ATTACHMENT_21_-_CARPE_III_Mid-term_Evaluation_-English.pdf

EVALUATION

Midterm Evaluation of Phase III of the USAID Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment

July 2017

This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by Integra Government Services International, LLC.

MIDTERM EVALUATION

PHASE III—USAID CENTRAL AFRICA REGIONAL PROGRAM FOR

THE ENVIRONMENT

July 5, 2017

AID 605-TO-16-00001

DISCLAIMER

The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

Cover Photo: Theodore Trefon 2016, some rights reserved

CONTENTS

Acronyms

1. Executive Summary

1.1 Evaluation Purpose and Evaluation Questions

1.2 Project Background

1.3 Evaluation Questions, Design, Methods, and Limitations

1.4 Findings and Conclusions

1.5 Recommendations

2. Introduction

2.1 The Congo Basin Forest

2.2 Social Dynamics

3. The Development Problem and USAID’s Response

4. Evaluation Purpose and Evaluation Questions

5. Evaluation Methodology

5.1 Preparation

5.2 Field Data Collection and Synthesis

5.3 Roles and Responsibilities

5.4 Assumptions, Constraints, and Risks

6. Findings

6.1 Program Performance

Biodiversity

Poaching and Wildlife Trafficking

Land Use Change

Livelihood Alternatives

Capacity of Local Communities

Climate Change Mitigation Objectives

Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation

Shifting Cultivation

Fire

Logging

Charcoal Production

Leakage

REDD+ Strategy

Policy and Regulatory Environments

Women’s Empowerment, Gender Integration and Indigenous Peoples

6.2 Program Design and Implementation Strategy

Validity of hypotheses and assumptions

6.3 Program Management and Coordination with IPs

IP capacity to design, implement, and manage activities, including livelihood alternatives

Cost-Effectiveness

6.4 Sustainability

Financial and Institutional Sustainability

Social Sustainability

Review of Sustainability by Strategy

Sustainability of Institutions that CARPE Strengthens

6.5 General findings from CARPE National Partners

7. Conclusions

8. Lessons Learned

9. Recommendations

9.1 Program Performance

9.2 Program Design and Implementation Strategy

9.3 Program Management and Coordination

9.4 Sustainability

10. The Future of CARPE

Annexes

Annex I: Evaluation Statement of Work

Annex II: References

Annex III: Team Composition, Level of Effort, and Maps

Annex IV: Data Collection Instruments (Survey Forms)

Annex V: CARPE III MTE Evaluation Results – Questionnaire Data Analysis Annex VI: Summary of Findings by Landscape

ACRONYMS

ADS Automated Directives System (of USAID) AFR Africa Bureau of USAID AgCLIR Agriculture Commercial Legal and Institutional Reform AWF African Wildlife Foundation BIR Brigade d'Intervention Rapid (Rapid Response Force) CAFEC Central African Forest Ecosystems Conservation CAFI Central African Forest Initiative (from Norway) CAFEE Centre pour L'autonomisation de la Femme et de L'education, Africa

Capacity CAR Central African Republic CARPE Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment CBO Community-Based Organization CBFP Congo Basin Forest Partnership CBNRM Community Based Natural Resource Management Network CC Climate Control CEFDHAC Conférence sur les Ecosystèmes de Forêts Denses et Humides d’Afrique Centrale (Conference on the Ecosystems of the Dense Rainforests of Central Africa)

CIB Congolaise Industrielle du Bois (Congolese Wood Industry, a logging concessionaire)

CNIAF Centre National d’Inventaire et d’Aménagement des Ressources Forestiéres et Fauniques (National Center of Inventory and Management of Forest and Wildlife Resources, ROC)

CN–REDD+ National Coordination of Reduction of Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (DRC)

COCOCongo Coalition pour la Conservation au Congo (Congolese Coalition for Conservation)

COCOSI Comité de Coordination de Suivi du Site (Site Coordination Committee) COMIFAC Commission des Forêts d’Afrique Centrale (Central African Forests

Commission) COTREFOR Compagnie de Transport et d'Exploitation Forestière CSO Civil Society Organization CWT Combating Wildlife Trafficking/Poaching DIAF Direction d’Inventaires et d’Aménagement Forestiéres (Directorate of

Inventory and Forest Management, DRC) DO Development Objective DRC Democratic Republic of Congo E3 Economic Growth, Education, and Environment Bureau of USAID

ECOFAC Programme de Conservation et Utilisation Rationale des Ecosystemes Forestiers en Afrique Central (Conservation and Rational Use of Forest Ecosystems in Central Africa) EU-funded regional program

EMAPS Environmental Monitoring and Policy Support ER Emissions Reduction ER-PD Emissions Reduction–Program Document ERZs Extractive Resource Zones FAB Forestry and Biodiversity Office (of E3 Bureau) USAID FACET Forêts d’Afrique Centrale Evaluées par Télédétection (Monitoring the

Forests of Central Africa using Remotely Sensed Data Sets) FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FARDC Forces Armées de la République Démocratique du Congo (DRC Armed

