addis.unep.orgaddis.unep.org/projectdatabases/00510/documents/gfl-4c72 li - annexes.pdfannex 1....

Annex 1. Project Document

1

F

PROJECT DOCUMENT

SECTION 1: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION

1.1 Project title: Agrobiodiversity Conservation and Man and the Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: Bridging Managed and Natural Landscapes

1.2 Project number: GFL: 4158 PMS: 510 1.3 Project type: FSP

1.4 Trust Fund: GEF

1.5 Strategic objectives:

GEF strategic long-term objective: BD1 BD2

Strategic programme for GEF IV: SP3; SP5

1.6 UNEP priority: Ecosystem management

1.7 Geographical scope: National

1.8 Mode of execution: External

1.9 Project executing organization: Instituto de Investigaciones Fundamentales en Agricultura Tropical (INIFAT),

Bioversity International

1.10 Duration of project: 60 months Commencing: December 2012 Completion: December 2017


2

1.11 Cost of project US$ %

Cost to the GEF Trust Fund 1,368,182 32.98

Co-financing

Cash

INIFAT 145,316 3.50Bioversity 498,602 12.02ProNaturaleza 107,018 2.58INIFAT PGR&PB Dept. 50,000 1.21FAO 60,000 1.45Sub-total 860,936 20.75

In-kind

INIFAT 881,712 21.26BIOVERSITY 732,378 17.66UNESCO 200,000 4.82Diversity &Development 45,000 1.08FAO-Land Water Division 60,000 1.45Sub-total 1,919,090 46.26

Total 4,148,208 100


3

1.12 Project summary

The development goal of the project is to conserve biodiversity within and around protected areas in ways that improve the livelihoods of rural communities and sustain ecosystem functions in and around the Man and the Biosphere (MaB) Reserves in Cuba. The project objective is to mainstream agrobiodiversity into the management of Cuban MaB Reserve system. The project will seek to achieve its goal and objective through the implementation of three components: Mainstreaming mechanisms that integrate high levels of agrobiodiversity into MaB buffer and transition zones (Component 1); Improved protected area management systems and capacity building (Component 2); Improved livelihoods from increased benefit flow within protected areas (Component 3) The project focuses on agrobiodiversity conservation and sustainable use in Cuba’s Man and Biosphere Reserves and its mainstreaming in protected area management. It will identify ecologically sound agricultural practices in resilient landscapes that contribute to the sustainability of the protected areas and the livelihoods of rural communities. The project will support and mainstream sustainable uses of agrobiodiversity that build on traditional knowledge and bio-cultural values, and foster community and stakeholder participation in ways that encourage long-term custodianship and highlight the resilience and innovative resources that agrobiodiversity provides for society. The project will work closely with a range of stakeholders and beneficiaries including farmers and communities, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), universities and government agencies across relevant sectors including environment, agriculture, education and tourism.


4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION ............................................................................................... 1 SECTION 2: BACKGROUND AND SITUATION ANALYSIS (BASELINE COURSE OF ACTION) ................ 8

2.1. Background and context.................................................................................................8 2.2. Global significance ........................................................................................................12 2.3 Threats, root causes and barrier analysis ...................................................................14 2.4. Institutional, sectoral and policy context ....................................................................18 2.5. Stakeholder mapping and analysis ..............................................................................24 2.6. Baseline analysis and gaps............................................................................................26 2.7. Linkages with other GEF and non-GEF interventions..............................................28

SECTION 3: INTERVENTION STRATEGY (ALTERNATIVE) ................................................................. 33 3.1. Project rationale, policy conformity and expected global environmental benefits .33 3.2. Project goal and objective ............................................................................................40 3.3. Project components and expected results ...................................................................41 3.4. Intervention logic and key assumptions ......................................................................50 3.5. Risk analysis and risk management measures ...........................................................52 3.6. Consistency with national priorities or plans .............................................................56 3.7. Incremental cost reasoning ..........................................................................................58 3.8. Sustainability .................................................................................................................61 3.9. Replication .....................................................................................................................64 3.10. Public awareness, communications and mainstreaming strategy ............................65 3.11. Environmental and social safeguards..........................................................................66

SECTION 4: INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS.................. 68 SECTION 5: STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION ..................................................................................... 72 SECTION 6: MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN.......................................................................... 74 SECTION 7: PROJECT FINANCING AND BUDGET............................................................................... 76 APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Budget by project components and UNEP budget lines Appendix 2: Co-financing by source and UNEP budget lines Appendix 3: Incremental cost analysis Appendix 4: Results Framework Appendix 5: Workplan and timetable Appendix 6: Key deliverables and benchmarks Appendix 7: Monitoring and Evaluation Plan, with Indicative costs Appendix 8: Summary of reporting requirements and responsibilities Appendix 9: Standard Terminal Evaluation TOR Appendix 10: Decision-making flowchart and organogram Appendix 11: Terms of Reference Appendix 12: Co-financing commitment letters from project partners Appendix 13: Endorsement letters of GEF National Focal Points Appendix 14: Draft procurement plan Appendix 15: Tracking Tools


5

ANNEXES Annex A. Baseline status of agrobiodiversity in Sierra del Rosario Biosphere Reserve (RBSR)

and the Cuchillas del Toa Biosphere Reserve (RBCT). Annex B. List of plant species in Sierra del Rosario Biosphere Reserve (RBSR) and the Cuchillas

del Toa Biosphere Reserve (RBCT). Annex C. Cuba’s National System of Protected Areas. Annex D. Public Involvement Plan. Annex E. List of documents and existing datasets consulted for Cuba-MAB baseline study. Annex F. Methodological Framework and Key Issues and Questions. Annex G. Indicators for resilience in socio-ecological production landscapes for adaptation and

use in agricultural biodiversity landscapes in Cuba MAB reserves. Annex H. Policy and Institutional Framework Annex I. Draft Project Communication Strategy Action Plan


6

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ABD Agricultural Biodiversity ACTAF Cuban Association of Agricultural and Forest Technicians ANAP National Association of Small Farmers BGS Baskets of Goods and Services BOKU Universitaet fuer Bodenkultur // University of Natural Resources and Life

Sciences CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CBM Community-based biodiversity management CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research CITMA Ministry of Environment Science and Technology CNAP National Center for Protected Areas COP Conference of the Parties CRPs CGIAR Research Programmes CUC Convertible Cuban Peso CUP Cuban Peso EA EOU

Executing Agency Evaluation and Oversight Unit

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations GBI GEF Benefits Index GEF Global Environment Facility GPA Global Plan of Action for the Conservation and Sustainable Utilization of

Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture GSPC Global Strategy for Plant Conservation IDRC International Development Research Centre ICSU International Council for Science IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development IIASTD International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and

Technology for Development INIFAT National Institute for Fundamental Research on Tropical Agriculture IPBES Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services IPSI International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative ITPGRFA International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture ISTOM Ecole supérieure d'Agro Développement International MAB Man and the Biosphere MACAC Campesino-A-Campesino Agroecological Movement MDGS Millennium Development Goals MEA Millennium Ecosystem Assessment MINAG Ministry of Agriculture MINAZ Ministry of Sugar MINED Ministry of Education MININT Ministry of the Interior MINTUR Ministry of Tourism NBSAP National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan NGOS Non-Governmental Organizations


7

NPC National Project Coordinator PA Protected Area PAR Platform for Agricultural Research PECS Programme on Ecosystem Change and Society PES Payment for Ecosystem Services PIF Project Identification Form PIR Project Implementation Review PMU Project Management Unit PNAU/ASU National Programme of Urban and Suburban Agriculture PoW Programme of Work PPG Project Preparation Grant PSC Project Steering Committee RBCT Cuchillas del Toa Biosphere Reserve RBSR Sierra del Rosario Biosphere Reserve SBSTTA Subsidiary Body for Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice SIGAP Geographic Information System of Protected Areas SNAP National System of Protected Areas TAC Technical Advisory Committee UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNU-IAS United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies WNBR World Network of Biosphere Reserves


8

SECTION 2: BACKGROUND AND SITUATION ANALYSIS (BASELINE COURSE OF ACTION)

2.1. Background and context

1. The Republic of Cuba is part of the Greater Antilles and comprises the Island of Cuba, the Isle of Youth and some 4000 keys and islets. Cuba is the most important island in the region in terms of biodiversity, particularly for plant diversity, with more than 6,500 vascular plants, 612 species of vertebrates and 7500 species of insects and arachnids, making it a top conservation priority for the Caribbean hotspot region. It also has the highest degree of endemism with 52.4% of its flowering plants1 and 32% of its vertebrates unique to the country. Approximately 85% of the reptiles and 100% of the amphibians2 are endemic. In addition, approximately 10% of the total fauna and 2% of vascular plants are considered at risk or endangered. Cuba has a large variety of ecosystems (42 types) and landscapes (23 types), ranging from arid and semiarid lands to humid tropical forests and mountains. Tropical lowlands cover 75% of the territory, whereas mountains cover 18% and humid coastal lands cover the remaining 4%. Like in many developing countries, the biodiversity of Cuba has been declining due to the modification of natural habitats and the country is one of 11 countries in the world in the greatest need of plant biodiversity conservation.3

2. Cuba is a major refuge for unique components of agrobiodiversity which are crucial for human well-being in tropical island environments. Although it is not among the primary centers of origin and crop domestication identified by Vavilov (1926), later studies (Hammer et al., 1992–1994; Castineiras et.al Castiñeiras et al., 2002, 2006),) have documented a high diversity of crop plants, including land races, wild relatives, and early introductions of crop plants that have continued to evolve over hundreds of years and thus Cuba can be considered as a secondary center of crop diversity for the neotropics. The diversity of plant species is impressive: including over 1200 useful species about 17% of the world crop species, including three endemic ones: Protium cubense, Garcinia aristata and Piper aduncum subsp. ossanum used as condiments in eastern Cuba. In addition to the diversity of tropical food staples, Cuba’s small scale agriculture and protected areas contain most of the plant species used as ornamentals, medicinals, fruits, condiments, crafts and timber. Species and varieties of mamey or sapote (Pouteria sapota), cherimoya (Annona reticulata), guanabana (Annona muricata), plantain and bananas (Musa spp.), guayaba (Psidium guajava), mango (Mangifera indica), coffee (Coffea arabica), malanga (Xanthosoma sagittifolium), manioc (Manihot esculenta) and beans (Phaseolus vulgaris and lunatus) are globally significant for both biodiversity conservation and livelihoods. This high crop species diversity is due in part to the influence of immigrants from Africa, Asia and Europe, who introduced a number of useful plants that are now part of the typical landscapes and ecology of Cuba. The distribution of this crop diversity is not homogeneous across the island with the highest diversity in the western region and lowest in eastern, however the latter region shows more intraspecific variability, e.g. yam (Dioscorea spp.), cowpea (Cajanus cajan) and Capsicum annuum. These biodiversity components provide a range of ecosystem services, including food, decomposition and nutrient cycling, crop pollination and seed dispersal. The bio-cultural

1 Conservation International. 2011. Biodiversity Hotspots: Caribbean Islands. Retrieved 4 April 2011 from

http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/xp/hotspots/caribbean/pages/biodiversity.aspx. 2 Blair Hedges, S. (1999). Distribution Patterns of Amphibians in the West Indies. Patterns of distribution of amphibians: A global perspective In Duellman, W.E. (Ed). Pp. 211-254 3 Giam, X., Bradshaw, C.J.A., Tan, H.T.W., & Sodhi, N.S. (2010). Future habitat loss and the conservation of

plant biodiversity. Biological Conservation 143(7): 1594‐1602. July.


9

landscapes4 where this diversity is maintained also provide recreational and spiritual spaces for ecotourism and income generation.

3. The agricultural genetic resources essential for sustainable agricultural production systems, including traditional varieties of beans, sweet potato, edible aroids, peanuts, and peppers and crop wild relatives of beans, tomatoes, and peppers, neo-tropical fruits, roots and tubers, and spices, along with a rich diversity of associated organisms can still be found in Cuba’s Man and the Biosphere Reserves and the small family farms within and around them.

4. Traditional agricultural biodiversity management practices were already present when the Cuban MaB biosphere reserves were established and they contribute to the unique ecosystem features and mosaic landscapes of these protected areas. The bio-cultural heritage found in Cuban Biosphere Reserves is largely attributable to the complex ecosystem interactions between the productive and livelihood activities of local communities in the reserves and biodiversity resources that comprise their livelihood assets. Diverse sets of wild, semi-wild and domesticated plant species found in the reserves have tolerated human activities and in many cases relied on traditional agricultural practices for their continued survival and ability to evolve to changing environmental conditions, both natural and anthropogenic.

5. However, positive elements of farmer community management of the interface between natural ecosystems and agricultural landscapes in biosphere reserves have not been adequately assessed and documented. Useful practices, traditional crop varieties, traditional knowledge and genetic diversity of edible and useful plants and animals have not been adequately documented and mainstreamed into national agricultural, environmental, and development policies and institutions. This gap limits the adaptive capacity and sustainability of agriculture in Cuba. The gap also leads to an undervaluation of biodiversity in protected areas and its contribution to the national development goals, especially food sovereignty, food security and incomes for rural communities. In the face of climate change impacts that include more intense hurricanes, storms, flooding and drought, conserving agrobiodiversity, including genetic resources, crop wild relatives, and mosaic landscapes is essential, for the adaptation and resilience of tropical agro-ecosystems. Recent policy and institutional changes in Cuba that prioritize food security and food sovereignty also require the mainstreaming of agrobiodiversity to produce more diverse and nutritious foods locally. While a growing awareness exists, biosphere reserve managers and policy makers lack the knowledge and tools to systematically consider the use of agrobiodiversity as an option to improve the conservation of protected areas and to mainstream biodiversity for more sustainable agriculture.

6. Globally, agrobiodiversity and managed landscapes play key roles in the management of protected areas. Agricultural landscapes located around critical habitats for wild species of

4 “The term ‘cultural landscape’ embraces a diversity of manifestations of the interaction between humankind and its natural environment. Cultural landscapes often reflect specific techniques of sustainable land-use, considering the characteristics and limits of the natural environment they are established in, and a specific spiritual relation to nature. Protection of cultural landscapes can contribute to modern techniques of sustainable land-use and can maintain or enhance natural values in the landscape. The continued existence of traditional forms of land-use supports biological diversity in many regions of the world”. http://whc.unesco.org/en/culturallandscape/. Bio-cultural landscape denotes mosaic landscapes including wild and cultivated components of biodiversity created and managed by local communities with distinctive cultures (biocultural diversity). These landscapes are the focus of conservation and development agencies around the world seeking to maintain and enhance positive synergies between people and biodiversity in meeting human needs, especially food sovereignty, healthy ecosystems, and well being. (See COP8, UNESCO side event;. COP10 Satoyama, UNCRD side events. Eyzaguirre, 2008, 2010) also http://www.christensenfund.org/issues/resilient-landscapes/


10

national and global importance are a priority investment for mainstreaming biodiversity.5 Biodiversity conservation strategies need to adopt integrated approaches that build on synergistic relationships between agricultural production, biodiversity conservation, and rural livelihoods within a landscape context. Small farms, home gardens and conucos 6 located within MaB reserves have maintained traditional varieties even after the introduction of modern cultivars and promotion of monocultures of imported varieties by centralized, state-run development projects. This has important implications for in situ conservation of threatened diversity, especially tropical horticultural crops, neglected and underutilized species, and species that are difficult to preserve ex situ (i.e., vegetatively propagated crops and tropical fruit trees).7 For example, sapote (Pouteria sapota, or red mamey), is valued for its flavour and growing economic potential as an export; because the greatest diversity of Pouteria sapota exists near the forest and nature reserves in Cuba, conucos within or surrounding those reserves are prime sites for in situ conservation and a breeding ground for developing high-value sapote cultivars. While conucos and home gardens provide an optimal environment where other species can flourish under its canopy, the number of sapote trees is declining due in part to a decline in conucos and traditional farming practices; therefore, the future of sapote is linked to diversity and management of these conucos and small farms within biosphere reserves.8

7. The conucos and home gardens host a high diversity of valuable cultivated and wild species despite the relatively small space they occupy, which is commonly located near the house.9 The baseline review of traditional home gardens and conucos (see Annex A) documented the variations in their composition and structure are based largely on topography and rainfall, especially proximity to forests. Despite the variations, conucos and home gardens generally display multi-strata vegetation (e.g., subterranean, herbaceous, bushes, and trees) along with cultivated species, wild species, and weeds in each stratum, with the cultivated species constituting the greatest proportion, maximizing efficiencies of water use, soil nutrients, and solar radiation. Microenvironments have historically been neglected by agricultural research, extension, and development workers because of their small size, specialized conditions, and often ephemeral nature. The baseline study conducted an exhaustive review of the literature on agrobiodiversity maintained within small scale systems and niches (see Annex E, List of data bases and documents consulted for Cuba MaB Baseline). Nonetheless, they often preserve cultivated biodiversity at the genetic and species level, and are important for household nutrition,

5 S. Scherr & J. McNeely (2007) Farming with Nature: The Science and Practice of Ecoagriculture. Wash: Island Press.10. Perfecto, I., J. Vandermeer and A. Wright (2009) Natures’s Matrix, Linking agriculture, conservation, and food security. Earthscan, London 6 Conuco is a Taino word used in Caribbean Spanish to refer to a family farm consisting of small plots used to grow a variety of tropical foods including fruit trees, maize, beans, vegetables, condiments, roots and tubers; they are commonly located near secondary forests. 7 Fundora Mayor, Z., Shagarodsky, T., & Castiñeiras, L. (2004). Sampling methods for the study of genetic diversity in home gardens of Cuba. In P. Eyzaguirre & O. Linares (Eds.), Home Gardens and Agrobiodiversity (pp. 56-77). Washington: Smithsonian Books. 8 Shagarodsky, T., Castiñeiras, L., Fuentes, V., & Cristóbal, R. (2004). Characterization in situ of the variability of sapote or mamey in Cuban home gardens. In P. Eyzaguirre & O. Linares (Eds.), Home Gardens and Agrobiodiversity (pp. 56-77). Washington: Smithsonian Books. 9 Castiñeiras, L., Fundora Mayor, Z., & Shagarodsky, T. (2001). Contribution of home gardens to in situ conservation of plant genetic resources in farming systems – Cuban component. In J.W. Watson & P. Eyzaguirre (Eds.), Home Gardens and In situ Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources in Farming Systems (pp. 42-56). Rome: Bioversity International.


11

health, and income.10 Understanding the management of family farms, conucos and home gardens in Cuban MaB Reserves and the environmental, socio-economic, and policy factors that play a role is crucial both for in situ agrobiodiversity conservation and natural ecosystem conservation within protected areas, and for the livelihoods of the people who live within the reserves.

8. The main issue facing the MaB Reserves is how to manage both natural and bio-cultural production landscapes as part of a single conservation and management plan for the specific protected area. Currently, the agricultural landscapes are tolerated but not part of the management plans and their value and potential contribution to development is less than optimal because the agrobiodiversity components are not well documented to determine relative impacts and thresholds for natural landscapes and managed for mainstreaming.

