WWF Mara River Basin Management Initiative, Tanzania and Kenya – Final evaluation report (dated February 2010)

Background:

The Mara River rises in the Mau forest complex (Kenya) and flows through Tanzania to Lake Victoria. The transboundary basin covers an area of 13,750 km 65% in Kenya and the remaining 35% in Tanzania. The Mara River supports the Masai Mara/Serengeti ecosystem which has global conservation significance, with the Serengeti National Park (SNP) recognised as a World Heritage Site and a Biosphere Reserve. The Masai Mara National Reserve and SNP provide nationally important tourism revenue and their ecological integrity and appeal to tourists are closely connected to the sustenance of the Mara River.

The Mara River rises in the Mau forest complex (Kenya) and flows through Tanzania to Lake Victoria. The transboundary basin covers an area of 13,750 km

In response to water resources management (WRM) challenges such as climate variability, increasing competition for water to support poverty reduction and economic growth, threats of water resource and environmental degradation in the basin, both Tanzania and Kenya have undertaken reforms to WRM policy, legislation and institutions to move towards the principles of integrated water resource management (IWRM / IRBM).

The project purpose was to facilitate participatory and sustainable Integrated River Basin Management (IRBM) initiatives for the conservation, sustainable and equitable use and restoration of freshwater resources and ecological processes in the Mara River Basin, and this should be resulting from conservation measures, sustainable use and land-use decisions taken by resource owners, users and developers under a supportive policy framework.

The Mara River rises in the Mau forest complex (Kenya) and flows through Tanzania to Lake Victoria. The transboundary basin covers an area of 13,750 km

In response to water resources management (WRM) challenges such as climate variability, increasing competition for water to support poverty reduction and economic growth, threats of water resource and environmental degradation in the basin, both Tanzania and Kenya have undertaken reforms to WRM policy, legislation and institutions to move towards the principles of integrated water resource management (IWRM / IRBM).

The project purpose was to facilitate participatory and sustainable Integrated River Basin Management (IRBM) initiatives for the conservation, sustainable and equitable use and restoration of freshwater resources and ecological processes in the Mara River Basin, and this should be resulting from conservation measures, sustainable use and land-use decisions taken by resource owners, users and developers under a supportive policy framework.

Purpose/objective:
The purpose of the evaluation was to assess and review the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of the Project in order to determine if intended benefits have been delivered with value for money after seven years of investment by Norad and WWF. The evaluation was also to guide WWF and the donors in the next steps for supporting equitable and effective water resource management in the Mara River Basin. It was also intended to contribute more widely to organizational learning, to assist the design of similar projects in the future and contribute to WWF’s transparency and accountability requirements.

Methodology:
The evaluation was commissioned by WWF ESARPO in collaboration with WWF-Norway and covered the full project period (2003–2009). The evaluation team comprised Dr. Nick Hepworth, a Tanzania based researcher and consultant in IWRM and aid effectiveness as the team leader, and Professor Japhet Onyando, a consultant and Associate Professor of IWRM based at Egerton University, Kenya. Field work was carried out in late 2009.

The evaluation team reviewed project documentation; interviewed 31 key informants (project staff, donors, partners, stakeholders and beneficiaries) and held focus group discussions; field observation at key locations and field based discussions with project partners, personnel and beneficiaries; two participatory evaluation meetings with stakeholders in Kenya and Tanzania. Key informant interviews were semi-structured based on checklists of issues for discussion.

Key findings:
Relevance of project goal and purpose: The project goal and purpose were highly relevant given the global, national and local conservation significance of the Mara-Serengeti ecosystem and the imperatives for social and economic development in the basin. The Project is highly relevant in terms of the national frameworks for WRM in Tanzania and Kenya, in effect, piloting approaches to policy implementation. The Project also addresses the shared vision of East African Community (EAC) / Lake Victoria Basin Commission (LVBC) and the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) and of the short and long term national and sectoral development plans and priorities of the two countries.

Project design: The outputs and activities tended to overlap. A simplified structure of fewer outputs may have increased the focus and reduced reporting and monitoring difficulties. The Project often has tried to do everything at once, rather than having a more phased approach more clearly reflected in the design. There was not an articulated strategy for identifying advocacy needs and policy level learning requirements that would help to lift multiple very important lessons for enhanced WRM in Tanzania and Kenya.

Overall achievements: The Project has generated significant momentum towards improving IWRM in the Mara River Basin and can demonstrate tangible achievements towards the project purpose of facilitating participatory and sustainable IWRM.