Forces) FDLR Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda FSC Forest Stewardship Council Certification GCC Global Climate Change Office, USAID GHG Greenhouse Gas HFLD High Forest Cover/Low Deforestation HICD Human and Institutional Capacity Development (a USAID Initiative) HII Human Influence Index ICCN Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature (Congolese

Institute for the Conservation of Nature) IGCP International Gorilla Conservation Program

IP Implementing Partner IR Intermediate Results IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature JGI Jane Goodall Institute KfW German Government-Owned Development Bank and ICCN Sponsor LandPKS Land Potential Knowledge System LSA Landscape Support Applications LTLT Lac Tele -Lac Tumba (Landscape) MAF Ministry of Land Affairs MAST Mobile Application to Secure Tenure MD Missing data MDDEFE Ministry of Sustainable Development, Forest Economy, and

Environment (ROC) MENCT Ministry of the Environment, Nature Conservation and Tourism (DRC) MI Measuring Impact MLW Maringa/Lopori/Wamba (Landscape)

MRV Monitoring, Recording, and Verification MTKB Maiko-Tayana-Kahuzi-Biéga NASA US National Aeronautics and Space Administration NC-REDD National Coordination – Reduction of Emissions from Deforestation and

Forest Degradation NGO Non-governmental Organization NNNP Nouabulé-Noloki National Park

NORAD Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation NRM Natural Resource Management OCP Okapi Conservation Project OSFAC Central African Satellite Observatory for the Congo Basin Forest PA Protected Area PNKB Parc National Kahuzi-Biéga (Kahuzi-Biéga National Park) PPP Public/Private Partnership RDCS Regional Development Cooperation Strategy REDD+ Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (plus ancillary benefits) RFO Reserve Faunal Okapi (Okapi Faunal Reserve) RIL Reliance Industries Ltd.

ROC Regional Office of Communications ROC Republic of Congo SCAEMPS Strengthening Central Africa Environmental Management and Policy

Support SFM Sustainable Forest Management SMART Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool SODEFOR Société de Développement Forestier or Forest Development

Corporation TGCC Tenure and Global Climate Change (a program) TNS Sangha Tri-National (Landscape) ToC Theory of Change UNDP United Nations Development Programme USAID United States Agency for International Development USAID/AFR USAID’s African Bureau USAID/E3 Bureau of Economic Growth, Environment and Education USAID/W USAID/Washington USFS United States Forest Service USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

UGADEC Union of Associations for the Conservation of Gorillas and Community Development, (eastern DRC)

WCS Wildlife Conservation Society WRI World Resources Institute WWF World Wildlife Fund (in USA), otherwise Worldwide Fund for Nature

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Evaluation Purpose and Evaluation Questions

A team of twelve experts, organized by USAID contractor Integra Government Services International (Integra), undertook a midterm performance evaluation of USAID’s Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment’s third phase (CARPE III). The assessment took place from mid-October to the end of November 2016. This was a complex evaluation involving four analytical and technical support activities for eight field programs (the CARPE Landscapes), in four countries: The United States of America (USA), the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Republic of Congo (ROC), and Rwanda. The Evaluation Team spent six weeks in the field (the itineraries are illustrated in Annex, Figures 10-14).

The team was composed of four experts from DRC, as well as experts from France, India, and the United States. Experts included a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) expert, three biodiversity experts (including a wildlife crime expert), two social scientists, an agronomist, and two climate change experts. The team met for a week in Kinshasa prior to fieldwork to finalize evaluation questions and cross-train thus ensuring consistent data collection across disciplines.

USAID provided evaluation questions are included in the Scope of Work (Annex 1). A midterm evaluation is generally intended to evaluate performance to date, however, USAID had supplemental requirements that address program impact (i.e. assessments of effectiveness).

Given the scale of the CARPE program and the breadth of the activities, it would take a substantially greater period to collect the data necessary to fully evaluate the effectiveness of CARPE. The Evaluation Team was, nevertheless, able to generate and analyze enough information to identify those areas most likely to succeed, and those most at risk of not meeting goals.

1.2 Project Background

In 1999, the Heads of State from six Congo Basin countries met in Yaoundé, Cameroon to sign a declaration and action plan. The Yaoundé Declaration created a framework for shared conservation objectives, including transboundary cooperation.

The Congo Basin Forest Partnership (CBFP), underpinned by CARPE, and joined by South Africa and 27 other public and private partners, was announced as an initiative to support the Yaoundé Declaration.

USAID’s CARPE was initiated in 1995. Phase 1 of CARPE ran from 1995-2002. It focused on understanding the legal, social, biological, administrative contexts of the Congo Basin forests, and on inventorying forest resources. Phase II, from 2003-2013, facilitated comprehensive regional land use planning to identify conservation and sustainable land use priorities.

USAID approved the Regional Development Cooperation Strategy (RDCS) in June 2011 to support CARPE. The goal of the RDCS is to accelerate Central Africa’s transition to a climate-resilient, low emissions development through its single development objective (DO): The ecological integrity of the humid forest ecosystem of the Congo Basin maintained. In addition to aligning with USAID’s Climate Change and Development Strategy and Biodiversity Guidance, the DO of the RDCS also supports the Congo Basin Forest Partnership’s objectives to promote economic development, poverty alleviation, improved governance, and natural resources conservation in Central Africa.