9. To address these gaps, the proposed project will provide evidence-based strategies, plans and practices that include agrobiodiversity functions in maintaining the wild and cultivated interface, buffers and biodiversity corridors as well as resilient and productive agricultural landscapes. Synergies and opportunities for collaboration between the National Center for Protected Areas (CNAP) and the National Institute for Fundamental Research on Tropical Agriculture (INIFAT) will be created for the inclusion of production landscapes in reserves management plans. In addition in situ conservation in MaB reserves will be linked with other institutions including the Cuban agricultural genebank in INIFAT to support and back up in situ conservation and mainstreaming of indigenous and endemic crop genetic resources. Currently, different ministries and departments of agriculture, environment, forestry, and fisheries have limited opportunities to produce integrated management plans that cut across natural resources to include both conservation and development concerns. The project will adapt and apply the practice and experience of cross-cutting platforms and strategies that conserve biodiversity in protected areas by highlighting the sustainable use of agrobiodiversity.

10. Cuba has six MaB reserves distributed in all major ecozones of the national territory (Baconao, Buenavista, Ciénag de Zapata, Cuchillas del Toa, Península de Guanahacabibes, Sierra del Rosario. See map below). The project will focus on two of the six Cuban MaB Reserves: the Sierra del Rosario Biosphere Reserve (RBSR) in the Pinar del Rio Province in southwestern Cuba and the Cuchillas del Toa Biosphere Reserve (RBCT) in the Guantánamo Province in northeastern Cuba. Both reserves are important reservoirs of genetic material and of many fruit and horticultural species and varieties that are currently under threat within the larger, more intensive agriculture systems elsewhere in Cuba. These two reserves have been chosen for this project as they contain the largest area of agricultural landscapes, the largest number of farm families, and cover the full range of agroecosystems found in Cuba. In addition, their geographical distribution at either end of the island, and differences in climate and associated vegetation provides a basis to document and compare a the full range of existing agrobiodiversity and its’ management by farmers. The baseline information that was consulted during the PPG phase confirms that nearly all information and materials pertinent to agrobiodiversity can be found in these two Reserves. In addition, both Reserves have specific management objectives to explore the uses and better conserve agrobiodiversity.

10 Guarino, L. & Hoogendijk, M. (2004). Microenvironments. In P. Eyzaguirre & O. Linares (Eds.), Home Gardens and Agrobiodiversity (pp. 31-40). Washington: Smithsonian Books.


12

11. The approach the project will take in the two Biosphere reserve is to do a complete assessment of the agricultural landscapes, their extent, location, management practices and species composition and interactions. The project will then look at the interactions between the social-ecological production landscapes and the natural ecosystems of the protected areas, to assess synergies and negative impacts that can be addressed through the improved management and use of agrobiodiversity. Because the agricultural landscapes have an important bio-cultural component that adds value to the Biosphere reserve in terms of local management capacity and knowledge and in the sustainable production of goods and services from the Reserves, the project will also examine the organization, livelihood status and well-being of family farms and communities in the Reserves. The lessons from the RBSR and RBCT will cover the full range of ecosystem and small scale traditional farming practices likely to be found in other Reserves in Cuba and will thus be communicated through the National System of Protected Areas (SNAP) as part of their regular planning and evaluation cycle. Together these activities will contribute to achieving the objectives of the 3 main project components and outcomes and generating knowledge and experience and conserving biodiversity that is of global value.

2.2. Global significance

12. Cuba's protected area system is part of the global Man and the Biosphere Programme (MaB) of UNESCO covering 553 reserves in 107 countries, representing the world’s most important ecosystems with unique biodiversity. The unique bio-cultural heritage found in Cuban Reserves can be attributed to the complex, long-standing interactions between the productive activities of farm households and communities within the biosphere and its buffer zones, and the ecosystems and biological resources that comprise their livelihood assets. The two reserves (RBSR and RBCT) contain most of Cuba’s endemic agrobiodiversity of global significance of


13

potential importance for global food security, adapatation to climate change and resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses, including both traditional varieties and their wild relatives (e.g., legumes such as lima bean, common bean, peanut, neo-tropical fruits such as annonas, guavas, avocadoes and mamey, roots and tubers such as Xanthosoma (malanga), particularly resistant during extreme meteorological events, Manihot esculenta, both tolerant to drought, and sweet potato (Ipomea batatas) plus eleven wild Ipomea species, and many Cucurbita land races and ruderal variants, plus unique Capsicum diversity and wild relatives). They also contain a rich diversity of associated organisms that are essential for sustainable agricultural production systems. These systems in turn provide both important ecosystem services (e.g. pollination, organic matter cycling, and soil erosion reduction) and income generation for local populations. The reserves are refuges and reservoirs of useful species and genetic diversity of many tropical fruit and horticultural cultivars that are under threat within the larger, more intensive agriculture systems. The productive activities of farm households and communities within the biosphere and its buffer zones, and the ecosystems and biological resources that comprise their livelihood assets.

13. The two reserves host some varieties of global significance that are extremely valuable for the rural communities living there. According to a study carried out by INIFAT between 2005 and 2007, 22 landraces of P. vulgaris were identified in Cuba, of which 10 can only be found in RBSR and two only in RBCT. Twenty-five landraces of Lima beans (P. lunatus) were found in the two reserves. The two reserves offer unique intraspecific variability also for maize which is recognized in Latin America and Caribbean regions for its singularity and its good general combining ability. Of the 18 landraces found in Cuba, 12 can only be found in RBCT and 6 only in RBSR. Among the traditional cultivars Canilla, Criollo and White dent are worth mentioning. Of the 30 landraces (cultivated and natural hybrids) of the complex C. annuum-chinense-frutecens, 16 can only be found in RBSR and five only in RBCT. Finally, five types of yam (Dioscorea spp.), a staple food for the rural communities of the northeastern part of the island, can be found only in RBCT. Several fruit trees found the two reserves have a significant intraspecific variability. The project will be working with: The Antillean race of avocado (Persea americana) has resulted highly tolerant to salinity; Psidium spp, is an important source of food not only for humans but also for wild fauna, while Psidium silvestre is used for the preparation of a typical drink (guayabita del Pinar). These fruit trees provide food at critical times of year, late spring and summer, when production of vegetables and grain decreases

14. The total number of species identified in Cuba (Hammer et al 1994, last inventory to date) numbers 1029. Considering that RBSR and RBCT host 517 species (see Annex B), the two reserves contain approximately 50% of the cultivated plants, distributed in 2,273 km2 (250 km2 for RBSR and 2,023 km2 for RBCT), which corresponds to 21% of the total area of the island, 105 000 km2, excluding the cayos (small islands) where no agriculture is practiced. In summary, the work in the two reserves will allow the management and conservation of a significant percentage of planted varieties on the island, and most important, 26 of these varieties can only be found in the two reserves.

15. Improving the management of the two reserves will also ensure the conservation of endemic fauna that only lives in the two reserves. BRSR hosts 12 endemic species of birds, 10 endemic species of freshwater fish, of which three are only found in this reserve (Girardinus creolus, uninotatus and cubensis). BRCT hosts the habitat of the most typical Cuban mammalian fauna, the manatee (Trichechus manatus) and the carpintero real (Campephilus principalis).


14

16. Both reserves host several plants that are included in the red list of Cuban vascular flora (2005)11 and some of them are in danger of extinction at different levels (e.g. Laplacea curtyana; Sloanea amygdalina, Manilkara jaimiqui, Rheedia aristata, Cissus grisebachii in BRSR; and Magnolia cubensis, Tabebuia dubia, Bactris cubensis, and Calyptronoma plumeriana in BRCT). Both reserves also host several endemic forest and fruit trees. Protium fragans and cubensis, Micropholis polita, Sideroxylon jibilla, Calophyllum utile, Bonnetia cubensis, Acrosynanthus latifolius, Pinus cubensis and Guatteira moralesii found in BRCT, Phyllomelia coronata a monotypic endemic genera in BRSR.

2.3 Threats, root causes and barrier analysis

17. Threats to the dynamic relationship between agrobiodiversity and conservation within MaB Reserves targeted by the project, and the communities and farm households living within them are significant. Lack of practical knowledge on how the agricultural mosaic landscapes and traditional farming systems within Cuba’s MaB reserves provide a supportive matrix for biodiversity conservation has led to an under-valuation and lack of support for these synergistic practices that can meet multiple conservation and development objectives. The results of this gap are continued threats to the integrity and functions of ecosystems in the Biosphere reserves themselves as well as to the livelihoods of farm families practicing eco-agriculture within the Reserves and its transitions zones. These threats range from high-level overarching themes, such as a lack of understanding of the role of agrobiodiversity in natural biodiversity conservation, to low-level issues specific to one reserve, such as increased soil erosion in RBCT reserve. The following paragraphs describe these threats, their root causes, and barriers to overcoming these root causes.

18. Increased pressure from extractive practices such as mining and logging, and the promotion of diversity-poor agricultural practices, contributing to soil runoff and silting of coastal marine areas and wetlands, are combining to increase the threats to the unique and globally significant biodiversity. Over 100,000 people living in the MaB reserves depend on agriculture and fishing for their livelihoods. Yet their community management practices, which have for generations conserved the wild-cultivated crop interface that characterizes these productive, mosaic landscapes is not taken into account under the protected area management plans. Nor has the promotion of biodiversity-rich agricultural buffer zones been adequately addressed by the formal agricultural research and development sectors. To do this, the role that small family farms play in managing Cuba’s rich patrimony of biodiversity for sustainable agriculture and improved ecosystem functions needs to be recognized, understood and mainstreamed into the management of the MaB reserve system.

Barriers which are intrinsic to the project and which it will seek to address include:

11 Berazaín Iturralde R., F. Areces Berazaín, J.C. Lazcano Lara y L.R. González Torres (2005). Lista Roja de la Flora Vascular Cubana. Jardín Botánico Atlántico, Documentos 4, Gijón, 86 pp.


15

19. The role of agrobiodiversity in the MaB Reserves is excluded from reserve management plans: A gap in knowledge and understanding of agrobiodiversity in the project MaB Reserves is an intrinsic barrier as the study of agrobiodiversity in protected areas is a relatively novel concept. There is also a barrier due to the lack of common methodologies for the use of reserve managers and plant genetic resources scientists concerned with agrobiodiversity in biosphere reserves. While there is a strong interest on the part of the various ministries, agencies, and organizations to work together, in many cases this will be a new experience, and procedures and methods will need to be worked out. The project specifically addresses these barriers and root causes by investing in improved understanding of agrobiodiversity conservation and bringing various reserve stakeholders and decision-makers together with scientific researchers and the local communities. By investigating and raising awareness of the value of local food crops and the biocultural landscapes that maintain the richest diversity in these crops, the project will contribute to the successful integration of agrobiodiversity into Biosphere reserve management plans and maximize benefits for biodiversity conservation and sustainable and environmentally sound agricultural systems. If the role that MaB Reserve communities play in managing the interface between natural and managed landscapes is better understood and incorporated into MaB Reserve management schemes, the practical knowledge and tools reserve managers and policy-makers need to systematically use agrobiodiversity as a pathway for improving the conservation of protected areas and to mainstream biodiversity for more sustainable agriculture will be attainable.

20. Insufficient support for in situ conservation of agrobiodiversity: The root cause of this threat is a lack of appropriate methodologies and funding for in situ conservation inside the reserves. INIFAT has studied in situ conservation within the reserves, but there is no formal and/or direct mechanism for communicating this information to reserve managers, stakeholders, decision-makers, or farmers. Barriers to overcoming these root causes are mostly financial in nature, as the project seeks to address the methodological deficiencies by developing interest and collaboration between interested parties and a mechanism for promoting and carrying out in situ conservation within the reserves. The project seeks to demonstrate the value of in situ conservation of agrobiodiversity in RBSR and RBCT and design an easily replicable (but flexible) methodology that can be applied to other Cuban MaB Reserves as well as MaB Reserves in the region and elsewhere around the world.

21. Abandonment of traditional, agriculturally diverse farming practices: The root causes of this threat are production intensification (somewhat buffered in protected areas) due to population increase, the need for more food produced domestically, commercialization of larger conucos and farms, and a lack of incentives that support traditional, agriculturally diverse farming practices. Barriers to overcoming these root causes are the global economy and high price of food, placing an emphasis on increasing production through intensification. The project seeks to demonstrate how traditional, agriculturally diverse farming practices can alternatively increase production as well as conserve biodiversity and preserve the environment. Many of the crop genetic resources, knowledge and practices for ecoagriculture and achieving food sovereignty can be found within the agrobiodiversity landscapes of Cuba’s MaB Reserves. The project will work directly with farmers and other stakeholders to mainstream this biodiversity and associated knowledge in the wider agricultural landscapes and production systems to meet Cuban policies aimed at achieving food sovereignty.

22. Inadequate livelihoods options: This lack of options has forced rural communities to either have insufficient livelihoods, health, and well-being, or to turn to extractive natural resources practices (i.e., mining and logging) or to abandon the areas altogether and emigrate to


16

urban centers. These are root causes of the threat, as they encourage and perpetuate activities that are not sustainable and detract from the project goal and objective. Barriers to overcoming alternative unsustainable land use practices are the financial incentives to work in mining and logging industries, for example, compared to a small farm. The project seeks to address this by developing activities to improve livelihoods such as certification programmes and agro-ecotourism. If rural communities have better access to sustainable livelihoods options in agriculture, the tendency to work in extractive natural resources industries and to move to already overpopulated urban areas will be reduced.

23. Erosion of plant genetic resources: Small farms typically contain a smaller population size of crops, resulting in an increased risk of germplasm loss and/or loss of genetic integrity of on-farm populations via outbreeding (e.g., chilli). The root cause is not necessarily the small farms themselves, but the lack of emphasis and support placed on local plant genetic resources. Varieties and species grown and exchanged at low frequencies are those under greatest threat. Barriers to overcoming this include resistance by stakeholders and decision-makers concerned solely with increasing production in the short-term. Cross-fertilization of crops grown in close proximity to one another (in conucos, for example) is another root cause of plant genetic resource erosion. To address this threat the project strongly supports exchange of genetic resources among the farmers of the project MaB Reserves (e.g seed fairs), and capacity building training programmes on agrobiodiversity. Moreover, the project seeks to enhance the collaboration between National Gene Banks and community seed banks.

Barriers which are extrinsic to the project, which it cannot necessarily alter or target directly, but which it should be aware of:

24. Aging rural population: The root cause of Cuba’s aging rural population is a steady migration of younger generations to urban centers, typical in much of the developing world. Limited livelihood options in rural areas have forced younger generations to the cities, leaving their aging parents to farm the land. For example, three heads of the 30 families included in previous projects have since passed away. One farmer in RBSR who has been involved in the project since its infancy is now 80 years old. The barriers to overcoming this threat are mostly beyond the scope of the project in that they are part of a larger population trend of moving off the farm and into the city. Labor shortages in agriculture remain despite policy changes in 2008, including granting ten-year leases to cultivate government land.12 13 The project can provide indirect support to policies that seek to maintain small family farms on productive arable lands by identifying agrobiodiversity livelihood options that can serve as incentives for younger generations to either stay or return to the rural areas. The agrobiodiversity livelihood options include capitalizing on new sustainable agriculture markets, agro-ecotourism schemes, and new participatory involvement in management and decision-making processes of the reserves that directly affect their livelihoods.

25. Poor access to markets: From a purely physical standpoint, limited transportation infrastructure within the project MaB Reserves – particularly RBCT – threatens the viability of establishing sustainable connections to markets outside the reserves. The root cause of the lacking 12 Hanson, Stephanie. (2008). “Seeds of economic reform on Cuba’s farms.” Published 12 September 2008.

Retrieved 12 May 2011 from http://www.cfr.org/cuba/seeds‐economic‐reform‐cubas‐farms/p17119. 13 Price, Laura. (2008). “Raul Castro to Redistribute Land to Private Farmers.” Published 18 July 2008.

Retrieved 12 May 2011 from

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aPRGP6fU6jtA&refer=latin_america.


17

transportation infrastructure has historically been minimal government investment in constructing and maintaining infrastructure, especially in rural areas. Addressing this neglect is beyond the scope of the project. However, if the economic value and potential of agrobiodiversity in the reserves and their resident communities can be demonstrated, it is hoped that increased government attention and investment in infrastructure development will result.

26. The nature of markets: From an economic standpoint, Cuba’s unique food supply and distribution system complicates market access further. The country’s monthly subsidized food rationing system and a complex array of state and non-state or informal food markets and purchasing channels 14 are additional barriers to improving market access. The system is further complicated by Cuba’s monetary duality (the Cuban peso, CUP, and convertible peso, CUC), which complicate economic measurement, economic resource allocation, resulting in increased transaction costs for the domestic market.15 Implications of the high transaction costs in the agriculture sector are reduced incentives to work in farming, leading many Cubans to work in transient occupations or petty resale of finished goods with little added value to the economy.16 The root causes include economic policies, trade embargos, volatility in donor relations and funding, reliance on food imports, and lack of people with agricultural knowledge and traditions to work in the agricultural sector. The project will not directly address these root causes that constrain markets in agriculture. The project results can however provide an potential example for use of agrobiodiversity to develop a “green economy”17 that is consistent with environmental and food sovereignty policies and may have positive impacts on creating efficient markets for peasant agriculture.

27. Ecological and environmental problems within the project MaB Reserves: Many of the challenges facing the environment and development globally also threaten MaB Reserves, including population growth and distribution, increasing demands for energy and natural resources, globalization of the economy and the effects of trade patterns on rural areas, the erosion of cultural distinctiveness, centralization and the difficulty of access to relevant information, and the uneven distribution of technological innovations.18 Some of the ecological and environmental threats reported by project reserve managers and farmers alike include deforestation and soil erosion (especially within RBCT), contaminated water resources (from mining activities and coffee processing),19 high incidence of pests and diseases, and poor germination rates.

14 U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2008). Cuba’s Food & Agriculture Situation Report. March. Retrieved 12

May 2011 from http://www.fas.usda.gov/itp/cuba/CubaSituation0308.pdf. 15 Mesa‐Lago, C. and Vidal‐Alejandro, P. (2010). The Impact of the Global Crisis on Cuba’s Economy and

Social Welfare. Journal of Latin American Studies 42, 689‐717. Retrieved 12 May 2011 from

http://thecubaneconomy.com/wp‐content/uploads/2011/02/Vidal‐andMesa‐Lago‐Cuba‐economic‐social‐

impact‐crisis‐JLAS‐11‐21.pdf. 16 Lapper, Richard. (2008). “A revolution to repair: new friends come to the aid of Raúl’s Cuba.” Published

18 August. Retrieved 12 May 2011 from http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/918dbe1c‐6d50‐11dd‐857b‐

0000779fd18c.html#axzz1M92333HA. 17 http://www.rona.unep.org/documents/partnerships/GreenEconomy/GREENECO-MDGs_Policymakers_Brief.pdf 18 UN Educational, Scientific, & Cultural Organization. (1995). Seville Strategy for Biosphere Reserves.

Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/MaB/doc/brs/Strategy.pdf. 19 Fong, G., Maceira, F.D., Alverson, W.S., and Wachter, T. (Eds.). (2005). Cuba: Parco Nacional “Alejandro

de Humboldt.” In: Rapid Biological Inventories Report 14. Chicago: The Field Museum. Retrieved 9 August

2010 from http://fm2.fieldmuseum.org/rbi/results_cub14.asp.


18

28. Local impacts of global climate change and variability: Threats from climate change and variability are inherent in farming; however, the rate of change and extent of variability have been occurring at levels that outpace adaptation. Cuban farmers are mostly affected by long dry seasons followed by shorter rainy seasons with more intense rainfall events. The new patterns are increasingly responsible for crop vulnerability and risks. Occasional crop failures subsequently result in a loss of saved seed (which typically represents a large proportion of total seed planted) and a reduction in agrobiodiversity. National policy has given due importance to the issue of climate change and its impacts on Cuban agriculture and environment. While national planning is advancing and some important vulnerability analyses have been carried out, many gaps exist. Among these are diversity maintenance, adaptation and resilience strategies which can be adopted by farmers at local levels. Another gap is access to a broader set of agrobiodiversity germplasm and seeds to meet changing climatic conditions and new market demands. The result is increased marginalization and poverty of small family farms that result in weakened capacity to maintain agrobiodiversity within landscapes.

