Project: Food and Nutritional Security Impact of Mekong Dams – Research and Capacity Building Initiative Project Code: MEK 0006-60-33 Project Evaluation Report Key findings and Recommendations Prepared for Oxfam Australia Phnom Penh Cambodia Prepared by Sokhem Pech, PhD PCSCR Ltd 260, 24 th Street East, North Vancouver, BC, Canada (With logistic support from Inland Fisheries Research and Development Institute (IFReDI) staff, Mr. Touch Bunthong, and Mr. Seum Nong, and provincial Fisheries Administration Cantonments officials) Version 1 August 11, 2014
Transcript
Project: Food and Nutritional Security Impact of Mekong Dams – Research and Capacity Building Initiative
Project Code: MEK 0006-60-33
Project Evaluation Report
Key findings and Recommendations Prepared for
Oxfam Australia
Phnom Penh Cambodia
Prepared by Sokhem Pech, PhD
PCSCR Ltd
260, 24th Street East, North Vancouver, BC, Canada
(With logistic support from Inland Fisheries Research and Development Institute (IFReDI) staff, Mr. Touch Bunthong, and Mr. Seum Nong, and provincial Fisheries Administration Cantonments officials)
3.0 FINDINGS IN RELATION TO THE SIX KEY QUESTIONS ......................................................... 6
3.1 DISCUSSION OF OVERALL RESULTS ..................................................................................... 6
3.2 KEY QUESTION 1: CHANGES IN POLICIES, PRACTICES, IDEAS, BELIEFS/ATTITUDES IN SPECIFIC INSTITUTIONS, GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS AS A RESULT OF THE PROJECT ............ 9
3.2.1 Project contribution to the national knowledge bank regarding the potential impacts of hydropower dams ........................................................... 9
3.2.2 How findings were disseminated within relevant government institutions .................................................................................................... 10
3.2.3 Acceptance of findings by key policy and decision-makers ............................. 12
3.2.4 Potential for research and advocacy by IFReDI and partners to influence hydropower development decision-making in Cambodia ............................... 13
3.2.5 Level of influence on national policies and strategies ..................................... 14
3.2.6 Research influence, or potential for influencing future FiA planning .............. 14
3.2.7 Any unintended political consequences of the research and advocacy activities........................................................................................................ 15
3.2.8 Availability of resources to influence thinking on hydropower impacts (format, media and frequency) ...................................................................... 15
3.3 KEY QUESTION 2: IFREDI /PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS IN WORKING WITH OTHERS IN VARIOUS STAGES OF THE PROJECT ................................................................................... 16
3.3.2 Significance of the partnership model (its make-up and function).................. 16
3.3.3 Experience of participation for Technical Advisory Group members ............... 17
3.3.4 Success Factors of the Technical Advisory Group (membership and/or model merit) ................................................................................................. 17
3.3.5 Mechanisms for finding compromise between the different funding schedules and requirements ......................................................................... 17
3.3.6 Project contribution to collaborative process with other actors ..................... 18
3.3.7 Involvement of participating villages ............................................................. 18
3.3.8 Unintended consequences of TAG model or village-level engagement ........... 19
3.3.9 What stakeholders liked the most about the working arrangements .............. 19
3.3.10 What stakeholders liked the least about the working arrangements .............. 19
3.3.11 Suggestion for improving working arrangements ........................................... 20
3.4 KEY QUESTION 3: LEARNING, AND SHARING OF LESSONS IN THE PROJECT ....................... 20
3.4.1 Evidence of increased understanding of likely dam impacts by target villages .......................................................................................................... 20
iii | P a g e
3.4.2 Evidence of increased understanding of likely dam impacts amongst key policy-makers ................................................................................................ 21
3.4.3 Ways to maximise infiltration and understanding of research findings amongst targeted groups .............................................................................. 22
3.4.4 Potential for Technical Advisory Group model replication .............................. 23
3.4.5 Sharing project learning among other stakeholders or interest groups external to the project................................................................................... 23
3.4.6 Capacity of IFReDI to work and cope with multi-donors and complex projects ......................................................................................................... 23
3.4.7 IFReDI capacity to mobilise resources and integrate their plan into FiA and national plan .......................................................................................... 24
3.5 KEY QUESTION 4: CHANGES IN WOMEN AND MEN’S LIVES AND LIKELIHOOD THAT THESE WILL BE SUSTAINED ............................................................................................... 24
3.5.1 Project impacts – intended or unintended - on the lives of people in participating villages...................................................................................... 24
3.6 KEY QUESTION 5: PROMOTION OF GENDER JUSTICE ........................................................ 24
3.6.1 Level of women and men’s involvement in and benefit from the project ....... 24
3.6.2 Research and communication of gender-specific impacts of dams ................. 25
3.7 KEY QUESTION 6: HOW EFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENTLY PROJECT RESOURCES WERE USED ................................................................................................................................ 25
3.7.1 Suitability of Project design ........................................................................... 25
3.7.2 Suggestion for change in project design and resources allocation for a future similar project ..................................................................................... 26
3.7.3 Components’ significance in the project design ............................................. 27
5.1 SHORT TERM RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................. 29
5.1.1 To Continue Driving for Sustainability ............................................................ 29
5.2 MEDIUM AND LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................ 29
5.2.1 To improve and replicate this model in future projects .................................. 29
5.2.2 To be more focused and strategic in maximising acceptance and absorption .................................................................................................... 31
5.2.3 To invest more in levelling the playing field for affected communities ............ 31
5.2.4 To use most appropriate format and media ................................................... 32
Figure 1.1 Key Evaluation Questions and their Linkages with Evaluation Specific Objectives ............................................................................................................. 2
Figure 2.1 Evaluation Implementation Process ....................................................................... 4 Figure 2.2 Interviewees Gender Profiling ............................................................................... 5 Figure 2.3 Interviewees Affiliations ........................................................................................ 5 Figure 3.1 Project Primary stakeholders and other Actors ...................................................... 6 Figure 3.2 Level of Appreciation of Project Contribution to related Knowledge ...................... 9 Figure 3.3 Perception on Dissemination Level ...................................................................... 11 Figure 3.4 Perception on Decision Makers’ Acceptance/Appreciation .................................. 12 Figure 3.5 Perception on Potential for Downstream Uses .................................................... 14 Figure 3.6 Perception on Project Partnership Model ............................................................ 16 Figure 3.7 Perception on Level of Involvement of other Actors ............................................ 18 Figure 3.8 Perception on Level of Involvement of Villagers .................................................. 19 Figure 3.9 Perception on Level of Villagers Understanding ................................................... 21 Figure 3.10 Perception on Change Level of Policy Makers’ Understanding ............................. 22 Figure 3.11 Budget Allocation (IFReDI, 2013) ......................................................................... 26 Figure 5.1 Continuum Knowledge Management .................................................................. 30
TABLES
Table 3.1 Project Scope and Evaluation Objectives ............................................................... 7 Table 3.2 Dissemination Workshops and Participants Profiles ............................................. 10
APPENDICES
Appendix A1 Evaluation Terms of Reference Appendix A2 Semi Structured Questionnaires Appendix A3 Progress/Achievement Against Project Log Frame
v | P a g e
ACRONYMS
CI Conservation International
CNMC Cambodia National Mekong Committee
CSO Civil Society Organizations (NGOs, Academia and Community Based Organizations)
DANIDA Danish International Development Agency
EU European Union
FACT Fisheries Action Coalition Team
FiA Fisheries Administration
IFReDI Inland Fisheries Research & Development Institute
IR International Rivers
MAFF Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
MEL Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MIH Ministry of Industry and Handicrafts
MME Ministry of Mines and Energy
MOH Ministry of Health
MOWRAM Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology
MRC Mekong River Commission
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
QA/QC Quality Assurance and Quality Control
R4D Research for Development
RGC Royal Government of Cambodia
TAG Technical Advisory Group
TWGF Technical Working Group on Fisheries
UNICEF United Nations Children Fund
WWF World Wide Fund for Nature
vi | P a g e
SUMMARY
Between early 2011 and September 2013 Oxfam Australia with other development partners funded the ‘Food and Nutritional Security Impact of Mekong Dams – Research and Capacity Building Initiative’ (the project) with the objective of increasing the capacity of the Fisheries Administration (FiA) and civil society organisations (CSOs) in Cambodia to influence government decision-makers to secure and sustainable livelihoods for rural people potentially affected by proposed Mekong mainstream dams.
The project supported the Inland Fisheries Research and Development Institute (IFReDI) of the Fisheries Administration to conduct a research project aimed at understanding the implications of basin development activities, particularly hydropower dam construction, on Cambodian national food security. The project comprised a two-pronged approach: increasing the influencing capacity of the Fisheries Administration (FiA) within the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) (the insider approach); and building the capacity of civil society organizations and affected community members (the outsider approach). The purpose of the project was to:
“Support the government agency – Fisheries Administration (FiA) and its Inland Fisheries Research and Development Institute (IFReDI) – to product scientific information on impacts of mainstream hydropower dams on food security (nutrition value) for its official use in informing policy decision, and for other users such as civil society organizations and individuals to use them for their advocacy and research works”.
Oxfam, the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) joined with IFReDI, WorldFish Center, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and Conservation International (CI) to form the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) that governed the project.
As the project concluded, Oxfam commissioned a summative/impact project evaluation. The main objective of the evaluation is “to determine the effectiveness of the project’s capacity building and to provide guidance on effectiveness of the project governance and policy influencing activities”. The evaluation was qualitative and quantitative in nature. Specifically the evaluation addressed the objectives, key questions and sub-questions as defined in the evaluation terms of reference (TOR); noting that these questions ask about broader impacts and influence (such as community-level changes) which were beyond the scope of the actual project design and objectives. The semi-structured questionnaire and list of key informants were developed and approved by the Oxfam in consultation with IFReDI. A total of 87 interviewees were interviewed using either semi-structured interviews or focus group discussions (latter for local Community leaders/members only) in late June and July 2014. The interviewees were selected and agreed upon by Oxfam and IFREDI based on the set criteria. Only 23% of the total interviewees (#20/87) were women.
FINDINGS IN RELATION TO THE SIX KEY QUESTIONS
In general, the project has contributed to addressing power imbalances through producing and using scientific information from the Fisheries Administration in its communication and discussion about dam and food security/nutrition for informing decision-makers. The project documents did not indicate that it was its main focus to help build the capacity of CSOs and affected community members in a more meaningful deliberation and consultation on the dam development and related mitigation measures.
vii | P a g e
During implementation, the project was extended to over 18 months. Many intended outputs and knowledge products were produced and disseminated, but other deliverables were not delivered as originally planned. The key stumbling blocks encountered during the implementation included: prolonged recruitment and mobilisation of consultants and project team; flooding in 2011; performance issues with consultants; internal coordination; long approval process in the Fisheries Administration and the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF); and budget issues.
Key Question 1: Changes in policies, practices, ideas, beliefs/attitudes in specific institutions, groups and individuals as a result of the project
The majority (83%) of the national interviewees close to the project were of the opinion that the project has contributed remarkably to the knowledge base around fisheries, nutrition and the potential impacts from dams in time for other dam debates related to the merits and costs of hydro dams including the discussions related to the proposed Don Sahong main stream dam in Lao PDR. However, inconsistencies between the two datasets of the dam impacts, nutrition vulnerability, and information in the synthesis report still need to be addressed.
In general, dissemination was quite good among the partners and with highly interested CSOs through the project Technical Advisory Group (TAG) and the project’s workshops. However, the dissemination was less than what had been envisaged in the communication plan. The higher government leaders and interested private developers/investors, and influencers at the national and local levels must be targeted much better.
The potential for uses of the findings for further research, and advocacy was found to be high. It was observed that the National Assembly invites the Ministers to appear in the National Assembly question and answer sessions more often. This fact would certainly drive a need for scientific information. The recent decision at a Mekong River Commission (MRC) meeting to take the Don Sahong dam project to prior consultation process presents another opportunity in using this downstream evidence base in that process.
