To ensure that fish production supported by the GP Fish is an accessible protein source also for the most vulnerable, GP Fish regularly tracks fish prices and the share of total production accessible to the food insecure population. According to the conducted surveys 90 %, 58 %, 84 %, and 99 % of farmed fish is accessible for the food insecure population in Madagascar, Malawi, Zambia, and Cambodia respectively (status 2023). These numbers again highlight the potential of extensive and semi-intensive aquaculture techniques to supply affordable protein and nutrients in areas with a high share of vulnerable people.

The project strategically allocated land for agricultural and conservation purposes to balance human and wildlife needs. This comprehensive planning ensured sustainable land use that supported both community livelihoods and wildlife conservation. Farmers cultivated their lands using the skills from Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) training, resulting in improved harvests with zero threats from elephants and other wildlife, making the 10% fence plans 100% effective. The remaining 90% of the land was used as fallow for wildlife and farmers' livestock, bringing a sense of wildlife-livestock integration. All farmers received dam liners for water pans and collected water for livestock and farming. This model brought a sense of integrated land use with a win-win benefit for both wildlife and communities. Sustainable practices were promoted, and policy support was advocated to back the integrated land use plans legally and institutionally. Continuous monitoring and evaluation systems were implemented to adapt and improve the plans over time.

The project trained farmers in climate-smart agriculture (CSA) and permaculture farming practices to improve yields and sustainability. This involved practical training sessions, demonstration plots, and ongoing support to help farmers adopt and sustain new practices. Training programs were developed and delivered on CSA techniques, including soil conservation, water management, and sustainable crop choices.

Farmers were trained by experts from the Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization (KALRO), with a deep concentration on dry crop farming such as cowpeas, green grams, millet, and cassava. They were also linked to KALRO for the procurement of certified seeds for planting. The training was conducted before the onset of the long rains season, allowing farmers to apply the skills garnered just in time for planting before the rains started. County Agriculture officers attended the sessions to drum up support from the government.

Demonstration farms were established within the community to showcase best practices and allow farmers to see the benefits firsthand. Support networks and farmer groups were created for sharing knowledge, resources, and experiences, fostering peer learning and support. Necessary resources such as seeds, tools, and organic fertilizers were provided to help farmers implement new techniques.

Thorough assessments were conducted to identify human-wildlife conflict (HWC) hotspots and ensure the project addressed the most critical areas. This involved gathering quantitative and qualitative data to make informed decisions about fence placement and other interventions. GIS mapping, surveys, and interviews were utilized to understand current land use patterns, wildlife corridors, and areas experiencing frequent HWC. Surveys were also conducted with households to establish threats, crop and property destruction, and the amount of harvest farmers were getting. The results of the needs assessment were submitted to the Kamungi Board, who used this information to select three final beneficiaries of the 10% Fence Plan. Their decision was then passed through a public participation community meeting, where members present endorsed the identified beneficiaries.

Under the application of the trap for intermittent harvest, the best results were achieved with the following combination of variables: maize bran (supplementary feed) x maize bran (trap bait) x O. Shiranus (species) x 2 fish/m2 (stocking density).

The total yields under this combination were 25 percent higher than in the control group with single batch harvest. A higher stocking density (3 fish/ m2) led to a slightly higher total harvest in the control group, but to a lower net profit. The use of pellets reinforced both effects and was the least economical.

Results from the on-farm trials (see Figure 1) have demonstrated the functionality and the excellent catch effect of the traps. Over the three-month on-farm trial period, the trap was used 2 to 3 times a week and a total of 27 times. On average, around 120 small fish – an equivalent of 820 grams – were caught each intermittent harvest. With the use of the trap, all households reported that they now eat fish twice a week. Before that, fish consumption was between one and four times a month.

The benefits:

• Reducing the competition for oxygen and food among the fish in the pond and thus measurable increase in yield.
• Improved household consumption of small, nutritious fish and better cash flow.

Success factors:

• Traps are easy and inexpensive to build (USD 3).
• Traps are easy to use, also for women.
• Directly tangible added value thanks to easy and regular access to fish.

Examples from the field

Overall, the user experience of households engaged in the on-farm trials was very positive:

“As a family we are now able to eat fish twice and sometimes even three times a week as compared to the previous months without the technology when we ate fish only once per month.” (Doud Milambe)

“Catching fish is so simple using the fish trap and even women and children can use it.” (Jacqueline Jarasi)

“It is fast and effective compared with the hook and line method which I used to catch fish for home consumption that could take three to four hours but to catch only three fish and thus not enough for my household size.” (Hassan Jarasi)

Under the application of the trap for intermittent harvest, the best results were achieved with the following combination of variables: maize bran (supplementary feed) x maize bran (trap bait) x O. Shiranus (species) x 2 fish/m2 (stocking density).

The total yields under this combination were 25 percent higher than in the control group with single batch harvest. A higher stocking density (3 fish/ m2) led to a slightly higher total harvest in the control group, but to a lower net profit. The use of pellets reinforced both effects and was the least economical.

