Download Integrating Environmental Safeguards into USAID Food

Integrating Environmental
Safeguards into USAID Food
Assistance Projects
Erika Clesceri, PhD, Bureau Environmental Officer; Tracy Thoman,
PhD, Senior Program Officer; USAID DCHA, Washington
FFP M&E Workshop Zimbabwe Programs
Harare, September 2013
Session Timetable
5 min: Quickfire Challenge
40 min: Plenary Presentation
Coffee Break
60 min: Break-Out Exercise
15 min: Plenary Stakeholder Feedback
Session Objectives
By the end of this session, you will have:
1. Discussed two types of USAID recommended
environmentally-sensitive indicators.
2. Identified opportunities for “greening” the project
results frameworks and indicator systems.
3. Learned about innovative approaches for
environmental monitoring.
Quickfire Challenge (5 min):
Question: How are the environment and
food security related?
Climate,
Environment
and Resiliency
How is environmental
degradation and climate risk
related?
Source: Adapted from IPCC 2012, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC)
Causal Linkages between Food Availability
and the Environment
Soil
Poor
Nutrient Agricultural
Poor Soil Mining
Inputs
Water
Retention
Salinization
Poor Soil
Fertility
Erosion
Drought,
Desertification
and Climate
Changes
Ineffective
Pesticide
Use
Poor Crop
Production
Water
Shortage
Lack of
Irrigation
Poor
Maintenance
of Irrigation
Canals, Water
Use Conflict
ClimateSmart
Agriculture
Food
Insecurity
Reliance on groundwater likely to increase…
African groundwater resources poorly understood….
7
Environmental Resilience Thinking
What ecological goods and services are
needed for this project?
 Are fuelwood stocks for cooking food aid in Zimbabwe well
managed?
 What harm (wastes or damage) to natural
resources might result?
 Will roads increase deforestation and erosion in Zimbabwe?
 What are impacts of the environment (floods,
droughts) on the project?
 Is physical and social infrastructure capable of responding to
flooding?
8
Goals for Sustainability
The goal of Title II projects is to reduce food
insecurity during the project. Communities will
need to sustain their natural resources to
support food security for generations to come…
"Anybody can dig a hole and plant a tree. But make sure it
survives. You have to nurture it….“
-Wangari Maathai, Nobel Laureate (1940-2011)
9
Environmental Safeguards &
Compliance
Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) is…
A formal analysis that identifies:
• Potential impact of projects on the
environment
IEE
• Measures to mitigate these impacts
Environmental Mitigation Monitoring
Plan (EMMP) is…
A formal plan that identifies:
• Indicators
• Frequency and Persons responsible
EMMP
What is the Purpose of the EMMP?
It is a management plan for Environmental safeguards,
which are linked to project results and indicators.
Activity for
IR X.X
Potential
Impact
Monitoring
Indicator
Frequency
of Data
Collection
Method of
Verification
Well
rehabilitation
Ground water
contamination
Wells Distanced
from latrine
Monthly by
Field Agents
Visual Inspection,
Field Reports
Requirement in the FY13 Request for
Application (RFA) for Zimbabwe Projects
“The M&E Plan should include gender and
environmental indicators to permit the measurement
of food security gains while promoting gender equity
and safeguarding environmental goods and services.”
12
Food for Peace Results and Indicator Frameworks
Results Framework (RF)
Indicator Performance
Tracking Table (IPTT)
Cross Walking M&E with the EMMP…
1. Identify results in the RF that have an
environmental component.
2. Compare results with analysis conducted in
the EMMP.
3. Reflect the EMMP analysis in the IPTT
indicators, where practicable.
OK…, how?
14
FFP Results Framework
Food Security
Improved
Assumptions
SO1: Resiliency
Improved
IR 1.1: Protect
Communal Assets
IR 1.2: Disaster
Risk Management
Improved
SO2: Health and
Nutrition
Improved
IR 2.1:Consume
Nutrient Rich Diet
IR 2.2: Water and
Sanitation
CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES: Gender, Capacity Building
15
Environmental Issues Annotated for the RF
Title II IR
EMMP Issues
IR 1.1: Protected Communal Assets
(Roads, Agriculture/Irrigation)
Roads: Erosion, Wash Out,
Protected Area Encroachment,
Conflict over Access
IR 2.1: Nutrient Rich Diet
Nutrition/Health: Biomass Energy,
Medical Waste (vaccinations)
IR. 2.2: Water and Sanitation
Water: Poor Well/Latrine
Construction, Water Contamination,
Ground Water Drying, Poor O&M
All: Direct Distribution
Fumigant Pesticides, Fuelwood,
Solid Waste
16
Greening the FFP Results Framework
Food Security
Improved
Assumptions
SO1: Resiliency
Improved
IR 1.1: Protect
Communal Assets
IR 1.2: Disaster
Risk Management
Improved
SO2: Health and
Nutrition
Improved
IR 2.1:Consume
Nutrient Rich Diet
IR 2.2: Water and
Sanitation
CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES: Gender, Capacity Building, Environment
17
What does it mean in practice to have
Environment as a cross-cutting theme in
Food for Peace results and indicator
frameworks?