There are concerns about the long term sustainability of the project outcomes and about the extent to which policy makers and other stakeholders want to listen to and take it into account or without continued efforts from the Fisheries Administration and other partners.
Efforts have been made for including the project key findings into the Government’s policy platform - Rectangular Strategy Phase III (RSIII) for 2013-2018 and final National Strategic Development Plan (NSDP) 2014-2018, and in updating of the Fisheries Administration strategy (2009-2018). The research is expected to be used by the new projects that are being approved by the development partners (EU, and Oxfam and WWF) for downstream works at Don Sahong, and fish passage for lower Se San 2.
The experiences were different for various end users. Members or observers of the project Technical Advisory Group were involved more regularly. Other actors at the national and sub-national levels received the information much less frequently. The knowledge products were designed for the policy makers, researchers and officials with higher education and related technical background.
Key Question 2: IFReDI /project effectiveness in working with others in various stages of the project
Most of the national interviewees familiar with the project and the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) (85% or 12/14) found that this partnership approach was effective. The make-up and
viii | P a g e
presence of the TAG as a vehicle for monitoring and strategising around the project was very important.
Efforts were made to reach out to other actors. Besides five dissemination workshop, the project team provided regular reports to the Technical Working Group on Fisheries (TWGF) (via quarterly meetings) and Sub-Group on dams that also comprised of the members from development partners, Government and CSOs. The national and local CSOs stressed that while considering the partnership model and government ownership important, the roles of the key partners in providing technical input review, and peer-pressuring for a timely and effective dissemination/disclosure must be strengthened.
Key Question 3: Learning, and sharing project lessons
The interviews at the sub-national level revealed some general understanding of likely dam impacts. However, it is hard to say with certainty that it was solely attributed to this project, as the project was focusing more on raising the awareness of the targeted decision-makers at the regional and national levels.
Both national and sub-national interviewees concurred on an urgent need to do much more in the coming years to maximise infiltration and understanding of the findings among both the communities and decision-makers.
The FiA and IFReDI senior management were of the opinion that capacity was available for carrying out some technical works. The CSOs representatives argued that IFReDI’s capacity should be strengthened significantly and make their mandates and target clear on what they want to achieve. The coordination mechanism with other relevant departments in FiA and MAFF needs to be improved too.
IFReDI seemed to have gained pride and confidence from the project implementation. But IFReDI still needs to improve its performance and fundraising capability so that they will be able to mobilise more resources and to contribute to FiA and national plan.
Key Question 4: Changes in women and men’s lives and likelihood that these will be sustained
It was not possible to gauge the community-level or gender-specific changes from the project since this was not a core or direct focus of the project. The research only provided data on the importance of fisheries, and fish protein for communities, for women, and for children. This limitation might be due to the priorities set by the partners for the first step of this complex modality. The Fisheries Administration and development partners thought that findings relating to vulnerability of women (especially expectant mothers) and children under 5 years old were powerful and would be used for designing proper responses to ensure healthy human resources and citizens.
Key Question 5: Promotion of gender justice
Gender mainstreaming was not explicitly expressed in the project design. As a result the community and women were not all involved in the project establishment and focus of this research.1 The project team involved women in the research project activities through: 1) data
1 There were only two female members in TAG, and one female project team member (international consultant on nutrition), and
among 18 numerators from MOP and IFReDI, there were four women. The IFReDI project management team was all male.
ix | P a g e
collection though a household consumption survey; 2) examining specifically at nutritionally vulnerable groups such as children under five years and also pregnant and lactating mothers; and 3) consultation and dissemination workshops.
Focus on the gender-specific impacts of hydropower dams was not explicitly envisaged in the project document, except for the focus on the nutrition vulnerability for the women, pregnant and young mothers, and kids under 5 years old. This limitation might be due to the budget constraints and priorities set by the partners for the first step of this complex modality.
Key Question 5: How effectively and efficiently project resources were used
All TAG members interviewed thought that the design was sound given different the priorities and focus of all partners in the group, and that problems encountered were in implementation rather than problems with the design. For the future projects, it was suggested that the design and scoping of the project should look for a different methodology which has a stronger gender agenda; a more regular and empowering community process, and also a more consistent approach to outreach using the local CSOs/networks in collaboration with relevant local authorities. The national and provincial interviewees suggested the communication component and the management team (communication core members, and other component leaders) should be created to work on the common work plan and regular monitoring, evaluation and learning.
The national interviewees recommended that the dependency of outcomes from various components, phases with concrete milestones, and the risk management and stakeholder engagement/communication strategies must be dealt with, implemented and closely monitored.
Some of the interviewees recommended that terms of reference must be in place for all key bodies in the project governance and positions including an overall coordinator who can propose ways in which integration and collaboration between the components (and the projects within them) can be improved without affecting inter-dependencies.
Most of the national interviewees suggested that a robust quality assurance and quality control mechanism and Technical Advisory Group must be in place and that all components are equally important. High quality research and knowledge products and the policy relevant research project could not achieve its objectives without communication, effective packaging, transmitting and feed-back mechanism and continued improvement.
KEY CONCLUSIONS
The project team and partners have every reason to be proud of the outcomes of the project in spite of the challenge and novelty of this partnership model. The combination of the insider and outsider approaches was another positive aspect of the project.
The Fisheries Administration is found to be an appropriate channel to deliver the message to the top level of policymakers. But it will require a strong commitment, robust and well-resourced communication and sustainability plan. There are good networks among key stakeholders such as the Technical Working Group on Fisheries, the Sub Group on dams and the project Technical Advisory Group - spaces to share and work experiences with many key stakeholders.
The Technical Advisory Group was highly instrumental and its model can be replicated for this highly technically/scientifically challenging and highly politically charged project.
In conclusion, the combination of the insider and outsider approaches is very positive and appealing aspect of the project. This strategy is a good one and can be strengthened by a more
x | P a g e
nuanced and targeted influencing strategy among decision makers and key agencies, and also be complemented by strengthened community and CSO capacity building (more community empowering approaches).
RECOMMENDATIONS
The partnership model demonstrated its relevance and replication potential. There are lots of lessons to learn from and for improvement. The recommendations are suggested and grouped into short-term, medium and long term as follows:
For the short term, the IFReDI and FiA need to continue with their improvement and dissemination of knowledge products and information on dam impacts, fisheries, food security and nutrition and other related products. It is important that technical and financial support will be mobilised to support these activities both from the existing partners and from the Fisheries Administration/Government source.
Oxfam and partners should consider continuing supporting and using/sharing their useful experience with all partners and communities to influence policy development and basic rights including rights to information, equitable development, fair compensation, and better livelihood and well-being.
For the medium to long term, the emphasis should be placed on the following:
1) To improve and replicate this model in future projects: IFReDI/FiA and partners should continue to replicate this modality and policy relevance research by scaling it up or scaling it out to other locations. Future project design should cover related phases (for continuity) and key milestones, address dependency of outcomes from various components, and include rigorous risk management and monitoring and evaluation, as well as with improving knowledge management - feed-back mechanism, and addressing internal inconsistency. The qualification, commitment and aptitude of the project team, especially the consultants are the key to a success.
2) To be more focused and strategic in maximizing acceptance and absorption: Considering the decision-making culture and political system in Cambodia, the future projects or future collaborations should assess (and resource) how to present ‘evidence-based” research into various stages of policy process, improving informed EIA, and how to reach actual decision-makers, key influencer and opinion makers etc.
3) To invest more in levelling the playing field for affected communities: The project’s focus should be on the community’s capacity and capacity development. It is not focusing on technical, managerial or engineering, but has to do with power relation and conflict management, psychology; social adaptation, financial resources, incentives and motivation interact to shape mutually acceptable outcomes. Local CSOs and existing networks can contribute more in improving stakeholders’ inputs/feedback and consultation and dissemination in a more cost effective and long term impact-based manner.
4) To use most appropriate format and media, and through a more targeted and sustained dissemination using appropriate forum, format and media.
Future research
It is recommended that the assessment will be conducted to identify capacity and knowledge gaps and needs. This assessment is considered as an important starting point for the knowledge management which will guide the planning and development of all relevant activities moving
xi | P a g e
forward. Some good suggestions gathered during this evaluation include in addition to the information on nutrition and food security impacts, more accurate information should be provided.
MANAGEMENT RESPONSE
The following management response includes input from IFREDI as the research host institution and from Oxfam as the commissioning agency for the evaluation.
IFREDI/ FIA Response
Recommendations
The partnership model demonstrated its relevance and replication potential. There are a number of lessons to be learned and areas for improvement. The recommendations are suggested and grouped into short-term, medium and long term as follows:
In the short term, the IFReDI and FiA need to continue with their improvement and dissemination of knowledge products and information on dam impacts, fisheries, food security and nutrition and other related products. It is important that technical and financial support is mobilized to support these activities, both from the existing partners and from the FiA/Government sources.
Oxfam and its development partners should consider continuing to support using and sharing this useful experience with all partners and communities in order to influence policy development and to promote basic rights including rights to information, equitable development, fair compensation, better livelihood and well-being.
In the medium to long term, the emphasis should be placed on the following:
1. To improve and replicate this model in future projects: IFReDI/FiA and partners should continue to replicate this research relevant to policy by scaling it up or widening it out to other locations. Future project design should address related phases (for continuity), include key milestones and address the inter-dependency of outcomes from various components. It is important to maintain rigorous risk management and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E), as well as improving knowledge management and feed-back mechanisms and addressing internal inconsistencies. The level of qualification, commitment and aptitude of the Project Team (especially the consultants) is the key to success.
2. To be more focused and strategic in maximizing acceptance and absorption: Considering the decision-making culture and political system in Cambodia, future projects or collaborations should assess (and resource) how to present ‘evidence-based” research at various stages of the policy development process, improving and informing EIAs, and be strategic on how to reach decision-makers, key influencers and opinion makers
3. To invest more in levelling the ‘playing field’ for communities at stake: The project’s focus should be on the community’s capacity and development. It is not focusing on technical, managerial or engineering capacities. It is to do with power relations and conflict management, psychology; social adaptation, financial resources, incentives, benefit sharing, economic and environment trade-offs and motivation to interact to shape mutually acceptable outcomes. Local CSOs and existing networks can contribute more in improving
xii | P a g e
stakeholders’ inputs/feedback, facilitating consultation and dissemination in a manner more likely to achieve more cost effective and long term impact.
4. To use the most appropriate media formats and plan more targeted and sustained dissemination with the use of a range of communications tools.
Future research
It is recommended that an assessment will be conducted to identify capacity and knowledge gaps and needs. This assessment is considered as an important starting point for knowledge management that will guide the planning and development of all relevant activities in the future. For example, in addition to the information on nutrition and good security, the research could have used the opportunity to gather more accurate information.
Oxfam Australia Response
Oxfam Australia would like to thank Sokhem Pech for the quality of his evaluation. We also thank everyone who participated in the evaluation for sharing their insights and views on our program. Oxfam believes the methodology, including the size, inputs from all respondents and Technical Advisory Group, have been useful to get a variety of perspectives, which has helped in balancing feedback.
The evaluation and its recommendations are informing Oxfam’s plans for future work in 2014/15: this includes plans for another collaborative research project, proposed by FiA/IFReDI in order to provide scientific information to decision makers, and provide evidence for awareness-raising of fisheries impacts to key stakeholders in Cambodia and Mekong countries.
We are also working with IFReDI, development partners, members of sub-dam working group and civil society to explore more practical means to implement the communication plan, in different forms, to ensure the communities (and civil society more generally) have access to information about the project results. Our responses to the evaluation’s synthesized recommendations follow:
Recommendations Response How Oxfam will implement
Continue and improve the quality of dissemination materials on research products on dam impacts, fisheries and food security.
