MJUMITA COMMUNITY FOREST PROJECT (LINDI) · PDF filemjumita community forest project (lindi)...

MJUMITA COMMUNITY FOREST PROJECT (LINDI)

WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS ON SHARING THE CCB AND VCS PROJECT

DESIGN DOCUMENTS, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS AND

MONITORING PLAN TO LINDI STAKEHOLDERS

Conducted on 4th February 2014 at MM Hotel, Lindi

Report prepared by Mwila Mbegu, TFCG Monitoring Officer

February 2014

i

Executive Summary

This report describes a workshop on sharing the Community Climate and Biodiversity (CCB) and Verified

Carbon Standards project design documents (PDD), project implementation reports and monitoring plan to

Lindi site stakeholders in a workshop conducted on 4th February 2014 at MM Hotel in Lindi Town. This was in

respect of the project “MJUMITA Community Forest Project (Lindi)”. The workshop was conducted as part

of the project “Making REDD Work for Communities and Forest Conservation in Tanzania”.

The project design documents provide a description of the REDD project in order for external validators to

assess whether the project meets the requirements of the Climate, Community and Biodiversity project

standares and the Verified Carbon Standards.

According to the third edition of the CCB Standards that was published in December 2013, the standard

requires full and effective involvement of communities and other stakeholders. Furthermore, it also requires

that communities and other stakeholders are provided with relevant and adequate information about the

potential costs, risks and benefits associated with the project and in a form that they understand, and or how

the validation and verification process has been explained to them in accordance to the CCB standards.

In order to meet these and other requirements, the project carefully organised a one day workshop that

brought together a total of 91 participants (including 78 men and 13 women) representing Village leaders from

10 villages, ward and divisional leaders, Ward Councillors, district and Municipal officials, Executive Directors

from the District and Municipal councils, the DC and MP, journalists and project officers.. See Annex 1 List of

Participants during Lindi Stakeholders Workshop on 4th February 2014.

During this workshop, the project systematically shared with the Lindi stakeholders Swahili summaries of the

following documents;

The CCB Project Design Document

The VCS Project Design Document

CCB First Project Implementation report

Lindi Biodiversity and Community Impact Monitoring plan

The workshop was conducted in Swahili, presentations and all materials provided were also made in Swahili

and guided by a timed programme. See Annex 2- Workshop Programme. The facilitators of this workshop

were project staff from TFCG (Bettie Luwuge, Nuru Nguya) and MJUMITA (Someni Mteleka) with Technical

advice from Nike Doggart (TFCG) and Theron Brown (MJUMITA) Documentation of the workshop was done

by Mwila Mbegu (TFCG).

ii

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... i

Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................... ii

Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................. iv

1.0. Background to the project .................................................................................................................. 1

1.1. Brief description of the CCB and VCS project standards ................................................................ 1

1.2. Workshop objectives ...................................................................................................................... 1

1.3. Introduction and setting the scene .................................................................................................. 2

2.0. Process for developing the CCB and VCS Project Design Documents and Procedures for Validation

and Verification ......................................................................................................................................... 3

2.1. Overview of the presentation .......................................................................................................... 3

2.2. Goal and Purpose .......................................................................................................................... 3

2.3. Why are we here? .......................................................................................................................... 4

2.4. What are CCB Standards? ............................................................................................................. 4

2.5. Objectives of this specific meeting ................................................................................................. 4

2.6 The process of developing the PDDs .............................................................................................. 4

3.0 Climate Community and Biodiversity (CCB) Project Design Document for the project Community based

REDD in the Coastal Forests of Tanzania ................................................................................................ 5

3.1 Overview of the presentation ........................................................................................................... 5

3.2 The Objectives of the CCB PDD project - Community based REDD in the Coastal Forests of Tanzania

............................................................................................................................................................. 5

3.3 The Project Area ............................................................................................................................. 6

3.4 Original Conditions in the Project Area ............................................................................................ 6

3.5 Stakeholder and stakeholder identification in the project area ......................................................... 6

3.6 Project Activities .............................................................................................................................. 7

3.7 Starting period and implementation period of the project ................................................................. 7

3.8. Assessment of the project risks ...................................................................................................... 7

3.9 Stakeholder engagement in the project ........................................................................................... 8

3.10 Conflict resolution and grievance procedures ................................................................................ 8

3.11 Worker safety ................................................................................................................................ 8

3.11. Opinions and comments from the participants .............................................................................. 8

4.0 The Verified Carbon Standards (VCS) Project Design Document ..................................................... 10

4.1. Overview of the presentation ........................................................................................................ 10

4.2. Important Key REDD Concepts .................................................................................................... 10

4.3. Lindi Site Carbon Stocks .............................................................................................................. 14

4.4. Projected Baseline Emissions ...................................................................................................... 14

4.5. Projections of CO2 for 2012 - 2013 .............................................................................................. 14

4.6. Projected Village Baselines .......................................................................................................... 14

4.7. Individual village Performance...................................................................................................... 14

4.8. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 14

4.9. Comments and Discussions related to the VCS PDD presentation .............................................. 14

5.0 Current Update of Village Forest Reserves in the project area. ..................................... 16

5.1. Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 16

5.2. General Comments and Responses ............................................................................................ 17

6.0. First Project Implementation Report for the period starting April 2012 to April 2013 ......................... 18


6.2. Project area.................................................................................................................................. 18

6.2. Objectives of the project ............................................................................................................... 18

6.3. Expected community impacts of the project ................................................................................. 19

6.4. Expected Results of the project .................................................................................................... 19

6.5. Risk monitoring report .................................................................................................................. 22

iii

6.6. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 23

6.7. Comments and questions ............................................................................................................. 23

7.0. Biodiversity and Community Impact Monitoring Plan and Stakeholder Communication Plan ........... 23


7.2. How the Community impact Monitoring report and Communication Plan was developed ............. 23

7.3 Community Impact Monitoring Plan ............................................................................................... 24

7.4 Biodiversity Impact Monitoring Plan .............................................................................................. 25

7.5 Risk monitoring plan ...................................................................................................................... 25

7.6 Communication plan ..................................................................................................................... 26

7.7. Opinion / questions ...................................................................................................................... 26

8.0 Way forward and Closing remarks .................................................................................................... 27

Annex 1:- List of Participants for the PDD Sharing Workshop in Lindi on 4th February 2014 ................... 28

Annex 2: Workshop Program for PDD Sharing workshop in Lindi on 4th Feb 2014 ................................. 31

Annex 3: Guest of Honour Speech during the officiating of the PDD sharing Workshop ......................... 32

Annex 4 Photos during the workshop ..................................................................................................... 33

iv

Acknowledgements

The project appreciates the support provided by the District office in Lindi, the support from District

Commissioner Hon Dr. Nassoro and District Executive Director of Lindi District Council Madam Grace

Mbarouk who set aside their valuable time to take part in the stakeholders’ meeting on sharing the project

design documents for Lindi. Appreciations are extended to the Chair of the District Council Hon Makwinya and

District Natural Resource Officer Mr Charles Mwaipopo and his team for coordinating the logistics at district

level.

Thanks also go to the all the Ward Councilors, Ward Executive Officers, Village leaders and village executive

officers and MJUMITA network representatives from Mkombamosi, Mkanga 1, Muungano, Ruhoma, Kinyope,

Nandambi, Kiwawa, Likwaya, Milola and Makumba for carefully reviewing the submitted reports and sharing

their opinions during the discussions of the submitted documents.

The project ‘Making REDD Work for Communities and Forest Conservation in Tanzania’. has been financed

by a generous grant from the Royal Norwegian Embassy and our thanks go to the people of Norway for their

support.

I would like to extend special thanks to the TFCG and MJUMITA Technical Advisors (Ms Nike Doggart and Mr

Theron Brown) on the technical guidance provided during the development of the CCB and VCS Project

Design Documents (PDDs) and other reports, and the project team led by Bettie Luwuge with valuable support

from Someni Mteleka, Nuru Nguya, Baraka Samweli, Mohamed Nyamangaro, Sylvia Kalemera and Mwila

Mbegu for translating, organizing, executing and documenting of the PDD sharing process.

2

3. To present, share and review with Lindi stakeholders including the communities on the 1st project

implementation progress report, and the Biodiversity and community impact monitoring plan

4. To explain to the community and Lindi stakeholders on the forth coming validation and verification

process against the VCS and CCB standards

5. serve as a feedback mechanism for all the project initiatives and communication intervention to the

project beneficiaries regarding the project sustainability plans

1.3. Introduction and setting the scene

The one day workshop was guided by a workshop program as indicated in Annex 2. The workshop started at

8.30am, before officiating, participants had an opportunity to make self introductions which were facilitated by

the TFCG project officer and Project contact Person in Lindi Mr Mwaipopo in respect of all protocols.

The workshop was officiated by the Lindi District Commissioner (Hon Dr. Nassoro) and closed by the Lindi

District Council Chair Hon Makwinya. In the officiating speech (See Annex 3 for Swahili version of full opening

speech), his message to the communities and other Lindi stakeholders, emphasized key issues in relation to

the project as outlined below.

He reminded the audience that each and everyone be conversant with the importance of the project to the

development of the villages in terms of forest conservation in the Coastal Region. He recognized that the

project had made significant contributions at national and international level and has answered many

questions that were previously unanswered thereby enabling policy makers to make the right decisions at

various levels. This includes the project’s contribution to the process of developing the National REDD

Strategy and national Poverty Reduction Strategy (MKUKUTA) in the villages.

The DC once again recalled that the main goal and purpose of the project was to enable the communities to

reduce GHG emissions from deforestation and forest degradation to enable carbon credits to be marketed on

the international market. He mentioned that in order to be able to sell carbon in the international market, there

are a set of conditions to be meet and to be implemented, which have been implemented at different stages of

implementing the project. He reminded the participants that one of the conditions was the consent of the

community to accept and continue implementing the project, a condition that is well recognized at international

level.

