Monitoring system for repayments and environmental compliance (established and operational)
As with any conservation and development project, it is essential to monitor the activity and the impact. From the outset, monitoring in the MKUBA pilot has been constantly improved, with strong support with Mwambao-MCCC, GreenFi and the pilot community itself. The main components can be divided into the main three following fields:
Financial monitoring:To ensure that borrowers stay on track regarding their loan repayment schedule, and avoid any delay/knock-on to the rest of the eco-credit group, to ensure the eco-credit groups operate smoothly as planned/trained for, to detect and address any issues that may arise in the loans life-cycle in the eco-credit groups
Social/economic monitoring: To understand the social dynamic around the scheme, to understand what the loans are used for (it can be for productive purposes or livelihoods conditions ones, such as emergency needs, school fees, etc.), to ensure that the loans don’t lead into any over indebtedness
Environmental monitoring: To track the impact on compliance to local rules, and evaluate how it acts as an incentive boosting local management, to ensure that borrowers are not putting more pressure on other natural resources to repay their loans.
Some existing literacy in the groups to keep records
A pre-existing Monitoring & Evaluation system in the supporting organisations piloting the scheme, with flexible data management and related capacity to adapt, to be able to reflect and react timely.
An expert/dedicated support organisation (such as GreenFi) to help via: providing tools to make monitoring smoother and simpler, this can involve applications or other technological solutions.
Data recorders need a thorough understanding of the data to be collected and of the importance of correct recordings. For instance, people’s exact names and ages, as well as the time spent fishing are important so that fishing effort can be calculated.
Each of the first groups were issued with a tablet to record some data. This has not proved to be particularly functional - smartphones worked better in his case. The first version of the mobile app was difficult to implement properly.
There have been some business failures notably for instance on chicken breeding, and a milkfish small aquaculture project that eventually looked non-operational. Those did not seem based on proven technical feasibility or any existing skills by their initiators.
Eco-credit/MKUBA groups (formed and trained to issue loans to their member and track their repayment)
Business training
Rob Wild
MKUBA stands for Mfuko wa Kutunza Bahari: “Fund to care for the sea” in Kiswahili. It is a type of Community Eco-Credit scheme.
Community eco-credit is defined as: “credit, managed at the community level, conditional on ecological actions undertaken by the community member borrower required under the loan terms.” (Wild, et al, 2020) – will send ref is there space for it.
In our MKUBA pilot five groups, constituted according to the main livelihood activity of their members, have been initially established in 2018; they were made of foot fishers, net fishers, seaweed farmers, mangrove users, and the last group were the member of the WFCs.
The eco-credit group members attended a series of training to enable the group to operate and follow the rules they have to abide by to receive the capital funding from the supporting organisation. Trainings included the following main topics: Leadership training, Record keeping, How to protect the cash box, By-laws of each group, Fines, Capacity building in business (brief), Conservation management and reporting procedures.
A clear and relatively well-respected local management plan or by-laws (or one that is not subject to acute conflicts), that is therefore quite easy to translate into compliance conditions of access for the loans by the eco-credit groups’ members.
Previous local experience, in the supporting organisation(s) and/or in the communities benefitting, of formal or informal community credit handling loans cycles and revolving funds
A generally good mutual trust across the members of the groups to be established.
Eventual drop-outs from the eco-credit groups should be regularly and closely monitored.
If drop-outs signal a common problem it should be investigated and addressed quickly, particularly to avoid spreading further and endangering the whole scheme.
Duty of care: it is important for the project to operate a duty of care when encouraging individuals to do business, and to avoid encouraging inexperienced people to take on risky businesses.
Community-level ecosystem management institution (active and regularly engaging with the community the community they represent)
Mkuba data
Rob Wild
The Ward Fisheries Committee (WFC) is in Zanzibar the community institution responsible for local marine resources management. But they have often been weak: with little capacity and effectiveness.
The Eco-credit pilot was embedded in a wider project aiming to build a more effective co-management framework with strengthened WFCs.
Without a wider ongoing project in which an eco-credit scheme is nested, it would still be key to have an active community institution in charge of local natural resources management in some way, to link loans access to environmental conditions agreed by the community.
The community-level marine management plan sets priorities and objectives to manage natural resources. It is created by the WFC, facilitated by the project team if applicable. The plan can then serve as guidance for the environmental compliance and actions to be undertaken by the eco-credit groups’ members.
The local management plan can be started simple and focus on a few conservation/management targets with matching by-laws to enforce, and be further elaborated while the eco-credit scheme is running. In such cases the active participation of the broadest possible base of community members (especially those members of the eco-credit groups) is very important.
The legal and actual existence of recognised and active community institutions in charge of the local marine and coastal resource management.
Provisions in national legal framework for fisheries and marine conservation enabling communities to locally implement management actions (and enforce them).
Experience and support from the relevant authorities regarding the process to approve/formalise the by-laws decided by the responsible community institution.
Where collaborative management for fisheries is new, it is imperative that fishery authorities do not feel threatened by the process and fully understand the benefits.
Sensitive facilitation during the process is important.
Roles and responsibilities of committee members should be clearly understood to aid in the election of the most appropriate persons to key positions.
Building capacity for conflict resolution is very important especially in a previously open access fishery or where regulations or enforcement have been absent or are very low.