2.4. Institutional, sectoral and policy context

Institutional context

29. There are two national institutions that provide the framework for agrobiodiversity and biodiversity conservation in Cuba and are central to the implementation of this project. The National Institute for Fundamental Research in Tropical Agriculture (INIFAT) under the Ministry of Agriculture, which is the apex body responsible for directing, implementing and monitoring of state and government policy related to the use, conservation and improvement of land used for cultivation and the ownership and possession of agriculture and forestry lands. INIFAT implements government policies with respect to the conservation, management, rational use and sustainable development of forest resources and the country's wild flora and fauna. It is also responsible for the production of agricultural crops other than sugar cane, livestock and forestry, including rice, tobacco, citrus fruits, apicultural products, poultry, feed, forestry products among others. The other institution is the National Center for Protected Areas (CNAP) under the Ministry of Science, Technology, and Environment (CITMA) which provides the policy and strategic guidance and technical capacity for the management of the National Protected Area System referred to as SNAP. CITMA also sets national biodiversity policy in accordance with the various global conventions of which Cuba is a signatory. The CBD being the most comprehensive and longstanding of Cuba’s global policy commitments in environment and development. CITMA is also responsible for policy on all biosafety issues. The national Information Center for Environmental Management and Education (CIGEA) under CITMA will l contribute to outreach, mainstreaming, and education on project activities and outcomes. Other institutions within CITMA also provide a framework and capacity for project implementation, these include the Institute of Ecology and Systematics and the Institute of Geography and Institute of Anthropology and the Museum of Natural History. The Ministry of Tourism provides an institutional and policy framework for ecotourism and agrotourism that are to be executed by the project. The Institute of Physical Planning of the Ministry of Economy and Planning will also provide information in support of mainstreaming activities from protected areas to communities and local administrations. During the PPG a study of the biodiversity conservation policy and


19

institutional framework was carried out, policy and institutions that will be in effect during the proposed project cycle have been identified (see Annex H).

30. In summary Cuba’s Ministry of Agriculture (MINAG) and its Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (CITMA) have joined forces to assess the agrobiodiversity in its protected areas to mainstream it into other landscapes and sectors, thus increasing its important contribution to development. Specifically, the two lead institutions charged with innovation in agriculture and biodiversity, INIFAT (National Institute for Fundamental Research on Tropical Agriculture) and CNAP (National Center for Protected Areas) will focus their efforts on the unique, bio-cultural landscapes in Cuba’s Sierra del Rosario and Cuchillas del Toa MaB Reserves where communities practice traditional tropical agriculture in close association with natural landscapes.

National policy context

31. Within this overall biodiversity framework, the project will take advantage of existing policy processes to update and revise the National Biodiversity Strategic Action Plan (NBSAP) in light of the latest CBD Strategic Plan and Nagoya Biodiversity Targets outlined in Section 2.2 which assign greater importance to social and ecological production landscapes within existing biodiversity conservation activities and protected areas. Recent Cuban policies in 2011 being implemented by CITMA through CNAP/SNAP have implemented CBD calls to increase the total area of biodiversity rich ecosystems under protection. The new policy has placed 19.9% of Cuba’s terrestrial area under protection for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use. As a result, there is a need for greater linkage with biodiversity components in wider landscapes and production sectors. These new biodiversity and environmental policies and trends create a favorable and enabling environment for the project. The project provides concrete set of options, measures, and practices to guide these linkages and mainstreaming processes. Cuban government had a remarkable change of agricultural policy, from intensive external input dependant agriculture to sustainable agriculture, as a response to the food crisis after the collapse of its trade relation with the socialist block. The Cuban model also emphasises the diversification of agriculture. There is a trend to increase crop diversification influenced by changes in the policies for land tenure and in the production systems. The large monoculture states farms are being broken up and converted into rural co-operatives. The co-operative members are given the right of using the land, normally consisting of smaller production units. Although most of the land is still in sugar production, there is a trend towards increased diversification. There are also efforts to strengthen research to establish crop rotation for sugarcane, traditionally planted in monocultures, and polyculture systems combining agriculture with livestock, fishery etc (Meadows, 1997; UN, 1999a; Enríquez, 2000).

32. Cuba’s National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan covers topics related with sustainable agriculture, such as integrated pest management, soil degradation and conservation, plant nutrition and biodiversity. A series of action at short, medium and long terms are proposed with the institutions and bodies responsible for their implementation.

33. The National Programme of Urban and Suburban Agriculture (Programa Nacional de Agricultura Urbana y Sub Urbana - PNAU/ASU) of the Ministry of Agriculture promotes food production and sale closer to the urban areas based on the principles of crop diversity, environmentally sound practices, and the use of animal traction to keep fuel consumption to a minimum. The project will work in close collaboration with the Programme taking advantage of the production and distribution system developed by the Programme. This new policy is directly


20

relevant and supportive of the project’s agrobiodiversity management and mainstreaming activities. The policy supports ecoagriculture practices which are similar to those found in the reserves and that have synergistic relations, perform buffering functions and contribute to the sustainability of the reserves. The policy also supports project activities to improve livelihoods of biosphere farm families through the mainstreaming and value-adding activities.

34. The new National Plan for Suburban Agriculture of the Ministry of Agriculture opens new possibilities and includes the concept of a "Green Economy" that will extend over more than one million hectares of idle lands given in usufruct to thousands of smallholder farms20. The new policies that link the “Green Economy” to Food Sovereignty will create a facilitating environment and framework for market outlets and incentives to enable agrobiodiversity products to add value to products from Biosphere landscapes. Identifying and mainstreaming the sustainable flow of germplasm diversity, services and benefits from agrobiodiversity will be essential to achieve productive ecoagricultural systems and to create incentives for local communities to be more involved in the conservation and adaptive management of protected areas that account for nearly one fifth of Cuba’s territory and globally significant neo-tropical island ecosystems.

35. There are three main reasons for the high priority that Cuba has assigned to this multi-sectoral project. First, is the urgent need to mainstream agrobiodiversity from protected areas into small farms and eco-agriculture in order to achieve more sustainable use of traditional varieties and their wild relatives. Cuba currently imports 80% of its food and its large scale agricultural production systems lack diversity of tropical fruits, vegetables, roots and tubers that once typified tropical agriculture in the Antilles. Secondly, Cuba must improve the sustainability of its protected area system in response to fiscal policies that require public institutions, including those charged with protected area management, to sustainably finance their own activities. In the case of protected areas, these economic activities must be compatible and synergistic with biodiversity conservation goals. Thirdly, Cuba has increased the surface area and ecosystems under protection to 19.95% of its national territory (see the decision at CBD/COP10 to bring at least 17% of the world’s terrestrial service under protection) and will need the management practices and knowledge of agrobiodiversity developed under the proposed project to effectively integrate agrobiodiverse species and varieties into the MaB protected, buffer and transition areas. The additional areas under protection include many productive agricultural landscapes and rural communities that can benefit from the tools, policies and plans that the project will produce to link managed and natural landscapes for secure conservation and livelihoods.

36. National Law 81 on the Environment (1997) establishes the policy framework for the environment and policies and regulation under CITMA (Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology). Ecosystem conservation and enhanced ecosystem services are priorities under the legislation and its implementing policies. The project will operate squarely within the framework established by that policy. Recent policies (2010) to update provisions of the 1963 Agrarian Reform Act have significantly increased the amount of arable land available in long term usufruct to family farmers. The potential increase in smallholder agriculture can be supported by germplasm (nurseries, seed banks) and knowledge from ecoagriculture in the Biosphere Reserves. As mentioned earlier, the most significant recent development is the Legal Decree 259 extending the successful Urban Agriculture programme to suburban agriculture, based on family farms and

20 http://caribbeanscienceart.blogspot.com/2010/05/green-economy-in-cuba-for-one-million.html


21

home gardens practicing multi-story ecoagriculture and increased access to local markets with reduced transaction costs and more direct value chains. These reforms provide the bases for implementation of the project strategy to increase opportunities for commercialization.

37. National Law 85 on Forestry (1998) is committed to conserving the Cuban forest heritage and establishes the principles and regulations for the protection, sustainable use and development and growth of forests and promotes rational use of non-timber forest products. The law promotes and encourages reforestation, taking into account the protection of the genetic resources, the maintenance of natural forests (bosques naturales), the economic benefits that might derivate from some productive species. Furthermore the Legal Decree 212, art. 28, regulates agricultural activities in protected areas, which can be practiced provided natural vegetation is not removed or endangered, and disposal of solid and liquid waste is controlled.

38. Considering Cuba’s dynamic socio-economic situation, the project will pay close attention to monitoring policies on liberalisation of the agricultural production and marketing sector for local foods, any further changes and evolution along this path, and adapt activities as incentives and the policy environment continue to evolve. The project is in line with the new trends to liberalize food production and create incentives for small scale family farms using ecological and traditional practices.

Global and regional policy context

39. In addition to the consistency with national priorities and plans outlined above, the planned intervention is aligned with the CBD’s Strategic Plan and the protected area targets adopted at the 10th Conference of the Parties of the CBD in Nagoya 2010. Most directly the project is in line with Target 11 on conservation of areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes; Target 7, on sustainable management of areas under agriculture; and Target 13 on maintenance of the diversity of cultivated plants and farmed and domesticated animals and of wild relatives, including other socio-economically as well as culturally valuable species.

40. The project supports the UNESCO MaB Programme that incorporates the concept of conservation of both natural resources and human-influenced landscapes and their associated agro-biodiversity within protected areas. It takes account of its 2008 Madrid Declaration and the associated 2008-2013 Action Plan for Biosphere Reserves that emphasizes the key roles biosphere reserves play in generating knowledge on how natural systems work and how to maintain ecosystem services and resilient ecosystems, while at the same time using these systems to generate income, employment, and improve well-being.21 As Cuba’s protected area system is within the MaB framework, the project will contribute to meeting the goals and targets of the Madrid Action Plan of which Cuba is a signatory country.

41. The project also supports the International Satoyama Initiative launched at CBD/COP10 that promotes the conservation and support of social-ecological production landscapes of bio-cultural significance and builds synergistic interactions between wild and cultivated components

21 UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2008). Madrid Action Plan for Biosphere Reserves

(2008‐2013). Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural‐sciences/environment/ecological‐

sciences/man‐and‐biosphere‐programme/madrid‐action‐plan/.


22

of biodiversity. Implementing the project will also make an important contribution to the establishment of the Caribbean Biological Corridor that includes Cuba, Dominican Republic and Haiti. Its goals "Preserving biodiversity and integrating communities into a harmonious development with Nature" are in agreement with the project focus on synergies between farming communities and natural landscapes. Project activities in sites in eastern Cuba will impact directly on the implementation of conservation activities of the Caribbean Biological Corridor’s sites and species conservation targets in Haiti and the Dominican Republic. (http://www.car-spaw-rac.org/? The Caribbean-Biological-Corridor,212).

42. The Project supports the objectives of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Adopted by world leaders in the year 2000 and set to be achieved by 2015, the MDGs provide concrete, numerical benchmarks for tackling extreme poverty in its many dimensions. The MDGs also provide a framework for the entire international community to work together towards a common end – making sure that human development reaches everyone, everywhere. If these goals are achieved, world poverty will be cut by half, tens of millions of lives will be saved, and billions more people will have the opportunity to benefit from the global economy. The Project will seek to contribute to the achievement of the MDGs in Cuba focusing particularly on MDGs 1, 7 and 8.

43. The Project has been developed within the framework of UNEP’s Medium-term Strategy for 2010–2013 (UNEP, 2008)22. This Strategy strengthens the capacity of UNEP to deliver on its mission by focusing on six thematic priorities, three of which are particularly relevant to the Project: Resource efficiency – to ensure that natural resources are produced, processed and consumed in an environmentally sustainable way, paving the way to the Green Economy23, in which environmental impact is decoupled from economic growth and social co-benefits are optimized; Environmental governance - to ensure that environmental governance and interactions at the country, regional and global levels are strengthened to address environmental priorities; and Ecosystem management - to ensure that countries use the ecosystem approach: the holistic management of land, water and living resources to promote conservation and sustainable use to enhance human well-being.

44. The Project will establish synergies with UNEP’s Programme of Work, sub-programme 3: Ecosystem Management through Projects 4 and 9. Project 4, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning, seeks to develop practical tools to improve understanding of the relationship between biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and ecosystem services and apply this knowledge to ecosystem management. It also aims to develop biodiversity targets and indicators that link biodiversity and ecosystem services and integrate them into sectoral management plans. Project 9, Evaluating the Trade-offs and Benefits of Sustainable Food Production Systems, aims to strengthen the capacity of national policy makers and planners to understand the linkages between food security and environmental degradation, undertake economic valuation of ecosystem services relevant to food security and analyze the trade offs and distributive impacts of food security policies. The ecosystem approach will be demonstrated at two levels: national policy and decision makers, and food producers in areas of high agricultural intensification.

22 UNEP (2008). United Nations Environment Programme. Medium-term Strategy 2010–2013. Environment for Development. http://www.unep.org/pdf/finalmtsgcss-x-8.pdf 23 UNEP (2011) Towards a Green Economy, Pathway to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication: A Synthesis for Policy Makers.


23

45. The key national policy that has been cited by UNEP and others as a successful step towards a Green Economy is Cuba’s new policy approved by the Council of Ministers effective on 1 January 2011 that establishes a national programme for suburban agriculture under the Ministry of Agriculture with a national coverage around 156 municipios that serve as focal points throughout the island. The key features of the new policy that is directly relevant to the project are:

Support and recognition of family farms that maintain diversified production systems; Promoting the use of organic fertilisers, local seeds and agroecological farming

techniques including use of biodiversity in managing pests; Aim towards eliminating the use of petroleum-based inputs, promoting animal traction; Promoting diversified and sustainable use of local biodiversity in small scale agricultural

production; Apply measures to allow small scale farmers practicing ecoagriculture to market products

directly to consumers through farmer’s markets and fairs in the participating municipios and protected areas.

46. The concept of a Green Economy has become increasingly prominent in environmental policy discussions in Cuba. The ongoing financial crisis has supported the emergence of this topic, as uncertainty on the sustainability of the current global economic system grows. Green Economy is seen as an economy which is motivated by social welfare and securely anchored on sustainable patterns of natural resource use and stewardship. Ultimately, the goal is to align the economy with the principles of sustainable development, which recognizes the dependence of human wellbeing on nature. As such, biodiversity and ecosystems need to be kept at the centre of a Green Economy transition. Three important pillars for a successful transition to Green Economy include:

Managing ecosystems and biodiversity to build resilience Mainstreaming ecosystem values in the economy Developing an appropriate governance model for a Green Economy

47. The activities of the project will be undertaken in accordance with these principles to create a facilitating environment and framework for market outlets and incentives to add value to agrobiodiversity products from the Biosphere reserves. One key element of the Green Economy in Cuba is the promotion of small scale farming with minimal external input and the use of local products. Products of ecoagriculture from family farms are being channeled through local and municipal market systems as well as direct sale to hotels in the tourism sector. The increased revenues generated flow back in greater measure to small producers. The project will extend the area under ecoagriculture and sustainable use of biodiversity and expand the diversity of products available to outlets in the green economy, particularly tourism and local food markets.

48. Mechanisms will be put in place to ensure sharing and exchange of information on relevant activities and components resulting from the project’ contribution to mainstreaming agrobiodiversity through the Suburban agriculture “Green Economy” initiative. The outcomes and results of the project in mainstreaming and sustainable use of biodiversity into larger


24

production landscapes and markets will also inform UNEP’s Seven Options for Improving Food Security24.

2.5. Stakeholder mapping and analysis

49. During the Project Preparation Grant (PPG), guidelines were developed describing the types of stakeholders and actors the project should ideally engage. Based on this guidance the national executing agency, together with UNEP and Bioversity International, undertook extensive stakeholder consultations with potential partners and actors to explore roles and inputs and ways of creating added value and synergies. A detailed description of the major stakeholder and partner groups identified for the project can be found in Annex D of this project document. Section 4 of this project document elaborates the institutional framework and implementation arrangements.

50. In addition, Annex D provides detailed descriptions of stakeholders, their potential roles and contributions including their participation in management and coordination.

24 See http://www.grida.no/publications/rr/food-crisis/page/3459.aspx


25

Stakeholders Type of involvement

Major stakeholders and their participation Decision-makers:

Project National Steering Committee

Making appropriate policy decisions and providing necessary guidance and advice to the Project.

Ministries: Ministry of Agriculture (MINAG) Ministry of Science and Technology

and Environment (CITMA) Ministry of Tourism (MINTUR)

Representatives will participate in project management and execution and will be invited to take part in project consultations, seminars, meetings and workshops for relevant training and ongoing awareness raising and policy dialogues.

Scientific community (including academic and national institutions):

National Center for Protected Areas National Museum Scientific and Technology Research

Institutes National Genebanks University of Michigan ISTOM, France BOKU, Austria

Will support the project in providing scientific and technical inputs and collaborations in research and development of methods and approaches. Will be invited to participate in project consultations, seminars, conferences and workshops and to assist with development and delivery of training.

Collaborate in the development of outreach materials and the dissemination and up-scaling of project outputs through peer-reviewed scientific publications.

National Association National Association for rural development

Will be involved in project consultations and meetings and will be used extensively in the dissemination of outreach materials at the grassroots level.

Multi-lateral agencies: UNESCO

United Nations University – Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU – IAS)

FAO – Land and Water Division

Will provide relevant scientific inputs and assistance with research and application of tools, methodologies and approaches. Assistance in development and delivery of capacity building and training. Sharing of their substantial tools and resources in relevant components.

Local communities Community-based organizations Women’s groups Framer Organisations and Groups

Will be involved in participatory appraisals and community based activities to map agricultural biodiversity. Will have access to training and capacity building and other benefits arising through the project. Will assist in the documentation of information. Involvement in activities pertaining to conservation and sustainable management of agricultural biodiversity in MaB Reserves.


26

Stakeholders Type of involvement

Non-governmental organizations and civil society NGOs such as ProNaturaleza, ANAP, ACTAF, Diversity and Development

Will help facilitate consultations and collaborations with communities at pilot sites and assist in mobilizing participatory action research. Will be invited to take part in Project consultations and meetings and will be used extensively in the dissemination of outreach materials at the grassroots level.

Will particularly support the maintenance and mobilization of relevant traditional knowledge

2.6. Baseline analysis and gaps

51. The baseline analysis completed as part of the PPG phase of the project included a literature review, an inventory of agricultural biodiversity present in the MaB reserves in Cuba, an analysis of gaps in the current knowledge and understanding of this agrobiodiversity as well as gaps in policy support, agricultural practices and the farmer community management of the interface between natural ecosystems and agricultural landscapes in Biosphere reserves. The baseline analysis also pinpointed needs in all these areas, collected data on markets, looked at the distribution of agrobiodiversity across landscapes and examined the environmental, socio-economic and policy factors that influence the management of family farms, conucos and home gardens in the Cuban MaB reserves. The PPG analysis demonstrated the years of dedicated research and hard work already undertaken by Cuban government agencies and institutions, particularly INIFAT and SNAP focused on the MaB reserves. However, the existing work is limited in scope and scale and faces many threats and barriers (discussed previously in Section 2.3). Significant gaps related to thorough understanding and robust, sustainable management of agrobiodiversity conservation within natural and managed landscapes of the project MaB Reserves must be resolved in order for the project to meet its ultimate goal and objective (presented in Section 3.2).