Another condition the DC mentioned in relation to enable the communities to sell their carbon credits is to

register their project with the internationally recognized institutions coordinating GHG projects. Such

registration of these kinds of projects is made possible if the project has been approved and accepted through

submission of the “Project Design Document”. Registration of the project enables the project to graduate from

being a pilot project to becoming a fully fledged REDD project. The DC was informed that the TFCG and

MJUMITA technical experts have already prepared these documents; summaries prepared and ready to be

shared to the communities and other stakeholders today. The remaining responsibility is for us to accept,

review, comment, own and communicates them to the rest of the community. The next step will be for the

project to be visited officially by international auditors (validators and verifiers) to validate and verify the

information in these documents.

The DC mentioned that due to the importance of the process and the fact that these documents will be

validated, he reminded the audience on a few key points;

Project lifetime: 1st April 2010 and will continue until April 20th 2022

Project area: the area of land covered in forests in May 2012 within the village boundaries of the

villages implementing the project.

The Memorundum of Understanding between the villages and Mtandao wa Jamii wa Usimamizi wa

Misitu Tanzania (MJUMITA) that they will be the sole service providers and facilitate the management

3

of the project and that they will be responsible to register the project on behalf of the participating

villages.

Project village boundaries, how to share information, project sustainability, resolution of conflicts that

are likely to emerge during the implementation of the project.

The project documents also identifies the different risks that the stakeholders should understand in relation to

the implementation of the project and if not well addressed could cause the project to fail. He mentioned some

of the risks to include;

Risk 1. Private investors purchase forests within the project area and clear them for agriculture

Risk 2. Internal conflict within communities over forest access rights.

Risk 3. Corruption in relation to the REDD payments undermines the effectiveness and equitability of

REDD

Risk 4. Corruption in relation to forest reserve management results in forest clearance

Risk 5. Political support for REDD in Tanzania is withdrawn or legislation is changed to prevent

communities accessing REDD revenues directly

Risk 6. REDD revenues are insufficient to incentivise sustainable forest management

The DC continued to remind the participants that this was a very important meeting and was part of the

process of registering the project. He kindly asked the communities and other stakeholders present to

strengthen the cooperation so that the project can be a success and benefit the community. He insisted that

the project will be registered not as one village but for all villages as one project, this means that if one village

continues to deforest then other villages will be affected.

Another important thing that the DC mentioned was the willingness of the government to support on the

interventions already started in the participating villages. he put emphasis on participants to be good

ambassadors, and spread good message that the village land forest reserves do not belong to the project but

rather they belong to the respective villages;

He finally asked all participants to look at the documents provided to them which include the Community,

climate and Biodiversity Standards PDD, Verified Carbon Standards PDD, the first project implementation

report for validation, Biodiversity and community impact monitoring plan for communicating with the

stakeholders.

2.0. Process for developing the CCB and VCS Project Design Documents and Procedures for

Validation and Verification

By Bettie Luwuge, Project Manager, TFCG

2.1. Overview of the presentation

The Project Manager took all participants through this session. The aim was to ensure that all people

understand why they were in this meeting and how important this stage is for the project and the CCB

requirements. She started by giving an overview of the project Making REDD work for communities and Forest

Conservation. Being a 5 years project, implementing the final year ending August 2014. The project is funded

by the Norwegian Government, implemented by TFCG and MJUMITA, working in 27 villages situated in 3

districts (10 in Lindi, 12 in Kilosa and 5 in Mpwapwa). The project location is in two biodiversity hotspots in

Tanzania; the Eastern Arc and the Coastal Forests of Tanzania. Implementing stakeholders were also

mentioned to include all the local governments mentioned above, all the 27 communities, Morogoro and Lindi

Regional offices, VPO and TFS.

2.2. Goal and Purpose

Goal -To reduce greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and degradation in Tanzania, in ways that

provides direct and equitable incentives to rural communities to conserve and manage forests sustainably.

4

Purpose -To demonstrate, at local, national and international levels, a pro-poor approach to reducing

deforestation and forest degradation by generating equitable financial incentives from the global carbon

market for communities that are sustainably managing or conserving Tanzanian forests at community level.

2.3. Why are we here?

She mentioned that this was a very important part of the process at this stage of the project implementation

related to presenting the Project Design Documents of CCB and VCS for the project known as “MJUMITA

Community Forest Project (Lindi)” for Validation Using the Climate, Community and Biodiversity (CCB), and

Verified Carbon Project Standards.

2.4. What are CCB Standards?

These are standards that are used to validate the quality of implementing activities in carbon projects. A core

component of the CCB Standards is the specification that the co-benefits of carbon project must - like carbon-

be real, ‘additional’ and measurable. At the very least, specify that carbon projects must ‘do no harm’ to

communities in the project area and must have a clear social monitoring plan.

2.4.1. Validating using the CCB standards

Is a process of evaluating the design and management of a project according to the different rules of the CCB

guidelines/standards.

2.4.2. Verification by CCB Standards

It is an evaluation of how the project can bring climate, community and biodiversity benefits according to the

design of the project validation. This is done at least once in every 5 years.

2.4.3. What are VCS Standards?

These are standards used to verify and maintain a high level of quality. These standards aim at attaining a

quality, additional, permanence of carbon credits. Verification by using VCS standards for emission reductions

attained for the carbon credits can be achieved by analysing the additionality, MRV, leakage and permanence.

2.4.4. Who will audit/validate/verify the project?

Any individual or institution recognised internationally with a capacity and qualifications of conducting an audit

a project if it has followed the CCB or VCS rules.

2.5. Objectives of this specific meeting

These are as discussed in 1.2 above.

2.6 The process of developing the PDDs

The participants were informed that the process of developing these PDDs were participatory in nature and

involved all the relevant stakeholders at various levels at village, district, national and also international levels.

The process involved an analysis that emphasised on the important steps that were recommended by experts

form Forest Trends in relation to the social impact assessment of carbon projects. The steps were;

i. A multi-step process was implemented reflecting the project’s commitment to free, prior and informed

consent. These steps

Introductory meetings with Village Councils

Community level awareness raising and consultation at sub-village level

Community level awareness raising, consultation and request for consent to proceed at village

level

ii. Community level, participatory project design and social impact assessment workshops with

community representatives

5

Participatory social impact assessment workshop at landscape level involving community

representatives and other stakeholders

iii. Consultation meetings with community leaders on village land use planning, participatory forest

management and REDD

Community consultation meetings on proposed REDD readiness activities

iv. Implementation of the proposed REDD Readiness activities and designed theoris of change by the

project and communities.

End of Presentation

3.0 Climate Community and Biodiversity (CCB) Project Design Document

By Someni Mteleka, Carbon Enterprise Coordinator, MJUMITA

3.1 Overview of the presentation

The Carbon enterprise Coordinator –Someni Mteleka took all the participants through this session. A summary

of the document was prepared and translated into swahili language for all the stakeholders to follow as

reference. In his presentation, he described the Project Design Document for Climate, Community and

Biodiversity Project Standards which will be used to validate the project. The presentation was made in

Swahili and reference to previous project activities and implementation stages was made every now and then.

In brief the presenter emphasised on the following issues;

He informed the participants that the main implementer of this project is MJUMITA on behalf of the

communities. The document provides a summary in Swahili of the CCB Project Design Document. The project

design document provides a description of the REDD project in order for external validators to assess whether

the project meets the requirements of the Climate, Community and Biodiversity project standards. These

standards provide guidelines for those involved in developing and implementing REDD on how to ensure that

a REDD project brings positive impacts.

3.2 The Objectives of the CCB Project Design Document

The following objectives were identified by the stakeholders.

Climate

To reduce emissions of greenhouse gases from deforestation on village land through sustainable

forest management.

To enhance the carbon stock within the village forest reserves by allowing natural regeneration

Community

To maintain forest ecosystem services and a sustainable supply of forest products through an

equitable and effective system of PFM.

To generate individual cash incomes from REDD for investing in improved agricultural practices

and other enterprises and for livelihood diversification with a particular focus on poorer households

and women.

To improve the quality and availability of public services and infrastructure.

Biodiversity

To conserve threatened and endemic species.

To conserve an extensive area of Eastern African Coastal Forest.

Prioritised objectives,

sustainable forest management

improving agricultural practices and then

Improving public services.

6

3.3 The Project Area

Communities were informed that the project area described in the PDD is as follows, project area (41,924 ha)

includes all woody vegetation meeting the definition of forest in April 2012 within the village boundaries of the

10 participating villages with the exception of areas classified as non-forest in May 2001 or deforested

between May 2001 and April. 2012.

Most important sections of this PDD

3.4 Original Conditions in the Project Area

These are explanations on the existing sitautaion related to the social, economic, environmental and

biodiveristy condtions within the project area. These include the following

Project location and physical parameters

Vegetation

Population

Cultural and historical aspects

Communication and transport

Project boundaries

Carbon stocks

Community description

Current land use and customary and legal property rights

Current biodiversity

High Conservation Values

3.5 Stakeholder and stakeholder identification in the project area

The presenter informed the participants that the stakeholder identification process was highly participatory and

it followed advice and rules laid out by experts in the CCB manual and Forest Trends through a social impact

assessment for carbon projects. At the onset of the project a stakeholder analysis was conducted to

understand which stakeholders are available and who are most affected by the project or not within and

outside the project area. These include a list of social groups, stakeholders that were identified during the

Social Impact Assessment workshop and who took part in the process at village level meetings. 10

participating villages are; Milola Magharibi, Kinyope Ruhoma Mkombamosi Muungano Nandambi Mkanga 1,

Likwaya, Makumba and Kiwawa. Other community groups includes; farmer groups, charcoal makers, root

7

collectors, NTFP collectors, hunters, IGA groups, VNRCs, Network members. Other stakeholders includes;

ILLULU Cooperative, District Agriculture office, telephone companies operators, forest product users (not

charcoal makers), NGOs and business people i.e. charcoal transporters.

