Appendix A4 Mid-term Evaluation Report (February 2003) Introduction

Project Results and Impacts

In the past two years, considerable investment has been directed to the Wetlands Project. The question is this: what has been accomplished through this expenditure? The answer: despite many inputs and a high level of activity, there has been limited progress made in terms of achieving the project’s objectives. Experts have done numerous studies (61 reports); personnel have undergone training; equipment has been delivered to project areas. However, without a major redesign, these inputs are unlikely to lead to the conservation of globally significant wetland biodiversity in China.

Progress in relation to the project’s objectives is presented in section 3.2. Details on the results of specific activities and outputs of the project are given in sections 3.3 and other results are presented in Section 3.4.

1. Status

The Wetlands Project has been underway for slightly over two years since its inception in July 2002. During that time, the implementation of activities has adhered to the plan as laid out in project documents and annual work plans. Project documents suggest that the implementation of activities has been very good, with CPMU figures showing that approximately $5.5 million USD of the GEF/Third Party funding had been dispersed as of December 2002. Despite the fact that the implementation of some activities and sub-contracts has been delayed, the dispersal of planned GEF inputs was similarly high, measured as a percentage of the total budget rather than in terms of specific activities. The GOC has invested a counterpart contribution of $6.28 USD (CPMU statistics) so far, mainly on infrastructure for nature reserves and capacity building. Sub-contracts 1 and 3 are well underway however; sub-contracts 2 and 4 have been delayed due to a bidding process that was more time-consuming than anticipated and also more fruitless. The bidding process for sub-contracts 2 and 4 suffered from problems with TORs, as well as certain irregularities and interference. There was, for example, an unacceptable length of several months between the evaluation of bids and announcement of the winner for sub-contract 4.

2. Achievement of Objectives

1. Outputs and Intermediate Objectives

1.1 An expanded Honghe NNR in Sanjiang Plain to include additional biodiversity hotspots and create wetland corridors within the PAS.

1.2 Strengthened protected wetland area management of the extended Honghe NNR.

1.3 Restoration and management of the water regime at Honghe NNR.

1.4 Biodiversity-friendly agricultural development demonstrated in buffer zone of Honghe NNR.

1.5 Over all the plain, biodiversity-friendly land use planning demonstrated through preparation of biodiversity overlays.

1.6 Raised public awareness of wetland values and functions in the Sanjiang Plains.

Intermediate Objective 2: To ensure conservation of globally significant wetland biodiversity at Xiaman PNR, Gahai NNR, Shouqu PNR and intervening areas in Ruoergai Marshes.

2.1 Expanded protected wetland areas in Ruoergai Marshes to include additional biodiversity hotspots, as necessary.

2.2 Strengthened protected area wetland management in the Ruoergai Marshes (Xiaman PNR, Shouqu PNR and Gahai NNR).

2.3 Increased community involvement in management of protected wetlands at Ruoergai Marshes.

2.4 Over a wider area, biodiversity-friendly land use planning demonstrated through preparation of biodiversity overlays.

2.5 Raised public awareness of wetland values and functions in Ruoergai Marshes.

3.1 Expansion and re-alignment of protected wetland areas in Yancheng Coastal Marshes to include additional biodiversity hotspots and creation of coastal wetland eco-cline.

3.2 Improved protected area management and protection of globally significant biodiversity in the core areas of the Yancheng Biosphere Reserve.

3.3 Sustainable use of inter-tidal resources demonstrated by local communities and cooperatives in Dafeng NNR buffer zone.

3.4 In the Yancheng coastal area, biodiversity-friendly land use planning demonstrated through preparation of biodiversity overlays.

3.5 Raised public awareness of wetland values and functions in Yancheng Coastal Marshes.

4.1 Improved protected area management at East Dongting NNR.

4.2 Identification and management of biodiversity hotspots in the wider Dongting Lake basin.

4.3 Biodiversity overlays prepared and biodiversity conservation fully integrated into development plans for a large area.

4.4 Raised public awareness of wetland values and functions in Dongting Lakes area.
Intermediate Objective 5:

To develop sustainable alternative livelihoods with local communities in and around wetland areas in order to decrease pressures on globally significant biodiversity.

Outputs:

1. 
   Alternative livelihood schemes developed for local communities in and around wetland areas in Sanjiang Plain.
   

5.3 Demonstrations of sustainable grassland management for local herder communities in Ruoergai Marshes.

5.4 Alternative livelihood schemes developed for local communities in and around wetland areas in Yancheng Coastal Marshes.