52. The generally limited understanding and incorporation of agrobiodiversity conservation in protected areas management points to several gaps that impede wider consideration and appreciation of the interactions between managed and natural landscapes. The main issues with respect to the gaps identified are summarized in the following paragraphs

53. Lack of participatory management and conservation strategies that include communities and that support and rely on their use and maintenance of landscapes. Traditional agriculture is threatened both by the homogenization and industrialization of modern agriculture, and also by the dominant conservation practices, which fail to recognize that natural and human systems (including natural and managed landscapes) have co-evolved and are not necessarily in conflict or incompatible with one another. These systems actually support each other and numerous examples exist within the Central American region of certain types of agricultural systems and practices such as shade coffee farms that play key roles in sustaining wild species diversity and maintaining ecosystem services and environmental and social resilience. The two reserves selected by the project have additional cases involving a broader range of farming practices and production landscapes to assess and derive benefits from synergies that arise in maintaining agricultural landscapes and agrobiodiversity in and around the Reserves.


27

54. Insufficient understanding of the role of agrobiodiversity within protected areas. Agriculture is present within the wide range of ecosystems in the RBSR and RBCT protected areas. However there are few technical documents covering the practical conservation and livelihood aspects. Key questions remain to be answered such as, what type of agriculture is compatible or synergistic with ecosystem conservation goals? How do agricultural livelihoods in protected areas or biosphere reserves contribute to the sustainability of the protected area and the sustainability and well being of communities? How are benefits from agricultural production fed back into the maintenance of agrobiodiversity landscapes? Given the gaps in knowledge and understanding and practical guidelines and indicators it is not surprising that agricultural landscapes and agrobiodiversity are seldom recognized as positive factors in conservation and are seldom addressed in decision-making and management plans for protected areas. What is needed is a robust analysis of the effects (positive and negative) of certain agriculture practices and managed landscapes within protected areas and natural landscapes so that conservationists can harness the knowledge and experience of farmers who have been working the land for decades, while also encouraging farmers to pursue or maintain sustainable practices through improved livelihoods options. These findings will have important implications for other MaB Reserves and perhaps protected areas and conservation strategies in general.

55. Undocumented and uncategorized abundance and distribution of agrobiodiversity at a landscape scale within the RBSR and RBCT MaB Reserves. Agrobiodiversity within the reserves has only been identified as part of specific, short-term projects. No comprehensive inventory or mapping project has been conducted in RBSR or RBCT. This is a gap that prevents a robust and thorough analysis of agrobiodiversity within the reserves from being conducted so that it can then be further studied for its effects on the ecosystem at large and at the landscape scale and thus be incorporated into management schemes as appropriate.

56. Limited knowledge and resource sharing within and between MaB Reserves regarding agrobiodiversity. SNAP coordination of the reserves is strong, but as discussed previously, agrobiodiversity is excluded from management practices. Furthermore, farmers share agrobiodiversity through an informal, uncoordinated system. What is needed are mechanisms and useful methodology to create and sustain a social and institutional dynamic that supports widespread adoption.

57. Undervaluation and poor distribution of traditional varieties, wild species, and local breeds of domestic animals. Currently, the distribution and use of traditional varieties, wild species, and local breeds of domestic animals is not well understood in relation to their conservation status, nor is their role within the landscapes and ecosystems of the biosphere reserves. Their impact on conservation goals and their contribution to food security and food sovereignty is also not well known or understood due to the lack of a formal design or monitoring and evaluation process. This makes it difficult to take full advantage of their potential for adaptation to environmental and economic stresses and the local impacts of global climate change. The value of neglected and underutilized species within the project MaB Reserves is also poorly known and as a result their value to food security and potential value in specialty markets has not been identified nor exploited. If the value of these species can be realized and farmers and reserve managers can optimize their distribution and sustainable use. The project will establish areas of cooperation whereby the Cuban crop genebank at INIFAT can support in situ conservation and wider dissemination of crop varieties and wild relatives in project MaB Reserves.


28

2.7. Linkages with other GEF and non-GEF interventions

58. The project will establish linkages with the Campesino-a-Campesino Agroecological Movement in Cuba (MACAC)25,26 supported by the National Association of Small Farmers (ANAP). The ANAP promoted the spread of MACAC to all Cuban provinces in the early 2000s to transform productive systems through agroecology (the application of farming methods based on principles drawn from biology and sound science). MACAC has contributed so far to increment productivity while reducing costs and contributing to national food sovereignty. The project will build on the experience to disseminate agroecogical methods to be used in conjunction with the increased use of traditional crop varieties. 27 59. Cuba has an active United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) in place. A UNDAF elaborates an agreed programme between the country and a United Nations country team and describes the collective actions and strategies of the United Nations towards the achievement of national development priorities. The UNDAF, which aims to maximize the UN’s comparative advantage, includes outcomes, activities and UN agency responsibilities, including those of UNEP that are agreed by government. Cuba’s UNDAF (2008-2012) highlights the priority area of economic growth and social services and provides a useful coordination and communications framework with other development goals and activities. Specifically, the project will contribute to UNDAF 3.3 on strategies to conserve and sustainably use biological diversity in national development plans and as noted in 3.3.2 the project will implement actions for the conservation of biodiversity in agriculture, forestry and tourism. The project will also contribute to UNDAF 5.1 food security for the rural poor and specifically 5.1.2. to increase the production of local foods through peri-urban agriculture, home gardens, and community gardens as well as promote more diverse production using local agrobiodiversity. 60. By improving the conservation and management of agrobiodiversity in the MaB reserves and mainstreaming it into the growing sector of small family farms, Cuba is meeting its obligations under the CBD and taking advantage of associated initiatives such as the Satoyama partnership. The International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative (IPSI) was developed to promote and support socio-ecological production landscapes in order to maintain their contribution to human well-being and the objectives of the CBD. United Nations University - Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS) provides the IPSI Secretariat developed within the framework of the Satoyama Initiative with the aim of promoting socio-ecological production landscapes that contribute to the maintenance and conservation of biodiversity. An output of the project will be the development and application of indicators with support from UNU/IAS, IPSI Secretariat in response to calls from the CBD.

25 Machín Sosa, B., Roque Jaime, A.M., Ávila Lozano, D.R., & Rosset, P.M. (2011). Revolución Agroecológica:

El Movimiento de Campesino a Campesino de la ANAP en Cuba. Retrieved 18 March 2011 from

http://www.rebelion.org/docs/111067.pdf. 26 Rosset, P.M., Machín Sosa, B., Roque Jaime, A.M., & Ávila Lozano, D.R. (2011). The Campesino‐to‐

Campesino agroecology movement of ANAP in Cuba: social process methodology in the construction of

sustainable peasant agriculture and food sovereignty. Journal of Peasant Studies 38(1): 161‐191. 27 Rosset, P.M., Machín Sosa, B., Roque Jaime, A.M., & Ávila Lozano, D.R. (2011). The Campesino‐to‐

Campesino agroecology movement of ANAP in Cuba: social process methodology in the construction of

sustainable peasant agriculture and food sovereignty. Journal of Peasant Studies 38(1): 161‐191.


29

61. A number of relevant national and international GEF and non GEF interventions have been identified which the project will take full account of and/or with which it will develop appropriate links. At the national level the links with following project will be established with :

62. The project Sustainable Management of Natural Resources from the Buffer Zone of the Alexander von Humboldt National Park, Guantánamo Province is currently under development by Cuban Association of Agricultural and Forest Technicians (ACTAF) with support from German Agro Action. The main objective of this project is to increase productive activities compatible with the conservation of the National Park to improve the livelihoods of the communities living in the buffer zone of the Cuchillas del Toa Biosphere Reserve. The proposed project will establish links with this project, particularly to contribute to the achievement of Component 3.

63. The two projects of the Ministry of Tourism (MINTUR), Integrated training programme for nature tourist guides and project for improving existing tourist products and design of new products in different geographical landscapes on national territory have the objective of updating the knowledge and developing the skills of nature tourist guides of Cuban travel agencies, as well as propose and make relevant changes to improve offers to tourists and promote the creation of new products and their commercialization. The proposed project will build on some of the outcomes of this initiative particularly relevant for Component 3. Synergies will be also established to develop sustainable tourist activities within project MaB reserves.

64. The UNDP/GEF project “Strengthening the National System of Protected Areas in Cuba” completed in 2010. The objective of this project was to improve management of the National System of Protected Areas, conserving Cuba's terrestrial eco-regions of global importance. The proposed project will build on the results of the improved management strategies and improved coordination within the national system of protected areas. This should allow for more effective development of outreach programs to mainstream the inclusion of agrobiodiversity elements within National Management Plans of MaB Reserves.

65. The ongoing UNDP/GEF project Application of a Regional Approach to the Management of Marine and Coastal Protected Areas in Cuba's Southern Archipelagos. (project ID #3607),, has the objective of conserving and sustainably using globally significant marine biodiversity through an extended, and integrated network of coastal and marine protected areas in the Southern Archipelagos of Cuba. Results from this project will be taken into consideration, particularly for the work to be carried out in the Cuchillas de Toa MaB reserve, where mitigation measures to reduce negative impacts of agricultural practices on coastal areas need to be identified.

66. The UNDP/GEF project “Mainstreaming and Sustaining Biodiversity Conservation in Three Productive Sectors of the Sabana Camaguey Ecosystem’. This project is currently on-going and seeks to promote operational changes within the tourism, fisheries and agriculture sectors to ensure biodiversity conservation across the seascape and landscape. The proposed project will develop links with this UNDP/GEF project and benefit from methodologies, knowledge and experience developed in the Sabana-Camaguey archipelago, particularly those regarding tourism.

67. The UNDP/GEF project “Enhancing Prevention, Control and Management of Invasive Alien Species in Vulnerable Ecosystem”, aims to safeguard globally-significant biodiversity in vulnerable ecosystems. Synergies will be built with this project to integrate local varieties and


30

landraces of agrobiodiversity into environmental management plans and promoting in situ conservation to discourage the prevalence of invasive alien species and reduce ecosystem vulnerability.

68. The UNEP/GEF global project “Conservation and Use of Crop Genetic Diversity to Control Pests and Diseases in Support of Sustainable Agriculture”, implemented in China, Ecuador, Morocco and Uganda. Phase I of this project completed in 2010 generated information and documented best practices on how to reduce crop vulnerability to pest and disease attacks through increased use of genetic diversity on-farm. Links will be sought with partners that worked in that project to benefit from its experience, methodologies and knowledge on using intraspecific crop diversity to manage new pests emerging in Cuban MaB Reserves landscapes due to changing climate, more rain during atypical periods and increasing length of droughts.

69. The UNEP/GEF project “In-situ conservation of crop wild relatives through enhanced information management and field application”. The project included 5 countries (Armenia, Bolivia, Madagascar, Sri Lanka and Uzbekistan) and was completed in 2011, with the objective to effectively conserve crop wild relatives and increasing their availability. The methodology developed within that UNEP GEF project will be used and adapted to Cuban environment in order to ensure that crop wild relatives are prioritized, conserved and used within the two project MaB Reserves.

70. The UNEP/GEF project “In situ/On-Farm Conservation and Use of Agrobiodiversity (Horticultural Crops and Wild Fruit Species) in Central Asia. The objective of this project, carried out in five countries (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan) is to provide farmers, institutes and local communities with knowledge, methodology, and policies to conserve globally significant in situ/on-farm horticultural crops and wild fruit species in five countries in Central Asia. This will contribute to achieving sustainable agricultural development, food security, and environmental stability. The tools, methodologies and generic lessons from that project in Central Asia will be studied and considered for their potential use by partners in the proposed project in eventual restoration of traditional local varieties of fruit trees maintained by farmers and their wild relatives growing in forests in the two project MaB reserves.

71. The World Bank/GEF supported project “Integrated Silvopastoral Approaches to Ecosystem Management”, Colombia, Costa Rica, and Nicaragua. The project completed in 2008 intended to provide an incentive for the adoption of agroecological or silvopastoral practices and contribute to poverty reduction by making payments to poor farmers.28 Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) can be designed to benefit poor and small scale farmers to provide incentives for them to switch to or maintain land use practices that are compatible with biodiversity conservation on farm29 . Payment for ecosystems services is one of several possible incentives and the work of the Cuban MaB project will link to this past and ongoing work in two ways. First by considering areas and practices where tested PES strategies can be adopted in Cuba for similar

28 Pagiola, S., Arcenas, A., & Platais, G. (2005). Can Payments for Environmental Services Help Reduce

Poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America. World Development

33(2): 237‐253. 29 Ibrahim, M., Casasola, F., Villanueva, C., Murgueitio, E., Ramírez, E., Sáenz, J., & Sepúlveda, C. (2011).

Payment for environmental services as a tool to encourage the adoption of silvo‐pastoral systems and

restoration of agricultural landscapes dominated by cattle in Latin America. In F. Montagnini & C. Finney

Restoring Degraded Landscapes with Native Species in Latin America (pp. 197‐219). New York: Nova Science

Publishers, Inc.


31

ends in small scale ecoagriculture and food production, and secondly by providing and expanding the set of incentive options beyond PES to include landscape-based income strategies. Linking to an expanded set of incentive structures and options is vital to the project dual outcomes of improved livelihoods and conservation.

72. Several GEF projects under the “Cuban Partnership Programme (CPP): Supporting Implementation of the Cuban National Programme to Combat Desertification and Drought” (NPCDD) are being implemented through UNDP and UNEP; they are directly relevant to the proposed project. During the implementation of the MAB project opportunities will be created to share experiences for coordinating with the CPP projects Task Managers and taking advantage of synergies through the national partners involved in agriculture and conservation. The GEF projects under CCP framework operate in Pinar del Rio and Guantanamo and involve the Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Soils, CITMA, ANAP, and ACTAF that are also involved in the proposed project. The potential to establish complementarities across outputs and outcomes of the UNDP and UNEP-GEF projects are described below.

73. Specifically GEF Project “Supporting Implementation of the Cuban National Programme to Combat Desertification & Drought (NPCDD)” is aimed at capacity building and involves MINAG, Institute of Soils and ANAP. Capacity building at small scale in both Guantanamo and Pinar del Rio will provide a good mechanism for project outreach and mainstreaming of agrobiodiversity components and practices that can contribute to halt land degradation and rehabilitation by selection and use of indigenous trees, traditional crop varieties identified and multiplied through the proposed project activities in the Sierra de Rosario MaB Reserve in Pinar del Rio, and the MaB Reserve Cuchillas del Toa in Guantanamo.

74. GEF Project “Capacity Building for Planning, Decision Making and Regulatory Systems & Awareness Building/Sustainable Land Management in Severely Degraded Ecosystems” aims at promoting inter-sector planning, monitoring and evaluation systems to monitor extreme climatic events. The intervention areas of this project are the same as the proposed project (Pinar del Rio and Guantanamo). The project also works to build management capacity for small scale farmers to better manage and restore degraded lands. This will provide an excellent platform to collaborate in the outreach and mainstreaming of agrobiodiversity maintained within MaB Reserves. Finally, this project provides a framework to improve land management for increased resilience to extreme climatic events at the policy and institutional level. The proposed project will establish close collaboration and liaison with existing policy platforms and mechanisms thus avoiding duplication and ensuring cost effectiveness of GEF investments.

75. The UNEP-GEF regional project “Building Scientific and Technical Capacity for Effective Management and Sustainable Use of Dryland Biodiversity in West African Biosphere Reserves”, implemented in Benin, Burkina Faso, Cote d’Ívoire, Mali, Niger and Senegal from 2004-2008, focused on developing indicators of human pressures and impacts of agriculture, pastoralism, and extraction of products for immediate livelihood needs on biodiversity within the MaB Reserves. It also aimed to reduce human incursions into core protected areas. The proposed project will build on the efforts of this completed project particularly with regards to increasing the incomes for communities in buffer and transition zones through sustainable uses of biodiversity and ecotourism.


32

76. The GEF-FAO project “Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems” (GIAHS) aims to establish the basis for international recognition, conservation and adaptive management of Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems and their associated landscapes, agricultural biodiversity, knowledge systems, food and livelihood and cultures throughout the world. Links with this project will be established to scale up activities on dynamic conservation management approaches in agricultural systems and landscapes.

77. The Canadian International Development Research Centre (IDRC) project “Adaptive Management of Seed Systems and Geneflow”, a multi-country project in Cuba, Mexico, and Peru, concluded in 2008, focused on the capacity of seed system to shape crop genetic diversity. The proposed project will build on the results of the IDRC project to strengthen the local seed systems and increase the use of traditional varieties and wild species.

78. The project “Design and validation of an administration model for the rescue and conservation of agrobiodiversity in protected areas” implemented in Cuba by the German NGO Brot für die Welt (Bread for the World). This project has an important component of environmental education and sustainable management of local agrobiodiversity that will complement the activities proposed by this project on the same issues.

79. The Global Crop Diversity Trust projects “Evaluation of traditional cultivars of national common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) collection, under drought stress and poor lands” and “Regeneration of traditional cultivars in the Cuban national common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and lima bean (P. lunatus L.) collection”, currently underway, evaluate traditional cultivars of the common bean under drought conditions on marginal lands, regenerate traditional cultivars of the Cuban national common bean and lima bean collections, and study the contribution of traditional methods of in situ conservation and management of bean diversity to the food security of rural families in Cuba. The proposed project will build on the results of the Trust project particularly focusing on the methodology to restore traditional varieties using traditional methods.

80. The project “Contribution of in situ variability of maize and bean traditional seeds on farmer families’ food security in Cuba” supported by the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture The proposed project will work closely with this initiative, which is implemented in the same MaB Reserves selected by the proposed project, on identifying farmers’ management practices (on selection criteria of local varieties, seed conservation) to be able to develop sustainable strategies in support of in situ conservation.

81. The IAASTD (International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science, and Technology for Development) published in 200930 produced recommendations for further work and more evidence in areas of direct focus of this project. It calls for greater focus on the multi-functionality of agriculture with specific reference to non-commodity outputs such as environmental services, landscape amenities, and cultural heritage. The IAASTD’s recommendations to “enhance environmental and cultural services while increasing the sustainable productivity of agricultural landscapes” and maintain biodiversity by minimizing adverse impacts of agriculture on people and the environment, will be directly addressed as

30 http://www.agassessment.org/


33

outcomes from the project. The project’s selection of agricultural landscapes in unique and protected ecosystems provides a concrete basis to measure and demonstrate how IAASTD goals may be achieved. The project will liaise with the IAASTD follow up partners to deliver and mainstream the project results and outputs thus adding to the project’s global impact.

