Closeout Report

CLOSEOUT REPORT CBRLM SUPPLEMENTARY RANGELAND DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS SERVICES 24 OCTOBER 2014 Training and Pract...

1 downloads 223 Views 465KB Size
CLOSEOUT REPORT

CBRLM SUPPLEMENTARY RANGELAND DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS SERVICES 24 OCTOBER 2014

Training and Practical Application of Local Resources Monitoring Tool – Ogongo Participants

COMPILED BY: Indongo Indongo, Manager: M&E

1.

Introduction and Background

The main goal of the CBRLM project was to increase wealth among the NCA farmers by enhancing the productivity of the livestock sector in Northern Namibia through improved rangeland resource, livestock management, marketing and community development. The Project targeted 21 Rangeland Intervention Areas in 6 regions in the Northern Communal Areas. The project has three pillars of evaluation: the Household Income and Expenditure Assessment, the Cattle Condition Assessment, and a Rangeland Management / Productivity Assessment. The main objective of this consultancy was to analyze and interpret the rangeland data collected through a separate consultancy and to help place the results in context. To reach this objective, this consultancy requires high quality knowledge and information on the main driving forces and processes operating in the NCA agro-ecosystems, and may require additional field data using standard rangeland, soil or vegetation monitoring methods to supplement the primary rangeland monitoring data. Field data may also be required to elucidate specific processes or aspects that were not sufficiently captured by the rangeland assessment. An important aspect of this consultancy will be to document, and where possible to quantify, event changes that may affect the interpretation of results and which might be useful to contextualize the findings.

2.

Process

On 17 December 2012, the Request for Consultant’s Qualifications (RCQ) was published for a consultancy with the following main objectives: The main objectives of the consultancy are: 

to provide high quality knowledge, information and data to improve analysis and interpretation of the results of the primary monitoring data using the methods outlined in TOR, as well as other standard rangeland soil and vegetation monitoring methods as required;



assess the potential impact of differences between treatment and control in both CBRLM “intervention now” areas as well as “intervention later” areas and the expected impact of the CBRLM intervention; and



document event changes under the direction of and in consultation with MCA-N and USDA, as necessary to contextualize and interpret the quantitative data collected under the rangeland data collection consultancy.

The closing date for submissions in response to the RCQ was 31 December 2012 and the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) met on 15 January 2013 to consider the applications received. Mr Colin Van Der Waal was selected. After submission of his financial proposal and the conclusion of successful contract negotiations, the contract was signed on 11 March 2013 in the amount of N$648,320.

Closeout Report: CBRLM Supplementary Rangeland Data Collection (October 2014)

Page 1 of 3

The scope of work for this contract was later amended in line with the MCC-required discontinuation of the rangeland assessment. However, training on the practical application of local resources monitoring tool was added.

3.

Outcomes

Rangeland Assessment Results Baseline results were presented at various platforms including: the rangeland experts workshop held on 2 October 2013; United Nation Convention to Combat Desertification – Conference of Parties (UNCCD COP 11), and Rangeland Forum.

Closeout Report: CBRLM Supplementary Rangeland Data Collection (October 2014)

Page 2 of 3

Training and Practical Application of Local Resources Monitoring Tool In total 108 farmers, students, lecturers, governmental technicians and officers, conservancy members or managers, mentors, agricultural advisors, involved in rangeland management in one way or another, were trained in how to monitor rangelands.

Training and Practical Application of Local Resources Monitoring Tool – Kunene Farmers

The feedback received from institutions that sent staff to participate has been very positive and the GIZ’s CLDP management has approached the Consultant to train their future mentors in rangeland monitoring. The use of the mobile phone technology also provides valuable feedback for the LandPKS project (http://landpotential.org/landpks) that has just started in Northern Namibia.

Conclusion The experience gained during the MCA-N’s rangeland assessment, availability of a training manual and development of training protocols, provides a good footing to promote wider monitoring of rangelands. Building on this foundation, existing and future agricultural development projects in Namibia, which plan to explicitly incorporate rangeland monitoring in their work plans, are likely to expand on this. Future efforts in this regard should also emphasize the importance of using monitoring data to support rangeland management decisions on the ground, in order to improve Namibia’s degraded rangelands. Furthermore, rural community members have learnt how to use low-tech, simple-to-apply, and effective tools for monitoring and documenting changes in natural resource conditions in order to guide and support grassroots-level management responses accordingly, then they can “take” rangeland monitoring “back” from the historically exclusive domain of scientists, academics and extension workers trying to fine-tune complex methods that are inaccessible to land users who lack the advanced equipment to implement them.

Closeout Report: CBRLM Supplementary Rangeland Data Collection (October 2014)

Page 3 of 3