Phase III, which was initiated in 2013, focuses on implementation of priority actions. CARPE III aims to achieve the DO through four intermediate results (IR): (1) targeted forest Landscapes sustainably managed, (2) threats to biodiversity in targeted forest Landscapes mitigated, (3) policy and regulatory environments supporting sustainable forest and biodiversity conservation established, and (4) capacity to monitor forest cover change, greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity strengthened.

1.3 Evaluation Questions, Design, Methods, and Limitations

Evaluating questions were designed to cover four major areas: (1) program performance, (2) program design and implementation strategy, (3) program management, and (4) coordination and sustainability. The full set of questions and sub-questions is available in Annex I, Statement of Work.

Program Performance Biodiversity conservation: Is CARPE on track to achieve its biodiversity conservation objectives?

Climate change mitigation: Is CARPE on track to achieve its climate change mitigation objectives?

Gender and minorities issues: How well does CARPE address issues concerning women empowerment, gender integration, and indigenous peoples?

Program Design and Implementation Strategy What are the merits and shortcomings of the CARPE III strategic approach?

How valid are the development hypotheses and the assumptions outlined in the CARPE III RDCS and the strategic approaches and associated Theories of Changes as elaborated upon by partners with the assistance of the Measuring Impact (MI) Team?

What evidence exists that the strategic approaches developed for each implementing partner are (or are not) appropriate for effectively and efficiently achieving CARPE III objectives?

Program Management, Coordination, and Sustainability How well are CARPE’s activities managed and coordinated to achieve the program objectives and results?

What have been CARPE’s relative strengths and weaknesses in ensuring the financial, social and institutional sustainability of USAID’s investments after CARPE III implementation?

1.4 Findings and Conclusions

CARPE is instrumental in reducing rainforest loss in the world’s second largest tropical rainforest ecosystem. CARPE is a critically important hedge against future greenhouse gas emissions and provides essential protection to threatened and endangered species.

As a long-term commitment to protecting the rainforests of the Congo Basin, CARPE provides an opportunity for the conservation and development communities to better understand ecological processes and effective conservation measures. The initial priorities were established in 1999, but over seventeen years, USAID and its partners have grown and improved their understanding of how sustainability can be achieved. They have also developed a deeper recognition of the ecological and economic importance of the Landscapes where CARPE and its

Implementing Partners (IPs) have invested resources. Much about the importance of the resources protected under CARPE remains to be discovered. Even at the time of writing this report, major new findings are emerging from research in the Cuvette Centrale, where the Lac Tele - Lac Tumba (LTLT) Landscape is located. The extent of the forest peatland is being quantified. The peatland is now understood to be the largest such complex in the world, and highly significant for future greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies (Dargie et al, 2017).

CARPE has a catalytic role in the development of new tools and approaches to forest monitoring that have benefited the global conservation community. It has influenced the establishment of Africa’s first major forest carbon climate change mitigation program, the Maï- Ndombe REDD+ Program in and adjacent to the LTLT Landscape. CARPE promotes an unusual level of cooperation from historically competitive conservation partners, and leverages a substantial amount of resources, both in co-financing and in sharing of information and ideas.

CARPE also identifies emergent issues through its collaborative learning environment, and has been able to generate results through its foundation in sound science. Notably, research undertaken in CARPE Landscapes has been instrumental in establishing the connection between biodiversity and carbon cycling in forests, and the implications of defaunation on the climate mitigation capacities of forests. This process of continuous learning will necessitate a rebalancing of conservation efforts to produce desired outcomes.

CARPE, however, is not without flaws. The evaluation found that there is substantial and critically important work to be done to integrate the social dimensions of natural resource management with conservation biology. Adaptive management in CARPE is weak, and inhibited by planning processes. Weaknesses in overall program design are also apparent, particularly in strategies to reduce emissions. For example, to meet urban energy demand, a major driver of deforestation in some Landscapes, a systemic approach is required that includes intervention outside the CARPE Landscapes. Such activities could be better accomplished through joint programming with other USAID operating units whose expertise is not available within CARPE.

Integration with other USAID programs, and with other donors, would enable more strategic implementation of CARPE activities.

Biodiversity Objectives CARPE is on track to achieve its biodiversity objectives, having successfully identified and mobilized to address threats under difficult circumstances. Given the complex array of economic, social, and political forces that drive biodiversity loss, most of which are outside of the remit of CARPE, this is a significant accomplishment. By comparing protected areas within CARPE Landscapes with areas having similar attributes, it is clear to see that many vulnerable species would be in much worse condition than they are without the support provided by

CARPE.

The management authorities in all CARPE Landscapes have adopted the Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART), an open source data collection system for supporting data-driven patrols in protected areas. While not yet fully operational, its use is growing, and with it, the ability of authorities to collect detailed data for improved law enforcement monitoring and response. This is a very positive development, though the sustainability of the activity cannot be guaranteed, in part due to the costs of replacing the relatively inexpensive equipment.