5. 
   Alternative livelihood schemes developed for local communities in and around wetland areas in Dongting Lakes.
   

6.1 National support structures for integrated wetland management established and operational.

6.2 Lessons learned and project results disseminated nationally and internationally.

Objectives 1 to 4: Conservation of Globally Significant Wetland Biodiversity in four areas: Sanjiang Plain, Ruoergai Marshes, Yancheng Coast and Dongting Lake
As Figure 3.1 illustrates, intermediate objectives 1 to 4 relate to conserving globally significant biodiversity in one to three nature reserves in each of the four areas; they also involve implementing some wider effects in the surrounding area (mainly public awareness and biodiversity friendly land-use planning and development decision-making). Thus, achievement of these objectives requires that actions at two levels be effective: the local or nature reserve level and the wider regional level. To make our assessment for these objectives, we looked at the two levels separately, and assumed for the local level that the regional actions were effective and vice versa.
We start with what will be accomplished in the Nature Reserves. According to the plan, biodiversity in the nature reserves will be conserved once certain changes have been implemented (specifically: boundaries enlarged to incorporate biodiversity hotspots, training and equipment provided for nature reserve staff; management plans developed and implemented; and site-specific problems fixed at some sites (i.e., water levels restored in Honghe NNR). In our view, these changes, although they will contribute to biodiversity conservation, will be insufficient to preserve biodiversity in the nature reserves. The main reasons for that conclusion are that the measures do not address:

• 
  the dynamic nature of the biodiversity resources, specifically: birds move freely over large areas, which means that protecting one site will not provide protection for species at large;
  
• 
  the dynamic nature of wetland ecosystems, specifically: Dongting Lake has changed shape dramatically since 1949, shrinking to half its size, with the emerging land being claimed for farmland; also, the Yancheng Coastline is accreting at a rate of 50 to 100 m a year; and
  
• 
  the financial situation and realities of nature reserves, specifically: the reserves have very little recurrent budget, which makes it impossible for them to mount proper programs for monitoring poaching and enforcement, or to prevent farmers and fishermen from using lands in the reserves; in fact, the reserves often depend on monies received from users of lands within the protected area to bolster their operating budgets.
  

In short, the project design is flawed. Even if the activities are well done they will not result in protection of biodiversity in the nature reserves. This does not mean that the activities are not worthwhile; building the capacity of nature reserves is an essential ingredient for biodiversity conservation. Most of the nature reserve activities are designed to do this, and in that sense are worthwhile and will contribute to biodiversity conservation. However, basic capacity development on its own will not be sufficient to protect biodiversity locally, the three issues listed above also need to be solved for the nature reserves to achieve the desired objectives. The immediate objectives for the nature reserves are unrealistic and unachievable, even in the long-term. We also looked at how well the activities are being implemented, and as discussed in section 3.3, have identified a number of implementation problems. So the activities as they are being implemented now will fall short of achieving adequate capacity development.

• 
  To achieve biodiversity-friendly land use planning in the wider areas, two main approaches are being used – development of biodiversity overlays and establishment of a Wetlands Management Authority (WMA) at the provincial level, composed of senior decision-making officials. The MTR does not believe these two approaches are sufficient to result in changes in land-use and development decision-making. Moreover, we have problems with the two approaches themselves.
  

In our view, the main impediments to biodiversity-friendly land-use and development plans are: (i) the lack of agency/sectoral cooperation and coordination; and (ii) the low priority of biodiversity in relation to economic development and poverty alleviation. The production of biodiversity overlays and the setting up of WMAs does nothing to address these constraints.

• 
  The public awareness elements of the project were designed as a separate sub-contract. In our view, it will be impossible to develop operational awareness and educational programs in isolation from the rest of the project. To develop successful awareness programs (i.e., programs that effectively raise awareness and that the forestry authorities are capable of implementing), the work must be integrated into other project activities and coordinated with the ongoing work of provincial and natural reserve units. The present sub-contracting and management arrangements prevent the achievement of this integration.
  