3.6 Project Activities

The presenter mentioned the expected project activities that the project will be undertaking and insisted that

these won’t be new activities but continuing from the readiness period up to 2022, the end time of the

implementation period of the project. These include;

To strengthen governance at village level

To implement sustainability plans for land management

Community based forest management

Payment of REDD revenues to the communities

To strengthen social services and infrastructure.

Project activities that were implemented from 2010 to 2014 through TFCG and MJUMITA which need to

continue and need support from the District after 2014

Improve profitability and ecological sustainability of agriculture.

Improve access to microfinance services for community members.

• Generate incomes from the sale of bee products.

• Growing and harvesting trees on woodlots and through agroforestry.

• Improve social services and infrastructure

3.7 Starting period and implementation period of the project

Communities were informed through the presentation that they should note the starting and ending period of

the project. The presenter clarified the project life time and project emission accounting period as seen below.

3.7.1. Project lifetime

They were reminded that the project life time begins on the project start date i.e. 1st April 2012 and will

continue until April 20th 2022, the end of the GHG Accounting period

3.7.2. GHG accounting period

The historical reference period is from May 25th, 2001 to April 21st, 2012 and corresponds to the start and end

dates of the imagery used in the historical land-use and land-cover change analysis. They were told that the

GHG accounting period start date is April 21st, 2012 and for the first fixed baseline period the GHG accounting

period will be from April 21st, 2012 to April 20th, 2022.

3.8. Assessment of the project risks

The presenter described the kind of risks that the project has and the need to ensure that these risks are

minimized or even mitigated so that the project can bring benefits to the communities involved. However,

though various interventions that have been going on during the pilot stage of REDD readiness, most sod

these risks could be achieved with more commitments. The following are the risks of the project:

Private investors purchase forests within the project area and clear them for agriculture

Internal conflict within communities over forest access rights.

Corruption in relation to the REDD payments undermines the effectiveness and equitability of REDD

Corruption in relation to forest reserve management results in forest clearance

Political support for REDD in Tanzania is withdrawn or legislation is changed to prevent communities

accessing REDD revenues directly

REDD revenues are insufficient to incentivize sustainable forest management

8

3.9 Stakeholder engagement in the project

The communities were also reminded that most of the pilot project activities that were conducted were highly

involving and all the relevant stakeholders have been involved at different levels. They were also informed that

this specific workshop is part of the engagement process that should be taken critically.

A multi-step process was implemented reflecting the project’s commitment to free, prior and informed consent.

These steps are outlined below:

Introductory meetings with Village Councils

Community level awareness raising and consultation at sub-village level and request for consent to

proceed at village level

Community level, participatory project design and social impact assessment workshops with community

representatives and later workshop at landscape level involving community representatives and other

stakeholders

Consultation meetings with community leaders on village land use planning, participatory forest

management and REDD and on proposed REDD readiness activities including establishment and REDD

by-law development

Community consultation and planning on REDD payment mechanism and piloting of the REDD payment

mechanism

Stakeholder consultation and evaluation involving community representatives and other stakeholders

Community level awareness raising on implementation of village land use and forest management plans

and training on roles and responsibilities

Community consultation and participatory development of MoU between MJUMITA and the communities

3.10 Conflict resolution and grievance procedures

Communities were also reminded that conflict resolution procedures for REDD should follow the same

procedures as are in place for other conflicts within the District. During the previous meetings on social impact

assessments with all stakeholders, community representatives selected the District Executive Director to

facilitate the resolution of any conflicts between a community and the project.

3.11 Worker safety

For community members, there are risks associated with forest patrols which the project seeks to mitigate by

ensuring that patrol teams and village natural resources committee members are properly equipped.

End of presentation

3.11. Opinions and comments from the participants

After the presentation, communities and other stakeholders were able to ask a number of questions and

provide their inputs to the document provided following the presentation made. Participants raised the

following questions and opinion.

Opinion / questions

Population figures

Ward executive officer (WEO) of Nangalu ward said that there were several errors in population figures in the

PDD

Mnyimmadi VEO of Kinyope responded that since valuators will go around the villages to validate the PDD all

corrections will be made before that time.

Report on REDD performance to show village level figures

9

Hassan Mpanga (Chairperson of MUHIMIRU of network) suggested that, report should be open i.e. it should

show performance of each village so that the villages will be able to understand where to put more efforts. He

added that all ten villages should join efforts to conserve and protect their forests.

Who to decide on distribution trial payments

In response to DC’s idea on trial payments Deputy district council chairperson Mr. Salum Mandambwe, said

that, during a meeting in Morogoro in 2013, where village representatives were making laws on how REDD

activities should proceed; they suggested that it would be better if money from trial payments would be given

to villagers themselves. And that those villagers would be sensitized to contribute some money for

development activities. The aim of doing that is to avoid complaints from villagers if the money would have

been misused by village government or district officials.

CDC pointed out that REDD Project guide lines requires that villagers have final decision on how best the

money from trial payments can be used.

Mr. Salum Mandambwe added that people should go to Mkanga 1 and / or Nandambi to learn how REDD

payments have changes peoples’ lives. For instance some people bought bicycles, others people houses’

roofs are constructed of metal / iron sheets instead of grass. People are willing to contribute REDD payment’s

money to development activities but extravagance of village government leaders put them off.

Contributing to this, Deputy district administrative officer (DAO) said that, she supports DC’s idea because it is

constructive and it is useful. Even though, the REDD project guideline requires villagers to have final decision,

therefore the district leaders / officials need to go back to the villages, to educate people on how best they can

use the money from trial payments i.e. the money can be used so solve various problems in the particular

villages. Also they (district officials) can help villagers to bring to light priorities among development activities.

Additionally, PM added that villagers reached the decision to distribute money from trial payments among

themselves due to a history of embezzlement which was done by heads of village governments and / or district

officials, in the past. For instance some villages reported that, villagers contributed some money (not REDD

money) for construction of dispensary, but the dispensary was never constructed. Therefore leaders at all

levels need to work hard in order to build trust to the people that are being led, so they (leaders) can

participate in helping them to bring to light needs of the particular society.

Importance of improving village-level governance

Mohamed Masudi from Likwaya pointed out that village leaders in many villages are not transparent about

income and expenditure of their villages, because they are dishonest. He does not think the DED gets reports

of general assemblies. In order to control corruption and to encourage villagers to contribute to development

activities, he requested the DED to order all village leaders to be transparent on income and expenditure of

villages. He added that the DED should make sure good governance is implemented in village governments.

If this is done villagers can agree to contribute some money from trial payments to development activities.

The DED responded on corruption of village leaders. She agreed that village leaders are supposed to be

transparent on income and expenditure (accounts) of their villages, because 20% of the income from a

particular village is usually sent back to that village. Village chairmen (VCs) and their village executive officers

(VEOs) are obliged to report on income and expenditure of their villagers. Even though there are ward

development committee meetings (WDC), where the ward councillor need to get report from villages on

income and expenditure of villages in the ward. The WDCs have authorization to question if something is not

done as required. Also, villagers are supposed to speak strongly against the matter i.e. village income and

expenditure. The DED can obligate VEO but not VC. But, villagers themselves are supposed to obligate VC

because they are the one who put them in power.

Time for Workshop

10

The chairperson suggested that time allocated for the workshop is too short; hence, it should have been at

least 3 or 2 days due to sensitiveness of the matter. It was noted for action.

Project Implementation period

Said Musa Ngapalaji a community carbon surveyor; asked that initially when the project was being introduced

into the villages, it was said that the project was a trial and it will be for 3 years. Today we are told the

implementation period is 10 years i.e. starting from 2012 up to 2022. What is the duration of the project?

In response to this, the CEC said that, in May 2013 the project team had a meeting with district officials, village

representatives. It was discussed how villages will continue to implement REDD activities after the trial period.

It was said any villages (among the 10 villages) will be free to choose whether to continue with REDD or not.

There was a design / plan which was discussed to get opinion from village representatives. After that the

project team had meetings with village councils in their respective villages. It was explained what the village

council was supposed to do if wants to continue with implementation of REDD activities. Folders were left so

that villagers could read them and then return them to the project team. Also, villagers were expected to give

consent to continue with REDD or not. Ten villages which were invited (they are the same that are here today)

gave their consent to continue with REDD. Because the trial project will end in August 2014, in order that the

villages continue to receive REDD payments and continue to implement REDD activities, there are things

need to be done i.e. to approve PDD and register the project. After that the villages will continue to implement

the project. In this PDD the time span is 10 years. The project will be for all the 10 villages together and not for

each village alone. If one village decide otherwise, it will take us several steps back.

Additionally, participants were also informed that the pilot project started in 2009 and will phase out in August

2014. During all this period, the pilot has been setting the foundation from REDD readiness to actual

implementation of the REDD project that will after the pilot ends. However, in the presentation and summary

report, the project start date was 1st April 2010 and will continue until April 20th 2022, the end of the GHG

Accounting period. This is because most of the activities that contributed to the reduction of GHG emissions

started in the field. While the GHG accounting period start date is April 21st, 2012 to April 20th, 2022.

4.0 The Verified Carbon Standards (VCS) Project Design Document

By Someni Mteleka, Carbon Enterprise Coordinator, MJUMITA


The presenter, Someni Mteleka took all the participants through this session. A summary of the document was

prepared and translated into Swahili for all stakeholders to follow as reference. In his presentation, he

described the Project Design Document for the Verified Carbon Project Standards which will be used to verify

the project. The presentation was made in Swahili and reference to previous project activities and

implementation stages was made every now and then. A summary of the presentation is presented below.

4.2. Important Key REDD Concepts

The presenter started with unfolding the presentation and mentioned 3 key concepts that will be commonly

referred to during the presentation and the VCS PDD which are Baselines, Leakage and Permanence.

