kate FORRESTER Professor George KAJEMBE Mr Bakari MBANO Ms Isabell von OERTZEN Dr Sibylle RIEDMILLER Final Report submitted to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism and the Royal Norwegian Embassy, Dar es Salaam November 2006 3 Management of Natural Resources Programme, Tanzania TAN-0092 Final Evaluation TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME 1: MAIN REPORT Summary of Main Findings and Recommendations Executive summary i-iv Acknowledgement v Acronyms and abbreviations vi Structure of the evaluation report 1 PART 1: Overview and main findings Methodology 1 Limits to the report 2 MNRP background 3 Programme objectives 3 Impact 4 Measuring impact and benefits 4 Using programme indicators 5 Project impact on livelihoods and poverty 7 Gender impact 8 Efficiency: use of programme funds and human resources 8 National level efficiency 9 Use of funds at programme and project levels 9 Programme and project effectiveness 12 Relevance 12 Ownership of programme operations 13 Institutional collaboration 13 Norwegian-Tanzanian programme governance13 Collaboration with Norwegian institutions 14 Collaboration with local government15 Collaboration with other development partners 15 Sustainability 15 Private sector promotion 16 Governance: the missing link between NRM and development outcomes 17 Lessons learned and key challenges ahead 18 Recommendations for future Norwegian support for NRM in Tanzania 19 Tables Table 1: Utilization by project main activities 2004-05 10 Table 2: Summary of spending by Coordination and Capacity-building project by expense type, 2004-2005 10 Table 3: Summary of spending by Coordination and Capacity-building project by main activities, 2004-2005 11 Figures Figure 1: Governance shortcomings in the MNRP and NRM in general 17 4 PART 2: Project summaries I Catchment Forestry in Kilimanjaro, Arusha, Manyara and Morogoro 21 II Mangrove Management Tanga 22 III Fuelwood Forestry Ruvu 22 IV Beekeeping Manyoni, Kibondo, Tabora, Handeni, Kondoa 23 V Natural Forest Resources Management and Agro-Forestry Centre 24 VI Tanzania Forestry Research Institute, Morogoro 24 VII Serengeti Regional Conservation Project 25 VIII NCA Karatu 26 IX Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute, Arusha 26 X College of African Wildlife Management, Mweka 27 XI Mafia Island Marine Park 28 Tables Table IV.1: Average income from beekeeping in the pilot villages in 2004/05 (TShs) 24 Table XI.1: Marine Parks and Reserves expenditures 2003-05 See Annex 4 VOLUME 2: FINDINGS FROM FIELD VISITS Introduction 1 Forestry and forestry research (projects I-VI) I Catchment Forestry Arusha and Manyara, Kilimanjaro, and Morogoro 1 II Mangrove Management Tanga10 III Fuelwood Forestry Ruvu 15 IV Beekeeping Manyoni, Kibondo, Tabora, Handeni, Kondoa 24 V Hifadhi Ardhi Shinyanga, Natural Forest Resources Management and Agro- Forestry Centre 28 VI Tanzania Forestry Research Institute, Morogoro 33 Wildlife and wildlife research (projects VII-X) VII Serengeti Regional Conservation Project 37 VIII NCA Karatu 43 IX Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute, Arusha 46 X College of African Wildlife Management, Mweka 50 Marine (project XI) XI Mafia Island Marine Park 60 VOLUME 3: ANNEXES Annex 1 Terms of Reference 2 Annex 2 Business Care Services’ response to the Terms of Reference 9 Annex 3 Bibliography 20 Annex 4 MNRP Indicators 25 Annex 5 MNRP accounts 28 Annex 6 Persons met, interviews, group discussions 44 Annex 7 Response to comments on the Zero Draft 54 5 Management of Natural Resources Programme, Tanzania TAN-0092 Final Evaluation VOLUME 1: Main Report Summary of Main Findings and Recommendation FINAL REVISED REPORT Dr Brian COOKSEY Mr Leonce ANTHONY Dr Jim EGOE Ms Kate FORRESTER Professor George KAJEMBE Mr Bakari MBANO Ms Isabell von OERTZEN Dr Sibylle RIEDMILLER Final Report submitted to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism and the Royal Norwegian Embassy, Dar es Salaam November 2006 6 MANAGEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PROGRAMME (MNRP-TAN 092) FINAL EVALUATION Volume 1: MAIN REPORT Executive summary The final evaluation of the Management of Natural Resources Programme (MNRP) consisted of site visits to the programme’s eleven projects, interviews with project managers and beneficiaries, and a review of programme documents and other relevant literature. MNRP impact on natural resources and livelihoods The MNRP’s main objective is: ‘Increased benefits to rural communities based on sustainable natural resource management in Tanzania.’ The evaluation team finds that MNRP has recorded positive achievements with regard to this objective. In terms of natural resource conservation and restoration: ¾ The Catchment Forestry Project has improved the quality of forests in all project regions: the number and intensity of fires have decreased significantly, woody vegetation and canopy cover have increased, and the quantity and quality of water has improved; ¾ The NCA-Katatu project has led to the regeneration of vegetation in degraded areas; ¾ Partly as a result of the Mangrove Management Project, mangrove areas increased from 115,500 ha to 133,480 ha., an increase of nearly 16 percent; ¾ In the Ruvu Fuelwood Forestry project, many trees have been planted, some of them valuable indigenous species. As well as planting trees on their forest plots, people have also started planting trees in their shambas, despite there being no culture of planting trees on shambas in this area; ¾ Conservation measures in the Mafia Island Marine Park (MIMP) have significantly reduced the incidence of dynamite fishing; ¾ The establishment of bee reserves under the Beekeeping Project has had a positive impact as regards maintaining or restoring biodiversity. The project has led some farmers to abandon tobacco cultivation and has reduced the use of bark hives, which are environmentally destructive; ¾ Through the HASHI/ICRAF project, the Shinyanga people were able to restore over 350,000 ha of degraded land by 2002, raising the afforestation rate from 1,000 to 20,000/ha per year; ¾ As a result of the Serengeti Regional Conservation Project, there has been a significant increase in the wildlife population following a reduction in poaching. MNRP can also claim numerous successes in terms of increased income generation and poverty reduction among community members in project areas, including: ¾ In catchment areas, households plant trees on individual plots and cut firewood and harvest grass for their zero-grazed cows. Income from the sale of honey and beeswax has enabled some families to improve nutrition, pay school fees, buy food and corrugated iron roofing sheets; ¾ Heifers supplied in Karatu have generated a cash income is used for food, other domestic needs, and school fees; i ¾ The mangrove project has attained or surpassed project targets relating to accessing mangrove products and revenues, and involvement in diverse income-generating activities; ¾ In Ruvu, people's food security has improved because they have larger, more fertile areas on which to plant a variety of crops, and because they are able to sell poles and charcoal to cover the shortfall in food during droughts; ¾ The creation of MIMP has resulted in a clear increase in income within the park; ¾ In pilot villages, beekeepers increased honey production from an average of 175 kg/beekeeper in 1999 to of 494 kg/beekeeper in June 2005. By 2005, the average income per beekeeper was TShs 456,000; ¾ The HASHI Project has had a significant impact on household income through woodlot enclosures, with benefits from restoration estimated at USD 14/person/month; ¾ In SRCP, food security has increased for employed people, including Village Game Scouts. Income from tourism has led to increased benefits to the rural communities in the 21 villages in the project area, particularly in terms of social and welfare amenities. At the community level, income earned from various project activities, including tourism royalties, meat sales, and taxes on forest products, have financed investments in social infrastructure. These achievements reflect positively on Norwegian-Tanzanian collaboration over a range of natural resources and their management, and on the capacity of the MNRT to translate external and national resources into positive outputs. However, projects supported through MNRP have sometimes achieved their conservation objectives at the expense of, or with unforeseen negative consequences for, local populations. For example: ¾ In catchment project areas, the benefits for communities