Agreed We will:
Discuss a detailed communications plan with IFReDI; ensuring information is accessible through using simple techniques/ media and working with CSOs to disseminate at their target areas
Would be looking to engage with new audiences such university students, who are studying on environmental and water issues
Discuss with IFReDI our approach with different media in order to share more widely the research products and disseminate to public
Continue to feature and disseminate the findings via Oxfam website and social media.
xiii | P a g e
Use the research’s product to inform and influence in different forms of policy dialogues
Agreed We will:
Work with IFReDI to use the research products to integrate into policy discussions and other national’s events
Improving and replicating the model in future project: Improving the Risk management framework;
Clarify a MEL framework for future project and consider diverse approaches within the communication strategy
Agreed We will:
Work to setup the platform to implement the monitoring tools in the new project, for example on Don Sahong research project and continue to raise M&E in TWGF meeting
Ensure shared understanding and commitment with key stakeholders to the risk mitigation framework by developing it as a core tool in the new project, and reviewing it regularly during project meetings.
Focused and Strategic in Maximizing Acceptance and Absorption: Using evidence base to inform the policy change with policymakers, for example EIA and other laws
Agreed We will:
Share the research products with other stakeholders and present to policymakers in different events / forums.
Engage with the EIAs of Sambor and Stung Treng hydropower dams to promote consideration of the findings of the Food security and Nutrition project.
Invest More in Levelling the Playing Field for Community stakeholders: Using the research products to educate the communities and CSOs to increase their knowledge, giving them information to influence different consultations and project discussions
Agreed We will:
Work with NGOs and IFReDI to use the research products to educate the communities to increase awareness so they can speak out in national consultations and other events
Work with OXFAM’s partners and civil society networks to diversify dissemination of the project findings to reach the community level
Using Appropriate Format and Media: Developing different materials for different audiences
Agreed We will:
Work with communication staff to develop key messages for online and social media platforms.
Ensure the project has access to communications expertise to develop simple messages which translate technical research findings and data sets into more accessible information, helping community and CSO stakeholders inform decision processes
1 | P a g e
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Between early 2011 and September 2013 Oxfam Australia, the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), and the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA) funded a project with the objective of increasing the capacity of the Fisheries Administration (FiA) and civil society organizations (CSOs) in Cambodia to influence government decision-makers to secure and sustainable livelihoods for rural people potentially affected by proposed Mekong mainstream dams.
Specifically, the project supported the Inland Fisheries Research and Development Institute (IFReDI) of the FiA to conduct a research project aimed at understanding the implications of basin development activities, particularly hydropower dam construction, on Cambodian national food security. The study estimated the quantity of fish and other aquatic animals available for consumption at the baseline of 2011, and compared them with scenarios of future dam development in Cambodia by 2030. At the same time, the project aimed to address the power imbalances that characterise decision-making in the management of Cambodian natural resources, and to better inform decision-makers within the Royal Government of Cambodia on the proposed dams. Thus the two-pronged approach was comprised of: increasing the influencing capacity of the Fisheries Administration (FiA) within the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) (the insider approach); and building the capacity of civil society organizations and affected community members (the outsider approach).
The evaluation was conducted with an understanding of the purpose of the project, namely to:
“Support the government agency – Fisheries Administration (FiA) and its Inland Fisheries Research and Development Institute (IFReDI) – to product scientific information on impacts of mainstream hydropower dams on food security (nutrition value) for its official use in informing policy decision, and for other users such as civil society organizations and individuals to use them for their advocacy and research works”.
Oxfam, DANIDA and WWF joined with IFReDI, WorldFish Center, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and Conservation International (CI) to form the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) that governed the project. As the project concluded, Oxfam commissioned a summative/impact project evaluation.
1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION
The main objective of the evaluation is “to determine the effectiveness of the project’s capacity building and to provide guidance on effectiveness of the project governance and policy influencing activities”. The specific objectives of the evaluation were to establish:
1. Whether government institutions and individuals who play a role in dam decision making have received, understood, and appreciated the significance of IFReDI’s research findings.
2. Whether and how communities in the participating villages were/are better equipped by the project to self-assess the likely environmental/food security and economic impacts of proposed dams, and meaningfully contribute to EIAs.
3. Whether and how the project’s activities and outputs have increased or are likely to increase the integration of socio-economic and biological impacts into hydropower dam development policy or decision making in Cambodia.
2 | P a g e
4. Whether the project design including the system of governance was optimal to achieving the above objectives.
The evaluation was qualitative and quantitative in nature. Specifically this evaluation addressed the specific objectives and key questions (Figure 1.1) and sub-questions as defined in the evaluation TOR. The sub-questions were refined and added to allow quantitative assessment of some key aspects of the project. The key evaluation questions were:
1. What changes in policies, practices, ideas, beliefs and attitudes have occurred in specific institutions, groups and individuals as a result of the project? (To address Objective 1 and 3)
2. How effectively has IFReDI we worked with others and involved them in all stages through the project? (To address Objective 4)
3. To what degree has IFReDI we learnt from this experience and shared the learning with others and themselves ourselves? What will IFReDI we now do differently, or what will we do more of? (To address Objectives 1 and 2)
4. What changes have occurred in women’s and men’s lives and to what extent are these likely to be sustained? (To address Objective 2)
5. How far has the project promoted gender justice? (To address Objectives 1 and 2)
6. How effectively and efficiently have our resources been used? (Overarching evaluation question)
4 Specific objectives1) If dam decision makers appreciate this research; 2) ability of participating communities to assess impact and contribute to EIAs; 3) if project has increased or will increase integration of socio-economic and biological consideration into dam decisions; 4) if project design including the system of governance was optimal to achieving the objectives.
1: What changes in policies, practices, ideas, beliefs and attitudes have occurred in specific institutions, groups and individuals as a result of the project? (To address Objective 1 and 3)
2: How effectively has IFReDI worked with others and involved them in all stages through
the project? (To address Objective 4)
6: How effectively and efficiently have our resources been used? (Overarching evaluation
question)
5: How far has the project promoted gender justice? (To address Objectives 1 and 2)
4: What changes have occurred in women’s
and men’s lives and to what extent are these likely to be sustained?
(To address Objective 2)
3: To what degree has IFReDI we learnt from
this experience and shared the learning
with others and themselves ourselves? What will IFReDI now do differently, or what will we do more of? (To
address Objectives 1 and 2)
Figure 1.1 Key Evaluation Questions and their Linkages with Evaluation Specific Objectives
3 | P a g e
The semi-structured questionnaire and list of key informants were developed and approved by Oxfam in consultation with IFReDI. The questionnaire is provided in Appendix A1. Data was collected from three main sources: project documents and products provided by IFReDI and Oxfam, key informants and project stakeholders.
The consultant (Dr. Sokhem Pech) who conducted this evaluation was involved for five days in compiling relevant inputs from the project’s TAG and Technical Synthesis Report into a policy brief. However, he did not play any role in the finalization and dissemination of the policy brief. The management of the project knowledge products, including conducting synthesis and analysis, finalization and approval, and dissemination - were a sole responsibility of the Project Team, and TAG and were over-sighted by the senior management members of FiA and Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF). Hence it was judged by Oxfam recruitment team that there was no case of conflict interest.
2.0 METHODS
All tasks and milestones listed in the evaluation terms of reference (TOR) (provided in Appendix A1) were implemented using a phased and integrated approach. The methods were designed to provide a credible study, founded on carefully gathered information, rigorous analysis, and meaningful feed-back mechanisms, and were supported by well planned and facilitated processes to ensure involvement of key stakeholders.
The evaluation was built upon the results of the following tasks.
i) Conducting desktop analysis of the relevant documents, meeting minutes, relevant monitoring, evaluation and learning guidelines and knowledge products;
ii) Conducting semi-structured interviews with 87 stakeholders with first-hand knowledge of the projects and subject matters at national, provincial, district/commune, and community levels in Phnom Penh, Stung Treng, Kratie, Siem Reap and Kompong Chhnang; and
iii) Conducting 12 personal observations and meetings with selected key informants (Oxfam, EU, IFReDI, WorldFish, and WWF) to fill information gaps and validate the findings by meeting/calling in with selected informants.
The initial findings were presented to the project team members and other key stakeholders, before the final evaluation report was prepared and finalised.
4 | P a g e
Desk review June 2014
Semi Structured Interviews in PP June - July
Semi Structured Interviews in Stung Treng, Kratie, Siem Reap and Kompong Chhnang
July 6-17
Data analysis and follow-up questions July 18-20
Validation Meetings with smaller group July 21-25
Preliminary Results for Validation Meeting with key informants
July 28
Report based on findings and feedback from Validation Meetings
July 29-31
Figure 2.1 Evaluation Implementation Process
A total of 87 interviewees were interviewed using either semi-structured interviews or focus group discussions (latter for local Community leaders/members only) in late June and July 2014 in Phnom Penh, Stung Treng, Kratie, Siem Reap and Kompong Chhnang. The semi-questionnaires are provided in Appendix A2. Two interviews were conducted on-line (via rounds of emails using semi-structure questionnaire template), the rest were conducted through face-to-face meetings. The written records were made on the questionnaires for each individual interview.
The interviewees were selected and agreed upon by Oxfam and IFREDI based on the following criteria:
1) Interviewees’ familiarity with the projects, and representatives of the project’s key partners (Oxfam, IFReDI, NGO Forum, WorldFish, FACT, CI, WWF etc.);
2) Representatives of key stakeholders from Line Ministries, Sector Departments, International and National NGOs, and leaders of local communities and elected Commune Councils for their involvement in the projects in different capacities (workshop participants), and those possessing first-hand knowledge and playing active role in dam development discussion).
5 | P a g e
Figure 2.2 Interviewees Gender Profiling
Only 23% of the total interviewees (20 of 87) were women. The main reason of this lower number of the female interviewee was high dominance of men in the composition of the project team, Technical Advisory Group, and Sector Ministries and Department (except for the Departments of Women’s Affairs, and local CSOs), and among participants of the dissemination workshops organized by this project.
The interviewees included: 1) heads of the key government agencies, decision makers (DM) of sector departments, and heads of CSOs; 2) the representatives of key Line Agencies at National and Provincial levels; and 3) representatives of local CSOs and leaders of the Commune Councils and Fisheries Communities.
Figure 2.3 Interviewees Affiliations
6 | P a g e
3.0 FINDINGS IN RELATION TO THE SIX KEY QUESTIONS
3.1 DISCUSSION OF OVERALL RESULTS
It is important to start this evaluation by acknowledging the following:
The research was supported by an innovative grouping of development and conservation International NGOs, bilateral development partner and with technical support provided by the World Fish Center and UNICEF); and
IFReDI, FiA, of MAFF, implemented it with the support of the project TAG and consultants. The TAG brought together a diverse set of skills and experience at no-cost to the projects, who were motivated by a common goal to ensure that the people and Government of Cambodia and other stakeholder organizations understand the impact of construction of Mekong River hydropower dams on nutrition in Cambodia.
Regardless of the envisaged risk, the development partners and other partners decided to introduce this partnership modality (basket fund and collaboration among government agencies, CSOs and Development Partners) and leadership and ownership by the Line Agency (LA) of the RGC in the project process and outputs.
IFReDI/FiA Technical Advisory
Group (TAG) Core: IFReDI, Oxfam, WWF,
DANIDA; WorldFish Partners: UNICEF, EU
Invited: CI, NGO Forum, FACT, IR etc.
FTWG + Sub Groups RGC + LAs
INGOs, CSOs
Oth
ers actors at levels
PROJECT TEAM - IFReDI Management
Team - Consultants
Figure 3.1 Project Primary stakeholders and other Actors
The grouping initiative (partnership model) was started by the WWF to generate some effective knowledge/communication products for influencing policy makers when the mainstream dam projects at least the one for Sambor in Kratie, in Cambodia was expected to move ahead. According to IFReDI and FiA, MEM has recently taken this proposed Sambor project back to a drawing board “for a more social and environmental friendly options” as result of this project (Dr. Nao Thouk and Chheng Phen, 2014). There was no further evidence to back up this statement yet from our interviews with the provincial departments of Mines and Energy2.