18
What are some Environmentally-Sensitive
Indicators?
As for Gender, we have two types:
1.Stand-Alone Indicator.
2.Integration Indicator.
19
Purpose of Environmentally-Sensitive
Indicators?
1. Stand-Alone Environmental Indicators
To measure progress towards planned project
environmental results, throughout the life of the
activity.
E.g., For Climate Change and Natural Resources
Management
But this alone is not enough…
20
Purpose of Environmentally-Sensitive
Indicators?
2.Environmental Integration Indicators
To measure progress towards planned project results
while incorporating environmental mitigation measures,
throughout the life of the activity.
E.g., For Irrigation, Roads, Water, Sanitation, etc.
A typical FFP project, will have more of the Integration
type of environmentally-sensitive indicator, than the
Stand-Alone.
21
Environmental Impact Sectors
What sectors of the FFP Zimbabwe programs are
associated with potential environmental impacts?
PVO
Climate
Change
WV
X
CNFA
X
Cookstoves
Ag/NRM/
Pesticides
WASH
Irrigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Stand-Alone Environmental Indicator Measuring
Progress of NRM Investments…
NRM: (Indicator # 4.5.2-2): Number of hectares under improved
technologies or management practices as a
result of USG assistance
Measuring Natural Resources Management (NRM) and Climate
Change Adaptability under Feed the Future (FtF)
“…for both the projected future for agricultural landscapes and the needs
of a growing world population, food security strategies must address the
sustainable intensification of agriculture...Environmental degradation and
climate change are critical cross-cutting issues that can affect the
sustainability of FTF investments … “
USAID Feed the Future Indicator Handbook, V.7
http://feedthefuture.gov/sites/default/files/resource/files/Volume7_FTFNRM.pdf
23
Stand-Alone Environmental Indicator for USG
Climate Change Investments…
Climate Change Adaptation: (Indicator # 4.8.2-26) Number of
stakeholders with increased capacity to adapt to impacts of climate
change as a result of USG assistance
Stakeholders with increased capacity include:
• Implementing risk-reducing practices/actions to
improve resilience to climate change
• Using climate information in their decision
making
USAID GCC Indicator Handbook (2012)
http://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1865/G
CC_Indicator_Handbook_Definition_Sheets_2012.pdf
24
Stand-Alone Environmental Indicator for
Fuelwood Needs for Commodity Cooking
How much firewood does a typical
FFP program use?
~1 kg firewood/person/day x 70,000
beneficiaries x 365 d
~30,000 MT of firewood /yr
Indicator:
 Amount of fuel or time saved by
improved practices
Measured with Kitchen Performance
Tests (KPTs)
25
Cross Walking IPTT with the EMMP…
Indicator
Performance
Tracking Table
(IPTT)
Environmental
Mitigation
Monitoring
Plan (EMMP)
Choose Environmental Integration Indicators
for the IPTT by referencing the existing EMMP
Environmental Integration Indicator
Approaches
Simple Environment Integration in a Standard
Indicator…
For a Drinking Water Result Measured by the FFP
Standard Indicator #40,
% of HH using an improved drinking water source
Ensure environmental integration by implementing in
accordance with existing project EMMP analysis
•EMMP helps to adapt “improved” to project
•Does not constitute a change in the indicator!
27
People are using, but this may not be what we mean
by an “improved” drinking water source…
In addition to the WHO-UNICEF JMP definition in
the PIRS, the EMMP unpacks the project-specifics
of what is meant by an “improved” water source
28
Environmental Integration Indicators
Depending on local context,
the project may identify the
need to track environmental
integration indicators, in
addition to Standard.
For roads,
• # of road borrow pits or quarries restored
• % of roads with community resource use
committees functioning
29
Additional Environmental Integration Indicators
Rooted in the EMMP
Sector
Illustrative Indicators Chosen by FFP Projects
Pesticides /
Inputs
% of farmers that can identify (a project-defined minimum number)
safety measures for pesticide use
Water
% of target beneficiary wells with a rapid assessment of drinkingwater quality (RADWQ)
Sanitation
# of communities maintaining open defecation free status (over a
project defined minimum time period, suggest 1 year)
Irrigation
Km of irrigation canals built or rehabilitated with appropriate design
and planning standards
Report on Environmentally-Sensitive
Indicators in the ESRs and IPTT
Timeline
IEE
Approved
Year 1
ESR
Year 1
Year 2
ESR
Year 2
Year 3
ESR
Year 3
Report on Indicators in the annual Environmental
Status Report (ESR) to inform PREP and the IPTT
31
CASE STUDY: ENVIRONMENTAL
MONITORING, GO GREEN STRATEGY (GGS)
• Program: CRS Madagascar, Title II, SALOHI Program
• Objective: GGS is an approach to where PVO and
community members adopt an “environmental reflex”
for project activities
• Approach: Tailored EMMP Yes/No Scorecards; Ranked
Red, Yellow, Green; Monitored Monthly, Reported in
IPTT as:
 % communities with “green” status in GGS
• Purpose: Compare results between communities to
monitor progress, and where to focus more effort
“Took environmental compliance beyond the dry rules and regulations to
permit understanding underlying values behind USAID’s environmental
policy.”