SECTION 3: INTERVENTION STRATEGY (ALTERNATIVE)

3.1. Project rationale, policy conformity and expected global environmental benefits

82. As highlighted and described in section 2.1, Cuba is a centre of evolution and speciation in the Antilles and is one of the most important islands for biodiversity in the world.41,45 Accounting for half the land area of the insular Caribbean biodiversity hotspot, it harbours more than half of the region’s endemic plants44,45 largely within its reserves. Agrobiodiversity in Cuban biosphere reserves underpins rural livelihoods and is essential for many ecosystem functions; it is also an important component of cultural identity.45 The project selected two of the six Cuban biosphere reserves, the Sierra del Rosario in the Pinar del Rio Province in southwestern Cuba, and the Cuchillas del Toa in the Guantánamo Province in northeastern Cuba, based on the following criteria. (i) Both reserves are rich in natural and agricultural biodiversity. (ii) The population living in the buffer and transition zones of both Reserves practice traditional conuco, ecoagriculture, and home garden cultivation that maintains major components of the total biodiversity. (iii) The two Reserves have taken the initial steps in recognizing that agrobiodiversity and associated management practices are important and have established collaboration agreements with agricultural research institutions and programmes. (iv) The Reserves have carried out small-scale pilot studies to identify and gather data on these agrobiodiversity components and practices that the project can build on to make them more systematic and nationally and globally relevant. (v) In addition, RBCT with its approximately 6,000 hectares along coastal area and wetlands represents an important area of study to assess the impact of agricultural practices on conservation of aquatic diversity, under threat due to soil runoff and water quality from non-sustainable extractive agricultural practices.

83. The proposed project will seek to accomplish the goal of contributing to the conservation of agrobiodiversity within and around protected areas by focusing on these two reserves that contain most of Cuba’s endemic agrobiodiversity of global significance including both traditional varieties and their wild relatives. The reserves are refuges and reservoirs of useful species and genetic diversity of many tropical fruit and horticultural cultivars that are under threat within the larger, more intensive agriculture systems. The unique bio-cultural heritage found in Cuban reserves can be attributed to the complex, long-standing interactions between the productive activities of farm households and communities within the biosphere and its buffer zones, and the ecosystems and biological resources that comprise their livelihood assets.

84. In addition to their endemic agrobiodiversity, the two Reserves are characterized by significant areas composed of agricultural landscapes and family farms in the midst of natural ecosystems,31 allowing the project to examine the interactions between natural ecosystems and agricultural landscapes and to identify the benefits derived from agrobiodiversity that provide incentives to the conservation of biodiversity in the Reserves. These include the practical and

31 Natural ecosystems refer to biotic communities and landscapes able to reproduce its structure and functions without direct human intervention, as opposed to anthropogenic, managed, or production landscapes.


34

concrete benefits to livelihoods of small family farming and the use of agrobiodiversity. By assessing the role of agrobiodiversity in the protected areas, increasing the amount of agrobiodiversity in the buffer and transition zones of the two Reserves and promoting the use of traditional varieties and wild species in these zones, the project will secure the conservation of agrobiodiversity in the Biosphere Reserves and contribute to more diversified and sustainable agricultural production systems. The concrete information gathered by the project in the two Reserves will be used to produce methodologies and indicators that support and guide the integration of agrobiodiversity in ways that provide direct benefits to Biosphere communities. The methods and indicators will also guide and facilitate the mainstreaming of key genetic resources, knowledge, and ecological farming practices into the agricultural sector. This should provide a concrete and verifiable body of evidence to guide future investments in biodiversity conservation and mainstreaming in Cuba and under the CBD work plan for agrobiodiversity.

85. RBSR encompasses an area of 26,686 hectares and is rich in both wild and agricultural biodiversity.. The main ecosystem types found in RBSR are tropical dry or deciduous forest; while the major habitats and land cover types are evergreen tropical forest, semi-deciduous forest, coniferous forest with pine, thorny xeromorphic thicket, residential areas agroecosystems, pasture land and forestry systems. Of the 889 plant organisms identified, 11% are endemic. Eight rural communities totaling approximately 5,000 people live within the RBSR buffer and transition zones. Their livelihoods are derived from small family farms and conucos. Baseline inventories document a total of 322 cultivated species in these communities, including traditional plant varieties used as food, fodder, condiments, ornaments, insecticides, craft-making, tools, and spiritual purposes. The project will be working in seven communities located in different parts of the reserve so as to include all the major agricultural landscapes and their surrounding ecosystems. The total number of people living in the selected communities of the reserve equals approximately 3,000, representing more than 50% of total population of the reserve. Road access to all communities is good, thus facilitating mainstreaming into other agricultural landscapes and links to markets.

86. Based on existing data, the following five crops are represented in home gardens, and conucos surveyed in and around RBSR: cherimoya (Annona reticulata), common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris), plantains and bananas (Musa spp.), guava (Psidium guajava), and coffee (Coffea arabica). An additional 12 crops were found in more than 80% of the home gardens and small farms: mango (Mangifera indica), guanabana (Annona muricata), coconut (Cocos nucifera), malanga (Xanthosoma sagittifolium), pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata), cassava (Manihot esculenta), gliricidia (Gliricidia sepium), breadfruit (Artocarpus communis), sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum), orange (Citrus sinensis), mamoncillo (Melicoccus bijugatus), and mamey colorado (Pouteria sapota).32 Other studies also report gandul (Cajanus cajan), and grains such as maní (Arachis ipogaea) and sesame (Sesamun orientale).33 Faunal biodiversity includes 115 species of birds, 33 species of reptiles, and a variety of amphibians and mammals. An education center established by the communities within the reserve aims to promote

32 García, M., Castiñeiras, L., & Shagarodsky, T. (2006). Reserva da la Biosfera Sierra del Rosario. In M.

García & L. Castiñeiras (Eds.), La Conservación de la Biodiversidad Agrícola en las Reservas de la Biosfera de Cuba:

Un Reto para el Futuro. Paris: UNESCO. 33 Shagarodsky, T., Fuentes, V., & Barrios, O. (2004). Exposición de la biodiversidad agrícola conservada en

areas rurales de la Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra del Rosario. In Memorias de la Renunión Nacional de

Agrobiodiversidad en Reservas de la Biosfera de Cuba (pp. 129‐134). La Havana: INIFAT.


35

environmental education towards enhancing conservation in the reserve and securing the respect and implementation of national environmental regulations.34

87. RBCT covers approximately 208,305 ha,. The main ecosystem type consists of tropical humid forest including 6,013 ha of marine and coastal areas; the major habitats and land cover types are montane rainforest, xeromorphic matorral, pine (Pinus cubensis), cloud forest, mangrove, rocky and sandy habitats, coral reef, agroecosystems with coffee, cacao, and coconut, residential areas and chrome mines. It comprises the highest levels of biodiversity and endemism of the whole of the Antilles. RBCT is characterized by two vegetation formations, rain forests and scrub, on peridotite- and serpentinite-based soils. The total number of inhabitants residing in the buffer and transition zones of RBCT is 22,135. The project aims to work directly with a set of sample households comprising 10% of the population in 15 communities distributed across the different types of agricultural landscapes and ecosystems in the reserve. The approximate number of people living in the selected communities is 2,500 persons. Access by road to the selected communities is poor. Other communication infrastructure is also rudimentary or non-existent.

88. Family farms in this region tend to contain more commercial crops with mixed cropping of coffee, legumes, roots, and tubers. The main economic activities include forestry and agroforestry, shade coffee, cacao groves, and the aforementioned conucos. Significant use of forest timber for fuel wood, house construction, or for commercial use (regulated by the Ministry of Agriculture) occurs in RBCT.35 The main forest trees harvested are an endemic pine species (Pinus cubensis), cigar-box cedar (Cedrela odorata), Cuban blast (Hibiscus elatus), and mahogany (Swietenia mahogany), among others. Deforestation is an issue and needs to be controlled; increased awareness of sustainable agroforestry activities among the local population could contribute to curbing logging.36

89. Management of agrobiodiversity in RBCT is influenced by the isolation and difficult access to the region. Conucos and home gardens have been found to contain less interspecific diversity than in the west, due to the stronger commercial orientation of agricultural production (i.e., sugar cane, livestock, etc.). In addition, large households and their isolation result in a predominance of staple crops. Environmental factors such as the high altitude limits fruit production, but has a positive effect on roots, tubers, medicinal species, grains, and herbs.37 Maize is an important crop, both for human and animal food and is characterized by high intraspecific diversity. A total of 258 cultivated species with high levels of diversity within each species are known to exist. Of particular importance is the genetic diversity within Phaseolus spp., Dioscorea spp., and Zea mays, which comprise the traditional food crops in eastern Cuba. Most (80%) of the surveyed conucos and home gardens contained Musa paradisiaca, Psidium guajaba, Allium chinense, Eryngium foetidum, Ipomea batatas, Dioscorea spp., Manihot esculenta, Phaseolus

34 García, M., Castiñeiras, L., & Shagarodsky, T. (2006). Reserve da la Biosfera Sierra del Rosario. In M.


Un Reto para el Futuro. Paris: UNESCO. 35 Cuban Ministry of Agriculture. (1998). Ley 80: Ley Forestal. La Habana, Cuba. 36 Giraudy, C., Castiñeiras, L., & Shagarodsky, T. (2006). Reserve de la Biosfera Cuchillas del Toa. In M.


Un Reto para el Futuro. Paris: UNESCO. 37 Castiñeiras, L., Fundora Mayor, Z., & Shagarodsky, T. (2001). Contribution of home gardens to in situ

conservation of plant genetic resources in farming systems – Cuban component. In J.W. Watson & P.

Eyzaguirre (Eds.), Home Gardens and In situ Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources in Farming Systems (pp. 42‐

56). Rome: Bioversity International.


36

vulgaris, Persea americana, Saccharum officinarum, Zea mays, Coffea arabica, Citrus aurantium, Citrus sinensis, Lippia alba, and Plecthranthus amboinicus. The three endemic species that have been recorded are Protium cubense (or copal, providing wood for construction), Garcinia aristata (or manajú, used mainly for timber), and Piper aduncum, Piper ossanum (or Platanillo de Cuba) for medicinal purposes. In addition, RBCT is home to significant populations of endemic and threatened bird species, representing a critical area for neotropical migrant birds that pass through the region in order to winter in Cuba. The Reserve contains a disproportionate amount of Cuba’s herpetological fauna given its size (less than 1% of the land area of Cuba) and a wide diversity of important hymenopterans are also present38. In addition, its watershed affects the habitat of the highly threatened manatee (Trichechus manatus).

90. Previous research by INIFAT (MINAG) and the CNAP (CITMA), with support from Bioversity International, documented the unique and important crop genetic diversity that is maintained by farmers in the reserves. The agrobiodiversity that was identified is crucial to the sustainable development of agriculture and food sovereignty in Cuba. At the same time, this prior research identified gaps in the protected area assessment; agrobiodiversity was a major feature of protected area landscapes but this biodiversity component was not fully captured in protected area plans and strategies. Prior investigations concluded that an improved understanding of the synergies between natural and managed landscapes is crucial for preserving traditional sustainable land management systems and channelling benefits to Biosphere communities that maintain resilient landscapes and biodiversity.

91. A literature review during the PPG phase of the proposed project also raised several important questions for effective biodiversity conservation. First, what participatory management and conservations strategies include communities and support the farmer practices, traditional knowledge, and institutions that enable farmers to maintain and sustainably use agrobiodiversity at the landscape scale? In response, the project will identify, document and extend the best practices, document and disseminate the practical local knowledge, and support the participatory and viable institutions that are crucial for the maintenance of productive, diversity rich agricultural landscapes. Second, to understand the role of agrobiodiversity within protected areas, how do mosaic agricultural landscapes affect and are compatible with the conservation of the unique ecosystems and wild biodiversity in the reserves? The project will apply indicators and measure the flow of services that include pollinators, wild relatives, corridors for movement and connectivity of target species for conservation, soil maintenance, water quality and species diversity in and around mosaic agricultural landscapes in comparison with more homogeneous managed landscapes. Third, what agrobiodiversity exists within the reserve and associated buffer zones and how is that agrobiodiversity distributed at landscape scale within the reserve? Inventorying, mapping and assessing the distribution of diversity is a necessary prerequisite to discerning the effects exercised by agrobiodiversity on the ecosystem at large and the incorporation of agrobiodiversity considerations into management schemes. Fourth, what benefits, incentives, and support can be made available to Biosphere communities that maintain agrobiodiversity in synergy with protected area conservation? As a response, the project will assess all the products and potential products of agrobiodiversity produced by small farms and conucos in the Biosphere Reserves, review a full range of value-adding schemes and processes that deliver benefits directly to the communities and at the same time provide incentives to maintain the landscape management practices that result in mosaic landscapes that are synergistic

38 Fong, A., Maceira, D.F., & Alverson, W.S. (Eds.). (2005). Cuba: Parque Nacional “Alejandro de Humboldt.”

Rapid Biological Inventories Report 14. Chicago: The Field Museum.


37

with biodiversity conservation. This would lay the foundation for a useful methodology to create and sustain a social and institutional dynamic that supports widespread adoption. Finally, how can the undervaluation and poor distribution of traditional varieties, wild species and local breeds be countered so that agrobiodiversity and related ecosystem services can be mainstreamed in support of food sovereignty thus also adding to the recognized value of the Reserve biodiversity. The project will work in partnership with farmers and communities in the Reserves and with extension services and farmers organisations to identify agrobiodiversity such as traditional cultivars, neglected and potentially valuable food species, and ecoagricultural practices that can be mainstreamed into national programmes to increase local food production based on local agrobiodiversity, especially, fruit, horticultural species, legumes and roots and tubers. The project will build on the existing initiatives in the RBSR and RBCT Reserves to develop a portfolio of methods and tools for integrating biodiversity conservation with ecologically sound, low-cost and low-impact agricultural production systems. These practices should favour greater resilience and adaptive capacity to environmental shocks including periodic hurricanes and the increasing severity and unpredictability of climate change impacts. Use of endemic and useful plant diversity exemplified by traditional Cuban tropical agroforestry and valuable non-timber forest products will be investigated and assessed for mainstreaming in mitigation and restoration of distinctive zones in the MaB Reserves.

92. Several methods will be developed, adapted, tested, and made available for dissemination to other reserves based on the recognition and documentation of the current sustainable agricultural practices identified and applied in the RBSR and RBCT Reserves. Options will consider the development of participatory licensing, certification, and labeling schemes for households and communities that practice sustainable agricultural methods. The project will undertake assessments and develop indicators to establish practical thresholds and guidelines for sustainable and ecological tropical agriculture that is not only compatible with protection of natural ecosystems but provides synergies, connectivity and extension of the biodiversity maintained within the MaB reserves. These schemes would establish a set of sustainable farming practices and techniques for lead agricultural households whose family farms act as nodes in the dissemination and exchange of agrobiodiversity knowledge, seeds and planting materials. The practices to be introduced and mainstreamed by the project will be developed and assessed to contribute to larger and more secure revenue streams such as ecotourism and alternative markets for traditional agricultural products from MaB bio-cultural landscapes.

93. The project focuses on GEF 4 Strategic objective 1: To catalyze sustainability of protected area (PA) systems, Strategic programme 3 Strengthening terrestrial PA networks. The project will provide information tools for including agricultural biodiversity conservation in PA management plans and provide options through the sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity to increase the flow of benefits and sustainability of Cuban MAB reserves. The outputs and activities under project Component 2 will contribute to strengthening the protected areas by including key components of biodiversity that had not been adequately covered in protected area management plans and activities. The project will identify and catalyze community initiatives and support small scale conuco agricultural production as cost-effective sustainable economic mechanisms which will benefit communities in and around the Biosphere Reserves, while recognizing and enhancing the value of natural landscapes for sustainable agriculture, livelihood security, and biocultural diversity. The management models designed on the basis of project experiences in two reserves will be applicable to the other four reserves in Cuba, and can be replicated in other Protected Areas worldwide which include coastal and marine ecosystems. By offering concrete avenues to the better integration of the sustainable use of agricultural


38

biodiversity resources, the project will significantly contribute to the strengthening of Protected Area management plans and policies for mainstreaming biodiversity. Working in Biosphere Reserves with their associated buffer zones, the project will explore methods for simultaneously enhancing the conservation of agricultural biodiversity while improving the livelihoods of the rural poor in and around the protected areas. The ecosystem approach, the guiding principle in the management of Biosphere Reserves and other activities undertaken under the Convention on Biological Diversity, will be strengthened and improved by addressing the links between agricultural biodiversity and traditional farming practices in protected areas.

94. The project will also contribute to GEF 4 Strategic objective 2, To mainstream biodiversity in production landscapes/seascapes and sectors, Strategic programme 5. Fostering markets for biodiversity goods and services: The project supports this focal area strategies programme by mainstreaming knowledge, practices, genetic and crop diversity into the national markets. The project will implement a set of specific targeted activities aimed at improving the sustainable marketing of the products of rich agricultural biodiversity production systems within and around protected areas. This will be done through the development of marketing programs for certified and non-certified agricultural biodiversity products in a nationally recognised market chain. Conditions will be put in place to promote markets which emphasize the production of traditional and indigenous crop varieties with diverse genetic base. Marketing campaigns will help to building public awareness of the biological and bio-cultural value of Cuban Biosphere Reserves at national and international level and will also serve to improve markets and help to create opportunities and conditions for public and private investment in the agro-tourism and ecotourism that supports the protected areas in Cuba. The project will also develop and apply indicators that can assess impacts of mainstreaming agrobiodiversity conservation in MAB reserves on community wellbeing. In this regard, the project was able to establish a partnership with the Satoyama Initiative and gain access to experiences and expertise to develop indicators that measure both ecosystem conservation and community wellbeing at the landscape level. The Satoyama project, implemented by INIFAT and Bioversity developed preliminary indicators and tools that were vetted at the October 2011 CBD/SBSTTA meeting in Montreal where they were deemed useful to develop and test further. They can be used to help guide and monitor investments in biodiversity conservation and livelihoods in a portfolio of projects supported by GEF Small Grant Programme and other conservation networks. The project will work in close collaboration with the Satoyama Initiative to further refine and test these indicators.

Expected global environmental benefits

95. The project activities will contribute to conservation and sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity in MAB reserves by improving reserve management system together with livelihoods of the communities living in the reserves. This will be achieved by identifying sustainable agricultural practices that contribute to conservation of protected areas and their biodiversity, and that build on traditional knowledge and biocultural values and maintain resilient landscapes. The project will cover the full range of agro-ecosystems for family farming and eco-agriculture in Cuba, thus providing the context to test and adapt the practices for use in similar agricultural and bio-cultural landscapes in other protected areas within the global MaB network and other protected areas under sustainable use regimes.

96. By including agricultural biodiversity in protected area management plans and activities, many of the MaB transition zones can be better integrated into the conservation and development goals. As countries work to achieve the Nagoya global targets to increase the area under


39

protection, much of the expansion in protected areas will necessarily come from increased coverage of sustainably used areas and agricultural landscapes. The project outcomes, particularly the methods and tools, will provide strategies and options that can be applied in a range of settings to manage the expanded areas under protection, both in Cuba and in protected area systems globally. Concretely the project will identify thresholds and functional relationships between wild and cultivated areas that contribute to the long term sustainability of protected ecosystems over a larger area. Here below a list of global environmental benefits expected to be delivered by the project; further details are provided in section 3.7.

The in situ conservation and sustainable use of the unique agrobiodiversity found in two project reserves of global significance practiced directly on 2,200 ha. of landscape over the collective pilot sites in the Project and monitored by the GEF BD-2 tracking tool. Summary information on species has been given above particularly under the project site descriptions and in para. 12 -16 of Annex 1 Project document). The populations, varieties and species conserved are likely to possess globally significant genetic variation for useful traits, particularly for biotic and abiotic stress. The project will secure two key conservation objectives: the maintenance in situ of unique genetic diversity and the conservation of resilient agro-ecosystems (recognized by the International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative (IPSI) as of global significances.