Some specific achievements: The Project coped well with highly challenging objectives and contexts and demonstrated an adaptive approach to this. The Project has raised the profile of environmental degradation in the basin (e.g. focused political attention and action at regional and national leadership levels on the protection of the Mau forest complex in the headwaters of the Mara River) as well as generated widespread understanding and awareness of WRM issues at a grassroots and institutional levels. A main result has been the establishment and mobilization of about 50 stakeholder WRM entities which are genuinely representative of communities, at grassroots, sub-catchment, national basin and transboundary basin level. These entities are at different stages of work

plan implementation, development of catchment strategies, ability to be self-sustaining and in their ability to influence higher levels of governance. Establishing the Technical Advisory Committees (TACs) and District Facilitation Teams (DFTs) to provide technical backstopping and integrated institutional support to Water User Associations (WUAs) and IWRM at local government level is an innovative model that brings together and focuses previously disparate and often ineffective efforts on IWRM. WWF has facilitated political momentum and are formally recognised by the EAC / LVBC Council of Ministers in terms of moving towards a transboundary WRM.

Some weaknesses and challenges: Some authorities saw the WWF project as moving too fast and trying to deliver outside its mandate. Some felt there was a threat of WWF work 'outshining' the authorities and threats to future budgets where WWF had delivered work of the authority already. Linkages to the NBI NELSAP programme have been weak. Some success was noted in terms of influencing policy (e.g. drawing attention to Mau Forest destruction). However, the Project has not fully appraised, documented and communicated the many valuable lessons generated or directed them through a focused advocacy strategy. Despite promising signs regarding the sustainability of WRM stakeholder entities the majority are yet to be self-sustaining. Continued support and leadership, and lobbying / advocacy on their behalf, is required. Challenges include finding an optimal geographical scale or level within the water user hierarchy at which WWF chose to engage. This is a very critical question for effective WRM in sub-Saharan Africa where financial, regulatory and data resources for WRM are limited and participatory approaches which harness the knowledge and cooperation of stakeholders are likely to be the key to progress. WWF could use its experience in the Mara to develop sophisticated and very valuable insights into the cost-effectiveness of participatory effort and stakeholder engagement at various scales. Another challenge is the relative focus on water quality versus water quantity issues. While the Project was designed to focus on the longer term water quantity issues through IWRM, many stakeholders raise short-term water quality issues.

Recommendations:
The evaluation strongly recommended a 2-3 years strategic consolidation phase with focus on synthesis of outward learning and policy messages. Specific recommendations are:

Establish, document and publish the evidence base: Investigate, appraise and document the multiple lessons for supporting establishment of WRM institutions, IRBM, environmental protection and connected livelihood support activities as well as transboundary river basin management. This should shape policy development and implementation elsewhere.

Data, monitoring and information: Finalise arrangements for continued use, maintenance and management of data sets, monitoring equipment and installations invested in.

Alignment of donor and government effort: Closer collaboration at strategic and operational levels between multiple donor supported initiatives in the basin (e.g. NBI NELSAP) and government initiatives.

Strengthening the advocacy role: Catalyze accountability processes for better water governance, e.g. through partnering with local and national CSOs, stakeholder institutions and basin authorities in social accountability monitoring and public expenditure tracking and use WWF’s significant credibility and influence at a public policy advocacy level to incentivise better performance.

Strengthening strategic focus: Strengthen understanding of the key threats facing the basin in terms of priority processes and locations affecting water quality and quantity, and to refocus management interventions based on a risk-based approach.

Activating stakeholder platforms: WWF should focus on i) developing sustainable funding streams; ii) development of coherent, realistic and targeted work plans and strategies; iii) enhancing communications and representation between these organisations in particular from grassroots level, through catchment committees to Basin Water Boards (Tanzania) / Catchment Area Advisory Committees (Kenya) and transboundary fora; iv) formalizing and embedding TAC and DFT structures; and v) establishing a clear mandate and work plan for the Transboundary Water Users Forum (TWUF).

Comments from the organisation, if any:
Evaluation findings are mostly in line with WWF-Norway’s views and WWF agrees with the overall conclusions and recommendations. The final evaluation has applied an analytical and critical approach and through this highlighted key challenges based on a sound foundation, both in terms of WWF’s work and the work of mandated government institutions. WWF will continue to support the Project for 2-3 years and through a consolidation phase follow-up the main recommendations of the evaluation.