2 Ministry of Industry, Mine and Energy (MIME) has been recently split into two ministries at national and sub-national levels.
This re-organization causes some confusions and “information gaps”.
7 | P a g e
It is important to acknowledge the commitment and achievements made by the project and this grouping. The project has made some remarkable achievement in spite of the challenges including force majeure (flooding), financial, technical and human resources limitation, and power relationship. Moreover, it was implemented when numerous decision makers considered this topic of hydropower dam development, impacts, and cost and benefit sharing in Cambodia as an extremely sensitive political issue.
It is also important to note that some of the questions and sub-questions for our evaluation (Evaluation TOR) are broader than the original scope of the project and its re-design in the Inception Report. For fairness, Table 3.1 below summarises the scope of this project according to its project documents namely the Inception Report (especially its log-frame) and its “Communications and Dissemination Strategy”.
1. An assessment of food and nutrition security sensitivity and adaptive capacity to mainstream hydropower dam development in Cambodia.
3) if project has increased or will increase integration of socio-economic and biological consideration into dam decisions
The project managed to produce some assessment on food and nutrition security. But a journal article and Khmer synthesis findings. What is missing are concrete recommendations on how to address the sensitivity and adaptive capacity to mainstream hydropower dam development.
2. An assessment of food and nutrition security exposure and vulnerability in Cambodia to mainstream hydropower dam development arising from forecasted changes in the supply of fish and OAA after accounting for adaptive capacity.
3) If project has increased or will increase integration of socio-economic and biological consideration into dam decisions.
The project managed to produce some assessment on exposure and vulnerability. However, inconsistency in component 1 above and this component was addressed only to some extent. A journal article could not be produced. What is missing are concrete recommendations on how to address the nutrition exposure and vulnerability to mainstream hydropower dam development.
3. Communicated and disseminated project Outputs 1 and 2.
1) If dam decision makers appreciate this research; 2) ability of participating communities to assess impact and contribute to EIAs;
The Communications and dissemination Strategy was a “shopping list”. A long list of targeted audience focuses only those at the regional and national actors, and some provincial departments and private sector. Private sector was not actually involved. Local communities were engaged in some data collection and dissemination activities. Only means for dissemination for the sub-national authorities was dissemination workshop, and only 9% of the budget was for dissemination and communication.
Three out of five communication products were not delivered:
1) Illustrated Khmer language summary of the synthesis report;
2) News Releases; and 3) Round-table discussion with video
presentation on mainstream dam impacts.
4. Project management and implementation
4) If project design including the system of governance was optimal to achieving the
The Technical Advisory Group was highly instrumental in helping/leading the project implementation.
8 | P a g e
objectives The project design was re-scoped a few times to accommodate urgent needs (policy influencing) and limited financial resources. Its revision in the inception report resulted in a much stronger focus on research components, and much less fund for communication and no resources for supporting “ability of participating communities to assess impact and contribute to Environmental Impact Assessments”.
Changes in livelihood, gender consideration and justice as a result of the project (Q. 4 and 5)
It was not considered in the project document. Hence the findings on these topics will be more forward looking for future work.
This evaluation took this project’s scope and expected outcomes into account accordingly. Some of the suggestions and recommendations emerged from the evaluation on those questions outside the project scope and expected outcomes, and are for future research and reference.
In general, the project has contributed to addressing power imbalances through producing and using the scientific information by the Fisheries Administration in its communication and discussion about dam and food security/nutrition impacts for informing decision-makers. Hence the project helped increase the Fisheries Administration's influencing capacity at the national level. The project documents did not indicate that it was its main focus to help build the capacity of CSOs and affected community members in a more meaningful deliberation and consultation on the dam development and related mitigation measures.
The project was originally for an implementation period of 6 months, and then was changed to 12 months in the project document. During the implementation, it was extended to over 18 months. The evaluation of the project log-frame and communication plan found the extent to which activities, outputs and/or the desired effects/outcomes (effectiveness and efficiency).
Most of the milestones originally set for late 2011 and early 2012, were completed only in late 2013 and early 2014. Many intended outputs and knowledge products were produced and disseminated (Appendix A3), but other deliverables were not delivered as originally planned. The following were considered to be the key stumbling blocks encountered during the implementation:
Recruitment and mobilisation of consultants and project team took longer time than expected;
Flooding in 2011 made the planned field works impossible;
Inability of the international nutrition specialist to deliver her outputs of acceptable quality in time, and her subsequent resignation due to a health issue;
Inability of the international team leader to reconcile the results from both components without additional resources, and his eventual departure;
Lack of proper coordination between the two components that led to inconsistency/ discrepancy in approach, data and results. It took the team members and Technical Advisory Group longer to address them;
It took longer time for approval of the findings by the Ministry due to the national election and due to “fear for unintended political consequences”; and
9 | P a g e
Budget allocation for communication was low, and the communication plan was not adequately developed and implemented.3
Another minor factor was it took time to get agreement from all development partners on the basket fund modality.
3.2 KEY QUESTION 1: CHANGES IN POLICIES, PRACTICES, IDEAS, BELIEFS/ATTITUDES IN SPECIFIC INSTITUTIONS, GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS AS A RESULT OF THE PROJECT
3.2.1 Project contribution to the national knowledge bank regarding the potential impacts of hydropower dams
The majority (83%) of the national interviewees close to the project were of the opinion that the project has contributed remarkably to the knowledge base around fisheries, nutrition and the potential impacts from dams in time for other dam debates such as Don Sahong. The sub-national interviewees could not provide any comments since they only received the products (synthesis report (English only) and policy brief (English and Khmer) on the days of interview. Those who took part in the workshops in late 2012 and/or 2013 argued that they could not remember due to the fact that those events took place a long time ago and they had not received further information since. This identifies a gap in communication implementation. From the project scope and its communications and dissemination strategy, the outreach to the national and regional levels was considered a top priority.
Figure 3.2 Level of Appreciation of Project Contribution to related Knowledge
Nevertheless, all interviewees appreciated the efforts in bringing this new finding into the dam and development debate, and potential equation/factors for decision-making.
The interviewees familiar with the project reported that the project has helped raise awareness in Cambodian government and non-governmental actors about the mainstream dam impacts. There has been some take-up by various actors; such as NGO Forum on Cambodia (NGO Forum),
3 From our personal observation, it was due to both the budget and human resource issues.
10 | P a g e
Fisheries Action Coalition Team (FACT), WWF, Oxfam, European Union (EU), WorldFish, Mekong River Commission (MRC), Cambodia National Mekong Committee (CNMC), and the Technical Working Group on Fisheries (TWGF). The research results were presented in a series of national and international events including the petition to the National Assembly, and in Don Sahong’s discussions. Three community representatives in Stung Treng confirmed that they have used knowledge generated by the project in the recent debates on Don Sahong.
Many national interviewees thought that a focus on fisheries and their nutritional and food security context (as well as economic) was a strategic decision; not to counter the dams directly or question the need for energy, but rather look at the impact for Cambodia by considering impacts on fish catch and food security.
The Technical Advisory Group members pointed to the need to continue to address internal inconsistency of the two datasets of the dam impacts, and nutrition vulnerability - and information in the synthesis report. The representatives of CSOs at national and sub-national levels were of the opinion that the future research for development needed to touch upon the impacts and intervention options in more precise terms, and address quality assurance and control, scientific credibility, present them with more convincing evidence, and spell out and address internal consistency of the statistics of fish consumption and impacts. The findings should also include more recommendations and practical steps for addressing them (how, when, what, by whom, and at what cost).
3.2.2 How findings were disseminated within relevant government institutions
86% of the national interviewees (12/14) argued that the dissemination was well done. In quantitative terms, the project conducted a series of five national and provincial validation workshops in 2012, and another series of five national and provincial dissemination workshops in September 2013.
Table 3.2 Dissemination Workshops and Participants Profiles
The research was regularly reported to the Technical Working Group on Fisheries (TWGF); a very active technical coordination platform between the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC), development partners and CSOs on specific sector issues. A number of institutions such as Fisheries Administration, CNMC, WWF, Oxfam, NGO Forum, and WorldFish Center reportedly have used the findings in the dam impact debate, including the debate surrounding Lower Se San 2 and Don Sahong, and at the regional fora and Conferences (2nd Mekong Summit in Ho Chi Minh City). IFReDI used the research findings at the Mekong roundtable in Australia in 2013. The EU representatives used the information in their presentations at Mekong River Commission governance meetings, and their bilateral cooperation with MIME (now MIH, and MME). In addition, it was noticed that the research results were disseminated through Oxfam in its websites and in the national and international events, through Save the Mekong list serves, M-Power and
No Dissemination Venues Participants
Total Women Men
1 Dissemination workshop in Kratie 78 8 70
2 Dissemination workshop in Stung Treng 79 12 67
3 Dissemination workshop in Kampong Chang 117 13 104
4 Dissemination workshop in Siem Reap 51 2 49
5 Dissemination workshop in Phnom Penh 63 9 54
11 | P a g e
Mekong Research list serves. The findings were presented by IFReDI staff at forums such as the Challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF) Hanoi forum in November 2013. A series of interview and news pieces quoting the project’s findings were found in the national and regional newspapers.
In general, dissemination was rather good among the partners and with highly interested CSOs through the Technical Advisory Group and the project’s workshops.4 However, the project scope was limited for other stakeholders especially for those at the sub-national levels. There were numerous reasons including: 1) not the same staff members were assigned to attend various meetings; 2) no internal mechanism for storing and sharing the knowledge products; and 3) limitation in communication plan and resources.
Figure 3.3 Perception on Dissemination Level
The national interviewees (6/14) who were familiar with the project said that the dissemination was much less than what was envisaged in the communication plan. Others said it was not strategically done, and was not provided with enough resources, and the key sector agencies including MME and MOWRAM, were not engaged enough.
The draft “Communications and Dissemination Strategy” for this project was developed and revised in November 2011. It was more a communication and dissemination plan by listing only the key products, targeted groups and institutions, and provided little strategic guidelines on how to make the communication and dissemination successful and sustainable.
Five communication products were listed in the Communication Strategy. Two of them were developed and distributed (selectively), while three others remain to be completed. They include:
1) Illustrated Khmer language summary of the synthesis report; 2) News Releases; and 3) Round-table discussion with video presentation on mainstream dam impacts.
The dissemination at the workshops in September 2013 provided the participants with the power-point presentations and debriefing notes. Most of the other project knowledge products such as the technical synthesis report and policy briefs (in both English and Khmer) were completed only
4 Power point presentations in Khmer and English and policy briefs (10,000 copies in English and Khmer) and 2,400 copies of the
synthesis reports in English and Khmer were published. Their posting on the FiA website was postponed due the website security issue. Plan B is being considered by FiA. DG of FIA has communicated the findings to the senior management members in COM, MOP, MME, and MOH, and hope to continue doing it on a more regular basis.
12 | P a g e
in November 2013 and in June 2014. The dissemination workshops were organised, but there was limited time for meaningful discussion and addressing all relevant questions and comments from the participants. The community representatives said they came to the workshop unprepared since they were not informed in advance about its objective, issues and topics. 5
These shortfalls might have been caused either by the lack of budget, or capacity issues (see next sections).
3.2.3 Acceptance of findings by key policy and decision-makers
The response to the question: whether the policy and decision-makers found the findings relevant and timely, and presented in an easy to understand format and media, were slightly divided among the national and sub-national interviewees. This division might be due to the facts that the sub-national actors observed: 1) decisions on dam development are made mostly at the national level; and 2) those who make that decision might not have been reached by the project adequately yet.
Figure 3.4 Perception on Decision Makers’ Acceptance/Appreciation
Many national interviewees (43%) concurred that normally it takes time to clearly see the influence of the research on any changes in policies, practices and belief/attitude, and often decisions are made by much higher government leaders and interested private developers/investors. Moreover, the acceptance and absorption in decision-making are two different stories. It was hard to evaluate with certainty if those who make or influence the decision on the hydropower (including energy options) have accepted the findings.6 And the private sector was not involved in any dissemination or deliberation process.
