Commitment to explicit, attainable conservation objectives through long-term Conservation Agreements

Conservation Agreements (CAs) are binding grant contracts created and agreed upon by specific communities and the ECF. CAs set out clear, attainable and realistic conservation objectives and determine the scope of conservation measures to be implemented within communities that demonstrate the have the organization, motivation and commitment to follow 10-year habitat management plans. Conservation objectives are determined by the ECF and the local community using expert and local knowledge. Each agreement is tailored to the identified needs in the target community and the local landscape. These contracts bind communities to protect ecosystems but also assist traditional land users to use the land in a sustainable way. 

 

The communities that sign Conservation Agreements have been selected to do so because they show initiative, community involvement and potential through the FPA process and establishment of a CBO. In order to ensure the sustainability of the projects, the compliance of Conservation Agreements is monitored. Each community must submit annual technical reports. In case they fail to perform the planned activities, the payments under the agreement may be suspended until they meet the requirements, or subsequently terminated if they don’t comply for more than a year.

  1. Successful application of the FPA; communities practice using tools, models, financing
  2. Development of a philosophy of support and education, not policing
  3. Careful selection of communities which demonstrate the skills, organization and involvement to commence conservation measures
  4. Providing training and education to make decisions and manage landscapes in cooperation with nature conservation ideals
  5. Clearly defining activities being paid for creates a sense of purpose for CBOs
  6. Assisting communities secure additional funding 
  • Technical expertise is needed in very few cases for specific questions related to agreeing on habitat management plans.
  • The cost estimates were developed in cooperation with the local community representatives based on their knowledge of local markets. The final result is that a fair full cost reimbursement is set by the conservation agreements that allows the CBOs to implement the Conservation Agreements and secure their economic sustainability over the contracted period.
  • Annual community reports include: a comparison of targeted and actual values for the planned measures; developments in project time frames; general financial report; information on problems and identification of possible solutions.
  • Each year a sample of conservation agreements are selected for independent audit of performance by ECF or a third party. This is an opportunity to examine monitoring and reporting as a method to test performance of the conservation agreement process.
  • Examining connections between conservation objective and resilience/livelihoods of locals helps direct future projects.
Potential as a Transferable Model

AGRUPAR could well serve as a model for other cities and form the basis for a national policy on local production.

 

CONQUITO has favoured observation tours and exchanges of experiences as well as transfer of methodologies, including among ministries and NGOs, for example the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Aquaculture and Fisheries and the Peace Corps.

 

Since 2015, AGRUPAR contributed to both the City Region Food Systems Project of FAO and the RUAF Foundation, which evaluated Quito’s food system. As a result, AGRUPAR staff decided to work towards a food policy for the city in a more systemic sense, within which urban agriculture is a strategic activity.

  • Commitment from the municipality to keep continuing and investing into the programme in the long term
  • A great equipe
  • The buyin of CONQUITO

Over its 16 years of existence, AGRUPAR has achieved impressive results. These results helped to make it an international well-known example of exemplary urban participatory agriculture and serve now as benchmark for all others that follow their path.

Focus on market development

Whereas in the past the focus of policy support for organic farming was often production-oriented, the current Danish OAP considers market development (including support for certain marketing channels), promotion and awareness, as well as public procurement, as priorities. The OAP is a mix of push and pull actions. Push effects are meant to increase production, while pull measures aim at increasing the demand for organic products.

 

If we look at the pull measures, a key action was to stimulate the demand for organic products by consumers and in private and public kitchens, such as schools and hospitals. For these activities, 6.4 million EUR were earmarked in the 2015-2018 period.

Municipalities were motivated through a national goal of achieving 60 per cent organic in all public kitchens and by earmarked funds to support the conversion process, primarily through the education of kitchen leaders and workers, and changes in supply chains and menus.

The aforementioned measure was highly successful. For instance, the city of Copenhagen succeeded in developing one of the most ambitious public procurement programmes in Europe, which met the goal of 90 per cent organic food in 2015, without an increase in meal prices.

Frugal Rehabilitation Demonstration (FRD): developing and adapting the methodology (FRM) through action-research

Once demonstration sites are selected, local ASM groups receive training and are contracted to implement FRM through six steps:

  1. Preparation & Planning: degradation, boundary, hydrological & equipment assessments; labor, volume estimates; waste management; OHS standards
  2. Technical Rehabilitation: infill, regrading and reprofiling; use of limited mechanisation
  3. Topsoils: identification, conservation and re-distribution across sites
  4. Biological Rehabilitation: topsoil enrichment ; natural regeneration assessments; identification of native and key vegetation communities; seed collection; seeds and natural fertilizers distribution into topsoils; tree, shrub and grass plantings
  5. Mitigation Hierarchy: integrating rehabilitation planning into active ASM design and operations so as to reduce primary environmental impacts and unnecessary rehabilitation efforts
  6. Handover of completed rehabilitation site to relevant government administrations for approval/sign-off
  • National and local government permission to implement Frugal Rehabilitation Demonstration projects.
  • Resources to fund demonstration labour effort and technical application of methodology at site.
  • ASM capacity and willingness to receive training and implement the methodology on site.
  • Successful application of the FRM: all the key physical and ecological requirements for successful rehabilitation are (with few exceptions) available within reasonable proximity of the site. They just need to be identified and adapted to context.
  • Habitat rehabilitation targeted to native vegetation communities can be successful without the use of non-native species.
  • Identification and recovery of topsoils are critical to success.
  • Biological rehabilitation works well together with topsoil seedbank  to establish a path to ecological recovery.
  • Low level mechanised approaches to heavy-lifting of material in topographic filling  can be effective but a dependence on mechanisation in the later stages of rehabilitation is not recommended. Overuse of machinery in these latter phases can result in reduced capacity for biological recovery.
  • FRM can be applied in abandoned areas, where mineral reserves are exhausted, and it can also be integrated into current ASM operations to reduce rehabilitation efforts.
  • Handover and sign-off from local authorities is key to ensure ongoing commitment.
Establishment of National FRM working group with government and sectoral stakeholders

On the basis that government ministries are willing and able to work together to develop solutions to address impacts of ASM on the wider environment, Protected Areas and on stakeholders impacted by such mining activity, a national working group (which includes such ministries, agencies and relevant representative stakeholders) needs to be established. This will help steer the process of project engagement with local government, artisanal miners and wider stakeholders at the local level to set the scene for Frugal Rehabilitation Demonstration (FRD). A key step in this process is to select sites for FRD that can serve the development and application of the methodology within the ecological, economic and social context. The purpose of establishing this FRM working group is to ensure a participatory, consultative approach to the development of the methodology, and to enable a demonstration site selection process that ensures an informed and strategic approach based on agreed criteria. Sites selected for methodology demonstration need to be typical, representative and associated with formalised ASM capacity to undertake the rehabilitation.

The key enabling factors were the collaborative approach to developing the FRM and adequate resources to undertake the participatory approach both at meetings and in the field. The working group was involved in a coordinated travel program to select, assess, monitor and review rehabilitation progress and approaches at sites.

The working group’s participation and involvement in the development of the FRM was critical to its eventual endorsement and adoption. Key ministries and associated agencies played a role in selecting FRD sites, visiting them through the rehabilitation process and discussing the development of a methodology that was informed through action-research across a range of representative sites. It was also important to have exposure and engagement with formalised artisanal miners, who were keen to participate in the work and help develop a mechanism for promoting best practice and their association with such practice.

Ministerial and Sectoral Alignment: a partnership-based approach to developing a Frugal Rehabilitation Methodology

Acknowledging and identifying conflicts between ministries and sectoral stakeholders is important. It is important at the early stages of an initiative to recognise these problems and to establish and work through a consultative platform to make the case for a methodology that is of value to all stakeholders, that is inclusive of artisanal miners and the stakeholders impacted by such mining as well as government ministries. It is only through such collaboration that a methodology can be developed that addresses environmental concerns, meets artisanal miners needs for performance-based incentives and access to land, and can be valued by government in formalising condition-based permitting for mining. It is within the context and platform of engagement that the FRM can be demonstrated to be of value to all stakeholders, and deliver outcomes at the local as well as national level.

  • Government recognition of range of problems across the sector
  • Government alignment on best environmental practices and effective enforcement
  • Government willingness to engage in wider partnerships to assess problems associated with informal ASM and to seek solutions and incentives for better environmental practices
  • National and stakeholder willingness for ASM formalisation to be conditional on environmental performance
  • ASM sector willing to implement FRM
  • Stakeholders willing to endorse ASM licensing based on improved environmental practices

It is critical for the initiative to have support from the national government, as a gateway to engaging with local government and other local stakeholders impacted by artisanal mining. Also, it is important that leading ministries that may potentially hold conflicting views (e.g. mining and environment) appreciate and support the initiatives’ capacity for developing solutions and approaches that can deliver benefits of interest to all parties (ministries).

Conservation fund

As a strategy of connection and contribution of the citizenship, because in the first edition (2013) We were able to finance all expenses, a conservation fund was generated from the collection of the cost of the registration of the event, the fund was delivered to the Promoter Group CPY and it was invested in conservation actions and sustainable use of the territory, with the fund was bought trap cameras for monitoring biodiversity.
This proposal was not sustainable for following editions, due to the considerable increase of the participation and the associated costs, currently we use the fee of the registrations to complete the event financing.

Have an emblematic conservation project in the region.
Having achieved the total financing of the initiative in its first year.
To have a permanent governance space (Cooperation System and CPY promoter group)

It is necessary to devote greater effort to the raising of economic resources to maintain the conservation fund.
To allocate the money raised in local projects, helps to strengthen the relationship between the promoter group and the community.
Having an external institution that helps finance 100% of the event, allows the creation of the conservation fund.