4.2.1. Key REDD Concept - Baseline in Lindi

When a REDD project is created, it is not possible to directly observe what would have happened without the

project. Therefore, in order to determine if a project has reduced green house gas emissions, a baseline is

used. Baselines provide information based on the historical amount and location of deforestation which is used

to predict where and when deforestation will happen in the future if no project were created.

11

4.2.2. Key REDD Concept - Leakage

Leakage refers to when a REDD project causes activities (such as deforestation) to shift from the project

location to a new location. Emissions caused by leakage must be subtracted from emissions saved by the

project.

4.2.3. Key REDD Concept – Permanence

REDD project activities must be permanent. If a REDD project prevents emissions from occuring now, it must

continue to prevent emissions from occuring in the future. If the project protects the forest today, but stops

protecting the forest tomorrow, then it is not permanent.

In order to identify the baseline, it is equally important to consider the reference region (an area of land

comparable to the project area but outside the project area). This area is also analysed for future deforestation

in reference to the project area. The reference region of the project areas should be the as similar as possible

to the project area.

Communities were informed that when a reference region/area has been established, a historical analysis of

deforestation is conducted for that area. A historical forest change analysis is in the form of a map showing

deforestation patterns in the reference area within a period of the past 10 years. The analysis is prepared

based on a time series of satellite images.

Example of a satellite image showing deforestation between 2001 and 2008

Year 2001 Year 2008

4.2.4 Deforestation in Lindi

Participants were informed through this presentation that 95% of the deforestation in Lindi is caused by

Agriculture. The annual deforestation rate from 2001 to 2012 was 2.57% and declined to 1.44% in 2006 and

increased again to 2.68%. The average deforestation rate over the 10 years was 1.99%.

4.2.5 Why is the deforestation rate different in each year?

The theory behind forest deforestation in Lindi was explained using the graph below.

12

Changes in maize cultivation are correlated with changes in deforestation rates in the project zone. VNRC

members found maize cultivation in 48 out of 52 farms cleared from forests between 2010 and 2012. In

surveys conducted with farmers, they report that mature forest is the preferred location to grow maize due to

soil fertility demands

4.2.6 What drives Maize production?

● Rainfall (but farmers can't predict the weather): Farmers report drought conditions discouraging maize

cultivation in subsequent years and deforestation analysis is in two year periods. Drought lowers need for

new clearings because most nutrients are still in soil, while pests and weeds are fewer.

● Labor competition with other crops: when farmers devote more labor to cash crops (cashews in paticular)

they grow less maize.

Other insights;

Farmers choose cash crops or maize depending on economic and environmental conditions. Periods with the

highest deforestation rates, 2001 to 2002 and 2010 to 2012, were the only two periods when maize export

bans were lifted. Even switching from maize to sesame could lower deforestation slightly if sesame is more

labor intensive than maize on a per area basis.

4.2.7 The Future

Deforestation rates in Lindi are affected by economic policies. Cashews are subject to an export tax.

Unprocessed cashews are potentially highly taxed. This is good for processors, but bad for cashew farmers. In

response to studies by USAID and others, the Tanzanian government has pledged to no longer use Maize

export bans. Current policy environment encourages maize production and therefore deforestation.

13

4.2.8 Lindi Baseline Model

● A computer model is used to predict the location of future deforestation.

● The model uses maps such as distance to recent deforestation or distance to roads to predict where

deforestation is likely in the future.

4.2.9 Measuring Carbon

● To know how much carbon is saved by avoiding deforesation, we must measure trees.

● VNRC members worked with the project carbon monitoring officer to measure 12,000 trees in 490 plots

accross the project area.

While there are many forest types in Lindi, in terms of carbon, forests can be broken into low and high carbon

forests.

14

4.3. Lindi Site Carbon Stocks

The project used equations developed by researchers at Sokoine University to use the tree measurements to

determine how much carbon was in the forest. The results show that: 1 ha of high carbon forest saves 173.20

tonnes of CO2 equivalent and 1 ha of low carbon forest saves 115.66 tonnes of CO2 equivalent.

4.4. Projected Baseline Emissions

Using the map of future deforestation generated by the model and the carbon stocks, it is possible to calculate

the baseline emissions. For the project area from 2012 to 2022 the projected baseline emissions are

1,112,507 tonnes of CO2 equivalent. If the project can reduce deforestation by 50% in that time, the savings

would be worth 2.8 million USD or 4.5 billions TSH at current market prices.

4.5. Projections of CO2 for 2012 - 2013

● Generally, villages in the project area have managed to reduce emissions up to 26% which is 34,400

tonnes of CO2 equivalent.

● Although 20% of that amount should be directed to the credit buffer, reserved if the project fails to

continue reducing emissions hence 27,550 tonnes of CO2 equivalent only is what will be sold.

● This amount of CO2 has a value of USD 96,360 which is eqivalent to TSH 154 million which can be paid to

villages that are implementing the project.

4.6. Projected Village Baselines

Village level baselines can also be established from the map. However, if converted to hectares the average

annual village baselines for 2012 to 2013 are:

No. Village Baseline for 2012-2013

1 Kiwawa 149 ha

2 Milola 52 ha

3 Ruhoma 38 ha

4 Kinyope 91 ha

5 Nandambi 85 ha

6 Mkanga I 81 ha

7 Likwaya 44 ha

8 Makumba 100 ha

9 Mkombamosi 109 ha

10 Muungano 192 ha

4.7. Individual village Performance

In explaining this session, in reference to the previous slides, the presenter inisted on the following issues:

● Each village should reduce its rate of forest deforestation below the baseline for it to be paid.

● Although measurements are conducted at project level, if a village is not able to reduce its emissions

below the baseline it consequently reduces the amount of money to be paid to other villages too.

● Therefore, all villages should work together to ensure that forests in the neighbouring villages are not

deforested.

4.8. Conclusion

Generally, the project has succeded in reducing GHG emissions for 2012 and 2013 and all villages will be

paid based on their performance in this year. However, a potentially bigger revenue can be achieved from the

sale of carbon if and only if villages in the project succeed in reducing emissions and enforce the

implementation of their land use management plans and corresponding bylaws as a team.

4.9. Comments and Discussions related to the VCS PDD presentation

Rates of DSA among village leaders

15

Issa Abdala Pilipili village chairperson of Milola Magharibi stated that Village leaders like the project, and they

are the ones who are very close to villagers and they are actually who motivate their people on conservation

issues (REDD), and do a lot of work to make sure that the project succeed. Since the project started, VCs and

VEOs have been supervising all the activities with all the heart and carefully. But the project is putting them

(VCs and VEOs) in a low rank especially in DSA payments compared to councillors and ward executive

officers (WEOs). He suggested that during meetings the DSAs should be flat rate to all attendees regardless

of the ranks.

PDD newsletter

Mnyimmadi VEO of Kinyope village requested the project to prepare newsletters on PDD and distribute to the

villages.

CEC responded that the project has prepared PDD newsletter, the project officer will present and distribute it

in the villages.

Now that the project is going to phase out who will oversee that certificates will be

obtainable to villagers?

Hassan Masud Katapila from Likwaya village stated that, they know that a village land use plan is not REDD,

but a national strategy which makes it obligatory for every village to prepare a land use plan. The costs of

preparations and implementations of VLUP are high, such that, the government cannot afford, so REDD

project incurred those costs and almost all villages have their plans endorsed at district level and we are

waiting for certificates. Now that the project is going to phase out who will oversee that certificates will be

obtainable to villagers?

CDC responded that Village land use plan (VLUP) is not REDD, but it is important to all villages to have VLUP

in Tanzania. The importance of village land use plan is emphasized in the Village Land Act No 5 of 1999 such

that, it is now obligatory for every village to prepare a land use plan. The land use planning Act No 6 of 2007

further elaborates that obligation. These two land use plan acts work together with the Forest Act of 1998

which gives authority to communities to own forest(s). The three Acts together, were used by REDD project to

help villages to set aside village land forest reserves (VLFRs).

CEC added that all village land use plans had met the required criteria and all procedures were followed as

required. Their plans were endorsed at district level and now they are waiting for certificates. The PM kindly

asked the DED for Lindi to put pressure so that the certificates are obtained.

CDC and district land officer (DLO) reported that when the process of preparations of VLUPs started, the

VLUP team fixed boundaries of nine villages. All documents were prepared and taken to ministry head

quarters to be signed by the commissioner who has to approve all amendments. After being signed, the

villages will get certificates and the process of preparing certificates of customary right of occupancy (CCROs)

will start.

Division of villages that have already gone through the VLUP process.

The project used this opportunity to air out its views in relation to division of villages in the project area. There

is an issue of splitting villages, especially during this time when our country is approaching general elections. If

the villages which have gone through the process of preparing VLUPs will be split, it will be a setback. This is

because the new villages will have to go through the whole process again. Preparations in one village has cost

between 14 million – 18 million TZS. If the villages will be split, donors will be put off and the community efforts

of exercising their primary right of decision making in the management of their resources will be undermined.

CEC added that in case a village split the VLFR area should be managed by both villages because the law

allows, although in case of VLUP it will a problem.

Do the Ward Tribunals now have power to solve all land disputes?

16

Juma Hassan Mbule (Mfuga Nyuki) from Kinyope village pointed out that there was encroachment in a VLFR

in Ruhoma village. When VNRCs made follow up and took the law-breaker to the village land council, and then

to the Ward Tribunal, the Ward Tribunal said that it has no right to take any action on land issues. Thus the

dispute was not settled and VNRCs were a laughing stock in the village, i.e. it was an embarrassment to

VNRCs. He wanted to know if the project leaders have provided the land by-laws to the Ward Tribunal, so that

next time when lawbreakers will be taken to it, action will be taken and there will no embarrassment to VNRCs.