Some interviewees thought that the research outcomes have reached some decision-makers, and that more decision-makers and influencers must be targeted in the future. The provincial sector decision-makers felt that “once the decision was made by the top leader, it was not for them to discuss or evaluate”. As a way forward, the Fisheries Administration needs to identify and reach
5 In some provinces, the participants were extremely high in number (over 100 participants from different backgrounds) and the
workshops lasted for less than one full-day. Some sub-national interviewees said the presentation was lengthy and technically complicated. There was no pause to ascertain if the participants could follow or have any burning questions.
6 Some CSOs and LAs said they were bothered by the reluctance in approving and sharing of the findings and knowledge products due
to “over-concern” about political consequences and sensitivity of the topics.
13 | P a g e
out to the key influencer and opinion makers, considering the decision-making culture and political system in Cambodia.
Some decision-makers in Siem Reap and Kompong Chhnang thought that dam sites were on the Mekong “many hundred kilometres away”, should not have any direct and severe consequences for them on the Tonle Sap. It points to an acute need for more effective and sustained communication and awareness-raising. In contrast other national interviewees (12/14) saw the connection and value in the findings between the research and debates for other dams – such as Don Sahong and Lower Se San 2, as cited earlier.
3.2.4 Potential for research and advocacy by IFReDI and partners to influence hydropower development decision-making in Cambodia
The majority of national interviewees (12/14) and more than half of the sub-national interviewees (54% or 40/73) found that the potential for uses of the findings for further research, deliberation and advocacy was high. The other 46% of the provincial interviewees found that it was hard to make any comments, since they had not read them yet. The provincial sector department and local CSO representatives judged that there would be an opportunity to use them for:
Informed deliberation at the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) consultation if that will be made accessible, and for informing the review of EIA and various mitigation plans; and
For educational and awareness-raising purposes, but that there is a need to simplify the knowledge products, and using existing experience, networks and trainers, and to communicate at key environment, fisheries and forestry days, and annual festival of Bun Tonle (Merit of River)7.
It was observed that the National Assembly in its current composition where the opposition members have grown in number and occupy key committees including the committee #3 on natural resources and environment, invites the Ministers to appear in the assembly for question and answer sessions more often. This fact would certainly drive a need for scientific information.
The interviewees at the national level point to the recent decision at the Mekong River Commission meeting to take Don Sahong to prior consultation process as another opportunity in using this downstream evidence base. They indicated that this would be possible on the condition that more adequately strategic and sustained efforts by the Fisheries Administration and development partners in improving information and dissemination, and stronger efforts in packaging and disseminating those findings. The potential for using them to influence decision-making regarding dam development is not only in Cambodia but also in the Mekong Region. However, further breakthrough in influencing dam decision in Cambodia is required.
Some interviewees (20/87) said that the current knowledge products can be further improved with greater certainty, social and scientific relevance and rigour, documentation of assumptions, and more convincing presentation using appropriate media and format. Demonstration of efforts to address comments from CSOs, and local communities were critical for sustaining interest of the key actors in promoting evidence-based information for advocacy and informed decisions.
7 Kratie based Cambodia Research and Development Team (CRDT) is operating in Kratie and Stung Treng. It partners with provincial
government in organizing this annual event for thanks-giving to mother water for bountiful resources.
14 | P a g e
Figure 3.5 Perception on Potential for Downstream Uses
3.2.5 Level of influence on national policies and strategies
Some of the local authorities and CSO respondents (12/87) thought that MAFF, the Fisheries Administration and the project team were too cautious and worried about the sensitivity, and believed that this “indecisiveness” caused the delay in the product approval and quality of dissemination, hence reduced its chance in influencing the Rectangular Strategy development.8
In the future, it is important to improve in the modality to ensure the “political correctness” and “effectiveness and efficiency” with a stronger leadership by Fisheries Administration, putting in place “a check and balance” (peer pressure) among the IFReDI project team and Technical Advisory Group, and an effective monitoring and evaluation system. Two national CSOs suggested that Oxfam and other development partners, while allowing Fisheries Administration to lead, need to step up to ensure that the agreed activities and deliverables are executed in an effective and credible manner.
Some interviewees expressed concern about the long term sustainability of the project outcomes and about how the policy makers and other stakeholders want to listen to and take it into account or not without continued efforts from the Fisheries Administration and other partners.
Other interviewees felt that the project maybe had more up-taking for trans-boundary context than that in Cambodia. More efforts need to be made to increase using the research results in discussions/ deliberations on Stung Treng, Sambor, and Lower Se San 2. It will need some serious advocacy or championing to make it part of the decision-making processes in Cambodian government. It is a well-placed research to do this, but it will need to come with extra push and popular media as well as the science.
3.2.6 Research influence, or potential for influencing future FiA planning
The Director General of FiA indicated that FiA was working with the Technical Working Group on Fisheries (TWGF)9, MAFF and MoP for including the project key findings into the Government’s
8 The “Rectangular Strategy-Phase III” 2013-2018 is the RGC policy platform to guide the development of the National Strategic
Development Plan (NSDP) for 2014-2018 and activities for promoting economic growth, creating jobs, equitable distribution of the fruits of growth, and ensuring effectiveness of public institutions and management of resources in Cambodia. 9 The Technical Working Group on Fisheries (TWGF) was established in response to a call for improved coordination across sectors.
The TWGs now form an integral part of the RGC’s Action Plan for Harmonization and Alignment for coordination among key
15 | P a g e
policy platform - Rectangular Strategy phase III (RSIII) for 2013-2018 and final NSDP 2014-2018. FiA and IFReDI’s senior management confirmed that through TWGF, the project team had shared the findings on fisheries, food security and nutrition for including in the National Strategic Development Plan (NSDP) (still being finalised at the time of writing). RSIII considered aquaculture and fisheries as key aspects for the national development and food security.
The Fisheries Administration has assured that they and IFReDI are using the finding for their updates of the strategy (2009-2018) as well, and two new projects are being approved by the development partners (EU, and Oxfam and WWF) for downstream works at Don Sahong, and fish passage for lower Se San 2.
The CSOs suggested the improvement in the internal coordination between IFReDI and related departments in Fisheries Administration and MAFF to ensure that the findings will be reflected in related speeches, policy and strategic documents of these departments and the Royal Government of Cambodia. The Prime Minister’s speech at the recent fisheries day in Kompong Chhnang did not contain key findings from the project. The MAFF Cabinet requested for information for preparing for the Minister’s presentation and answers to the National Assembly on 07 August 2014. It remains to be seen how much of these pieces of information will find their ways into the actual presentations and answers.
3.2.7 Any unintended political consequences of the research and advocacy activities
IFReDI said that the project team, FiA and MAFF senior management had treated sensitive issues with great care. They argued that it helped avoid any unintentional consequences, but caused delay. The Technical Advisory Group and Technical Working Group on Fisheries were able to help with proactively addressing any unintended political consequences.
3.2.8 Availability of resources to influence thinking on hydropower impacts (format, media and frequency)
The experiences were different for various end users. For instance the members or observers of Technical Advisory Group were involved in regular meetings, workshops, in reviewing and receiving reports, policy brief, and news pieces.
As expected from the Communication Plan, others at the national and sub-national levels received the information much less frequently. Some of the interviewees who took part in the dissemination workshops (national and provincial) obtained some preliminary results presented and discussed at the workshops back in 2013. However, they did not receive any further updates or feed-back. Most of the sub-national interviewees said that the knowledge products were designed for the policy makers, researchers and officials with higher education and related technical background.
government agencies, development partners, private sector and CSOs (DoF/FiA, 2006). Head of FiA and EU representative are co-chairs, and the FiA Planning Department serves as TWG Secretariat. TWGF has it three sub-groups – on dams, climate change, and agriculture.
16 | P a g e
3.3 KEY QUESTION 2: IFREDI /PROJECT EFFECTIVENESS IN WORKING WITH OTHERS IN VARIOUS STAGES OF THE PROJECT
3.3.1 Project partnership approach
Most of the national interviewees who were familiar with the project and Technical Advisory Group (85% or 12/14) found that this partnership approach was effective. They thought that the process and initiative was important in bringing in range of stakeholders, and promoting government’s ownership in research results, and its usage by concerned institutions in their research and advocacy and deliberation on dam, water and food. They confirmed that the investment in working closely with IFREDI, collaborating with other donors, and working through the Technical Advisory Group has been an important part of the success of the project.
The Fisheries Administration (Director General) and IFReDI (Acting Director) believed that this partnership allowed a positive move from bilateral arrangement to pooling of resources and harmonising reporting and accountability requirements.
The Technical Advisory Group was found to be instrumental in coordinating, trouble-shooting and providing guidance to the project team, as well as in supporting the Technical Working Group on Fisheries (one of the most productive Working Groups), and its sub-groups on dams, climate change, and agriculture. The Technical Advisory Group was effective and almost at no cost to the project. TAH members and the Project Team members thought that while the Technical Advisory Group was the best form of the Steering Committee, however, its challenge was the lack of clear leadership and coordination support.10
Figure 3.6 Perception on Project Partnership Model
The sub-national interviewees were not aware of this model as a result of the project scope.
3.3.2 Significance of the partnership model (its make-up and function)
All interviewees who were familiar with the Technical Advisory Group spoke highly of it. The make-up and presence of the TAG as a vehicle for monitoring and strategising in the project was very important. It helped build a mutual trust and ownership and provided a strategic forum for solving issues along the way. Commitment of the members from the partners (WWF, Oxfam, DANIDA, IR,
10 TAG Also brought together a wide range of expertise and view-points that normally would not come together to discuss these
issues.
17 | P a g e
WorldFish and UNICEF) was strong. Regular meetings were conducted with few occasional absences of its members. Minutes were kept and follow-up actions and progress were reported back regularly. The Chair reported to the TWGF and sub-group on dams.
The Technical Advisory Group’s problem-solving capability and building consensus helped the project team to overcome delays and avoid risk. By drawing membership from both community of practices/related science, development partners, and other key stakeholders from government and CSOs (national and international), the group was able to tackle many issues ranging from purely technical, to financial and managerial.
The challenge was however, that TAG members were pre-occupied with their work in their respective organizations and had different priorities – advocacy, evidence-based persuasion and/or blunt and timely advocacy. Nevertheless, the group seemed to overcome that diverse aspiration and used collective or majority decision-making to come up with a common position or acceptable compromise.11
3.3.3 Experience of participation for Technical Advisory Group members
The national interviewees found that the TAG modality allowed flexibility – informal process (bilateral, and email communication), regular meetings with clear agenda and commitment to problem solving in a collaborative manner. The group was able to trouble-shoot and take collective decision for the project success and effectiveness. For instance when the international consultant (nutrition specialist) resigned and the Team Leader left the project, the TAG selected the replacement and assigned two members (lead specialists) to support the finalisation of the reports and development of the synthesis report.
3.3.4 Success Factors of the Technical Advisory Group (membership and/or model merit)
Nearly all national interviewees (12/14) familiar with TAG agreed that TAG’s achievement were due first of all to the personality, background and interest/commitment of its members, and secondly to the partnership model itself.
3.3.5 Mechanisms for finding compromise between the different funding schedules and requirements
The Technical Advisory Group insiders confirmed that to address project delays and budget distribution and reporting requirements by different partners, TAG members from development partners were able to make decisions based on 2/3 majority.
The regular meetings and commitment to achieve consensus by right representation from all concerned partner organisations was a major decisive factor. Meeting record keeping and reviewing of action logs helped sharing of information on progress and outstanding issues requiring further action to solve them in a timely manner. Timely decisions by the group and devotion of some members in supporting development of the key deliverable (synthesis report by
11 The interests and limitations of the development partners seemed to have allowed for investment in different aspects of the
project. For example, Oxfam emphasized gender and community awareness-raising and ‘voice’ in the project by ensuring the findings were used proactively in shaping and influencing the debates about these two Cambodian mainstream dams, but the other mainstream dams as well.