Conservation of globally-significant habitats supporting important biodiversity, including bioculturally important agroforestry systems, that provide a pool of genes, species and ecosystems available to cope with local impacts of climate change and long term adaptation to global change. The selected MAB reserves are globally significant environments. The adoption of more appropriate agricultural practices in and around the reserve will reduce current negative effects and potential threats. For example locations along biological corridors will be selected to examine the role that different agricultural management practices in bio-cultural landscapes play in establishing connectivity and corridors for protected species and ecosystems. Once determined, these roles and functions will be supported or enhanced.

Increase of the area of agricultural ecosystems under sustainable management for biodiversity conservation. This will be achieved by developing and adopting sustainable management practices, including those that favour landscape connectivity and that take into consideration demographic and economic growth patterns and related carrying capacity of the landscapes and thresholds for sustainable agricultural activities. These practices will support the continuing evolution of important traditional varieties to maintain adaptability to climate change and reduce vulnerability of farming communities. The sustainable management practices can be widely adopted to improve landscape management in similar environments around the world, reduce agricultural pollution and impact on surrounding biodiversity of global significance. This will provide useful examples for achieving the Aichi Strategic Target 7 to increase area under protection by including agricultural and managed landscapes.

The sustainable use of agrobiodiversity in the target reserves by linking conservation to improved livelihoods, income and food security. This will be achieved by adoption of sustainable harvesting, strengthening market chains and access to markets, sales of


40

products and improved production (quality and diversity) at project site level and will include the rich diversity of vegetables, fruits, spices and medicinal plant species.

Fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the greater availability, accessibility and utilization, of genetic resources. New community seed banks and germplasm nurseries will be established and existing ones will be strengthened to guarantee availability of a broad range of species and varieties, as well as good quality of planting material.

Mainstreaming of biodiversity conservation into production landscapes to ensure a broad

distribution and use of the targeted agrobiodiversity over time. The inclusion of the traditional varieties with useful traits into agricultural production systems will stabilize production systems based on a rich genetic pool that will enhance the adaptation and resilience of the system while at the same time prevent genetic erosion.

Secure conservation of the knowledge associated with relevant agrobiodiversity and its management in a range of tropical landscapes combining wild and cultivated diversity. Traditional knowledge will be shared among farmers’ associations, local schools and public media.

3.2. Project goal and objective

Project Objective:

97. The Project Development Goal of the project is to contribute to the conservation of the diversity within and around protected areas in ways that improve the livelihoods of rural communities and sustain ecosystem functions in and around the MaB reserves.

98. The Project Objective is to conserve the diversity within and around protected areas through mainstreaming agrobiodiversity into the management of Cuban Man and Biosphere Reserve system. By securing the conservation of agrobiodiversity in Biosphere reserves and mainstreaming it into the wider landscapes, the project will provide essential biological resources and knowledge for more diversified and sustainable agricultural production systems in Cuba.


41

3.3. Project components and expected results

99. The project will achieve its objectives through three components. The main components, outcomes and outputs are listed in Appendix 4, Project Logical Framework. Appendix 4 contains the Project Results Framework and a listing of the main Components, Outcomes and Outputs. Appendix 5, the Workplan, provides a complete listing of the Key Activities by component and output as well as an indication of the timeframe. Components and their outcomes, and the outputs and activities necessary to achieve them, were specifically defined during the PPG phase in response to a process of participation and joint reflection on the part of the national partners in Cuba based on the findings of the different background studies and consultations that were undertaken during the PPG.

Component 1 – Mainstreaming mechanisms that integrate high levels of agrobiodiversity into MaB buffer and transition zones.

Outcome 1: Increased agrobiodiversity in the buffer and transition zones of the 2 Project MaB Reserves.

The outputs for Component 1 are:

Output 1.1: Assessment of the existing agrobiodiversity and its role and use in protected areas 100. In order to fully understand the relationship of agrobiodiversity to the surrounding wild landscape, and incorporate agrobiodiversity into new reserve management plans, better

Sierra del Rosario Biosphere Reserve

Cuchillas del Toa Biosphere Reserve


42

identification and mapping of agrobiodiversity will be carried out during the first year of the project particularly with regard to (i) the role agrobiodiversity plays at the landscape level within protected area ecosystems areas and (ii) how it is used by farmers and (iii) how they derive benefits from its use. Locations along biological corridors will be selected to examine the role that agriculture in bio-cultural landscapes plays in establishing connectivity and corridors for protected species and ecosystems. Once determined, these roles and functions can be supported or enhanced. This will help to facilitate collaboration among reserve managers and farmers to exchange knowledge, foster transparency and improved communication for more informed decision-making on protected area strategies and plans. Also, a more concrete assessment of benefits to communities and households from sustainable use of agrobiodiversity can help motivate more active participation of farmers in Biosphere management planning processes. To this effect, particular attention will be given to species of global importance (e.g. Phaseolus lunats and vulgaris, Capsicum and Zea mays) and to the identification of those species that have shown an economic potential; from a preliminary analysis of the baseline some species have already been identified: Phaseolus vulgaris and lunatus, already used by farmers but relegated to conucos, the Capsicum annuum-chinense-frutescens complex, whose rich variability is not used; some of the seven local races of maize, Helianthus annus, for oil production, Xanthosoma sagittifolium , Colocasia esculenta, Dioscorea spp. and endemic tropical fruits of high economic values, such as Carica papaya, Psidium guajava, Pouteria sapote. Market opportunities for these species will be developed in Component 3 (output 3.1). Although domesticated animals are not a focus in the project, they are an intrinsic part of agrobiodiversity (see CBD, FAO, and Bioversity-PAR definitions). That’s why the project will examine the impacts of small farm livestock on wild and cultivated areas. This is to provide guidelines to small farmers on mixed farming practices that are compatible with the overarching conservation goal of the MaB reserves. 39

101. Indicators for monitoring the distribution of agrobiodiversity and its uses will be identified and, in accordance with activities of Component 2, incorporated into project Reserve management plans; studies that analyse and document the role of agricultural landscapes as biological corridors will be up-dated or carried out where needed. Other useful indicators that will be developed are for monitoring and assessing management practices, knowledge, local customs, and rituals on resilience of bio-cultural landscapes and wellbeing of farming communities. Pilot sites for assessing impacts of agrobiodiversity on protected areas and vice versa will be selected and species that influence landscape connectivity will be identified. Subsequently, the most appropriate for the maintenance and/or restoration of Reserve landscapes will be identified and promoted. The information resulting from this Component will be used to develop a manual on conserving agrobiodiversity landscapes under Component 2.

102. Wild and cultivated materials maintained on Biosphere family farms have the potential to be used for managing pests and diseases, and to cope with abiotic stress including adaptation to climate change impacts, e.g. longer dry spells, increased volatility and severity of weather events. The project will identify, characterise, and test these materials for mainstreaming by INIFAT and its partners in agricultural extension services. The materials will also be distributed to small farmers within and outside protected areas.

Output 1.2: Increased use and conservation of traditional varieties and wild species 39 L. Castiñeiras, M. García, T. Shagarodsky, C. Giraudy, Z. Fundora, V. Fuentes, R. Cristóbal, F. Hernández and G. Begué. (2012 unpublished data). Oportunities for in situ conservation of agricultural biodiversity in Cuban biosphere reserves.


43

103. Traditional varieties have the potential to improve agricultural productivity. They are better adapted to local climatic conditions (even as they are changing), and pests and diseases and provide resilience and stability under variable and often difficult conditions.40 However, the pervasive use of these practices is often limited by the lack of a methodology for widespread adoption.41 The baseline situation identifies several gaps (as discussed in Section 2.6 and Appendix 4). While traditional varieties and wild species are currently used within the reserves their uses and how it affects their conservation and genetic diversity is poorly understood. By coordinating with farmers and their cooperatives to understand the ways they use traditional varieties and wild species and the reasoning behind those decisions, the project will design tools to promote and sustain the selected traditional varieties and wild species.

104. Another set of factors behind the decreased demand and use of many traditional crops and varieties is the loss of culinary knowledge and food culture based on local species. This includes the many indigenous and endemic legumes, lima beans (Phaseolus lunatus) pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan), the tropical roots and tubers and the many plants used in condiments and drinks. The use of traditional crop varieties and neglected and underutilised species will be supported through compilation and dissemination of information on their food uses. Recipe books on traditional foods from conucos and the Cuban biospheres, cooking displays, competitions, radio and television programmes will be developed to disseminate information on the dietary and cultural values of edible species in the Biosphere Reserves.

105. Characterization and localization of varieties will take place during the first semester of full project implementation. Participatory methods for diversity assessment, consultation and use of traditional farmer knowledge, characterisation and ranking of species and landscape components of Agrobiodiversity that provide benefits to farmers will be employed and adapted further when required. Based on their potential for success and contribution to the conservation goals of the MaB system, the project will also identify crop species and traditional varieties to be more widely distributed within the MaB Reserves to small farmers through local seed system and for mainstreaming into the suburban agriculture system that has recently been prioritised in national policies.

106. The project will foster and support complementary strategies that have greater and more positive impacts on agrobiodiversity conservation and food security in places where natural and managed landscapes interact. Establishing and or strengthening the effectiveness of community seed banks and nurseries and linking them to similar or complementary germplasm facilities of MINAG and CITMA will be carried out by the project. This should provide greater coverage in the reintroduction and restoration of biodiversity and the possible inclusion of species and varieties of economic value to small farmers, thus providing additional incentives for stewardship by Biosphere communities in restored biodiversity conservation areas. Furthermore the Urban and Suburban agricultural programme which extends to the boundaries of the Reserves will be used as a vehicle to mainstream the use and production of traditional varieties by including them into the Cuban production system.

40 Thompson, J., Hodgkin, T., Atta-Krah, K., Jarvis, D., Hoogendoorn, C., & Padulosi, S. (2007). Biodiversity in agro-ecosystems. In S. Scherr & J. McNeely Farming with Nature: The Science and Practice of Ecoagriculture (pp. 46-60). Washington: Island Press. Also see, http://agrobiodiversityplatform.org/climatechange/2011/06/15/save-and-grow/ 41 Rosset, P.M., Machín Sosa, B., Roque Jaime, A.M., & Ávila Lozano, D.R. (2011). The Campesino-to-Campesino agroecology movement of ANAP in Cuba: social process methodology in the construction of sustainable peasant agriculture and food sovereignty. Journal of Peasant Studies 38(1): 161-191.


44

107. Meetings between specialists and farmers that manage the community seed banks and nurseries, will generate knowledge exchange regarding traditional varieties, crop wild relatives, and other useful wild species. This knowledge exchange should produce innovation in practices that lead to greater distribution, increased value, and more secure conservation in situ of threatened crop varieties, wild relatives and traditional agrobiodiversity products that fail to reach markets including germplasm distributors and local seed markets. In order to ensure the sustainability of these activities, technical documents regarding agrobiodiversity conservation and sustainable agricultural practices within the project Reserves will be developed, distributed, and explained through participatory workshops and community meetings.

Output 1.3: Local seed systems are maintained and planting material of traditional varieties is distributed to farmers in project Reserves

108. Farmers in the Reserves rely largely on their own seeds for planting crops and establishing nurseries. To address the shortfall in seed systems, loss from extreme weather events such as hurricanes and drought, and migration, farmers have expressed interest in maintaining a larger network of seed banks and seedlings, improving the quality of the material and broadening the range of species and varietal diversity. The project will link these traditional household managed seed banks to increase the exchange and include a greater range of varieties and species available to farmers. Diversity seed fairs will be organized to enhance exchange of seeds of traditional varieties, together with the traditional knowledge linked to them, among communities. This will enable them to maintain productivity within their landscape mosaics. The project will also provide support, technical guidelines and assist in establishing priorities for seed exchange. Promoting the currently largely undervalued traditional and local varieties within the seed systems of the project Reserves will preserve them not only for their inherent ecological value, but lead to livelihoods improvements as socioeconomic values are assigned to varieties. Traditional and local varieties, evaluated and characterized (see Output 1.1), will also be disseminated to small farmers, home gardens outside Protected Areas by farmer networks (ANAP) and national food sovereignty, eco-agriculture programmes.

109. In order to further understand seed exchange within and between communities, model crops with intraspecific variability will be identified and studied. Factors that impact local seed systems, including biotic and abiotic conditions and stresses, social and cultural institutions, will be identified and possible mitigation measures (i.e. DAFO matrix) will be outlined in order to reduce barriers to existing and project seed systems. Mechanisms and networks for seed exchange and conservation will also be supported to further enhance seed availability and use. Local varieties will be incorporated into new and existing extension programmes and seed fairs to buttress measures to propagate and distribute planting material representing agrobiodiversity within project sites (Note that seed fairs also support the achievement of Output 3.1, discussed later in this section).

Component 2 – Improved protected area management systems and Capacity Building

Outcome 2: Improved management of Cuban Man and Biosphere (MaB) Reserve system through enhanced leadership and decision-making capacity of all stakeholders.

Output 2.1: Agrobiodiversity management actions are integrated and applied in the Management Plans of the Cuban MaB Reserves system


45

110. The project will establish a national platform, involving key stakeholders from the following sectors: agriculture, environment, farmers’ organizations and tourism, to promote the revised Management Plan of the two Reserves that will integrate agrobiodiversity. By providing platforms and spaces the project will facilitate discussion for the revision of management plans that include the participation and direct involvement of stakeholders from different sectors involved in the management of the reserves. Key stakeholders to be included in mainstreaming activities are farmers with their practices that address barriers, gaps and obstacles. Policy Learning Events will be organized to engage stakeholders, generate debate and disseminate information and best practices. Out of these activities will emerge a set of recommendations, guidelines and amendments which will be under consideration by relevant managers of MaB reserves (CNAP).

111. As described in section 2.1 unsustainable agricultural and extractive land use practices continue to threaten agrobiodiversity in MaB Reserves, particularly in coastal areas within RBCT. The proposed project will recommend specific management actions and mitigation measures to reduce negative impacts of agricultural practices. These measures will be incorporated into reserve management plans, and their implementation will be monitored, and evaluated using indicators developed by the project. Traditional agricultural systems that incorporate restoration practices and support the maintenance of natural and managed landscapes will be identified and selected for incorporation into reserve management plans and subsequently promoted and supported by reserve managers.

112. In order to properly integrate agrobiodiversity into project Reserve management plans, case studies to identify demographic and growth patterns and related carrying capacity of the landscapes and thresholds of agricultural activities will be examined. Agricultural management practices and socio-cultural influences affecting the natural environment (both positively and negatively) will be noted and explored. After carrying capacity, thresholds, and other influences are understood, management practices that favour landscape connectivity can be justifiably designed and implemented. The impact of different management practices on coastal areas within RBCT (e.g. soil runoff) will be assessed and alternative agricultural practices will be determined. Traditional varieties will be registered in the National Registry of commercial varieties of Cuba. In some cases, native species or species with traditional uses will be reintegrated to help repair damaged ecosystems. This will involve project support to farmer managed nurseries of agrobiodiversity, particularly tropical fruit and agroforestry species and farmers seed networks for traditional varieties of indigenous food plant, particularly roots, tubers, and legumes. Consultations between nurseries and germplasm activities for planting and restoration by Biosphere Reserve technical staff and farmer and community germplasm experts to establish complementarity in the use of varieties and species as well as favouring the planting of agrobiodiversity species with both conservation and economic use values.

113. In addition, the following activities will be carried out in order to facilitate scaling up of best practices across Cuban MaB reserves: Learning events to favour dissemination of best practices, show their efficacy and share lessons and experiences; organize working groups involving stakeholders at different levels and from different areas, to develop strategies that promote the mainstreaming of local biodiversity into project reserves and Management Plans.

114. Output 2.2: National policy-makers and provincial and local officials make informed decisions regarding conservation and sustainable use of agrobiodiversity to improve the sustainability of the National System of Protected Areas (SNAP)


46

115. Creating and enabling policy environment for conservation and sustainable use of agrobiodiversity in MaB reserves in the Cuban context will take into account the sustainability requirements of Protected Areas and the livelihood needs of family farms in areas of high biodiversity. In order to accurately reflect agrobiodiversity values to the livelihoods of different stakeholders and to the Protected Area system, the project will provide more precise and concrete indicators and measures of the economic incentives, institutional and policy barriers that currently exist in the valorization of agrobiodiversity conservation and use. The active participation during the PPG phase of the ministries of agriculture, tourism, environment, science and technology is a clear indicator of the existing, high-level political will around this innovative project. The project will respond directly to the new legal and institutional framework that promotes sub-urban agriculture and more flexible labour market for family farms. The identification of multiple stakeholders related to the joint valuation and value addition potential of local agrobiodiversity products and environmental services is of paramount importance. The results obtained from the agrobiodiversity value-added strategy (“From Conucos to Landscape”) will be relevant to local and national authorities and also to the UNESCO World Network of Biosphere Reserves, thus creating an enabling environment for mainstreaming the project outputs at different scales.

116. Cuban policy-makers are informed through research institutes such as INIFAT or CNAP of the identification and conservation of the reserves´ agrobiodiversity. A more concrete appreciation of the potential and existing economic value of agrobiodiversity as represented in the basket of goods and services from MaB reserves will provide stakeholders with the knowledge and specific tools related to politics, experiences, and options for agrobiodiversity conservation. Workshops and assessment reports about the legal and regulatory framework for the protection and valorization of agrobiodiversity resources will be organized.

Output 2.3: Government Institutions put in place capacity building programme 117. Strengthening the links between local social institutional networks and Reserve management and other government institutions is key to conserving agrobiodiversity in a sustainable manner that involves all parties affected by the reserve environment and agricultural activities. The project will develop training and support programmes for MaB communities which will help empower farmers and shape ownership of relevant project activities and outputs. Furthermore, by allowing, encouraging, and supporting the participation of local social institutions, reserve communities and farmers will be given a stronger voice in reserve management and decision-making, reducing tension between institutions and establishing a long-term collaborative relationship that benefits both parties and the reserve. Through partnership between local reserve communities and MINAG, the existing soils and pest and disease control programmes will be refined and better implemented. The project will set a precedent of best management practices for national social networks and institutions, which will be published in an outreach plan and guide for use at other Reserves. A manual or guide on agrobiodiversity will be produced for Biosphere Reserve mangers and partners as well as for use in environmental and biodiversity education programmes.

118. Although agriculture biodiversity is an important resource within the reserve areas, current protected area management plans lack specific guidelines, mechanisms and/or options to include agrobiodiversity management. The revised plans produced by the project will include the strengthening of the maintenance and use of agrobiodiversity, and associated local knowledge through the development and adoption of appropriate management models. Implementation of these plans will require building increased capacity of national and local institutions (including park management staff and other government staff) and farmers and communities to jointly


47

implement new models and approaches. Presently, capacity-building programmes related to agrobiodiversity conservation within project Reserves do not exist. Farmer knowledge and technical information is not captured into conservation management strategies, due, in part, to a lack of process or format for the transfer of knowledge to occur. The project will develop such a format so this knowledge and information can, for the first time, be incorporated into agrobiodiversity conservation and reserve management strategies.

119. In order to attain this output, the most appropriate local structures for facilitating the development and institutionalization of capacity-building strategies will be identified, as capacity-building and exchange programmes regarding the use, conservation, and management of agrobiodiversity are developed in the rural communities of the intervention sites. As part of the programmes, the value of agrobiodiversity conservation within the intervention sites will be clearly documented and made available through farmer diversity field fora conducted by farmers and project staff in key landscapes or farmer community centers managed by ANAP. The project will also produce technical guidelines for bio-cultural landscapes for agricultural extension and development workers in protected areas. project milestones and participatory methods and technical results (social, ecological, cultural and economic) will also be communicated to ensure transparency and support the cross-sectoral, trans-disciplinary, and participatory goals of the project.