The evaluation team found that livelihood alternative initiatives in CARPE are too limited in scope, under-conceptualized, and too poorly executed to be effective in reducing deforestation and forest degradation, as well as defaunation driven by high levels of bushmeat consumption and trade.

CARPE influences biodiversity policy and regulation by providing important decision support tools that influence and validate policy decisions. To a limited degree, CARPE is also advancing the capabilities that combat wildlife trafficking. There is potential to do more, particularly in promoting transboundary cooperation to disrupt trade routes for illegal wildlife products. The Evaluation Team identified positive developments in the ROC in building the capacity to combat wildlife crime, including poaching and wildlife trafficking. In the DRC, it found that there is a competent and motivated local partner that can help replicate the early successes in the ROC.

Climate Change Mitigation Objectives Concerning climate change mitigation, CARPE’s most significant interventions are still under development. CARPE does not yet completely address the identified drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. One root cause of deforestation in the Congo Basin is an urban energy shortage, which cannot be addressed solely through incremental improvements in existing wood and charcoal based energy systems. Where logging is concerned, CARPE’s ability to influence the behavior of logging concessionaires is mixed, and often limited.

In the Sangha Tri-National (TNS) Landscape, where the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) has succeeded in influencing the behavior of logging concessionaires, measurable results have been obtained that demonstrate the potential of constructive engagement. However, this success was due, in large measure, on the strong sense of responsibility of the logging company that owned the concession. Replicability is hampered by the unwillingness of many concessionaires to invest in sustainable practices. And others who do prefer more sustainable production are only marginally profitable, which constrains their management options.

Leakage, or displacement of avoided deforestation to other areas, has only been addressed in a generalized, qualitative way. This is, in part, because of the design of mitigation activities, and the absence of a project based approach to addressing leakage risks. CARPE does do a good job in providing the necessary baseline data necessary for quantified approaches.

Those CARPE Landscapes with a forest/savanna mosaic are fire-adapted. Nevertheless, fire can be a key driver of forest degradation in these systems. Changes in the climate regime amplify the impact of fire on the ecosystem. An increasing population creates new demands for land cover change, and fire is the most expedient way of accomplishing the task. Consequently, the patchwork of forest and savannah is gradually converted into open savannah, with concomitant greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and forest degradation. Thus, fire management is an increasingly important management strategy, both to prevent further degradation of existing forests, and to permit forest Landscape restoration. In all such Landscapes observed, the Evaluation Team concluded that the IPs have not yet developed a sufficient understanding of fire ecology or the role of fire in culture, and functional fire management approaches are lacking. There are some studies and awareness raising efforts, but these are not an adequate response to this threat. Efforts are coming underway to address fire, however, aided by data provided by EMAPS, which provides information on fire trends and the potential for early warning systems. Fire management will be of growing importance in some CARPE Landscapes, and could be a potential legacy of CARPE III.

Gender and Indigenous Issues Implementation observed in CARPE Landscapes to promote women’s empowerment and gender equality lack a systematic approach, and the analytical rigor that would lead to a strong basis for linking gender analysis and female empowerment to project goals. Married, elder Bantu-speaking men dominate society throughout central Africa. This is a reality that even the best strategies would have difficulty in shifting. CARPE partners have had only limited success because there have not been sufficient efforts to address cultural dynamics. Thus ender analysis is not translating into effective programmatic responses.

Likewise, CARPE has been unable to effectively integrate indigenous people into its biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation portfolios. CARPE needs clear strategies informed by social science and led by subject matter experts if it is to have any chance of having significant impact. A unified program spanning CARPE Landscapes with a dedicated staff trained and skilled to address the very delicate issues of relations with ethnic minorities (specifically “pygmies” – baMbuti, baTwa1) could yield better results.

Program Management and Coordination The management systems of USAID can be a barrier to adaptive management and innovation.

Bureaucratic inertia can hobble the ability of IPs to perform effectively. The Evaluation Team noted complaints of protracted processes for approval of management decisions. This can rob the IPs of the ability to manage adaptively and to respond effectively to changing conditions.

Ultimately, it encourages a culture of compliance to initial terms and conditions of the cooperative agreements, rather than one of adaptation and learning. This can be prevented if the necessary approval processes can be streamlined and requests are addressed promptly.

Sustainability Sustainability is the greatest challenge that CARPE, and all development activities in the Congo Basin, face. Government buy-in, as reflected in investment, varies from substantial participation in Rwanda, to limited and declining support in the DRC. The expectation of the government of the DRC is that the conservation community will finance the operations of the Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature (ICCN). As there are limitations to the degree that CARPE can support government institutions; the institutions that CARPE III has strengthened the most are the IPs themselves. Some IPs were active in the Landscape before CARPE, and they fully intend to be active after CARPE; they are essential to the goals of CARPE. Investment in the capabilities of the IPs is a logical response. Along a continuum, protected areas are typically advanced in their management planning, but in the RoC and DRC, the governments are not adequately supporting the protected area management authorities. Consequently, the protected areas are not fully sustainable. In some Landscapes, IPs are working to develop public/private partnerships (between the state and private sources of finance) to secure sustainable, and sustained, management of protected areas.