CDC added that all 10 villages and wards in Lindi site have got by-laws for VLUPs. For the case of the land

dispute in Ruhoma village, it was advised that it should be taken to The Ward Tribunal.

VC of Ruhoma explained that they took the law-breakers to District land office but were advised to take them

back to Milola Division officer. They met him but there were no solution until today.

Sustainability of project activities

Rashid Kibaba VC of Nandambi was concerned that normally district officials go to the village with project

team i.e. when the project has a specific activity in a particular village. Now that the project is phasing out the

district officials may never go to the villages again.

In response to this concern, the DED stressed out that REDD project was meant to build capacity to villagers

on REDD issues. Thus villagers are supposed to manage everything that they were taught e.g. by laws, rules

and regulations. A district official to come to the villages is not a big deal, they will come whenever necessary,

but the villagers need to abide with the rules, regulations.

5.0 Current Update of Village Forest Reserves in the project area.

5.1. Overview

This session involved village leaders and representatives presented an update of what is currently happening

in their VFR. Having listened to the presentations and understood the risks and potential benefits, the village

representatives described their respective status. All 10 villages implementing the project presented their

information as briefly described below.

5.1.1. Kiwawa

Shaibu Nkulyungu VNRC secretary reported that village land forest reserve (VLFR) has been reserved since

2010. Initially there was opposition against REDD, after trainings, 80% of villagers accepted it, yet there are

challenges. During patrols 19 lawbreakers were caught and judged / punished according to by-laws.

5.1.2. Ruhoma

Mohamed Ismail Makunda (Secretary of MUHIMIRU network) reported that there are challenges in

conservation and protection of VLFR. He gave an instance of Ruhoma village, where, people from the

neighbouring village (Milola Magharibi) are farming in the VLFR. These farmers were taken to village land

council, Ward Tribunal, and district natural resources office. But nothing has been done. It seems that there

are people who are trying to protect these farmers. I think it is better these farmers be taken to court of law.

The DED wanted to know the disputing villages, and she was told that the villages are Milola Magharibi and

Ruhoma

5.1.3. Milola Magharibi

Issa Abdala Pilipili (VC Milola Magharibi) reported that the problem is not land dispute between two villages;

rather it is just few people who are doing destruction. For instance there were six farmers from Milola B who

opened new farms in the VLFR in Milola Magharibi; these farmers should be taken to court of law. In case of

lawbreakers in Ruhoma are just two people, we have a meeting in division office and we agreed that those

lawbreakers should be taken to court of law.

17

5.1.4. Kinyope

Hassan Mpanga (Chairman of MUHIMIRU network) reported that the VLFR was encroached in 2013 but

action was taken to people who did it. Now the forest is protected.

5.1.5. Nandambi

Rashid kibaba VC of Nandambi reported that the condition of VLFR is not good; the forest is attacked by fire,

which comes from neighbour village. During patrols 15 timber, 2 saws were found. The timbers were used to

make tables for the village office.

5.1.6. Mkanga 1

Musa Makuwango a community carbon surveyor from Mkanga 1 village, reported that the condition of the

VLFR is good although it has been affected by fire which came from the neighbouring villages of Chikonji and

Ng’apa Kinamangalamanu sub villages.

5.1.7. Likwaya

Mwalim Kasian Tanga VC of Likwaya reported that villagers in his village have accepted REDD. The condition

of their VLFR is not good because it has been affected by fire which started in the neighbouring villages of

Chikonji and Ng’apa.

5.1.8. Makumba

It was reported that villagers from Chikonji are doing illegal timber harvesting in Makumba VLFR. During

patrols several timbers and a saw were found.

5.1.9. Mkombamosi

The VEO of Mkombamosi reported that the condition of the VLFR is good. It was affected by shifting

cultivation, but since last year 2013 farmers got training in conservation agriculture, and now they have started

to practice it. Thus it has started to show some improvements.

5.1.10. Muungano

Rajab Mohamed Mtopela Secretary of VNRC reported that the condition of the VLFR in all zones is good

except in the Noto zone. The forest has been encroached by people from Milola i.e. Libwage family. These

law-breakers were summoned by the village council but they are still continuing. During carbon stock

assessment, surveyors were attacked by the law-breakers (Libwage family), this makes patrols to be difficult.

5.2. General Comments and Responses

Milola Vs Ruhoma issue

The PM requested the DED to help solve the problem with six people from Milola village, who are farming in

Ruhoma VLFR. In response to this issue the DED responded that law-breakers are just a few people from

Milola. There is a Ward councillor, WEO and Division officer who need to solve the matter. She advised the

ward government to make a follow up on the issue. Also the DED herself promised to make a follow up. She

also added that regional government has organised a committee to investigate carefully what is going on in

Milola.

Mr. Kalambo councillor of Milola Ward responded that; whenever destruction is done in any village by law-

breakers from Milola Magharibi the VC is blamed. He added that those people (law-breakers) were taken to

court of law, but the matter was not solved. He urged that if someone is caught doing illegal activity should be

taken to court of law regardless of where the law-breaker is from which village. For instance, a few days ago

the VC and VNRCs in Milola B caught illegal timber harvesters from Mandawa village. 110 timbers were

seized and will used to make desks, while the law-breakers were detained and later will be taken to the court

of law.

18

Fire lines

The chairman (Hon Makwinya) emphasized on making fire lines or fire break around the VLFRs so as to avoid

risks of fire from one side to enter into another village’s VLFR.

6.0. First Project Implementation Report for the period starting April 2012 to April 2013

By Nuru Nguya, Community Development Coordinator, TFCG


The presenter Nuru Nguya took all the participants through this session. A summary of the document was

prepared and translated into Swahili to ensure that all the stakeholders could follow and as a reference. In her

presentation, she described the activities and progress as described in the 1st implementation report for the

project. This report wil be verified using the CCB project standards. This report describes the progress of the

project during the first implementation period in relation to the community and biodiversity objectives. The

presentation was made in Swahili and reference to previous project activities and implementation stages was

made every now and then. In brief the presenter emphasised on the following issues:

6.2. Project area

The project is located in Lindi District, in Lindi Region. The project area includes

19

To improve the quality and availability of public services and infrastructure.

6.2.3. Biodiversity



6.3. Expected community impacts of the project

1. Community-owned forests will be managed in a participatory, effective and equitable way.

2. Forest products will continue to be available and accessible to all community members including the

poorest households according to access rules agreed in a participatory way.

3. Villages will be better governed.

4. Communities will have more secure land tenure

5. Water sources will be better protected

6. Soil erosion will be reduced

7. Individual incomes will be boosted and diversified by receiving REDD payments

8. Household incomes will be more resilient to climate change and higher as a result of training and

investment in a range of enterprise activities.

9. REDD revenues will contribute to improving public services and infrastructure.

10. Villages will have village offices.

6.4. Progress in relation to the expected results of the project

Communities were asked to refer to the provided summaries for more information on the specific details for

each village such as tables and maps

1. Community-owned forests will be managed in a participatory, effective and equitable way.

The approved total area included by May 2013 was 33,726 ha. All 10 villages now have a village natural

resources committee who are responsible for managing the Village Forest Reserve. By September 2013,

women constituted between 25 % and 55 % of the VNRC members with only one VNRC, Muungano, having

less than 33 % of its members being women.

2. Forest products will continue to be available and accessible to all community members

including the poorest households according to access rules agreed in a participatory way.

The total area of the village forest reserves is available for sustainable use including collection of non-timber

forest products.

3. Villages will be better governed.

The number of village council meetings held over the twelve month period between 1st July 2012 and 30th June

2013 varied from 2 to 12. Villages are supposed to hold one Council meeting per month i.e. the target is 12

meetings per year per village. Village assembly meetings are open to all women and men registered as

residents in a village. They are supposed to be held quarterly i.e. the target is 4 meetings per year per village.

By September 2013, women constituted between 17 % and 35 % of the Village Council members with only

one Village Council, Mkombamosi, having less than 33 % of its members being women.

20

4. Communities will have more secure land tenure.

Up to the day of presenting this report to the communities and stakeholders in Lindi, there was no village that

possessed its Village land certificate. All of the villages now have village land use plans. These have been

approved and signed at District level and copies have been returned to all 10 villages. In some villages,

amended village boundaries have been approved at village, district and now forwarded to the regional and

national offices for approval before they are finally accepted for use in the villages. All villages have village

offices.

5. Water sources will be better protected-

Village forest reserves in the project villages now provide protection for part of the watersheds for these

streams, the water sources may be considered better protected.

6. Soil erosion will be reduced

Seven villages have included land in their village forest reserves with slopes exceeding 20°: Muungano,

Kiwawa, Nandambi, Ruhoma, Milola Magharibi, Mkombamosi and Makumba. Based on the training of farmers

and community based agricultural trainers, the uptake of conservation agriculture techniques also contributes

to preventing soil erosion.

7. Individual incomes will be boosted and diversified by receiving REDD payments-

Between November 2011 and July 2013.A total of TZS 284,842,940 has been paid to the ten villages with per

village payments ranging from TZS 4,647,200 to TZS 51,511,200.

4574 women have received payments.

3306 men have received payments.

8171 children and dependents have been allocated payments, made to the mother or, if not

possible, to another designated Guardian

The communities chose to invest in 17 development projects that are now underway or

completed. In some cases, the REDD funding was not the only source of funding for these

projects.

21

.

School latrines and Dispensary under construction in Kinyope Village. September 2013

Makumba classroom for Standard 3 and 4 and teachers’ office. Two new primary school classrooms at

Uleka sub-village and Nandambi Heath Centre

8. Household incomes will be more resilient to climate change and higher as a result of training

and investment in a range of enterprise activities.

The project has supported three types of community development projects that aim to improve livelihoods: a

total of 453 men and women form 10 villages were trained in improved agriculture, microfinance and bee

keeping.