Output 2.4: Information on agrobiodiversity conservation in project MaB Reserves is made available to the global MaB network coordinated by UNESCO. 120. Project information will be made available for use by the global MaB network. A GIS database on agrobiodiversity within the project Reserves that is systematically updated will be accessible where permissible to the global network as a model that may be useful to other MaB Reserves. In order to make information on agrobiodiversity conservation within project Reserves available to the global network, a methodology for disseminating good agricultural management practices to the other four Reserves in Cuba will first be developed. An information-sharing mechanism comprised of a network between project partner institutions and agencies will be created. Existing biodiversity databases will be updated to include agrobiodiversity and will be incorporated into the existing Geographic Information System of Protected Areas (SIGAP). project partners will participate in IberoMaB network and other UNESCO and international agrobiodiversity networks and agrobiodiversity research platforms to exchange information. A project website will be created and linked to several partner institutions, platforms and networks (see agrobiodiversityplatform.org; http://satoyama-initiative.org/en/;www.ecoagriculture.org/; http://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/centrehostedresearchprogrammes/pecs.4.5686ae2012c08a47fb5800013559.html).

Component 3 – Improved livelihoods from increased benefit flow within protected areas

Outcome 3. Improved livelihoods of communities living in and around the project MaB Reserves through benefit-sharing mechanisms that support the sustainable use of agrobiodiversity

Output 3.1: Identify and strengthen income generation and other benefits from agrobiodiversity management. 121. The potential of agrobiodiversity to provide values and services that contribute to livelihoods has been recognized, and increasing attention is being given to the role markets can play for agrobiodiversity conservation through product diversification and increasing


48

competitiveness in niche and novelty markets. The project will develop different studies to identify the products and income generating activities that result in both positive impacts on the livelihoods of local communities while maintaining high levels of agrobiodiversity. Specifically, the project will screen the species from the project MaB reserves to identify those with a high economic potential (see Output 1 for a list), develop market opportunities, and enhance the economic value of products from biodiversity (e.g. labeling and value added activities such as special handling and processing). Furthermore, the unique role that Biosphere Reserves play in protecting traditional varieties and crop wild relatives will be explored by promoting farmer germplasm nurseries and seed production for small scale ecoagriculture and home gardens. This further mainstreams biodiversity into the larger landscape and adds a new revenue stream to Biosphere communities.

122. Specific attention will be given to the formulation and adaptation of a methodological framework for agrobiodiversity promotion and sustainable use. One proposed methodological framework has already been tested in other biosphere reserves such as the Intercontinental Mediterranean Biosphere Reserve between Spain and Morocco and addresses the specific issue of how to create incentives for agrobiodiversity at the landscape scale. By building on and adapting existing frameworks it will be easier to share and scale out the results and lessons learned in the Cuba project to the UNESCO World Network of Biosphere Reserves, thus reinforcing the possibilities of mainstreaming the project outcomes at different scales and decision making levels for global impact. The scope and content of the proposed methodological framework are detailed in Annex F.

123. The project will support Community-Based Organizations, whereby smallholders can pool resources and market their products collectively to reduce the high transaction costs resulting from their individual small commercial volume. Collective and cooperative community organizations and institutions can also help improve farmers’ access to tools, equipment, credit, training, transport and information, increase bargaining power and in turn facilitate process of differentiation such as certification for goods and services.

124. The project adopts a holistic and integrated approach to the socio-economic assessment of the interrelations among a range of agrobiodiversity products and services including agro-ecotourism. A Basket of Goods and Services (BGS) methodology, a comprehensive tool which promotes the joint valuation of local quality products and environmental services that are strongly linked with the territory and culture, will be developed to stimulate a fair and equitable flow of benefits along the value chains in ways that positively impact the whole local community managing bio-cultural landscapes.

125. In partnership with the Ministry of Tourism, CNAP, and UNESCO-Havana, agro-ecotourism circuits based on the discovery of conucos, local gastronomy, and their associated intangible heritage will be developed. Educational materials and a media campaign will be developed in partnership with Reserve managers and regional authorities to build demand for agrobiodiversity products and local foods products increasing the visibility of the two biospheres reserves as destinations for agro-ecotourism. The project will build on the existing circuits of both biosphere reserves maximizing the potential of diversity in products and food cultures from the two project reserves.

126. Communication and marketing campaigns for agrobiodiversity goods and services will target consumer demands for products and services with inherent ecological and bio-cultural aspects embraced by their value chain and will support the positive interactions with the


49

productive areas and natural landscape. Actions to introduce the products into niche and novel markets will build synergies with the tourism sector. The strategy for agrobiodiversity value addition will also focus in Cuban consumers through direct market channels, such as local markets and fairs.

127. The project will also explore the possibilities of linking existing mechanisms for payment for environmental services such as the Soil Conservation Fund with agrobiodiversity conservation strategies. The socio-ecological production landscapes, wild biodiversity, and local communities of these biospheres can benefit from integrated investments in these ecosystem services, specific agrobiodiversity food products, and innovative forms of tourism related to conservation of agrobiodiversity. The project will develop a strategy “From conucos to landscape” to ensure improved livelihoods of local communities and improved resilience of socio-ecological production landscapes. (See Annex F).

Output 3.2: Methodologies and tools for national participatory certification schemes that support sustainable agrobiodiversity management practices and products

128. Key ways to channel benefits to local producers and local value chain actors are through properly designed certification schemes42 for supporting agrobiodiversity management practices through the commercialization of derived products and services. The project will review several existing certification schemes (e.g. Protected Designation of Origin, Protected Geographical Indications, Quality Denominations, Regional Distinctive, Collective Brands, Participatory Guaranty System, Organic Certification, Fair Trade) that have shown successful results in different types of production processes.

129. The project will try to scale out the existing initiatives that support quality brands and certification processes so that they are also applied to small scale producers and conucos. A participatory certification scheme method is currently being designed by the ANAP. The project will build on the knowledge and experience accumulated in the region around certification and labeling schemes, taking advantage of the knowledge and practices accumulated in the World Network of Biosphere Reserves and in particular in the IBERO Network, to develop a participatory certification model for agrobiodiversity products and services.

130. The project will focus attention on feasibility and benefits that can be obtained through landscape/territorial labeling approaches and how they promote ecosystem services delivery, landscape resilience while capturing the cultural and symbolic attributes of the landscape. A territorial certification scheme for agricultural biodiversity products aims to provide incentives that support specific landscape management practices that meet both conservation and livelihood objectives. They are thus linked to a territory e.g. a landscape and the multiple gods and services it provides. A territorial certification or labeling includes 4 elements in a protocol that are identified through a participatory process with agrarian communities that reside in and manage the landscape. They include (i) an agreed vision of the territory or landscape that is the source of unique products and services (ii) a local bio-cultural model for production and commercialization of a basket of goods and services, (iii) an agreed set of organizational and institutional

42 Certification is a formal differentiation mechanism in which a certification organization declares that the product or service that the consumer is paying for is produced or done under a specific norm or “code of conduct”. Thus, certification can establish a relationship of trust among producers and consumers, in which the producer response to the different consumer´s desires related to cultural, social, ethics, and/or environmental aspects.


50

arrangements to certify and deliver the goods and services to market that retains the geographic and bio-cultural identity of the landscape, and (iv) agreed set of regulations and protocols to assign and maintain the bio-cultural certification and commercial brand.

131. In order to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the participatory certification model a set of methods and tools will be developed, which will also contribute to building synergies between certification schemes, agrobiodiversity conservation, and the management of bio-cultural landscapes. Training programmes for participatory certification schemes will be implemented, monitored, and evaluated in both project Reserves as part of regional collaboration on managing natural and cultural patrimony in the Caribbean and also for dissemination to the global network for use and assessment.

3.4. Intervention logic and key assumptions

132. The project aims to conserve the diversity within and around protected areas in ways that both improve livelihoods of rural communities and sustain ecosystem functions. By addressing both rural livelihoods and ecosystem functions through integrated management plans and cross-cutting the natural resources, conservation, and development sectors, the project seeks to set a precedent for the synergies between and long-term sustainability of both agriculture and conservation. The project will develop and apply a set of indicators to measure synergies and benefits that accrue to Biosphere Reserve conservation and to the farm families and communities in and neighbouring the Reserves that use local agrobiodiversity. This is attached in Annex G and will be further amplified with quantitative and qualitative measures and data. Documentation of the value of previously underappreciated agrobiodiversity resources within the project Reserves, will enable managers and farmers in the Reserves to generate a diversified flow of benefits contributing to their sustainability.

133. Component 1 seeks to mainstream agrobiodiversity in the project Reserves through filling existing gaps with respect to agrobiodiversity, its distribution, value and the role of family farms and bio-cultural landscapes within protected area ecosystems.and the increased distribution and use of traditional varieties and wild species – especially in the vital buffer and transition zones – to enhance both food sovereignty and food security.

Key assumptions of Component 1 include:

Farmers’ interest in conservation, use, and management of local agrobiodiversity National authorities are sensitive to conservation of local agricultural species in the MaB

Reserves Adequate coordination with experts on biological corridors in the Caribbean region Ability to overcome logistical constraints in access to different zones Cooperation of the farmers within project Reserves National institutions have the capacity to collaborate with communities National institutions are willing to promote the commercialization and valorization of

MaB Reserves local products Farmers are able to create community seed banks on their farms National agricultural extension programmes promote traditional cultivars


51

Seed multiplication facilities and nurseries are able to scale-up production of a larger number of local varieties

Farmers recognize and understand the importance of crop genetic diversity The existence and implementation of a new national suburban agriculture programme Farmers who are willing to create community seed banks on their farms for the benefit of

the surrounding community National agricultural extension programmes are willing to promote traditional cultivars The existence and trust placed in the National Association of Small Farmers (ANAP) Farmer interest in increasing and/or maintaining agrobiodiversity on their farms and

practicing agroecological approaches to production Qualified technical training staff are made available

Coordination with experts on biological corridors in the Caribbean region to obtain needed information, models and experiences.

134. Component 2 seeks to improve the management systems of protected areas – beginning with the project Reserves. Supporting local farmer communities through the establishment of government linkages and making agrobiodiversity information in the project Reserves available to the national protected area system as well as the regional and global network of MaB reserves for scaling up and scaling out project results is a major element of this component.


Decision-makers and administrators are interested in and receptive to incorporating agrobiodiversity into management plans and decisions

Farmers willing to register traditional varieties Relevant national sectors are willing to cooperate. Policy makers at all levels recognize and understand the role of MaB Reserves in local

food security, national food sovereignty, development goals and human well-being. Internet access at partners’ level is improved. The existence of national networks of producers of local agrobiodiversity production Traditional varieties are registered in the National Registry of Commercial Varieties of

Cuba and are included in the Species, Habitats, and Ecosystems Programme of the Management Plans

Coordination with experts on biological corridors in the Caribbean region through UNESCO and the Caribbean Biological Corridor43

Exchange expertise and technical know-how under The Madrid Action Plan for Biosphere Reserves 2008-201344

135. Component 3 seeks to improve livelihoods through income generation and other benefits from good agrobiodiversity management, certification schemes, and full integration of agrobiodiversity into national policy-makers, provincial and local officials, and SNAP.

43 http://www.car-spaw-rac.org/?Caribbean-Biological-Corridor,212 44 http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0016/001633/163301e.pdf


52


National interest in improving the income of rural communities Existing tourist circuits are functioning and unaffected by restrictions in travel or

international trade The existence and successful implementation of the new national suburban agriculture

programme The existence and successful implementation of the new national suburban agriculture

programme National interest in improving the income of rural communities Interest and support from MINTUR Experience with certification of agricultural products Certification schemes in the region and/or within the global MaB network The existence of a National System of Protected Areas and related national legislation Recognition and understanding of the role of Reserves in local food security, national

food sovereignty, development goals, and human well-being

3.5. Risk analysis and risk management measures

136. A series of risks that the proposed project faces in trying to reach its objectives was considered during the PIF and PPG phases. Key assumptions have been formulated (see Section 3.4 and Appendix 4) which, if successfully addressed, are expected to minimize the risks discussed below. During the PPG phase assessment and analysis, the main barriers have been taken into account by designing the intervention strategy to address the issues that the project and its key partners have prioritised. Aspects that remain outside the reach of the project represent risks for the project. However, these have been classified as relatively low, resulting in a high sustainability probability of the project. The risks and some of the measures for mitigation considered for the project are summarized in Table 1 below:

Risk Rating

* Risk Mitigation Measure

a) Changes in policy and economic environment

M Project activities are underpinned by long-term national commitments to international treaties related to biodiversity conservation (e.g., CBD) and supported by international networks.

Empower communities and local institutions to implement project activities so they are able to continue activities in the event of external shocks that may affect the project.

Governments, communities, and local institutions understand and value the project outputs.

b) Conflicts between conservationists and resource users (farmers); competing needs and goals;

M Joint committees of farmers and protected area managers to be established to address divergent or common objectives and needs,

Project to build upon a strong and positive history of collaboration between Reserve managers and scientists, and staff and Biosphere farm families.


53

Risk Rating


divergent cultural understanding.

Participatory approach takes into consideration and reconciles different needs, includes code of ethics on recognition and use of traditional knowledge; anthropologists to participate in documenting intangible cultural property. .

Focus on bridging aspirations and thus minimizing conflicts between development needs of local communities and the need to protect natural ecosystems.

Build understanding that aims of conservation and agriculture can be complementary.

c) Difficulty in communicating findings effectively to other Reserves in Cuba and to protected area systems in the region and globally

L The project idea has been developed in collaboration with UNESCO-MaB and Ibero-MaB involved in PPG phase. Project has strong, high-level support within UNESCO.

Key issues and terms were agreed at the outset to aid communication of lessons to other Reserves within national protected area system,, reserves within the Ibero-MaB network and the Global network of protected areas.

Priority focus for communication strategy are those protected areas with tropical forests and agriculture, thus providing more specific communication targets D

MaB network is backed by national policy frameworks; participating reserves subscribe to the goals of the Seville Strategy for Biosphere Reserves, and the Madrid Action Plan 2008-2013 which the project will help to implement.

d) Target beneficiaries, including local communities, do not adopt project recommendations or best practices

L Recommendations and best practices will be formulated through a participatory research process. They will combine “traditional”/”indigenous” and scientific knowledge to increase relevance and adaptability to local circumstances.

Practices are designed to improve livelihoods and increase income, not to impose additional burden of conservation.

Capacity building and support structures will decrease barriers to adoption.

e) Farmers and communities are unwilling to take part in project activities or information sharing

L Establish concrete relevance of project activities to livelihoods of farmers, including support to sustainable ecoagriculture activities.

The project will strive to assist indigenous and local communities in achieving recognition and support for the contribution their livelihood practices make to protected area management and biodiversity conservation.

The project builds upon positive history of collaboration and farmer community ties and networks; project encourages social inclusion and equity throughout its implementation.

Implementing good practices by community-based biodiversity management (CBM) model which build local institutional capacity in decision making and implementations of locally-driven conservation


54

Risk Rating


actions.

f) PA management staff and local partners unwilling to collaborate with and yield influence to communities

M Demonstration of mutual benefits of integrated conservation and use

PA management models to conservation and agriculture. Discussion forums will stimulate communication and increased

understanding between communities and park management.

g) Local impacts of global climate change L The project itself seeks to buffer communities from climate change by

making available a portfolio of agrobiodiversity management practices, which increases their options to adapt to change.

*Note: H=High Risk, S=Substantial Risk, M=Moderate Risk, and L=Low Risk

137. Changes in policy and economic environment. This risk is considered moderate because although the Cuban government and economy have experienced shocks due to interruptions in external trade and isolation, the project has been supported throughout its inception and development by long-term support at the inter-ministerial level, is rooted in agreements and institutional frameworks of UNESCO, UNEP, UNDP, and GEF who will collaborate to The project’s close collaboration with local communities and institutions helps ensure their capacity to undertake project activities autonomously during brief periods of change in policy and or economic downturns. Trends indicate that economic and agricultural policies in Cuba are evolving in ways that are consistent with the objectives of the project to provide incentives to sustainable agrobiodiversity producers and consumers. Links to the Caribbean Biological Corridor provide additional support to activities in Cuba as part of its obligations under regional network activities and programmes. Furthermore at the global level, Cuba has consistently provided strong policy support for protected area conservation under CBD, UNESCO MaB and other biodiversity forums. Recent policies to achieve food sovereignty are particularly supportive of project goals and are unlikely to change under current government structures. The latter two issues are key parts of the Cuban government’s agenda and the project harnesses this support.

138. Conflicts between protected area conservation and resource users. As discussed in Section 2, traditional protected area conservation strategy views resource users – including traditional farmers – as competitors or a disturbance for ecosystem integrity and functions. In practice , sustainable agricultural practices depend upon services from intact ecosystems and wild biodiversity and the fragmented nature of wild biodiversity depends upon a matrix of sustainably managed agrobiodiversity landscapes to achieve conservation and development objectives in project Reserves. As a result of this intrinsic synergistic relationship, this risk is considered moderate provided the project delivers the evidence and practical tools to enable both agricultural and conservation stakeholders to work together. Because it is a new venture and the two potentially conflicting groups have not historically collaborated and may have different needs, the project seeks to mitigate the risk by identifying common needs and objectives and by fostering communication and compromise so that all voices are heard and considered in management strategies. Project activities that investigate the role of agrobiodiversity and agroecosystems in the reserves and as biological corridors, for example, will provide supporting


55

evidence that the aims of conservation and agricultural can be reconciled, and are in fact complementary and synergistic.

139. Difficulty in communicating findings effectively to other Reserves in Cuba and to protected area systems in the region and globally. This is considered a low risk because the project was developed in collaboration with UNESCO and has been strongly supported from the beginning. Regarding the Network, it has always been intended as continual and is supported by a strong accompanying policy framework. Several project activities specifically address the communication of project information so the sole responsibility does not fall on UNESCO. UNESCO’s active involvement is needed throughout if the project is to serve as a catalyst for similar projects within Cuban Reserves and the global Network. Because the project directly supports the Seville Strategy for Biosphere Reserves and the Madrid Action Plan, serious risks with UNESCO Network are not anticipated.

140. Target beneficiaries, including local communities, do not adopt project recommendations or best practices. There is always the possibility that the targeted beneficiaries of the project do not respond to recommendations or best practices established by the project. However, this is considered a low risk for the project because the recommendations and best practices will be formulated via a participatory process that combines traditional, local, and indigenous knowledge with scientific knowledge to ensure they are appropriate and adaptable to local circumstances. Furthermore, the project seeks to improve livelihoods and increase income through innovative strategies that sustainably capitalize on agrobiodiversity within the reserves, not to impose additional burden or hardship stemming from conservation. Through capacity-building activities and continual support, barriers to acceptance and adoption caused by misunderstanding, differing opinions, or disinterest will be overcome or at least minimized.

141. Farmers and communities are unwilling to take part in project activities or information sharing. This risk is considered low because of the years of cooperative, amicable relationships between farmers and reserve communities and project institutions such as INIFAT and SNAP. Although they have not collaborated in the past on decision-making activities, the project will encourage social inclusion and equity throughout and ensure that indigenous and local communities receive recognition and support for their contribution to protected area management and conservation. Building local institutional capacity will eventually place the project activities and information sharing in the hands of the farmers and the communities so it essentially becomes their own project and part of their daily life.