-SALOHI COP
Key Lessons Learned in GGS
1. Field Agents originally found that the scorecard
was too cumbersome with data entry, therefore
changed collection method to Recall.
2. Posting the GGS in the communities was critical,
so they understand what they’d be scored on
3. Competition between community members
within one region was very effective incentive
(Prize of 100 Fruit Trees!)
Value of the GGS in SALOHI
• “…for field agents and community to know what
“green” communities look like, and for [communities to
practice] trash/ compost pits, cyclone proof housing of
local materials, protected water and forest resources
available for food and firewood today, and in the
future.”
-SALOHI COP
GGS Contacts:
Jennifer Peterson, SALOHI COP, [email protected]
and Zoely Ramanase, SALOHI Environmental Coordinator,
[email protected]
Potential Research Area:
Community Perception Indicators
• Capacity building to mitigate potential negative
environmental impacts within communities is a critical
aspect of project EMMPs.
• We want this capacity to be sustainable, but how do we
know sound environmental practices will continue once
our projects end?
• Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices: we can impart the
knowledge, but how do we measure if the community
key stakeholders VALUE the practice? Practices will
only be sustainable if they are valued.
35
WHY USE COMMUNITY
PERCEPTIONS? Sustainability
• Prior to Intervention: Measuring community
perceptions of environmental best practices before
an intervention could provide information regarding
what attitudes should be targeted for maximum
sustainability.
• End of Intervention: Measuring these perceptions at
the end of our intervention could tell us if our capacity
building efforts were successful and therefore if
environmental best practices are likely to be
sustained once we leave.
36
Session Results
1. Discussed two types of USAID recommended
environmentally-sensitive indicators.
•
Stand-Alone Environmental Indicators and
Environmental Integration Indicators
2. Identified opportunities for “greening” the project
results frameworks and indicator systems.
•
Cross Walk your IPTT with EMMP!
3. Learned about innovative approaches for
environmental monitoring.
•
Go Green Strategy (GGS) and Community
Perception Indicators
For more information contact:
Dr. Erika Clesceri
Bureau Environmental Officer
USAID, Bureau for Democracy Conflict and
Humanitarian Assistance
[email protected]
Break-Out Exercise
1 hour
39
Break-out Exercise
1. Explain how the project can use the EMMP to make the
IPTT more environmentally sensitive. Specify two
examples.
2. Explain how the project can use data collected from
environmentally-sensitive indicators to modify project
interventions.
3. How do you plan to measure community capacity in
environmental sustainability best practices?
40
WV PROPOSED “GREEN” INDICATORS
Sector
Indicator
WASH
Percentage of sanitation facilities in functional condition 1 year-later
Percentage of infrastructure in functional condition 1 year-later
Agricultural
Infrastructure,
Irrigation
Number of functional maintenance committees established
Number of farmers applying effective water management techniques
Area in km2 under improved NR management practices as a result of
USG assistance
NRM
Number of NRM plans with equitable access mechanisms by users
Number of watershed management plans developed
What do we mean by functional? Functional is
described in the EMMP.
CNFA Proposed “Green” Indicators
Sector
Indicator
Agro-dealers with lists of GOZ approved fertilizers and pesticides
Pesticides /
Inputs
WASH
Irrigation
NRM
Number of farmers reporting use of micro-dosing techniques
Y/N: Farmers report use of non-chemical controls
Water samples taken and tested (Y/N)
Recommendation to users to boil water prior to consumption if
contaminants found (Y/N)
Number of community members trained in operation and maintenance
of irrigation system, including periodic fluctuation of water levels and
canal maintenance
% of farmers employing 2 or more irrigation best practice technique
taught
Area in km2 under improved natural resource management practices
as a result of USG assistance
Ancillary Slides, For Reference Only
43
Guidance for greening results
and indicator frameworks
44
Environmental and Sustainability Indicator
Guidance
1. Green Recovery and Reconstruction
(GRRT)
2. UNHCR / CARE International FRAME
Project
45
Green Recovery and Reconstruction
Toolkit (GRRT), WWF & Red Cross
Modules:
1. Opportunities for Green Recovery
and Reconstruction: An
Introduction
2. Project Design, Monitoring and
Evaluation
3. Environmental Impact
Assessment Tools and
Techniques
4. Strategic Site Selection and
Development
5. Materials and the Supply Chain
6. Construction
7. Water and Sanitation
8. Livelihoods
9. Disaster Risk Reduction
10.Organizational Operations
Project Design, Monitoring
and Evaluation
Green Recovery And Reconstruction: Training Toolkit For Humanitarian Aid
UNHCR Environmental Indicator Framework
FRAME PROJECT
• Recognised gaps in available tools
• Needed innovative and appropriate
approaches
• Needed an approach which addressed the
whole cycle of programme management
• Needed a system which could reach
across all sectors
• Wanted a product that could be used by
different stakeholders and is capable of
being adapted for different situations
EXAMPLE OF A FRAME SCORE CARD
49
USAID Sector Environmental Guidelines
50