149 people were trained on improved agriculture techniques

55 people were trained on microfinance

249 people were trained on bee keeping aspects

9. REDD revenues will contribute to improving public services and infrastructure.-

As a result of the project, more public services are now available with additional service improvements in the

pipeline: all villages now have village offices; in three villages, Makumba, Muungano and Kinyope,

improvements are underway or completed to primary school buildings; in three villages, Milola Magharibi,

Nandambi and Kinyope, improvements are under way to health faciltities including the construction of

dispensaries in these villages.

10. Villages will have village offices.-

With support from the REDD project, all ten villages have constructed village offices.

At this point, the presenter reminded the participants on the Biodiversity objectives of the project which are;



Below are the expected biodiversity impacts that were communicated to the stakeholders during the

presentation

22

1. Populations of threatened and endemic species persist within the project area.

In 2nd – 6th October 2013, the Critically Endangered Rondo galago Galagoides rondoensis was found at two

sites within the project area.

The status for endangered and vulnerable plant species at October 2013 reveals that 3 endangered species, 4

vulnerable species and 1 coastal forest endemic species were found on village land forests in the project area.

2. Extensive areas of Eastern African Coastal Forests continue to exist within the project area.

By April 2012, there was 41,924 ha of forest on village land

By April 2013, in all the 10 villages, the total Area of forest on village land was 41,271 ha, therefore

Total Area of village land in approved village forest reserves at April 2013 was 33,726 ha

3. There is less pressure on the Eastern African Coastal Forest from deforestation and

degradation drivers

The high biodiversity areas refer to the village forest reserves where the threatened and restricted range

species have been recorded. Annual deforestation rate per village for implementation period is 1.58% While

the Deforestation rate within VFRs for project implementation period is 0.91% for Lindi

4. Communities and other stakeholders are actively engaged in the management of Eastern

African Coastal Forest within the project area.

Based on interviews with the VNRC and VC members, the available budgets and expenditure by the VNRCs

per village is presented below. In total TZS 7,885,000 was the combined annual budget for nine of the ten

villages. Likwaya Village did not allocate any funds for VFR management

In eight out of ten villages, the forest management plans were available at village level when assessed in

September 2013.

In all ten villages, the VNRC have a work plan and are implementing activities including forest patrols.

6.5. Risk monitoring report

The presenter continued to elaborate on the different project risks as mentioned in the CCB PDD. At this point,

she showed how the project activities were addressing or mitigating some of the risks. The following risks were

monitored during the project implementation;

i. Private investors purchase forests within the project area and clear them for agriculture-

There have been no sales of village land to external investors during this reporting period

ii. Internal conflict within communities over forest access rights.- There have been no

internal conflict events reported within the ten project villages over forest access rights during

the implementation period. All community members have equal access to forest resources

within their Village Forest Land.

iii. Corruption in relation to the REDD payments undermines the effectiveness and

equitability of REDD.-There has been 1 corruption event in Likwaya Village. In this event the

Village Executive Officer stole five hundred thousand shillings (TZS 500,000) intended for

supporting the purchase of a power tiller for the village. Follow up action was taken including

reporting to Lindi police station.

iv. Corruption in relation to forest reserve management results in forest clearance- There

has been at least one event of illegal harvesting of timber in Kinyope; and one event in

Muungano

v. Political support for REDD in Tanzania is withdrawn or legislation is changed to prevent

communities accessing REDD revenues directly- The National REDD strategy includes

community access to REDD revenues as one possible option

vi. REDD revenues are insufficient to incentivise sustainable forest management- None of

the ten villages have opted out of the project.

23

6.6. Conclusion

The presenter concluded that overall the project has had a positive impact on the communities and on the

biodiversity of the area compared with the ‘without-project scenario.

The strategies that have brought the greatest impact to the highest number of people include the REDD

payments and the investment in community development projects.

Capacity building on improved livelihoods has also brought positive impacts to the communities, particularly

through the adoption of improved agricultural practices.

End of Presentation

6.7. Comments and questions

Amendments / Correction; Juma Njangali VC of Muungano village Made correction on number of village

council meetings and village assemblies; he said that every month they have village council meeting, thus

there are 12 meetings in a year. Also there are four (4) village assembly meetings in a year which was

contrary to what was presented, he advised to change and this was noted for action.

Selemani Mpili VC of makumba village made correction on number of village council meetings and village

assembly meetings. He said that they had problem with VEO in the past, the VEO was transferred and there is

an acting VEO. Thus, they are doing all village council meetings and village assemblies as required. Also it

was noted for action.

Ali Abdala Makalani community communicator of Milola Magharibi, keenly urged the project publications to

include illustrations and photos from Milola and other villages too, because they are implementing the same

activities as in other villages.

PM agreed that everything done in other villages it was done in Milola too, including taking photos. However,

the photos were not used in the handouts probably because they were blurred. She added that the project

team had heard what representative from Milola have said and that they (the project team) will make sure

illustrations and photos from all villages will be used for publications in the future.

7.0. Biodiversity and Community Impact Monitoring Plan and Stakeholder Communication Plan

By Bettie Luwuge, Project Manager, TFCG


The presenter Bettie Luwuge led the participants through this session. A summary of the document was

prepared and translated into Swahili to ensure that all the stakeholders could follow and retain as a reference.

In her presentation, she explained that the plan will be validated according to the CCB project standards. The

plan describes the way in which the project will measure its progress in relation to the community, climate and

biodiversity objectives. The presentation was made in Swahili and reference to previous project activities and a

detailed summary of the plan was made every now and then.

7.2. How the Community impact Monitoring report and Communication Plan was developed

The presenter started by insisting on a few issues that were part of the process of developing this plan to the

community. She informed them that the presented plan was prepared in a very participatory way and involved

different stakeholders at different levels of the project including the communities especially through the

participatory planning meetings. They were informed that this plan will be placed on the CCB website for

comments from other stakeholders at national and international level. Project implementation reports for each

year will be open to all stakeholders at District, ward and village representatives. Summaries will be provided

to all communities in the project area.

24

7.3 Community Impact Monitoring Plan

Participants were informed that this plan describes the community variables to be monitored and the frequency

of monitoring and reporting. The indicators have been selected to ensure that they are directly linked to the

project’s community development objectives and to the anticipated impacts of the project. The presentation

looked at the expected community impacts and their corresponding indicators whose details on the methods,

frequency of monitoring and reporting, means of verification, responsible, costs of monitoring and reference for

baseline value were provided in the handout summaries provide to each of the participants.

Community Impact Indicators

1. Community-owned forests

will be managed in a

participatory, effective and

equitable way.

1.1 Area of village land per village included in village forest reserve.

1.2 Area of village forest reserve available per village for sustainable

use including collection of non-timber forest products

1.3 Number of villages with elected VNRCs in place.

1.4 Percentage of women on the VNRC in each village

1.5 Deforestation rate per village within village forest reserves

1.6 Net change in carbon stocks within village forest reserves

2. Forest products will continue

to be available and accessible to

all community members including

the poorest households

according to access rules agreed

in a participatory way.

2.1 Number of people with the right to access forest products

including measures to safeguard access for poorer households

2.2 Area of village forest reserve available per village for sustainable

use including collection of non-timber forest products.

3. Villages will be better

governed.

3.1 Number of Village Council meetings held per year in each village

3.2 Number of Village Land Use management committee meetings

per year in each village

3.3 Number of Village Assembly meetings per year in each village

and number of people attending disaggregated by gender

3.4 Percentage of women on the village council

4. Communities will have more

secure land tenure

4.1 Number of villages with village land certificates

4.2 Number of villages with village land use plans and by-laws

4.3 Number of villages with village land registries

5. Water sources will be better

protected

5.1 Number of villages with water sources within village forest reserves.

6. Soil erosion will be reduced 6.1 Number of villages with steep slopes included in village forest

reserves.

6.2 Number of villages with farmers practicing soil conservation

techniques.

7. Individual incomes will be

boosted and diversified by

receiving REDD payments

7.1 Total value of REDD payments made per village including individual

and community development payments

7.2 Total value of REDD payments made to individuals in each village.

7.3 Total value of REDD payments allocated to community development

projects in each village

7.4 Number of women receiving REDD payments

7.5 Number of men receiving REDD payments

7.6 Number of children and dependents receiving REDD payments

7.7 Number, type and value of community development projects financed

with REDD revenues that are completed

8. Household incomes will be

more resilient to climate change

and higher as a result of training

8.1 Number and type of community development projects supported by

the project and number of beneficiaries per village

8.2 Gold Level: the project zone is in a low human development country

25

Community Impact Indicators

and investment in a range of

enterprise activities.

8.3 Gold Level: At least 50% of households within the lowest category of

well-being (e.g., poorest quartile) of the community are likely to benefit

substantially from the project.

9. REDD revenues will

contribute to improving public

services and infrastructure.

9.1 Changes in the public services available in villages (including primary

schools, secondary schools, clinics, meeting places, village offices,

improved water points) and transport infrastructure (quality and quantity

of roads).

10. Villages will have village

offices.

10.1 Number of villages with functioning villages offices with brick walls

and corrugated iron roofs.

7.4 Biodiversity Impact Monitoring Plan

The plan also describes the biodiversity variables to be monitored and the frequency of monitoring and

reporting. The monitoring variables have been selected on the basis of their direct link with the project’s

biodiversity objectives and anticipated impacts. The presenter took participant through the presentation with

specific emphasis on the biodiversity impacts and corresponding indicators whose details on the methods,

frequency of monitoring and reporting, means of verification, responsible, costs of monitoring and reference for

baseline value were provided in the handout summaries provide to each of the participants.

Impact Indicators

1. Populations of threatened

and endemic species persist

within the project area.

1.1 Presence of the Rondo galago within the project area. 1.2

Presence of three endangered and four vulnerable plant species

2. Extensive areas of

Eastern African Coastal Forests

continue to exist within the

project area

2.1 Hectares of forest within the project area per village

2.2 Forest edge index

3. There is less pressure on

the Eastern African Coastal

Forest from deforestation and

degradation drivers.