Land use planning is a central feature of CARPE’s approach. Land use planning is a policy tool to optimize land uses according to different social needs such as conservation, food production, wood, or mineral production. In CARPE, land use planning has been difficult to implement in part because of the absence of data on the social dimensions of land use, including information on customary resource use. None of the CARPE zones (i.e., protected areas and community managed land units) has a detailed map of the customary territories of ethnic groups or clans.

This gap is important because when management of a unit of land must be shared between multiple, possibly competing, social units it complicates governance, and could exacerbate tensions, increasing the potential for conflict. The lack of attention to local capacity to implement land-use plans and naïveté about local dynamics of land use and resource rights are examples

1 For simplicity this report refers to all pygmy people as Mbuti, a Swahili term. We recognize however that there are distinct populations of forest-dwelling people with hunter-gatherer traditions, which differ by landscape.

of imperfect understanding of the problem set. This may have slowed progress towards sustainability. Other examples of community-managed conservation exist in the region that are not supported by CARPE, but which could provide useful insights, were CARPE Implementing Partners attuned to these efforts.

The Evaluation Team found that the proposed alternative livelihoods used in CARPE were in general (with some notable exceptions) poorly designed, and too small in scale to have an impact. Even if they were to be scaled up, there is no evidence that they would prevent unsustainable forest use. At best, they would supplement income from such uses. The experience provides important lessons for future attempts at sustainable economic development in and around the Landscapes. CARPE projects have shown the potential of community-based conservation as a sustainable approach to Landscape level conservation, notably in the fisheries compacts of Lac Tele communities.

1.5 Recommendations

The evaluation identified opportunities to capitalize upon success. CARPE III is poised to serve as an important laboratory for the use of community-based approaches to expand the area of forests managed for conservation and greenhouse gas emission mitigation, if it can support the governance of community forest concessions granted by the Community Forest Decree in the DRC. This decree presents a new opportunity to secure resource rights for well-managed communities. CARPE could demonstrate to other countries of the Congo Basin, some of which do not have a precedent for community resource rights, the potential of such a community-based approach. The decree allows for enhanced community resource rights in the form of community forest concessions. Security of resource rights will give communities an incentive to protect forests and restrict their exploitation, including through colonization of land. CARPE’s Strengthening Central Africa Environmental Management and Policy Support (SCAEMPS) program is working with the DRC’s Ministry of the Environment, Nature Conservation, and Tourism (MENCT) to operationalize Arrêté 025, of February 9 2016, constituting the administrative finding, of the Community Forestry Decree (Decree #14/018). This will provide the criteria for granting a concession to communities.

CARPE has good relationships with key national management authorities and provides valued support. Additional engagement with government representatives at the local and provincial levels could enhance CARPE’s effectiveness.

CARPE should scale the lessons from early successes in combating wildlife crime and trafficking across CARPE Landscapes through cross-training among the Landscapes, IP, and host country partners. The Evaluation Team recommends that CARPE assess the feasibility of undertaking such an activity.

There are some technical issues yet to be resolved with the SMART technology, such as battery life adequate for long-term field patrols. It remains to be seen if SMART use can be sustained without the support of CARPE. A demonstrably high return on investment will be a compelling argument, and CARPE should be prepared to demonstrate the added value of this technology to authorities throughout the region. CARPE Landscapes provide a useful test of the tool for the consortium that is developing SMART. The benefits of large-scale use across the Landscapes should be identified as well.

CARPE should establish and use an alert system to monitor and report fires in the Léconi- Batéké-Léfini Landscape, and engage communities in active management of fires and reduction of fire risk.

USAID should streamline the request approval process to prevent delays in program implementation. If request approval delays are due to the failure of IPs to follow correct procedures or adequately document requests, it is recommended that USAID or Implementing Partners provide further instruction to responsible staff.

Where USAID approval of management decisions is necessary, USAID should determine a test of what constitutes a reasonable response time, and seek to ensure that IPs have their instructions in a timely manner.

IPs are engaged in efforts to create sustainable management mechanisms, in the form of public/private partnerships for individual protected areas, operated through a cooperative agreement with the State, and financed by external sources through trust funds. These efforts are laudable, but there is a risk of balkanizing the protected area estate by creating a dynamic of haves and have-nots. In the long-term, semi-independent trust funds to support the overall protected area estate may be a more balanced approach to ensuring sustainability of key biodiversity areas. IP efforts to support protected areas through public/private partnerships is a positive step if the partnerships avail themselves of important lessons from the Virunga Landscape, particularly insofar as effective engagement with local institutions and authorities is concerned.

CARPE should abandon investment in all but the most promising sustainable livelihood activities (such as the shade grown cacao program in the Ituri Landscape and fisheries in the LTLT Landscape), where important lessons can be learned. It should focus on effective governance and resource rights at the community level.

The Community Profile methodology used by the International Gorilla Conservation Program, in Rwanda’s Virunga Landscape, provides a good way of “listening” to communities that would help to secure buy-in and sustainability. This approach may be profitably replicable in other Landscapes.