18 | P a g e
reconciling two different reports with two different and sometime contradicting datasets) was a case in point.
3.3.6 Project contribution to collaborative process with other actors
The national interviewees (12/14) familiar with the project argued that efforts were made to reach out to other actors, including inviting other local authorities (including CNMC), international and national CSOs (CI, EU, UNICEF, NGO Forum, International Rivers (IR) and FACT to attend TAG meetings. They provided comments on project findings along the way. Besides five dissemination workshop, the project team provided regular reports to the TWGF (quarterly meetings) and Sub-Group on dams that also comprised of the members from partners, Government and CSOs.
Figure 3.7 Perception on Level of Involvement of other Actors
The representatives from the state television and radio (TVK), Royal University of Phnom Penh (RUPP), and Royal University of Agriculture (RUA) were among the workshop participants. However, the private sector was not involved as scheduled in the Communication Plan, and the project did not pay enough attention to sub-national stakeholders, especially the local communities.
Most of the sub-national interviewees (90% or 65/73) argued that in the future the CSOs, Commune Council and local communities “at stake” need to be provided with applicable knowledge and platform for generating awareness and strong public opinion, and use their leverage and common voice. The focus should be not only on capacity to understand the implications and possible solutions, but also on how to promote their ability to participate in the deliberation and decision-making in a meaningful way (levelling playing field and address power relation, and promote knowledge as a powerful tool, and use application means for mobilising support and common position).
The interviewees from the national and local CSOs stressed that while considering the partnership model and government ownership important, the roles of the key partners in providing technical input review, and peer-pressuring for a timely and effective dissemination must be strengthened.
3.3.7 Involvement of participating villages
It is important to stress that the project communication plan did not choose the village and communities as their target for engagement per se. Nonetheless, some villagers in 24 provinces and municipalities were involved in the household survey, and some commune and community leaders from four targeted provinces took part in the dissemination workshops.
19 | P a g e
The local representatives at the provincial workshops were mainly from fisheries communities, and the representation of other communities was missing.12
Some national interviewees (6/14) thought that lower level of engagement of the villagers was due to the project scope and its communication design focusing more at immediately influencing the mainstreaming dam deliberation at the regional and national levels, and lower investment for involvement of local communities. For the future projects or activities, the site and community focus should provide learning and data for a wider Cambodian-wide context of impact. It is important not just to extract data from communities but also involve them more meaningfully in the science, the data gathering and the analysis and application of findings.
It was not clear if the communities have taken ownership of the findings or not, or if they can make use of these now or in the future in their own engagement with river and resource managers, government authorities and private sector actors involved in developments. Besides, the translation of research findings to local knowledge and easy to understand format was not adequately addressed.
Figure 3.8 Perception on Level of Involvement of Villagers
3.3.8 Unintended consequences of TAG model or village-level engagement
Not found during the evaluation.
3.3.9 What stakeholders liked the most about the working arrangements
The Technical Advisory Group was highly regarded as a good mix of highly motivated individuals with their professional interest and commitment in achieving informed decision making and deliberation on dam development and livelihood/ poverty alleviation.
Leadership was shown by the Fisheries Director General and Deputy Director General and the project process was relatively open to CSOs (NGOs, Academia, and community-based organisations) even though the village level engagement was not prescribed in the project document.
3.3.10 What stakeholders liked the least about the working arrangements
The following “they like the least” were indicated by some national interviewees. They were mainly related to the project scope, and its implementation:
12 From reviewing the lists of participants in all the workshops organized/provided by IFReDI.
20 | P a g e
Not enough time and resources for consultation, gender, capacity and opportunity for engaging villages with a direct stake in dam development outcomes.
Lack of platform for continued feed-back and update.
Project Team (especially the consultants) should have played their role more effectively.
The project was not really scoped as an empowering process for communities (directly).13
Lack of adequate investment in trust and belief building in the ultimate decision makers in government, local authorities, and private sector.
Timing issues and lack of financial resources for additional work load, and all Technical Advisory Group members have their full time work and busy schedule in their respective organisations.
Not enough active participation of the Fisheries Administration staff at the national and sub-national level, and reliance too heavily on the consultants. This reliance might be explained by the highly technical nature of the subject matter and the desire of IFReDI to have research that could be published internationally. This staff involvement was constrained by the regulations on incentives and supplementary salary.
3.3.11 Suggestion for improving working arrangements
The national interviewees (8/14) suggested reflection on operations, membership and ways of working. They thought that 5-6 members of the Technical Advisory Group would be more manageable, and needed to be supported by the project team members and management team. The internal and external coordination must be improved in order to encourage others actors to engage and for internal consistency and efficiency.
3.4 KEY QUESTION 3: LEARNING, AND SHARING OF LESSONS IN THE PROJECT
3.4.1 Evidence of increased understanding of likely dam impacts by target villages
The interviews at the sub-national level revealed some general understanding of likely dam impacts. However, it is hard to say with certainty that it was solely attributed to this project, as the project was focusing more on raising the awareness of the targeted decision-makers at the regional and national levels.
The sub-national interviewees said they have some general level of understanding of the potential impacts from dam development since they have been involved in a number of meetings, training and workshops organised by this and other projects. However, there was a different level of awareness observed in all four provinces. For instance, communities and commune leaders, as well as sector departments in Stung Treng demonstrated the highest level of awareness and understanding about the dam development and impacts due to a number of reasons, namely: 1) first-hand experiences from dam impacts on upper Se San since the early 2000s; and, 2) constant efforts of CSOs in dissemination for specific rights of the affected communities.
13 If it had had this starting point equally to that of influencing the policy and practice of government agencies and political processes, it might have ultimately been more empowering for communities.
21 | P a g e
Figure 3.9 Perception on Level of Villagers Understanding
Certain confusion “too far from dam sites on the Mekong”, “it has nothing to do with my agency” and preoccupation with other concerns revealed from the interviews with certain sector departments in Siem Reap. Kompong Chhnang interviewees showed a bit higher level of awareness. However, they were more worried about the impacts of mismanagement, pollution from floating villages, and increase in fishing efforts after the abolishment of the fishing lots.
The representatives of the Fisheries Communities said that the general public in their communities were aware of what to expect in general from those changes but do not know well enough when it comes to a more specific and concrete impacts and consequences for them to think about ripple effects and coping measures.
3.4.2 Evidence of increased understanding of likely dam impacts amongst key policy-makers
The national and local CSOs interviewees confirmed that some CSOs, such as WWF, NGO Forum14, FACT, and international organisations and development partners, such as EU, have used information in their work to petition for better coordinated water resources development and social justice both in Cambodia and Mekong Region.
CSOs (such NGO Forum, FACT…) were supported by Oxfam in conducting some capacity building and awareness raising events. NGO Forum organized study tour for the 15 CSOs representatives to Theun Hin Boun and Nam Theun 2 to look at the compensation, justice, and resettlement works.
22 | P a g e
Figure 3.10 Perception on Change Level of Policy Makers’ Understanding
In 2014, WWF, NGO Forum and FACT submitted reports to the National Assembly Committee (#3) then chaired by Dr. Mok Mareth, former MOE Minister. Recently, the MAFF Minister’s office was provided by FiA/IFReDI with all project products and data for preparing for the Minister’s statement and aide memoires for his appearance at the National Assembly scheduled for 7th of August 2014. Two other Ministers (MOWRAM and MOE) were also invited.
Most of the sub-national interviewees, however, found it hard for them to judge the policy-makers’ understanding due to: 1) lack of information on which of the policy-makers have received and appreciated the findings; and, 2) concern that many of those in the primary pole of power might not have been reached.
3.4.3 Ways to maximise infiltration and understanding of research findings amongst targeted groups
Both national and sub-national interviewees concurred on an urgent need to do much more in the coming years to maximize infiltration and understanding of the findings among both the communities and decision-makers. The following is a summary of their suggestions:
More targeted dissemination through relevant pathways using appropriate format and media – face to face meetings/training at local levels, leaflet, newsletter, and posters, mass media, especially radio and television, video clips for educational and awareness raising, shows/comedy about serious issues in a more relaxing/entertaining ways, more focused on those most affected. Need more sensitising with real cases e.g. Yali or other dam sites video, posters, case studies and face to face meeting/training
Dissemination should be more strategic, more extensive and long-term; focused on top leaders in Ministries and government as well as investors and developers. 15
Creating incentives/interests in the training and consultation/dissemination and proper strategies to address workshop fatigue;
Feed-back mechanisms, and filling gaps, and suggesting practical steps for prevention, minimisation or mitigation by relevant actors.
15 The provinces’ experience: radio and TV talk shows and video with telephone calls-in were considered to be more effective, given
the current readership practice in the country and region. It will require a strong commitment from the senior management of MAFF and FiA to allow this happen, as many of the key leadership consider the open discussion about dam development and its implication as something too sensitive and uncalled for.” It would be foreclosing any opportunity for any healthy debate, if the senior management thought that “once it has been decided by the government leader, it is no longer for discussion or debate”.
23 | P a g e
In addition to the information on nutrition and food security impacts, more accurate information should be provided such as on impacts from dams at specific locations and time-lines - during the study, during the construction, commissioning and during the operation.
Local CSOs and existing networks can contribute more effectively in improving stakeholders’ inputs/feedback and consultation and dissemination in a more cost effective and long term impact-based manner.
3.4.4 Potential for Technical Advisory Group model replication
Most of the respondents familiar with the Technical Advisory Group considered that this model can be replicated in the future projects. However, some of them suggested that some form of support (resources and time) should be made available for the members to perform some specific trouble-shooting works that require additional efforts and time.
Some insiders suggested that IFReDI and the Fisheries Administration's leaders need to devote more efforts in providing coordination, reporting and feed-back roles in influencing the Technical Working Group on Fisheries’ agenda and deliberation.
3.4.5 Sharing project learning among other stakeholders or interest groups external to the project
Project learning was shared with some other stakeholders as indicated in sub-headings 3.2, 3.2.2 and 3.2.3. Moreover, there are significant opportunities for ongoing dissemination of findings, and as possible future projects with IFReDI and development partners – for example on Don Sahong monitoring and Lower Se San 2 (IFReDI, Oxfam and EU).
3.4.6 Capacity of IFReDI to work and cope with multi-donors and complex projects
The Fisheries Administration and IFReDI senior management were of the opinion that capacity was available for carrying out many of the technical works. The recruitment was under way for the replacement for the retired staff. However the pool of the skilled technical experts is small and annual graduates with the required technical background are extremely limited.
Proper motivation and incentives will help in improving their commitment to use available skills for the project implementation. This motivation challenge is common for all government agencies at the national and sub-national levels. It was observed that FiA has got some experienced staff; however, they do not have means (resources and incentives) to discharge their tasks adequately. Most provincial and district sector departments are facing staff shortage due to retirement and other factors.
It has shown that only with the support from the Technical Advisory Group, IFReDI could manage the multi-donor basket funding project. It was admitted that the consultant team was practically dysfunctional due to lack of internal coordination among the components’ consultants and team leader and their inability to deliver the outputs that meet at least the minimal requirement.
It was observed that the disconnection between impact and nutrition components of the project took place during the project implementation. Nutrition deliverable was not completed, and the national nutrition consultant had to struggle in tying the loose ends. The project international consultant and team leader was not willing to take over and complete the unified report without additional resources that was not available to the project. TAG and its members had to step in to help “reconcile” the findings and develop the synthesis report. A close review shows that there
24 | P a g e
was still discrepancy in the reports and their two datasets. They can be further improved in its scientific credibility, consistency and reliability.
The CSOs representatives argued that IFReDI’s capacity should be strengthened significantly and make their mandates and target clear - what they want to achieve. The coordination mechanism with other relevant departments in FiA and MAFF also needs to be improved.