Results from the on-farm trials (see Figure 1) have demonstrated the functionality and the excellent catch effect of the traps. Over the three-month on-farm trial period, the trap was used 2 to 3 times a week and a total of 27 times. On average, around 120 small fish – an equivalent of 820 grams – were caught each intermittent harvest. With the use of the trap, all households reported that they now eat fish twice a week. Before that, fish consumption was between one and four times a month.

The benefits:

Reducing the competition for oxygen and food among the fish in the pond and thus measurable increase in yield.

Improved household consumption of small, nutritious fish and better cash flow.

Success factors:

Traps are easy and inexpensive to build (USD 3).

Traps are easy to use, also for women.

Directly tangible added value thanks to easy and regular access to fish.

Examples from the field

Overall, the user experience of households engaged in the on-farm trials was very positive: “As a family we are now able to eat fish twice and sometimes even three times a week as compared to the previous months without the technology when we ate fish only once per month.” (Doud Milambe)

“Catching fish is so simple using the fish trap and even women and children can use it.” (Jacqueline Jarasi)

“It is fast and effective compared with the hook and line method which I used to catch fish for home consumption that could take three to four hours but to catch only three fish and thus not enough for my household size.” (Hassan Jarasi)

The local community was consulted into the spatial planning process. The process involved holding big workshops for local community and inviting several interest groups, especially those of livestock owners, tourism workers, and hunting enthusiasts. The purpose was 2 main things; 1) to collect local data and knowledge into the planning product and more importantly to build a sense of ownership and belonging of the local community to the potential planning product.

Data from various sources were collectively integrated and put into a spatial prioritization and optimization algorithm based on targets stemming out from the Primary Management objectives of the Reser. This Algorithm is known as MARXAN working under a process termed as simulated annealing.  

The resulting planning product is then shared back to the local community and other stakeholders including governmental and non governmental entities to collect thier feedback to further tweak the product for maximum sustainability.

Cross-cutting partnerships were the basis for the glocal achievement. Initially, in partnership with the World Bank, partner that supported the development of the documents and agreed with IUCN that as the WB was phasing out IUCN could/should continue with the process as a reliable partner - this included co-funding one staff member for 6 months so the staff member could represent both entities until document development closure. Then by partnering with WWF and WCS, for their direct contribution with biodiversity data for the PNDT and the MSP - with a focus on WCS and the National Biodiversity database that was fully integrated in the above referred documents. Partnerships extended to all planning and conservation partners by maintaining a continuous information sharing system to ensure streamlined knowledge, support, understanding and engagement.

The principal partnership to be refer reports again to the Government. Good governance and policy making in a country is the Government's role and mandate. For policies to be improved or adopt it requires Government decision. And it requires also a transparent, reliable and efficient dialogue and capacities from the contributing partner. And this is where IUCN delivered at its best and expanded this engagement to its members.

Beyond facilitating access to hard-to-reach locations, sailboats also provide useful modes of transport for deploying scientific instrumentation. The boats can carry scientific equipment, both for deployment in the ocean, but also for continual measurement by sensors that are permanently onboard. The race boats’ speed means that data from different locations can be captured across short timespans, something which is not achievable by most research vessels. Yachts can also be used to pilot and test new research technology and techniques, such as technology that allows results to be shared in real-time, and the OceanPack – a device which records essential ocean data from aboard the yachts. 

In a racing context, carrying devices that take meteorological measurements is not only beneficial for science partners, but also for the race participants themselves, as it helps to inform and improve weather forecasts that will impact their own decision-making and performances throughout the race. 

Using racing yachts for data collection paves the way for the installation and deployment of measuring devices on other vessels such as fishing or commercial boats, as well as other sailing boats. 

Building Block 5 focuses on the provision of various bamboo trainings by Forests4Future to support different aspects of the bamboo value chain in their intervention zone. These trainings are essential as enabling factors for the success and sustainability of the bamboo-related activities undertaken by the project. Forests4Future provides both financial and technical assistance in organizing and implementing these trainings. Since the start of the project, Forests4Future has conducted multiple bamboo trainings tailored to specific needs, for example:

1. Bamboo propagation: Trainings on bamboo propagation are provided to tree nurseries to ensure the successful propagation of bamboo seedlings for plantation establishment.
2. Bamboo plantation/stand management and harvesting: These trainings cover various aspects of bamboo plantation management, including planting techniques, maintenance practices, pest and disease management, and sustainable harvesting methods.
3. Bamboo preservation treatment: This training is essential for bamboo processing units to learn proper techniques for treating bamboo with chemical, hot water and cold water treatments and harvesting time consideration to reduce insect susceptibility of bamboo culm.           
   (...)       

By offering these diverse trainings, Forests4Future aims to build the capacity and skills of local stakeholders involved in the bamboo value chain. This contributes to improved productivity, product quality, and overall sustainability of bamboo-related activities. Moreover, these trainings empower local communities to actively participate in and benefit from the economic and environmental benefits of bamboo.