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 The Congo Basin Forest

The Congo Basin is the drainage basin for the Congo River, the second largest river, by volume, in the world. The basin includes parts of Cameroon, the RoC, the Central African Republic, the DRC, Angola, and Zambia. The contiguous equatorial forest belt, known as the Congo Basin forest lies in the central Congo Basin (DRC and RoC) and spills over into other watersheds in Cameroon, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, the Central African Republic, and the Albertine Rift border with Rwanda. This forest, the second largest tract of rainforest in the world, accounts for more than 12 percent of the world’s tropical rainforest. The Congo Basin forest is critical to global climate regulation through its effects on rainfall in the North Atlantic.

The Congo Basin forest ecosystems consist of Congolian swamp forests in the central basin, including the LTLT Landscape and the Moringa-Lopori-Wamba (MLW) Landscape, the Northern Congolian forest-savanna mosaic, including the Sangha Tri-National (TNS) Landscape, Western Congolian forest-savanna mosaic, including the Batéké-Laconi-Léfini Landscape (Batéké Plateau), Central Congolian lowland forest, including the Salonga Landscape, and the Northeastern Congolian lowland forest, including the Ituri, Virunga, and the Maiko-Tayna-Kahuzi Biéga Landscapes. These ecosystems are derived from an intricate intermingling of forest and water—and human interaction. The forests of concern for CARPE III are considered generally to be high forest cover/low deforestation (HFLD) countries, which are of a lower risk of deforestation, and accordingly tend to attract fewer investments.

The primary source of greenhouse gas emissions varies by Landscape. The forests of the cuvette centrale are still isolated, and shifting cultivation is the major source of emissions. Other sources include logging, legal and illegal, and charcoal production. In the forest savanna mosaic of the western and northern parts of the Congo Basin forest, the dominant narrative of forest degradation is still logging, but in addition, the application of fire for clearing land is a growing problem.

The Congo Basin forest is a treasure trove of biodiversity. The DRC alone has approximately 10,000 plant species, thirty percent of which are endemic, 280 species of reptiles, 400 species of mammals, and 216 amphibian species. The Congo Basin is critical habitat for endangered great ape species, including bonobo (cuvette centrale), lowland gorillas (RoC, south Kivus), mountain gorillas (Virunga), and chimpanzees (all areas excluding the cuvette centrale). Okapi are found in the central and northeastern Congolian lowland forests.

The major direct threat to biodiversity in the Congo Basin forest is hunting for urban markets, which has resulted in defaunation of significant areas, primarily those within proximity to rivers (the main route for commerce) leading to Kinshasa and other major river towns in the DRC, as well as areas within reach of Pointe Noire and Brazzaville in the DRC. A live animal trade also exists, and the trade pathways, primarily to Rwanda and Uganda in the east, are intertwined with the illegal mineral trade.

Between 2002 and 2011, a 62 percent drop in the population of the forest elephant in Central Africa was documented, along with a loss of 30 percent of its geographic range. Illegal poaching for ivory drove this loss, with armed groups (including elements of the DRC’s armed forces [FARDC] implicated in the trade). Pathways for the trade are north through South Sudan and east through Uganda.

Threats to biodiversity are numerous, including rising populations, road construction, illegal mining and logging, illegal land clearing for agriculture, use of fire for land clearance, and charcoal production. These threats to biodiversity have their roots in a common access system in which the State claims, but does not effectively enforce, ownership rights over resources. The absence of clear resource rights for customary occupants of the land makes it difficult for them to exclude outsiders or otherwise regulate resource use.

2.2 Social Dynamics

A generation of conflict in the eastern Congo Basin, including the two Congo civil wars and numerous outbreaks of lower intensity conflict, has resulted in at least two million internally displaced people. Continued demographic shifts, including the ongoing migration of Banyarwanda into North Kivu, and displacement of other groups such as the Nande, Hunde, and Nyanga, has led to in-migration in the forests of the eastern Congo Basin. This, as will be discussed further below, is a major threat to the biodiversity and forests of this part of the basin.

It has also led to rapid urbanization for safety in numbers, and this in turn has created a huge energy demand, which is being met by charcoal production, including within protected areas such as Virunga, often by the same armed bands implicated in the aforementioned displacement.

Spiritual matters are given a very high priority by the inhabitants of the Congo Basin. This has direct consequences for social change endeavors, including governance and development initiatives, because of fatalistic attitudes and superstitions. People of the Congo Basin are reluctant to disclose their intentions—to marry, buy a plot of land, apply for a job, or take a trip

— out of fear that the forces of the occult will interfere before their aims have been met. Secrecy is therefore a powerful cultural reality, and a political strategy as well. Political elites in Congo tend not to believe in transparency; on the contrary, they generally adhere to the belief that to wield power effectively, it must be done in secret.