3.4.7 IFReDI capacity to mobilise resources and integrate their plan into FiA and national plan
IFReDI seemed to have gained pride and confidence from the project implementation. EU, WWF and Oxfam have shown interest in supporting the follow-up projects (Don Sahong and Lower Se San 2). IFReDI needs to improve its performance and fundraising capability so that they will be able to mobilise more resources both from the government development framework and other development partners, and to contribute to FiA and national plan.
3.5 KEY QUESTION 4: CHANGES IN WOMEN AND MEN’S LIVES AND LIKELIHOOD THAT THESE WILL BE SUSTAINED
3.5.1 Project impacts – intended or unintended - on the lives of people in participating villages
FiA and development partners thought that findings on vulnerability of women (especially expectant mothers) and children under 5 years old were powerful and would be used for designing proper response to ensure healthy human resources and citizen. The Ministry of Health found them useful for their future planning and action, however, it was not clear if those findings would be used by the Ministry of Health in the near future.
It was not possible to gauge specific changes in villages, since this was not a core or direct focus of the project. The research only provided data on the importance of fisheries, and fish protein for communities, for women, and for children.
3.6 KEY QUESTION 5: PROMOTION OF GENDER JUSTICE
3.6.1 Level of women and men’s involvement in and benefit from the project
Gender mainstreaming was not explicitly expressed in the project design. As a result the community and women were not all involved in the project establishment and focus of this research.16
The project team involved women in the research project activities through: 1) data collection though a household consumption survey; 2) examining specifically at nutritionally vulnerable
16 There were only two female members in TAG, and one female project team member (international consultant on nutrition), and
among 18 numerators from MOP and IFReDI, there were four women. The IFReDI project management team was all male.
25 | P a g e
groups such as children under five years and also pregnant and lactating mothers; and 3) consultation and dissemination workshops.
The project may have benefitted from a more dedicated or deliberate strategy for engaging women and taking into account the impacts on other vulnerable group such as senior citizen, handicaps, children and ethnic minority throughout the project and have a specific gender stream of work.
The issue of gender imbalance is prevalent in most of the government institutions at the national and sub-national levels, except for the Women’s Affairs Ministries and Departments. However, the gender balance/justice consideration is more obvious in the CSOs.
At community level, more women participated in the meetings and workshop due to: 1) gender awareness; and 2) their male counter-parts are either occupied (out migration or working in the field) or fatigue from attending the meetings. Nonetheless, the quality of the gender group’s contribution to the deliberation and decision-making needs to be improved. More gender specific requirement such as: 1) make it very clearly that women and other vulnerable group are encouraged to attend; 2) facilitators must allow women and vulnerable group more time to speak their minds and contribute; and, 3) decision and discussion must be gender sensitive. None of the female interviewees in communities expressed any claim empowerment as a result of the research yet.
3.6.2 Research and communication of gender-specific impacts of dams
This gender specific focus was not explicitly envisaged in the project document, except for the focus on the nutrition vulnerability for the women, pregnant and young mothers, and kids under 5 years old. This limitation might be due to the budget constraints and priorities set by the partners for the first step of this complex modality.
3.7 KEY QUESTION 6: HOW EFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENTLY PROJECT RESOURCES WERE USED
3.7.1 Suitability of Project design
All Technical Advisory Group members interviewed thought that the design was fine given different the priorities and focus of all partners in this group. The initial perceived priority for some partners was to generate evidence-based research information for Sambor project dam discussion and for influencing key decision makers.
The problem was encountered during the implementation. Capacity for coordination of different components and means for doing that should have been in place and time allocation should have been more realistic.
The national interviewees argued that the dependencies of all three components were thought through but the issue was with the competency and attitude of some consultants. There was little internal coordination among them during the inception and project implementation phases. It was observed that a delay by one component (nutrition) had implication on other components financially, as time went by and level of efforts wasted while waiting for the outputs from other component.
26 | P a g e
Figure 3.11 Budget Allocation (IFReDI, 2013)
Figure 3.11 above shows the budget allocation. 50% ($165,201) of the total budget was for survey and research (fees and expenses), plus another 32% (US$106,376) for travel and related expenses. Only US$30,000 was made available for the publication and dissemination.
From the total fees, the budget for communication was only 2%. TAG members contributed their diverse set of skills and experience at no cost to the project. If the times and efforts of all TAG members were accounted for and translated into monetary values, it could easily have added up the total cost of the project by two to three times higher.
The project team members explained that the budget constraint forced changes in the field methodology, and the communication budget was drastically reduced in the budget re-allocation, resulting in much less budget for this component. The interviewees also pointed to the high cost for two international consultants.
3.7.2 Suggestion for change in project design and resources allocation for a future similar project
For the future projects, some of the key national interviewees (5/14) suggested that the design and scoping of the project should look for a different methodology which have a stronger gender agenda; a more regular and empowering community process, and also a more consistent approach to outreach using the local CSOs/networks in collaboration with relevant LAs.17
The national and provincial interviewees suggested the communication component and the management team (communication core members, and other component leaders) should be created to work on the common work plan and regular monitoring and evaluation. This is critical for common understanding and expectation, and ownership. It will certainly help address concern about the impact on other components’ activities due to delay by other components. The communication component should focus as well on coordination, generating agreement on
17 An Oxfam’s reviewer indicated that Oxfam agreed to put some resources into this gender mainstreaming and communication area.
27 | P a g e
approach and methodology, as well as on data management, and provide peer pressure on other component leaders to do their parts and deliver as agreed in the work plan and M&E framework.
The interviewees indicated budget and level of efforts for all key components (knowledge generation, transmission, and policy influence) should be considered within a light of the research for development objectives. Some interviewees suggested that the budget should be allocated for the communication and gender at least 25% of the total budget. Time allocation should be higher, as the project of this nature with involvement of wide range of stakeholders and partners, and given the capacity of the project team, is time consuming.
The national interviewees recommended that the dependency of outcomes from various components, phases with concrete milestones, and the risk management and stakeholder engagement/communication strategies must be dealt with, implemented and closely monitored.
Some of the interviewees recommended that a terms of reference must be in place for all key bodies in the project governance and positions including an overall coordinator who can propose ways in which integration and collaboration between the components (and the projects within them) can be improved without affecting inter-dependencies.
The interviewees also recommended that the project design should be focused more on stakeholder consultation and participation both at national and sub-national level and potentially in trans-boundary context.
The FiA and IFReDI’s senior management members requested that a proper incentive and resources allocation for supporting active involvement of government staff at national level and sub-national level for more effective coordination and carrying out technical works should have been improved.
Most of the national interviewees suggested that a robust quality assurance and quality control mechanism and Technical Advisory Group must be in place.
3.7.3 Components’ significance in the project design
All components of the project design are considered by most interviewees as equally important. High quality research and knowledge products and the policy relevant research project could not have achieved its objective without communication, effective packaging, transmitting and feed-back mechanism and continued improvement.
28 | P a g e
4.0 KEY CONCLUSIONS
The project team and partners have reason to be proud of the outcomes of the projects in spite of the challenge and novelty of this partnership model. The project rationale of supporting Fisheries Administration to advocate within Government on the issue of mainstream Mekong dams and food security and nutrition proved to be an effective strategy. The combination of the insider and outsider approaches was another positive aspect of the project. However the insider approach gained more attention, while the outsider approaches focusing on awareness raising and capacity building of communities and CSOs to advocate for changes to policies and plans were not adequately designed and budgeted for. The report (sub-heading 3.1) lists key factors affecting the project implementation.
Tangible Outcomes:
To most extent, the project managed to produce some assessment on food and nutrition security and vulnerability as planned. But two knowledge products (journal articles), and three communication products and event were abandoned. Moreover, inconsistency in component 1 – dam impacts - and the component 2 – nutrition vulnerability - was not addressed completely yet.
The project design was re-scoped a few times to accommodate urgent needs for policy influencing and financial resources constraints. The revision made in the inception report resulted in a much stronger focus on research components, much less funding for communication and no resources for supporting “ability of participating communities to assess impact and contribute to Environmental Impact Assessments”.
The project’s communications and dissemination strategy provided only a long list of targeted audience - regional and national actors, and some provincial departments and private sector. Private sector was not involved. Only means for dissemination for the sub-national authorities was the workshop, and only 9% of the budget was allocated for dissemination. Local communities were not listed in the Communication Strategy, but some of them were involved in the dissemination activities. The livelihood, gender consideration and justice as a result of the project were not considered in the project document.
Intangible Outcomes:
Through this project, IFReDI and FiA have gained more experience to work with multi-donors with a complexity of model financial requirement and in handling the research topic that was sensitive. With further support and commitment, IFReDI and FiA can use their gained knowledge and confidence to lobby policymakers to understand on how the fisheries and nutrition are contributing to people’s life as a whole.
FiA is found as an appropriate channel to deliver the message to top level of policymakers. It will require a strong commitment, robust and well-resourced communication and sustainability plan. There are good networks among key stakeholders such TWGF, Sub Group on dams and the Technical Advisory Group. They provide spaces to share and work experiences with many key stakeholders.
In particular, the Technical Advisory Group was highly instrumental and its model can be replicated for this highly technically and scientifically challenging and highly politically charged project.
In conclusion, the combination of the insider and outsider approaches is very positive and appealing aspect of the project. This strategy is a good one and can be strengthened by a more
29 | P a g e
nuanced and targeted influencing strategy among decision makers and key agencies, and also be complemented by strengthened community and CSO capacity building (more community empowering approaches).
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
The partnership model demonstrated its relevance and replication potential. It is true for every first step, there are always rooms for improvement, and lots of lessons to learnt from. Building on those lessons, our recommendations are suggested and grouped into short-term, medium and long term as follows:
5.1 SHORT TERM RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1.1 To Continue Driving for Sustainability
1) The IFReDI and FiA need to continue with their improvement and dissemination of knowledge products and information on dam impacts, fisheries, food security and nutrition and other related products. Specifically IFReDI may need to consider undertaking the following:
Addressing internal inconsistency of the two datasets and information in the synthesis report;
Further improvement of the knowledge products, and completion of the Khmer summary of the Synthesis Report, and convening of the roundtable discussion/conference.
Repackaging the findings into appropriate communication products to suit targeted audiences at national and sub-national levels; and
Ensuring continued leadership and active role of FiA senior management in personally disseminating the key findings and information to the right decision-makers including office of PM, Council of Ministers, MME, and the hydropower Investors and Developers.
2) It is important that technical and financial support will be mobilised to support these activities both from the existing partners and from the FiA/Government source.
3) Oxfam and its development partners should consider continuing supporting and using/sharing their useful experience with all partners and communities to influence policy development and basic rights including rights to information, equitable development, fair compensation, and better livelihood and well-being etc.
4) IFReDI/FiA and other LAs can continue to lead the knowledge generation, while Development Partners through the local CSOs, such as Cambodia’s Research and Development Team (CRDT), in Kratie and Stung Treng, and FACT’s ACCESS to information projects in many provinces around Tonle Sap and Mekong River etc, support in knowledge dissemination and empowerment of the communities at stake.
5.2 MEDIUM AND LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS
5.2.1 To improve and replicate this model in future projects
1) IFReDI/FiA and other partners should continue to replicate this modality and policy relevance research by scaling it up or scaling it out to other locations).
2) The future projects need to be supported by:
30 | P a g e
TAG with proper membership and resources and Steering Committee with broader membership from DGs of MEM, MOWRAM, MOE, CNMC, MAFF, for improving ownership and uptakes of scientific knowledge through continued consultation and peer support;
1) Future project design should cover related phases (for continuity) and key milestones, address dependency of outcomes from various components, and rigorous risk management and monitoring, evaluation and learning.
2) The strategy combining the insider and outsider approaches can be strengthened by a more nuanced and targeted influencing strategy among decision makers and key agencies, and complemented by community empowering approaches.
3) The design and scoping of the project should look for a more consistent approach to outreach using the most effective existing CSOs/networks in collaboration with relevant LAs.
