Review and Appraisal Mission Report Support to the Establishment of the National Forest Auhority and Sustained Development of Uganda National Forestry Authority with Enhanced Focus on Northern Uganda

The Project

National Forestry Authority (NFA) was established under the National Forestry and Tree Planting Act, 2003 as a Government parastatal responsible for the management of Central Forest Reserves (CFRs) and development of private forestry. Norway has contributed NOK 40 Million towards the NFA Start-up Fund since 2004 (Phase 1: UGA 3003 UGA02/312). The key objective for this support was to provide financial help to establish the NFA. The combined review and appraisal assessed the performance in phase 1 and provided valuable input that guided the final formulation of the next phase of Norwegian support to NFA.

Interesting Findings

• In general on the evaluation of the Phase I support (2004-todate) the Team concludes that NFA has made important and relevant achievements. Implementation, however, has had varied results.
• The aspect of improving management of Central Forest Reserves performed satisfactorily.
• Regarding the over-all mandate of NFA, the Team concludes that NFA progress towards fulfilling its mandate was undermined by the governance turbulences it faced during its first years.
• There is also a general view that NFA tended to focus on CFR at the expense of other segments of its mandate, especially, regulatory and advisory service and monitoring.
• On the over-all assessment, NFA performance was seriously undermined by political pressures that led to frequent staff changes at senior levels. The performance was further affected by delays to establish and operationalize the District Forest Offices and unprecedented forest crimes in form of encroachment for agriculture and settlement, illegal trade in forest products, and generally, unwarranted negative attitudes towards NFA.
• The first four years of NFA establishment provides useful experiences and lessons as far as institutional building is concerned. For instance, it is important to learn that this phase of development is vulnerable to external forces (political involvement, public expectation and participation) as well as to internal factors (team building of staff and board members, building internal systems and procedures, confidence building among stakeholders).
• These four years also provided useful lessons informing the design and subsequent implementation of Phase II. The key lessons include the need for adaptive management, staff orientation to new ways of working, shifts in institutional policy and culture, building effective partnerships with constituency, strong M&E systems and sustained funding. All these issues are critical to success of any newly established institution.
• With respect to the proposed Phase II programme, the Team concludes that the proposed interventions are relevant to priorities of both governments and a wide range of stakeholders. It is worth noting that the affirmative action to focus on northern Uganda and align the programme to priorities in northern Uganda is a commendable effort.