Improving governance is a necessary, but insufficient, component of the DRC development agenda. Even a legitimate, democratically elected government with honest and competent leaders would not be able to move ahead without solving overwhelming obstacles (e.g., poor infrastructure, an inefficient public service sector, and rapid population growth). At the local level, however, effective governance is an essential condition for the CARPE objectives. Local governance shapes the social foundations upon which sustainable forest management and biodiversity conservation can be realized through its influence on human behaviors driving forest degradation and biodiversity loss. Women are largely responsible for family cohesion, and have become important protagonists in the dominant informal economy. They tend to be sidelined in decision-making processes at all levels, from within the family to the national political level. Improvements in local governance can empower women with participation in decision-making, promote transparency, and provide much-needed accountability in processes such as resource allocation.

Elites seem to be always one step ahead of the regulatory measures aimed at improving transparency and accountability. Private companies are complicit with Congolese elite networks as witnessed by their exploitation of complex corporate structures, non-transparent accounting practices, strategically orchestrated mergers and acquisition cabals. The fact that there is so much suspicion and so little real information about ownership of mining companies is an example.

While the traditional versus modern cleavage is becoming blurred, it still influences how people in the region live in the present, and how they perceive their future. Ethnic conflict is commonplace in the region. People originating in the large savannah kingdoms of the south tend to look down upon the smaller forest ethnic groups. The discrimination against forest-dwelling ethnic minorities (i.e. Pygmies or Mbuti) is the most flagrant example. Although there is extensive intermarriage and kinship ties that link ethnic groups, relations between them can be characterized by sentiments of rivalry, jealousy, and distrust, resulting in varying degrees of tension and conflict. This can be manipulated by elites. Although the cultural environment is always evolving, there are historically embedded and identifiable patterns. Solidarity networks based on the extended family, clan, and tribe is one example. They have developed to facilitate specific ethnic priorities such as job recruitment, political appointments, access to credit, housing for rural migrants, and university scholarships.

In the DRC, the central government has limited control over much of the national territory (i.e., the vast cuvette centrale). Efforts at control tend to overlap with immediately exploitable natural resources. By the same token, the motivations and powers behind armed groups are obscure.

Conflict is a tool of power. Allowing or perpetuating social tension is a political strategy to reinforce the power of incumbents or to obscure ulterior motives, including geopolitical ones.

This frustrates efforts to mitigate conflict and to protect the environment, because environmental protection potentially constrains access to desired resources.

Figure 1

Subsistence farming, hunting, and fishing are the main activities of the majority of people in the DRC. In addition, there are an estimated one million artisanal miners, who support up to six to eight million people (Cuvelier et al, 2014). An estimated 600,000 people are involved in charcoal production and trade, making it one of the country’s major economic sectors. Petty trade (largely carried out by women) is a major urban livelihood activity (Schur et al, 2013).

Other regional approaches include the EU’s program, Conservation and Rational use of Forest Ecosystems in Central Africa (ECOFAC), initiated in 1992; and USAID’s Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE) in 1995. Phase I of CARPE, from 1995-2002, focused on understanding the context and inventorying resources. Phase II, from 2003-2013, facilitated comprehensive regional land use planning to identify conservation and sustainable use priorities. Phase III, initiated in 2014, focuses on implementation of priority actions.

In 1999, the heads of state of six Congo Basin countries met in Yaoundé, Cameroon, to sign a declaration and action plan creating a framework for shared conservation objectives, including transboundary cooperation. CARPE was a major US government contribution to the World Summit on Sustainable Development (2002). The Congo Basin Forest Partnership (CBFP), underpinned by CARPE, and joined by South Africa and 27 other public and private partners, was announced as an initiative to support the Yaoundé Declaration at this summit.

3. THE DEVELOPMENT PROBLEM AND

USAID’S RESPONSE

USAID has identified the development problem in the Regional Development Cooperation Strategy (RDCS) 2012-2020, as the challenge to satisfy the current needs of more than 80 million people of the Congo Basin (among the poorest in Africa) without undermining the resource base for future generations. These people depend upon the resources of the globally and regionally significant forest ecosystems of the Basin for their livelihoods.

The RDCS is optimistic that there are prospects of new and emergent financing through partnerships to sustain the ecological integrity of the Congo Basin. Such partnerships would include public/private partnerships for impact investing by socially responsible businesses, and biodiversity offset programs.

The RDCS identified critical assumptions upon which the strategy is predicated:

• Central African governments remain committed to climate change mitigation and increase emphasis on forest conservation,

• Regional and national stability and security continues to improve,

• Governments in the region are willing to participate in and comply with international Global Climate Change (GCC) Agreements,

• Corruption will be contained and reduced,

• The international framework under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) will emphasize financial support for forest conservation.

USAID’s strategic response to this challenge, also reflected in the RDCS, is the CARPE goal to accelerate Central Africa’s transition to climate-resilient, low emissions development.

CARPE intends to meet this goal through its single Development Objective (DO): “The ecological integrity of the humid forest ecosystem of the Congo Basin maintained.” CARPE aimed to achieve the DO through four Intermediate Results (IR):

• Targeted forest Landscapes sustainably managed (IR 1),

• Threats to biodiversity in targeted forest Landscapes mitigated (IR 2),

• Policy and regulatory environments supporting sustainable forest and biodiversity conservation established (IR 3), and

• Capacity to monitor forest cover change, greenhouse gas emissions, and biodiversity strengthened (IR 4).