4) The budget should be allocated adequately to the communication and gender. Time allocation should be higher, as the project of this nature is time consuming.
5) The design has to focus both on achieving scientific rigour and socially relevant, policy interface and uptake, cross-stakeholder collaboration, engagement with communities through appropriate knowledge development, communication and application strategy.
6) The qualifications, commitment and aptitude of the project team, especially the consultants are the key to success. No matter how good the model is, it cannot be successful without the right personalities and leadership, team-work, and commitment to sharing and communicating.
7) Place greater emphasis on ownership by FiA and other LAs in broader alliance.
8) The terms of reference must be in place for all key groupings (TAG, Project Steering Committee, and Project Team) and positions including an overall coordinator who can propose ways in which integration and collaboration between the components (and the projects within them) can be improved without compromising inter-dependencies.
9) Proper incentive mechanisms and resource allocation for supporting active involvement of FiA staff for more effective coordination and carrying out technical works must be improved.
31 | P a g e
5.2.2 To be more focused and strategic in maximising acceptance and absorption
There is an urgent need to do much to maximize infiltration and understanding of the findings among both the communities and decision-makers.
1) IFReDI/FiA is seen an ideal knowledge manager and influencer, but needs a set of activities designed to bring gradual, but continual improvement to a process through capacity building and constant review, and much stronger commitment to handle “sensitivity” with efficiency. Efforts should be made to have a similar entity or institute from the Ministry of Mines and Energy and Supreme National Economic Council joined in the project consortium.
2) Most importantly, effort will be made by the project (e.g. IFReDI, FiA and partners) in identifying and using proper pathway and champion to reach out to PM, DPMs, Ministers, Governors, EIA Companies, and developers. The current National Assembly (NA) set-up from the ruling and opposition parties, and practices in inviting the Ministers to answer to the questions by the NA will drive a growing need for scientific information.
Box 1 – Potential pathways and Influencers18
Considering the decision-making culture and political system in Cambodia, future projects or future collaborations should assess (and resource) how to present evidence-based research into various stages of policy process, improving informed EIA, and how to reach actual decision-makers, key influencer and opinion makers etc.
5.2.3 To invest more in levelling the playing field for affected communities
1) To continue support the strategy for maximising both insider and outsider approaches, it is critical to address the outsider approaches focusing on awareness raising and capacity building of communities and CSOs to advocate for changes to policies and plans which did not get adequate attention from the previous project. It is important to focus on how to frame future research collaborations to ensure more inclusive process for communities in research projects, and designing research outputs and research in general to empower communities within the processes of research.
18 There were some power relation analysis reports (see e.g., MK16, 2014 by Sokhem and his team at http://wle-
mekong.cgiar.org/download/mk16-evidence-based-iwrm-catchment/MK16_Conflict-Analysis-Power-Relations-Pursat-river-catchment.pdf). New project needs to conduct this analysis as part of its communication strategy.
• PM and his inner circle; • NA (activism, check and balance) • Ministers (MEM, COM, CARD, MOWRAM, MAFF,, MPH, MEYS, MOWA , SNEC, MoP,
CDC); • Governors of provinces and districts of the proposed project sites; • Existing and prospective developers and investors; • Local CSOs and Network, leaders/lead opinion makers; and • Media.
2) Oxfam and its development partners should consider continuing supporting some concerned communities to influence policy development and basic rights including rights to information, equitable development, fair compensation, and better livelihood and well-being.
3) The project’s focus should be on the community’s capacity and capacity development. It is a process of developing the institutions, attitudes, organisations and capabilities for collective action that allow the community to shape its own bargaining position. It is not focusing on technical, managerial or engineering, but has to do with power relations and conflict management, psychology; social adaptation, financial resources, incentives and motivation interact to shape mutually acceptable outcomes; “Many different approaches to change may be relevant”.
4) The projects need to support the concerned communities in generating a common voice to lobby their elected representatives in the Commune Council and National Assembly, as well as the provincial and municipal governors. Depending on his/her choice, the Governor of the province is in a position to bring to the Prime Minister and his Deputy PMs attention of the “evidence-based concerns” of their local communities through regular teleconference or report.
5) To achieve changes can be started from practices (attitude, beliefs and works on the grounds) of our key actors (high at policy level down to local level) that can be translated into policy at some points in the future. Successful demonstration, case studies and pilot activities will be needed to convince the changes.
6) Local CSOs and existing networks can contribute more in improving stakeholders’ inputs/feedback and consultation and dissemination in a more cost effective and long term impact-based manner.
5.2.4 To use most appropriate format and media
1) It is important to achieve a more targeted and sustained dissemination using appropriate fora, format and media including face to face meetings/training at national and local levels, leaflet, newsletter, and posters, mass media, especially radio and TV, video clips with real case e.g. Yali or other dam sites video for educational and awareness raising, shows/comedy about serious issues in a more relaxing/entertaining ways, and place more focus on those most affected stakeholders.
2) Creating incentives/interests in the training and consultation/dissemination, and proper strategy to address workshop fatigue and famous two ‘SSs’ in the Workshop (silence and sleep) such as:
o participants feel let down, when they did not see their comments and questions were not properly acknowledged or addressed; and
o Design training and events to suit their interest, levels and background, and demonstrate efforts in addressing comments and feed-back.
5.3 FUTURE RESEARCH
It is recommended that the assessment will be conducted to identify capacity and knowledge gaps and needs for senior policy makers, technical practitioners and local communities for informed hydropower development deliberation and decision-making. This assessment is considered as an
33 | P a g e
important starting point for the knowledge management which will guide the planning and development of all relevant activities moving forward.
Some good suggestions gathered during this evaluation include in addition to the information on nutrition and food security impacts, more accurate information should be provided on:
Food security impacts and ripple effects including domestic violence, burden on women and bread winner, and future generation of human resources - health, growth and intelligence quotient (IQ) level.
Focus on multiple factors affecting food security and nutrition such as other dams development and water diversions within and beyond Cambodia.
More specific impacts from dams at specific locations and time-lines, and what would that mean for the communities and families during the study, before the commission of the construction, during the construction and during the operation.
Continue with knowledge development on fisheries, ecosystems, and livelihood issues and options, resettlement, compensation, and livelihood restoration, as well as on protection of internationally significant sites (e.g. Ramsar Site, Dolphin habitats, and other species of global and local significance).
Comprehensive economic analysis and cost and benefit sharing mechanism - clarifying who benefits, and who will have to bear the cost, and how to ensure equitable distribution of benefit and reduce externality by the developers and operators, and support for strengthening community participation and gender mainstreaming in development deliberation, proper dam operation rules and flow release as well as fish passage.
Cumulative impacts from all dam developments need to discuss in more details and more certain impact statements be generated, for considering other domino impacts (social, environmental and economic);
Assess impact of dams on endangered Dolphins that are migrating from Kratie to Khone falls, and their critical deep-pools around and near the proposed dam project sites, by generating more information on dam dis-connectivity impact and fatality due to power turbine and other incidents.
Build capacity in disaster risk management and early warning (on flow fluctuation due dam operation, sudden release, and dam break etc.)
34 | P a g e
6.0 REFERENCES
Oxfam, 2014. Program Evaluation Terms of Reference - Food and Nutritional Security Impact of Mekong Dams – Research and Capacity Building Initiative;
IFReDI, 2011. Revised Project Document - Food and Nutritional Security Impact of Mekong Dams – Research and Capacity Building Initiative;
IFReDI, July 2011. Project Inception Report - Food and Nutritional Security Impact of Mekong Dams – Research and Capacity Building Initiative;
IFReDI, November 2011. Communications and Dissemination Strategy - Food and Nutritional Security Impact of Mekong Dams – Research and Capacity Building Initiative;
TAG, 2011-2013, Series of Meeting Minutes.
IFReDI, September 2013. Back to Office Report on the Dissemination Workshops in four targeted provinces (in Khmer) Food and Nutritional Security Impact of Mekong Dams – Research and Capacity Building Initiative;
IFReDI, June 2013. Back to Office Report on the National Dissemination Workshops in Phnom Penh (in Khmer), Food and Nutritional Security Impact of Mekong Dams – Research and Capacity Building Initiative;
IFReDI, June 2013. Synthesis Report on Food and Nutrition Security Vulnerability to Mainstream Hydropower Dam Development in Cambodia, Food and Nutritional Security Impact of Mekong Dams – Research and Capacity Building Initiative;
IFReDI, 2013. Key Points for Consideration (Policy Brief) on Food and Nutrition Security Vulnerability to Mainstream Hydropower Dam Development in Cambodia, Food and Nutritional Security Impact of Mekong Dams – Research and Capacity Building Initiative;
Oxfam, ANCP Annual Summary Report for the Period 1st July 2010 to 30th June 2011.
Oxfam, 2012, ANCP Progress Report on: Food and Nutrition Security Impact of Mekong Dam.
Australian Government, 2012. AusAID NGO Cooperation Program, Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Framework, May 2012.
Oxfam comments on Impacts of mainstream dams on fish yield and consumption in Cambodia Inland report March 2012.
APPENDICES
________________________________________________
Appendix A1
Evaluation Terms of Reference
Appendix A2
Semi Structured Questionnaires
Appendix A3 Progress/Achievements Against
the Project Log Frame
Outputs Means of Verification Status
1. An assessment of food and nutrition security sensitivity and adaptive capacity to mainstream hydropower dam development in Cambodia.
By Jan 2012 Project Report: ‘Food and nutrition security sensitivity and adaptive capacity to mainstream hydropower dam development in Cambodia’.
Not seen
By Feb 2012 journal article: ‘Food and nutrition security sensitivity to dam development in Cambodia’.
Not completed
By March 2012: Project Final Technical Report. Synthesis Report completed in 2013 (Khmer version was completed in June 2014)
By April 2012: Other communication products. See below
2. An assessment of food and nutrition security exposure and vulnerability in Cambodia to mainstream hydropower dam development arising from forecasted changes in the supply of fish and other aquatic animals (OAA) after accounting for adaptive capacity.
By Feb 2012 Project Report: ‘Food and Nutrition Security Vulnerability to Mainstream Hydropower Dam Development in Cambodia’.
Not seen
By Feb 2012: Journal article: Food and Nutrition Security Vulnerability to Mainstream Hydropower Dams in Cambodia’.
Abandoned due to departure of Team leader
By March 2012: Project Final Technical Report.
Synthesis Report in Nov 2013 (Khmer version completed in June 2014)
By April 2012: Five communications products were outlined in this strategy, primarily targeting the print media with additional consideration given to websites and decision makers (five Khmer-language, three Chinese-language and two English-language publications) as well as seven international news agencies with offices in Phnom Penh (from France, the United States, Germany, Japan, Britain, Vietnam and China). Five domestic and two foreign television networks have also been identified along with seven foreign and domestic radio stations that broadcast mainly in Khmer but also English, French and Vietnamese.
Not seen during the evaluation Five communication products were listed in the Communication Strategy. Two of them were developed and distributed (selectively), while a few others remain to be seen. They include: 1) Illustrated Khmer
language summary of the synthesis report;
2) News Releases?; and
3) Round-table discussion with video presentation on mainstream dam impacts.
3. Communicated and disseminated project Outputs 1 and 2.
By April 2012 Mailing/distribution lists, dissemination workshop reports, presentation materials, news articles, and submitted / published journal articles, web sites with links to technical and final reports.
Four provincial and one national dissemination workshops were organized
19.
Website was hacked.
19 5000 key consideration note (policy briefs) in English and 5000 Khmer and 1200 synthesis report in English were printed in June
2013 (some of them were distributed in Kratie and Stung Treng, Siem Reap, Kampong Chhnang dissemination workshops, national fish day in Kampong Cham 2013, National Fish day Kampong Chhnang July 1, 2014, and other national and regional events) . 1200 synthesis report in Khmer was printed June 2014 (distributed National Fish day Kampong Chhnang July 1, 2014, sent 5 copies to minister of MAFF).