3.1 Deforestation rates and distribution relative to high biodiversity

areas.

4. Communities and other

stakeholders are actively

engaged in the management of

Eastern African Coastal Forest

within the project area.

4.1 Frequency of patrols of Village Forest Reserves

4.2 Annual budget available for VFR management

4.3 Number of villages with a forest management plan in place and

being implemented.

7.5 Risk monitoring plan

The presenter reminded the participants that in the CCB PDD presented in the earlier and the corresponding

first implementation report for the project, they both identify 6 risks potential to the project and this plan is

meant to monitor these risks. The monitoring variables have been selected on the basis of their direct link with

the project’s potential risks. The presenter took participant through the presentation with specific emphasis on

the potential risks and corresponding indicators whose details on the methods, frequency of monitoring and

reporting, means of verification, responsible, costs of monitoring and reference for baseline value were

provided in the handout summaries provide to each of the participants.

Potential Risk Indicators

1. Private investors purchase forests within the

project area and clear them for agriculture

1.1 Number of sales of village land to external

investors;

26

1.2 Area of forest within the project area sold to

private investors for non-forest land uses;

2. Internal conflict within communities over forest

access rights

2.1 Number of conflict events over forest access

rights per village per year.

3. Corruption in relation to the REDD payments

undermines the effectiveness and equitability of

REDD

3.1 Number of corruption events involving REDD

payments per year; value of resources involved; and

follow up action taken.

4. Corruption in relation to forest reserve

management results in forest clearance

4.1 Number of corruption events in relation to village

forest reserve management.

5. Political support for REDD in Tanzania is

withdrawn or legislation is changed to prevent

communities accessing REDD revenues directly

5.1 Policy statements supportive of / obstructive of

community access to REDD revenues.

6. REDD revenues are insufficient to incentivise

sustainable forest management

6.1 Number of communities who opt out of the

project due to insufficient revenues.

7.6 Communication plan

The presenter briefly went through the Project communication plan. The presentation in a summary form

looked at the communication objectives and potential stakeholders involved. A more detailed communication

plan was provided in the handout summary which was provided to each of the participants.

Communication objective Stakeholders involved

To ensure that community members are

consulted and informed about the proposed

project; the project design, conflict resolution

mechanism and monitoring plan.

MJUMITA, TFCG and Community members


informed about the progress of the project

Community members, MJUMITA, District Council, Ward

Representatives


informed about upcoming REDD payments

Village Councils, Village REDD sub-committees Local

Government (Ward and District)

To inform communities about upcoming

events

MJUMITA members and community members

To communicate about issues related to the

smooth implementation of the project.

MJUMITA members, village councils, VNRCs and MJUMITA

secretariat

7.7. Opinion / questions

Rashid Kibaba VC of Nandambi wanted a clarification on the difference between Rondo galago and

Noto galago

PM responded that Rondo galago is found in both forests Rondo and Noto, so Noto galago and Rondo galago

are the same species.

Shaibu Ali Nkulyungu secretary of VNRC in Kiwawa village, suggested that digital camera should be

provided to community based carbon surveyors, so that they can document evidence of what is

happening in the forests.

PM responded that it is possible to provide digital camera but it will take time. Communities could still set aside

some funds from their REDD revenues to buy those cameras for each village.

27

In seeking for clarification, Masoud A. Masoud WEO of Nangalu noted that the map in the handouts

shows that Kipunga sub-village is in Milola village, while it is supposed to be in Muungano village. Is it

a typing error?

CDC responded that in the document it is shown that Kipunga sub-village is in Muungano, but the name

appears in both villages. There was a contradiction and finally Mr. Chairman who is a Mayor, instructed

councillors and village heads of Milola and Muungano to settle the matter.

Restoration of natural forests and Establishing of Firelines

The Councillor for special seats (Tanangongoro Ward) wanted to know if there are plans to restore natural

forests, because village forests are natural forests, thus, due to the illegal activities going on in the forests it is

likely that the forests will disappear. Secondly two months ago they went to Nainokwe and Kilolwe villages in

Kilwa district for a study tour, the villagers made fire lines around their forest so as to protect it from fire in case

fire incidents occur. It could be better if villages in the project site could use the same approach.

CDC responded that fire breaks / fire lines are effective but are expensive. Nevertheless villagers should stop

burning forests.

There was a suggestion directed to Technical Advisers (TFCG and MJUMITA) that the project is

phasing out and yet there are so many things / activities which are not yet completed. Villages will not

be able to complete on their own. For instance farmers need more training in conservation agriculture.

It would be better if the project could be extended for 3 more years so that more impact should be

realised.

Councillors insist on more trainings of conservation agriculture should be provided to villagers.

8.0 Way forward and Closing remarks

The Project Manager Ms Bettie Luwuge on behalf of the project team, thanked all participants for their

invaluable opinions, contributions and active participation during this important process of the project. She

promised to incorporate all the amendments attributed to the workshop in the documents before they are put

onto the website. She informed the participants that the next step after the meeting was:

To document the proceedings of this particular meeting, secondly,

She kindly requested that all the representatives from the villages communicate everything that they

have discussed to the rest of their communities.

The project team will go to each village to communicate on the process of the validation and

verification of the project

The Validators and verifiers responsible for auditing the project will be visiting the participating villages

in a few months time.

After these few words, she welcomed the Chairman of the Council (Hon Makwinya) to welcome the acting

DED to make some closing remarks. He thanked the project team and reminded them that both district

councils, are there to serve the people. He continued saying that the REDD project has been implementing

participatory forest management (PFM) which is the Forest Act of 1998, and which the districts have been

doing the same. Also, the project has been involved with preparation of VLUPs which is the implementation of

the Land Act No 5 of 1999, which the district councils are doing the same too. Thus the district councils

definitely will continue with to support the activities that the REDD project has started, although they will not be

able to make REDD payments. Finally the workshop was closed.

28

Annex 1:- List of Participants for the PDD Sharing Workshop in Lindi on 4th February 2014

List of Participants during the CCB and VCS PDD Sharing Workshop, 4th Feb 2014, Lindi Town