1. 
   Sanjiang Plains – Planned activities involve developing eco-tourism as an alternative livelihood around Honghe Nature Reserve, even though the feasibility of eco-tourism here is unknown and should be assessed as a first step. Also, a community development model is the approach to be used for all areas, and it is inappropriate here, where State Farms own all the land. Moreover, the government plans to reflood lands in seven natural reserves; including Honghe NNR, and the central issue is thus one of resettlement, not the mitigation of agricultural practices. As part of resettling people, the government will help affected people develop alternative livelihoods that are economically viable. An Asian Development Bank (ADB) loan will be used to finance the government’s alternative livelihood program and another GEF project is helping integrate biodiversity considerations into the design of the ADB loan. There is no role or need for separate alternative livelihood activities here.
   

2. 
   Ruoergai Marshes – To succeed, any alternative livelihood scheme (for example, eco-tourism) must take into account national and provincial policy and development issues that lie beyond the control of local communities. The current project design does not do this. Micro-credit approaches in general have been found to be problematic and are no longer favoured by donors. In this case, the micro-credit amounts proposed to encourage local herders to reduce their use of the grasslands provides no incentives.
   

3. 
   Yangcheng Coast Marshes – With economic and population pressures affecting local communities and a lack of operating funds for nature reserves, the current pattern of land being quickly claimed for aquaculture, agriculture and industry in the lowland coastal areas in Yancheng will continue. Also, tenure and jurisdictional issues make it difficult for nature reserve staff to exert any influence beyond the core area of the reserve. These problems cannot be solved at the local level by community development approaches. Thus, alternative livelihood schemes are unlikely to cause any decrease in human impact throughout the large Yancheng Biodiversity Reserve.
   

4. 
   Dongting Lake – Once again, when the government refloods marginal agricultural land for flood protection reasons, the issue will be resettlement, and not alternative livelihoods and, in any case, government-funded resettlement schemes will include compensation and economically focused alternative livelihood packages. Also, WWF has already been working successfully in West Dongting Lake to promote sustainable alternative livelihoods among relocated farmers/fishermen. Assuming that the purpose of GEF is to develop new models for addressing biodiversity problems, the WWF model has proven its worth at Dongting Lake. There is no need to do more unless there is value in learning how to replicate successful approaches from one area (West Dongting Lake) to another (East Dongting Lake).
   

Work relating to this objective is meant to result in the creation of national support structures for integrated wetland management that will feed into national policy review mechanisms and legislation. However, although the CPMU has been established and a CTA hired, the lack of involvement of SFA staff in the project and the isolation of CPMU from SFA has prevented the project from making a useful contribution to national policy development. If these isolated and non-participatory practices continue, we do not expect the project to provide any support for national policy development.

2. Overall Objective

Impact on Global Biodiversity – GEF funded this project in order to preserve global biodiversity, and the MTR was asked to assess the project’s impact in terms of the project’s overall objective, which is to secure the conservation of globally significant wetland biodiversity in China.¹²

The achievement of global benefits takes a long time and requires that all the building blocks for global protection of a resource be in place and working well. Specifically”

• 
  the capacity has to be built at all levels, from local to national;
  
• 
  operational approaches for managing biodiversity resources have to be developed and successfully implemented; and
  
• 
  the institutions (national and provincial) for protecting biodiversity and the policies that make it a priority have to be in place and supported by the government and public.
  

In our view, the overall objective is unachievable within the timeframe of this project and should be adopted as a long-term objective instead. In that light, the vital question is whether the project is heading in the right direction. Are its activities likely to lead towards preservation of globally significant wetland biodiversity in China?

• 
  combating threats to wetland biodiversity;
  
• 
  promoting sustainable development in and around wetland sites; and
  
• 
  developing local and regional capacity to integrate conservation into the development process.
  

In our view, this project will have difficulty improving the situation through any of these means. With reference to the first mechanism, the project is generally designed to identify and address most of the local threats to wetlands (such as poaching, poisoning of fish and birds, etc.) and some threats from wider regional and national sources. The design demonstrates weaknesses and a lack of understanding of some of the local issues (e.g., overgrazing and causes of the mice explosion in Ruoergai). However, the biggest weakness in terms of threat analysis is that the project does not address the two most important threats to wetlands: (i) the lack of agency/sectoral cooperation and coordination; and (ii) the low priority given to biodiversity compared to that accorded economic development and poverty alleviation. Unless the project is designed to address these threats, its long-term impact on biodiversity conservation will be marginal. With regard to the second mechanism for addressing the overall objective (promotion of sustainable development with reference to alternative livelihoods) and the third (integration of conservation into the development process), our concerns are discussed in section 3.2.1 above.