USAID’s response (in partnership with Norway) since October 2013 has been twofold. The Central Africa Forest Ecosystems Conservation mechanism (CAFEC) of CARPE III supports IRs 1 and IR 2 through on-the-ground conservation efforts in eight Landscapes or parts of Landscapes in three countries (the Republic of Congo, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Rwanda). Three consortia, led respectively by the WCS, WWF, and the African Wildlife Foundation (AWF), implement work in these Landscapes. The Landscapes are:

• The Sangha Tri-National (TNS) Landscape (WCS), Republic of Congo

• Léconi-Batéké-Léfini Landscape (WCS), Republic of Congo

• Lac Tele-Lac Tumba “LTLT” Landscape (WCS), Republic of Congo/Democratic Republic of Congo

• Salonga-Lukenie Landscape “Salonga” (WWF), Democratic Republic of Congo

• Maringa-Lopori-Wamba “MLW” Landscape, (AWF), Democratic Republic of Congo

• Maiko-Tayna-Kahuzi-Biéga “MTKB” Landscape, (WCS), Democratic Republic of Congo

• Ituri-Epulu-Aru “Ituri” Landscape (WCS), Democratic Republic of Congo

• Virunga Landscape (WWF), Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda

The area of CARPE’s eight Landscapes is illustrated in Figure 1 above.2

The EMAPS portfolio supports IRs 3 and 4, and consists of:

• SCAEMPS, implemented by the World Resources Institute (WRI)

• Congo Basin Forest Monitoring Using Satellites, implemented by the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) with the Central African Satellite Observatory for the Congo Basin Forest (OSFAC).

• Forest Resource Management, implemented by the US Forest Service and the Central African Satellite Observatory for the Congo Basin

2 A ninth Landscape, the Garamba-Bili-Chinko Landscape of DRC and Central African Republic (CAR), began receiving CARPE support in October 2016 via an agreement with African Parks Network, which manages through public/private partnerships Chinko Reserve in CAR and Garamba National Park in DRC. This newest CAFEC Landscape was not included in the evaluation.

4. EVALUATION PURPOSE AND

EVALUATION QUESTIONS

Evaluation Purpose The purpose of this midterm evaluation of the five-year CARPE III program, funded by USAID and Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD), is to assess the degree to which CARPE is on track to achieve its objectives, and what modifications are necessary to improve program effectiveness between now and the end of the program.

The evaluation is designed to help CARPE management, the Government of Norway and CARPE backstops in USAID’s Africa Bureau (USAID/AFR) and Bureau of Economic Growth, Environment, and Education (USAID/E3) as they review and improve major strategic approaches, management systems, and allocation of program resources to scale up conservation and climate change mitigation actions. It will enable USAID and NORAD to assess the underlying assumptions and performance of CARPE III in the past two and a half years.

This evaluation focuses on program performance with respect to expected results and objectives, program design and implementation strategy, program management and coordination, the prospect of long-term sustainability, and practical recommendations for performance improvement and strategic planning. Evaluators are expected to use a series of questions under each of the above-mentioned major focus areas to establish the status of the program, identify gaps and bottlenecks, and recommend improvements.

The specific objectives of the mid-term evaluation are:

1. To assess the progress toward meeting CARPE III objectives,

2. To assess the continued validity of program strategies, approaches, and assumptions,

3. To assess program performance management of USAID and Implementing Partners,

4. To identify lessons learned and recommend actions for improving performance, and,

5. To make recommendations on how to broaden impacts based on findings of the assessments above.

A series of questions identify aspects of the program’s performance to be considered under each major area. Evaluators are expected to assess the current status of the program related to each question, identify gaps and bottlenecks, and recommend improvements. The questions are located in Table 2 below.

5. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

The CARPE III midterm evaluation, appropriately, uses a non-experimental observational process involving that combines qualitative and quantitative research methods and analysis.

This design allows for inquiries into the evolution of processes and the achievements of preliminary targets.

The data collected established, to the extent possible, quantitative changes in objective conditions, qualitative changes in resource management and stakeholder perception, and processes that have shaped the implementation of the project. USAID representatives accompanied the CARPE III Evaluation Team to some sites. Additionally, representatives of the Congolese Institute for the Conservation of Nature (ICCN), The National Coordinator of Reduction of Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation for the DRC (CNREDD+) personnel. The Ministry of Environment was informed of the evaluation design and was encouraged to provide insights into the evaluation process as well. This was done primarily to provide them with an appreciation and understanding of the evaluation; however, particular attention has been paid to mitigate any risk or compromise in the validity of data collected due to their involvement.

The Evaluation Team met with CARPE management and Implementing Partner teams, national government representatives, civil society representatives working in the area of biodiversity and conservation, community members in the targeted Landscapes, and other donor representatives, to gather additional relevant information for triangulation of data of findings and results.

Table 1 is a triangulation matrix presenting the relations between the different components of the evaluation and the data collection tools.

Table 1: Data…