No. Name of Participant Gender Village/Institution Title

1 Kitenge Selemani Male Nandambi WEO

2 Rashidi S. Kibaba Male Nandambi Village chair

3 Bakari A. Napete Male Nandambi Community Communicator

4 Mustafa Likokola Male Nandambi CBT

5 Bakari Nampoka Male Kikomolela Ward Councilor

6 Mohamed H Masoud Male Likwaya Community representative

7 Yususf S. Masoud Male Nangaru Division Secretary

8 Rashidi S. Rashidi Male Muungano VEO

9 Rajabu Mtopela Male Muungano VNRC

10 Juma Mnjangali Male Muungano Village Chairman

11 Joseph Msofe Male Mkombamosi Teacher

12 Selemani Mpilipil Male Makumba Village Representative

13 Mohamed Makunda Male Ruhoma Secretary MHIMIRU

14 Saidi Katambi Male Ruhoma Village Chair

15 Omari Maluva Male Ruhoma Village representative

16 Somoe Mtiko Female Milola Village representative

17 Hassan A. Mpanga Male Kinyope Chair MHIMIRU

18 Mussa Pilanga Male Kinyope Village chair

19 Athumani Kimete Male Mkanga 1 Village Chair

20 Mussa Makuwango Male Mkanga 1 VNRC

21 Anzigar Lilas Male Mkanga 1 VEO

22 Mwalimu K Tanga Male Likwaya Chair

23 Selemani Msaka Male Likwaya VNRC

24 Mathew Kuwena Male Likwaya VLUMC

25 Mussa Mangulu Male Kiwawa Village Chair

26 Hamisi Nawako Male Mkombamosi Farmer

27 Abdallah Liwiku Male Mkombamosi VLUPC

28 Mbaraka Liuma Male Mkombamosi VEO

29 Hamisi Nankoka Male Tandangongoro WEO

30 Rashidi Shaweji Male Mkombamosi Village Chair

31 Rashidi Mpwili Male Makumba VEO

32 Mikidadi Pangani Male Makumba Village communicator

33 Salum Liloko Male Likwaya VEO

34 Pukia Magwesi Male Ngapa Division secretary

35 Hereswida Mathew Female Matimba WEO

36 Abdulaziz Ahmed Male Chanel Ten news Journalist

37 Hussein Mapua Male Lindi DC DBKO

38 Saidi Mussa Ngapaliji Male Muungano VNRC

39 Ismail Mandambwe Male Nandambi Ward Councilor,

Tandangongoro

40 Shafii H. Saidi Male Milola WEO

41 Abdallah Kalambo Male Milola Ward Councilor Milola,

42 Sina Nyanga female Moka Division Secretary Nangaru

43 Selemani Makule Male Muungano Ward Councilor Nangaru

44 Mandred Ngombo Male Rutamba Ward Councilor Rutamba

29

No. Name of Participant Gender Village/Institution Title

45 Saidi Mawala Male Mkanga 1 REDD committee

46 Thabiti Chiutila Male Milola Division Secretary

47 Abdallah Mtimbule Male Kiwawa Ward Councilor Kiwawa

48 Omari Chabangile Male Rutamba WEO

49 Maulid Mangongo Male Kiwawa WEO

50 Ally Mponda Male Kiwawa VEO

51 Saidi Liochocho Male Kiwawa Treasurer network

52 Shaibu Mkulyungu Male Kiwawa VNRC

53 Ally Abdallah Male Milola Community Communicator

54 Bibie Mtalika Female Makumba VSL rep

55 Issa Pilipili Male Milola Chair

56 Gilben Chitanda Male Ruhoma VEO

57 Hamisi Mwinyimmadi Male Kinyope VEO

58 Juma Mbule Male Kinyope Bee keeping

59 Hamisi Mzee Male Milola VEO

60 Mohamed Chimbuli Male Manispaa Forest Officer

61

Bettie Luwuge Female TFCG, Dar es

Salaam

Project Manager

62

Fadhili Tuwa Male TFCG Dar es

Salaam

Driver

63 Mwila Mbegu Female TFCG Lindi MEC

64 Mohamed Nyamangaro Male TFCG Lindi Agriculture Officer -REDD

65 Baraka Samweli Male MJUMITA Kilosa CMO- REDD

66 Joel Mbasha Male TFCG Lindi Driver

67 Erick Mchia Male Lindi DC Driver

68 Nuru Nguya Female TFCG Lindi CDC

69 Ally Namila Male Lindi DC DAO

70 Abdallah Ndembo Male Lindi DC DALDO

71 Sharifa Mwango female Lindi DC Ag DAS

72 Manace Nkuli Male Lindi DC Ag DLO

73 Apiyo Ezra Male Lindi MC MNRO

74 W.E Mwailolo Male LMC MLUPO

75 Rukia Jaffu female LMC MCDO

76 Miriam Mgweno female LMC MPO

77 Joyce Kazana female LDC D-Fish O

78 Stanford Mahimbo Male LDC DFO

79 Nuguye Tama female LDC DCDO

80 Salum Mpili Male LDC DPO

81 Rashidi Tondoro Male MP representative

82 Grace Mbaruku female LDC DED

83 Mathei Makwinya Male LDC Chair LDC

84 Selemani Ngaweje Male LDC DLLFO

85 Charles Mwaipopo Male LDC DNRO

86 Danford Piliza Male LDC Driver DED

87 Someni Mteleka Male MJUMITA CEC

88 Nike Doggart female TFCG STA

89 Theron Brown Male MJUMITA TA

90 Habib Nassoro Male Matipa Lindi

91 Shadhry Mohad Male Matipa Lindi

30

31

Annex 2: Workshop Program for PDD Sharing workshop in Lindi on 4th Feb 2014

MKUTANO WA WADAU WA KUWASILISHA ANDIKO LA USANIFU WA MRADI WA

“MKUHUMI Unaotekelezwa na Jamii katika Misitu ya Pwani Tanzania”

TAREHE 4 FEBRUARI, 2014 KATIKA UKUMBI WA MM-LINDI

Muda Tukio Mhusika

2.00-3.00 Kuwasili na kujiandikisha Wote

3.00-3.15 Maelezo ya Utangulizi kuhusu Warsha na utambulisho Nuru/Mwaipopo

3.10- 3.30 Ufunguzi wa Warsha Mkuu wa Wilaya

3.30-4.00 Maelezo ya Utangulizi Kuhusu Mchakato wa Kuandaa

Andiko la Usanifu wa Mradi na Utaratibu wa

Uthibitishaji wa Miradi ya MKUHUMI

Bettie

4.00-4.30 Andiko la Usanifu wa Mradi la Viwango vya Jamii,

Tabianchi na Bionuwai.

Bettie/Someni

4.30-5.00 Mapumziko na Chai Wote

5.00-5.30 Majadiliano kuhusu Andiko la Usanifu wa Mradi Wote

5.30- 6.00 Taarifa ya Utekelezaji wa Mradi kwa Ajili ya

Uthibitishaji

Nuru

6.00-6.30 Majadiliano kuhusu taarifa ya utekelezaji Wote

6.30-6.50 Mpango wa ufuatiliaji wa athari za kijamii bionuwai, na

mawasiliano ya wadau.

Someni

6.50-7.00 Majadiliano Wote

7.00-8.00 Chakula cha Mchana Wote

8.00-8.30 Andiko la Usanifu wa Mradi la Viwango vya Hiari vya

Uthibitishaji wa Miradi ya Hewa Ukaa

Theron/Someni

8.30-9.00 Majadiliano Wote

9.00-10.00 Wawakilishi wa Vijiji kuelezea hali ya kupungua kwa

ufyekaji na uharibifu wa misitu katika kila kijiji

Wenyeviti wa

vijiji

10.00-10.30 Majadiliano na mipango ya baadaye Wote

10.30-11.30 Matangazo na kufunga Nuru na

Mwakilishi wa

Wilaya

32

Annex 3: Guest of Honour Speech during the officiating of the PDD sharing Workshop

HOTUBA YA UFUNGUZI WA MKUTANO WA WADAU WA MRADI WA MKUHUMI WA KUJADILI ANDIKO

LA USANIFU WA MRADI LILILOANDALIWA KWA AJILI YA UHAKIKI ILI MRADI USAJILIWE KATIKA

VIWANGO VYA TABIANCHI, JAMII NA BIONUWAI NA VIWANGO VYA HIARI VYA MIRADI YA HEWA

ILIYOTOLEWA NA MHESHIWA DR. NASSORO, MKUU WA WA WILAYA YA LINDI TAREHE 04

FEBRUARI, 2014 KATIKA HOTELI YA DOUBLE M, LINDI

Mheshimiwa Mwenyekiti wa Halmashauri ya Wilaya ya Lindi,

Waheshimiwa Madiwani wa Halmashauri za Manispaa ya Lindi na Wilaya ya Lindi,

Mheshimiwa Mjumbe wa Bodi ya Mtandao wa Jamii wa Usimamizi wa Misitu Tanzania (MJUMITA)

Kanda ya Kusini

Katibu Tawala wa Wilaya ya Lindi,

Wakurugenzi wa Halmshauri za Manispaa na Wilaya ya Lindi, Wenyeviti wa vijiji,

33

Nimeelezwa kuwa wataalam wetu wa mradi wa TFCG na MJUMITA wameshaandaa maandiko haya na

lililobaki ni sisi wadau wa mradi kuyapitia maandiko haya, kuyatolea maoni, na kuyafanya yawe yetu na

kuwajulisha wananchi wenzetu. Hatua itakayofuata baada ya hapo ni kufika kwa wageni watalaam wa

kimataifa katika vijiji vyetu ili kuhakiki na kuthibitisha usahihi wa taarifa zilizopo kwenye maandiko haya ya

usanifu wa mradi.

Kutokana na umuhimu wa masuala haya na ukweli kuwa maandiko haya yatahakikiwa na wataalam wa

kimataifa, napenda kuchukua fursa hii kuelezea masuala muhimu machache katika maandiko haya ambayo

wananchi wote wanatakiwa kufahamu. Baadhi ya masuala hayo ni pamoja na:-

Muda wa kuanza utekelezaji wa mradi kuwa ni kwa kipindi cha miaka 10 kuanzia 2012 hadi 2022;

Eneo la mradi kuwa ni maeneo yote yenye misitu yaliyo katika eneo la vijiji vya mradi;

Makubaliano yenu mliyoyafanya kuwa, Mtandao wa Jamii wa Usimamizi Misitu Tanzania (MJUMITA)

ndio watakuwa wasimamizi wa utekelezaji wa mradi na watawajibika kwa wasajili wa mradi kwa niaba

ya vijiji vyote vinavyotekeleza mradi;

Mipaka ya vijiji vya mradi, namna ya kupashana habari, uendelevu wa mradi na namna ya utatuzi wa

migogoro inayoweza kujitokeza wakati wa utekelezaji wa mradi.

Aidha, andiko hili linaanisha tahadhari mbalimbali zinazotakiwa kuchukuliwa na wadau wakati wa utekelezaji

wa mradi ambazo kama hazitaangaliwa vizuri zinaweza kupelekea kushindwa kwa mradi huu. Baadhi ya

tahadhari hizo ni pamoja na:-

Uwezekano wa wawekezaji kununua maeneo ya misitu kwa ajili ya shughuli zitakazopelekea ufyekaji

wa misitu hiyo katika eneo la mradi;

Migogoro baina ya wanajamii kuhusu matumizi ya msitu na kugawanyika kwa maeneo ya utawala wa

vijiji kunaweza kukwamisha shughuli za mradi na kupelekea ufyekaji wa misitu;

Vitendo vya rushwa katika malipo ya fedha za MKUHUMI na shughuli za usimamizi wa misitu;

Nchi kutokuendelea na jitihada za utekelezaji wa MKUHUMI na na kupelekea Tanzania kutokuwa na

sifa ya kutelekeza miradi ya MKUHUMI;

Fedha za MKUHUMI kuto kutoa motisha ya kutosha kwa jamii kwa ajili ya usimamizi endelevu wa

misitu na kupelekea wanajamii kukata tama na kuendelea na ufyekaji wa misitu.

Mabibi na Mabwana, masuala yote haya tumekuwa tukiyashughulikia kwa pamoja tangu kuanza kwa mradi

huu. Naomba tuendelee na mshikamano wetu ili kufanikisha kusudi la mradi huu kwa ajili ya maendeleo ya

wananchi wetu. Katika shughuli ya leo, tunatarajia kutoa mawazo yetu katika makabrasha yatakayowasilishwa

hapa ambayo ni andiko la usanifu wa mradi na viwango vya tabianchi, jamii, bionuwai na viwango vya hiari

vya miradi ya kupunguza uzalishaji wa gesijoto, taarifa ya utekelezaji wa mradi (kwa ajili ya uhakiki), mpango

wa tathmini ya athari za bionuwai, jamii na mawasiliano ya wadau. Ni matumaini yangu kuwa tutakuwa makini

kuwasikiliza wataalam na tutatoa michango yetu ili kuboresha maandiko haya.

Mabibi na Mabwana, naomba nisichukue muda wenu mwingi, niwakaribishe tena ndani ya manispaa yetu

tulivu, kama sitapata fursa tena ya kuongea niwatakie safari njema watakaokuwa wanasafiri baada ya

kukamilika kwa shughuli yetu.

Baada ya kusema hayo, nasema Mkutano Umefunguliwa. Asanteni sana.

Annex 4 Photos during the workshop

Date post:	22-Feb-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	doancong
View:	217 times
Download:	1 times