Strongim Lek Gen – an evaluation of Partners with Melanesians in the Managalas Sustainable Development Project

Background:
This is an evaluation of the Partners with Melanesians’ work in the Managalas Sustainable Development Project, with particular focus on those programs funded by Rainforest Foundation Norway. The Managalas Plateau, in Oro Province, has been aided by the Partners with Melanesians (PWM) in its conservation and development efforts since 1984.

Purpose/objective:
a.To document and learn from past and current activities and achievements of PwM. The main focus will be core activities supported by RFN in the period 2001 – 2010, since the last evaluation.

b. To assist PwM to evaluate the legitimacy, trust, relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, participation and sustainability of their main programs supported by RFN. This should also include an assessment of program management systems and relationships with donors, partners and stakeholders. The evaluation is thus a tool to monitor and keep track of the progress of the project and evaluate their successes and failures.

c. To identify issues and suggest steps for further improvement and especially identify areas for strengthening and improvement. A special emphasis should be put on examining the follow‐ups of the recommendations of the last evaluation.

Methodology:
This evaluation used a number of methods to collect data. Qualitative or ethnographic data was collected using participatory methods such as community dialoging, flexible conversation and timeline, and conventional approaches like in-depth interviews.

Whist the qualitative methods were useful in collecting rich data for the evaluation, qualitative data alone does not reflect the breath of success or failures of the project so, beneficiaries’ perceptions and experiences were gathered through a questionnaire survey. This provides better understanding of the achievements and shortfalls of the project.

Key findings:
Managalas Sustainable Development Project (MSDP) has been a success on many levels. Its main conservation objectives have been advanced, which is a considerable accomplishment. The consensus built to get to this point, twenty years on, is unparalleled elsewhere in PNG.  Rainforest on the Managalas Plateau has been spared from predatory logging and other environmental threats.

But the threats still exist, and the pressure to capitulate to them appears to have escalated in the last few years. People told us in a couple of zones that they are now ready for logging and mining, they have had enough of conservation with no visible benefits to their lifestyle.  Sentiments like these are ever-present in conservation projects, and constitute the most serious threats to their sustainability. The implication is that once the NGO(s) and their programs disappear, so too will the rainforest. But as part of the predictability of these projects, some policy needs to exist that will constantly address such threats. The best buffer is always rainforest literacy, which, over time, can convince the disgruntled that their best interests lie in conservation after all. But more fundamentally, the consensus building process needs to include awareness of the NGO’s limitations and the fact that they are facilitators, not benefactors. Where we heard these comments we also learned that the PwM team had rarely come around to visit, and certainly had made little effort to explain their efforts on that zone’s behalf. Negligence has an enormous price in conservation.

Recommendations:
There are several major recommendations that would apply to all zones on the Plateau, and all participants in the MSDP. These are some of the most important recommendations:

Education:
Restart the education and enterprise programs immediately. Conservation, Forest Literacy, eco-enterprise and sustainable livelihood programs are very effective and consistent, but it appears programs were only implemented according to Activity Funding.

Consensus:
The consensus building process should be revisited and redesigned and use that process to sorted issues, misunderstanding, and frustrations in relation to the 28 priority projects. PwM to seek external support to facilitate this confidence and trust building process.

Conservation:
Draft land use plans for each zone, and institute both rewards and penalties for adhering to them.  In some cases, families that follow plans closely should be given priority treatment to other programs (like training, enterprise, etc).

Management :
In order to stem the deteriorating relationships between MDF and PwM staff, both PwM and MDF need to put aside their differences and reach consensus on important issues, including which roles each player can perform. This may involve drafting new work charters for each position. 

Redesign programs and avoid repletion of programs activities relevant to project phases. Conduct proper needs assessments and entertain the suggestions for program design from the CBOs themselves. Keep programs relevant.