Capacity building to ensure the ecosystem approach

To improve local governance in the Sumpul River, it was crucial to mainstream the ecosystem approach into land management, and train accordingly water local governance structures, local authorities, and farmers. Together they implement EbA measures to face drought and variability such as: soil conservation practices, protected spring water and implemented agroforestry systems.

 

Capacity building was delivered to: 

  • >100 farmers through a "learning by doing" approach to attain demonstrative results in the field. The EbA measures implemented focused on the ecosystem services of water and soil, on productive diversification and on mitigating the impacts of climate change and variability (winds and extreme rainfall) on crops and goods and  improve water infiltration and availability in the area. 
  • Water Committes on organizational and management skills as well as on integral water management, in order to influence their understanding of the importance of water ecosystem services.
  • Leader and farmer women were trained on communication skills.
  • Municipal officers were part of a regional climate change adaptation training and exchange of experience with other 30 local governements of Mesoamerica. 
  • Synergies with existing projects and local organizations such as Plan Trifinio were crutial. 
  • Exchanges of experience contribute to training processes and to motivate participants to take part in water governance, and recognize the learning value of actions that are carried out.
  • Ensuring the capacities of local organization is key to ensure the provision of water ecosystem services, and will always be a good investment.
Developing flexible governance frameworks for adaptation

Governance for adaptation requires flexible policy and legal frameworks. Therefore, the upper sub-basin’s governance platforms required management instruments that would enable those adaptation options and forms of governance that brought about the greatest socio-environmental benefits to be valued and institutionalized. The Internal Regulations of several ADESCO Water Committees and the sub-basin’s Binational Community Committee were drafted, with the latter also updating its Strategic Plan (five-year plan) and Annual Operating Plan.

 

The process took into account new dynamics and trends in the sub-basin, as well as the EbA approach. The formulation of municipal policies was also supported (Local Adaptation Plans for La Palma and San Ignacio, El Salvador). Given that adaptation to climate change is immersed in a series of uncertainties about future climate impacts and development trajectories, these frameworks and instruments must be constantly evolving, always taking into account lessons derived from field and governance experiences. In this way, adaptation to climate change can move forward under a flexible approach, and through iterative cycles, generate short-term strategies in view of long-term uncertainties.

  • The continuous presence and the rooting in the territory of Plan Trifinio is a powerful enabling factor that provides flexibility in decision making and also vertical scaling. This trinational entity works closely with communities and knows the territory well, yet also has political weight and leverage with authorities, as it is part of the Central American Integration System and is chaired by the Vice Presidents and Presidential Delegate of three countries (El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras).
  • The Sumpul sub-basin has an Integral Management Plan, the implementation of which falls on all sub-basin stakeholders, and which could be revitalized based on the progress made with EbA and the strengthening of governance for adaptation. Flexible governance should contemplate the monitoring, evaluation and updating of this Integral Management Plan based on lessons of implementes projects.
  • The new management instruments prepared by the sub-basin’s governance platforms should in future be evaluated to determine how effective they were as adaptation responses. Any adjustments that result from this analysis will be a sign of flexible governance.
Achieving flexible governance for adaptation

Adaptation to climate change is immersed in a series of uncertainties regarding future climate impacts and development trajectories. Therefore, adaptation must proceed under a flexible “learning by doing" approach, integrating flexibility into legal and policy frameworks, and into sequential and iterative decisions that generate short-term strategies in view of the long-term uncertainties. In Goascorán, the lack of regulatory and policy frameworks for the management of shared basins limits the capacity to jointly respond to climate change - and therefore to be flexible and learn. This limitation was remedied by integrating adaptation into various management instruments at the micro-watershed, municipal and national level, and in transboundary agendas between local actors. The effectiveness of these (and other new) frameworks should be evaluated in interim periods, to allow for revisions and adjustments as knowledge about climate change increases; the same is true for EbA measures in the short term. The information that underpins these iterative processes must integrate Western science with local knowledge. In this way, it is possible to be flexible and identify new adaptation options and criteria for its evaluation.

  • A key aspect of governance for adaptation is the institutional and policy frameworks that back or facilitate it, and that confer it flexibility or not. In this sense, it was possible to take advantage of the window of opportunity offered by the updating of the Municipal Environmental Plans (El Salvador) and Municipal Development Plans (Honduras), the preparation of the National Adaptation Plan of Honduras, and the use of the legal figure of “Technical Tables” in El Salvador; all of which consecrate the value of governance for adaptation.
  • It is important to monitor and evaluate any improvements achieved through EbA, in order to use on-the-ground evidence to inform and substantiate changes to legal, policy and management frameworks, and in this way apply a flexible approach to adaptation governance.