142. Protected area management staff and local partners are unwilling to collaborate with and yield influence to communities. This risk is related to the previous risk, but is moderate because it is widely considered to be more likely that reserve management and other local academic, scientific, and technical partners might resist compromise rather than farmers or communities. This is due to greater respect accorded to formal scientists and their positions of power. Because of the high quality of staff involved in the project, and their experience working with participatory approaches, mitigation of this risk is probably unnecessary, but beneficial regardless. Throughout the project, partners will convene frequent, open discussion forums to share and better understand respective needs of conservation and agricultural stakeholders along with opportunities for synergies and shared benefits.

143. Local impacts of global climate change. Climate change can impact biodiversity-based products in mainly two ways. First, the medium and short-term survival of the species being used


56

in the production and promotion processes outlined in this project, and therefore the proposed livelihoods strategies, could be threatened. Second, climate change can shift the geographical location of the species into areas in which they cannot be accessed at a reasonable cost. The likelihood of these two types of impacts is considered low. It is unlikely that climate change will threaten all the agricultural species equally; some species might be well-adapted to the new conditions brought about by climate change. Because the project is supports the conservation, promotion, and sustainable use of agrobiodiversity, it will provide an adaptive strategy for farmers and communities within project Reserves to cope with the effects of climate change. Adaptation to climate change is incorporated as both a rationale and a result from the project in terms of assuring resilience of livelihoods and ecosystem services from agrobiodiversity in the Reserves. The project team is also consulting and making effective use of relevant experiences and best practices presented in the GEF publication Protected Areas for the 21st Century as a guide to manage this risk.

3.6. Consistency with national priorities or plans

144. Cuba is a signatory to the CBD and has developed a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. Cuba also ratified the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. All of Cuba’s three CBD reports emphasize the need for conserving and sustainably managing natural resources, while its report on plant genetic resources for food and agriculture underlined the importance of completing inventories of agricultural biodiversity in rural communities where high genetic variability on a wide range of crops is concentrated. It also identified priorities for in situ conservation, for promoting the established of community genebanks, and for strengthening institutional capacities to regenerate genetic diversity that is undergoing erosion.

145. Cuba has 253 protected areas under its National System of Protected Areas Management Plan. As of 2011 Cuba’s protected areas cover 19.95% of the national territory, exceeding the target set in Nagoya at CBD/COP 10. Given the importance of agricultural landscapes and agrobiodiversity within this vast array of terrestrial ecosystems, the National System of Protected Areas (SNAP) is committed to recognizing and conserving agriculture diversity in its management plans as evidenced in the SNAP 5 year management plans for 2009-2014. However the tools and scale of the effort is only in its initial stages, with preliminary studies in two reserves. This project will build the partnerships, provide the knowledge and tools so that the environment, agriculture, tourism, culture, science and technology sectors can work together to (i) improve protected area management in the project Reserves by addressing the current gap with respect to agrobiodiversity, and (ii) show the potential to mainstream agrobiodiversity to meet national development priorities for food security and food sovereignty, to improve livelihoods of family farms, and build healthier more productive ecosystems and ecosystem services. The project model can be scaled up and scaled out to all six Cuban Reserves, and surrounding productive landscapes thus supporting national laws, policies, and priorities on biodiversity conservation, ecotourism, food security and food sovereignty.

146. Cuba has a progressive and comprehensive legal framework, a number of sectoral policies and a National Environment Strategy related to biodiversity conservation. The strategy and action plans give high priority to the conservation of agricultural biodiversity, forest and marine ecosystems as well as to in situ conservation. The objectives of the National Programme 015 are to: (1) establish in situ conservation strategies of varieties of important crops in and their wild relatives as both alternatives and as complementary measures to ex situ conservation; (2)


57

conserve associated traditional knowledge and rescue wild varieties of the species in danger of genetic erosion; (3) design alternative strategies for the development of the training and environmental education on plant genetic resources and (4) inventory underutilized species, their uses and market options/ Cuba’s National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) for 2006-2010 calls for the diversification of the commercialization of genetic resources, a study of biodiversity management in Protected Areas, the promotion of community projects and public awareness campaigns for the sustainable use and conservation of biodiversity and the strengthening of capacity of genebank managers in in situ conservation.

147. A new policy framework for agricultural food security and food sovereignty adds to the support and the enabling policy environment for this project. The proposed project is in line with the national law # 259 on the use of abandoned land (Entrega de Tierras Ociosas en Usufructo) that entered into force in 2011 which gave full usufruct rights to over one million hectares to small farmers currently engaged or registered to become small farmers. In the 10th Congreso Campesino (ANAP Small Farmers Congress) in 2010, 24 actions were proposed to strengthen agrobiodiversity, increase productivity, farmer’s initiatives, capacity building, support through collaborative projects, and incentives. The increase in small family farms based on ecoagriculture creates a new support for the maintenance and mainstreaming of crucial agrobiodiversity in Cuba’s Biosphere Reserves. It also provides opportunities for family farms in the Reserves to find outlets for their products that can increase the social and ecological resilience of farming in Biosphere areas. Cuban agricultural production is organized into three principal components: intensive production centres, urban agriculture, and suburban agriculture. The priority production areas are basic foods, such as beans, rice, cassava and maize which are staple foods for the Cuban population. In 2008, world food price increases led Cuba to design and implement a food security strategy aimed at increasing food production and to reduce food imports. At the end of 2010, Cuba enacted a five year policy to raise local food production, reduce food imports, and achieve food sovereignty. Rice imports are expected to be reduced by 50%, and beans by 30% while increasing small scale livestock production of poultry and pork. Food prices for local products have been increased as an incentive to local producers of staple food crops such as maize, rice, cassava, and beans, along with vegetables.

148. The project will benefit from the newly developed urban and suburban agriculture system by increasing the production and commercialization of products from the reserves, including them in the basic products contracted and distributed within 4-5 kilometers of the main village or city, and selling and buying them through the established suburban agriculture network. Currently, there are 21 basic products and 8 priority areas for commercialization of products, but the development strategy for the suburban agriculture program includes the increase in the number of products, the production of foods in areas close to the villages and cities, and expansion to other areas. Thirty subprograms from the urban and suburban agriculture program are relevant to the project, including supporting the sustainable land use, agroecology, management, commercialization, environment, crops (i.e., tropical roots and tubers), and domesticated animals. The project provides a better opportunity to commercialize the agricultural products currently promoted by national policies and expand the program through the incorporation of additional agrobiodiversity products. The program is a collaboration of several government agencies, including MINAG (15 institutions), Ministry of Education (MINED), Ministry of the Interior (MININT), (Ministry of Sugar) MINAZ, and Ministry of Revolutionary armed force (MINFAR). The project further supports these kinds of multi-sectoral collaborations occurring in Cuba and elsewhere in the region (e.g., Venezuela, Mexico, Colombia, Trinidad and Tobago, Dominican Republic and other countries and islands in the Caribbean).


58

149. National policies adopted in November 2010 established a priority to carry out climate change research and develop actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change impacts , especially in agriculture and to implement a more rational and sustainable use of natural resources. In the agricultural sector the policy identified sustainable, environment friendly agriculture, or ecoagriculture as a priority. It also called for the conservation and sustainable use of genetic resources within the agriculture, forestry and fisheries. The project will build upon the work of the national programme for plant genetic resources and plant breeding. It will also work in conjunction with national policies and programmes to achieve the national target to increase the areas under forest in Cuba from 26% to 29% in 2015 by demonstrating the compatibility of agroforestry with endemic species and ecoagriculture as a way to reduce pressure on forest and provide biological corridors between forest fragments and forest systems. In regards to national policies on coping, adaptation and resilience in agriculture in the face of climate change, the project’s work with agrobiodiversity in mosaic landscapes within the Biosphere reserves will provide methods and indicators for building and maintaining resilience in the face of the increasing severity of weather events such as hurricanes under climate change. Preliminary studies in the SRBR following the devastation caused by Hurricane Gilbert documented a quicker and more complete recovery of agricultural productivity and ecosystem services in the agricultural landscapes in the reserves as opposed to farms with less diversity outside the Reserves.

150. Government policies have recently been adopted to encourage local territorial development including support to local food production and food systems, increased participation of women and greater attention to gender issues in decision-making, support to local cultures in different areas of the country, increasing participation of youth in socio-cultural development and food production. These policies will support the methodological approach that the project will employ in accordance with provisions of the CBD and access and benefit sharing protocols.

151. The proposed project is in line with Cuba’s support to the UNESCO/MAB Madrid Action Plan (2008) of the Seville Strategy focused to transform the MAB reserves into "the principal designated areas dedicated to sustainable development in the 21st century." The project has been developed and will work closely with the national MAB committee hosted in Cuba's Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology. The National MAB committee liaises regularly with the global MAB programmed to disseminate results and receive scientific and policy advice from other network members and experts.

152. Recent policy incentives have begun to bear fruit as in the case of restoring traditional shade coffee production in the mountain areas of Turquino, which has sparked a return of young people and family farms to this bio-cultural landscape. This Cuban example has been highlighted by UNEP as a “green economy success story” (see http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/SuccessStories/OrganicAgricultureinCuba/tabid/29890/Default.aspx). The Cuban suburban and small farm agricultural policy also builds on Green Economy principles as noted earlier in Section 2.4. The project will apply this success model in other landscapes and production systems that apply ecoagriculture approaches and build a supporting matrix for biodiversity conservation (see I. Perfecto, J. Van der Meer, A Wright: Nature’s Matrix: Linking Agriculture, Conservation, and Food Sovereign. Earthscan 2009).

3.7. Incremental cost reasoning

153. While biodiversity conservation has always been a priority within protected areas in Cuba, the baseline situation provides limited attention to the importance of agrobiodiversity, its


59

use by local communities and its potential to contribute to improved health and income generation for rural communities. The importance of biodiversity in Cuban protected areas becomes particularly relevant for its contribution to the maintenance of the ecosystems that incorporate agrobiological corridors preventing habitat destruction and fragmentation of landscapes. Sustaining agricultural productivity, indigenous cultures and rural livelihoods while protecting biodiversity requires an integrated approach to conservation where protected areas and productive landscape are managed jointly for a long term sustainability. GEF funds will allow creating such multi-sectoral working environment bringing together scientist from different disciplines that will contribute to the global research agenda on biodiversity and ecosystem function and services and their relationship to human well-being.

154. In recent years relevant Cuban Ministries and Institutions have recognized the value of agrobiodiversity maintained by local communities within the Cuban agricultural landscapes and traditional farming systems and the importance of managing such system in a sustainable way integrating natural and human resources. However Ministries and Institutes, including biosphere reserve managers, require a stronger common scientific framework and tools to work across sector and field of knowledge and often lack the capacity and coordination to be able to produce integrated management plans that will favour a greater resilience and adaptive capacity of the protected areas.

155. The baseline situation also provides limited information on useful practices, traditional knowledge and genetic diversity of edible and useful plants and animals. The ways in which farmer communities manage the interface between natural ecosystems and diverse local crop varieties in biosphere reserves has not been adequately assessed and documented. Unique and valuable genetic resources of crop varieties and wild relatives present in Reserves are not adequately documented and addressed both in protected areas conservation strategies as well as national crop genetic resources conservation programmes.

156. Based on the baseline understanding support to farmers and local communities living in the reserves has been promising but sporadic and not supported by planning and policies; rural communities suffer from limited access to planting material of local varieties, relevant capacity building programmes related to the conservation of agrobiodiversity and a strategy to channel products from biodiversity. Overall there is a poor policy and regulatory enabling environment to support maintenance and commercialization of local products coming from farmers and local communities living in the Reserves.

157. In this business-as-usual scenario, where resources to relevant sectors are not sufficient to maintain agrobiodiversity within protected areas or to develop appropriate strategies for this purpose, current rates of loss of biodiversity and habitats would be expected to continue within project Mab Reserves with strong negative in neighbouring biological corridors. Opportunities to mainstream valuable knowledge, genetic resources, and ecological practices into food sovereignty policies and programmes would be missed.

The global benefits of the project include:

The in situ conservation and sustainable use of the unique agrobiodiversity found in two project reserves of global significance practiced directly on 2,200 ha. of landscape over the collective pilot sites in the Project and monitored by the GEF BD-2 tracking tool;


60

Conservation of globally-significant habitats supporting important biodiversity, including bioculturally important agroforestry systems, that provide a pool of genes, species and ecosystems available to cope with local impacts of climate change and long term adaptation to global change;

Increase of the area of agricultural ecosystems under sustainable management for biodiversity conservation;

The sustainable use of agrobiodiversity in the target reserves by linking conservation to improved livelihoods, income and food security;

Fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the greater availability, accessibility and utilization, of genetic resources;

Mainstream of biodiversity conservation in the production landscapes to ensure a broad distribution and use of the targeted agrobiodiversity over time;

Secure conservation of the knowledge associated with relevant agrobiodiversity and its management in a range of tropical landscapes combining wild and cultivated diversity.

158. The project will address the global concern to link biodiversity conservation more closely to sustainable food production and healthy production landscapes. The evidence generated by the project on mechanisms to benefit communities managing agrobiodiversity and bio-cultural landscapes in protected areas, including the analysis and testing of certification schemes, will contribute to the global evidence base to guide investments in similar situations worldwide.

159. Further global environmental benefits that are expected to be realized include knowledge on the integrated management of agrobiodiversity and the development of specific tools and management practices for providing adaptability and resilience under changing conditions. The development of possible indicators for these will be explored during the project and will be available for use by the GEF in other areas. The full realization of these expected global environmental benefits (species and genetic diversity maintained in production systems and land maintained under agrobiodiversity-friendly management practices) requires GEF involvement and provides significant added value to Cuba’s conservation efforts.

160. In the absence of this project, the traditional knowledge of using and conserving traditional crops would be at risk; the conservation of agrobiodiversity will remain divorced from national development goals and receive less support from public policy. Ecosystems particularly rich in diversity and important as biological corridors as in the Caribbean Region will continue to face the threat of genetic erosion and the loss of valuable species, and these valuable resources will not be conserved and integrated into addressing the decision at CBD/COP10 to bring at least 17% of the world’s terrestrial service under protected area management. While Cuba has placed nearly 20% of its territory under the protected area system, it lacks capacity and knowledge to manage to both sustainable production landscapes and wild biodiversity under a common synergistic framework.

161. Without the project the contribution of MaB farming communities in conserving protected areas would not be adequately recognised and supported, with the risk of creating a ”user vacuum” that could bring to new external users with less knowledge of ecosystem and their services. This lack of knowledge could result in threatening activities (e.g. non-sustainable farming practices, soil erosion, logging, land conversion). The importance of the proposed project activities regarding the identification and support of sustainable agricultural practices is essential to improve and develop new restoration and rehabilitation of eroded and denuded areas within the reserves and their buffer zones. The proposed project intervention would allow the MaB mangers


61

and agricultural researchers to work together to provide concrete information on agroforestry and fruit tree species and varieties to plant. The project will also support development of guidelines and mechanism for creating synergies for including agricultural landscapes within protected area systems that are essential in meeting CBD Aichi Strategic goal B to reduce direct pressure on biodiversity and support sustainable use, specifically target 7 to ensure that areas under agriculture, aquaculture and forestry are managed sustainably, ensuring conservation of biodiversity.

162. The implementation of the project in Cuba will contribute to ongoing research on biodiversity and ecosystem function and services and their relationship to human well-being; Without GEF involvement and the cross-sectoral activities to be supported, an important contribution to achieving the goals of biodiversity conservation and sustainable use plans in Cuba will be at risk. GEF involvement is critical to support the necessary integration, coordination and collaboration between stakeholders, in terms of linking the mainstreaming actions at community and landscape level to wider policy perspectives and actions. GEF involvement will also contribute substantially to building the capacity at all level that will ensure continuation of activities even after termination of the project..

163. The expected national benefits of the project include: Individuals and organizations at all levels collaborating effectively, across relevant sectors; Enhanced awareness of the benefits of agrobiodiversity in maintaining natural landscapes; Strong evidence base for adaptive management practices based on agrobiodiversity; Knowledge and information managed and made accessible at all levels; Agrobiodiversity incorporated into Management Plans of Reserves thus filling a gap in protected area conservation and sustainable use; Agrobiodiversity is mainstreamed into wider agricultural production landscapes and sectors as a cost effective option to achieve food sovereignty and ensure food security; Agrobiodiversity mainstreamed, conserved and utilized, including the traditional knowledge associated with it in small farm and home garden sectors through the country; A broader portfolio of options for income generation is available for family farms and local communities in MaB reserves and environs. Activities in reserves using ecologically sound agriculture in mosaic landscapes to generate new and more sustainable value streams for the rural households in reserve areas; new value and income streams contribute to the sustainability of the protected area system.

164. The incremental costs and benefits of the project are summarized in the incremental cost matrix (Appendix 3). The baseline expenditures amount to US$ 878,299 while the alternative has been estimated at US$ 5,026,507. The incremental cost of the project, US$ 4,148,208 is required to achieve the project’s global environmental benefits. Of this amount US$ 1,368,182 (representing 32.98%) is being requested from GEF. The remaining amount of US$ 2,780,026 (67.02%) of the total cost will come from the Government of Cuba and other national and international donors. The figure includes both in-kind and cash contributions.

3.8. Sustainability

165. The project considers sustainability at two levels: 1) national and international policy, agreements and objectives; and 2) farmers, local communities and user groups. The project goal and objectives are fully consistent with NBSAPs (National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans) and this contributes to financial stability beyond the project. Because the project will build on the activities already underway in Cuba and will link to the national programmes, such as Urban and Suburban agricultural National Programme, this will also add to sustainability.


62

Sustainability of project practices will be achieved at the farm and community level, when this group derives clear benefits from the implementation of project activities. The project objective will be to conserve the diversity within and around protected areas in ways that both improve the livelihoods of rural communities and sustain ecosystem functions in Reserve buffer and transition zones. The project will demonstrate that markets exist for products coming from the endemic agrobiodiversity and that these markets can provide a premium price and enhance incomes and livelihoods and contribute to national food security and sovereignty. Taken together, these incentives provide a basis for sustainability and mainstreaming biodiversity conservation and sustainable use through relevant national sectors, programmes, plans and strategies. Market analyses carried out to date have shown the potential economic benefits of biodiversity targeting niche markets, particularly when it involves certification of diversity products for environmental sustainability. Another emerging income opportunity is to provide local healthy foods produced in Biosphere family farms and cooperatives to a growing number of national consumers and the tourism sector. Increased incomes at farm level have been shown to sustain conservation and management practices in other crop species. Similarly, increased commercial benefits from the use of wild species from natural habitats can be sustainable with appropriate levels of extraction that are consistent with certification schemes identified by the project.

166. The project has identified criteria that help to identify locations with a comparative advantage in terms of potential for synergies between natural and managed landscapes using agrobiodiversity. The project builds community stewardship of bio-cultural landscapes in the reserves by linking farmers to markets e.g. availability of support systems such as markets, roads, post-harvest processing and transport. So long as farmers, communities and national programmes benefit from conserving this diversity, the sustainability of project activities is assured. A further sustainability strategy built into site selection is the empowerment, capacity building and sense of ownership the project will engender at the community level. The community-based management approach promoted by the project will build-in a strong element of self-reliance and the capacity to mobilize communities to generate their own funds to support project activities after the completion of the project. This will be complemented by strengthening community linkages with government agencies, nongovernmental agencies and private sectors and would link to ongoing government and nongovernmental activities that will ensure sustainability at the national level. This would be strengthened by the wider national promotional, awareness and information-sharing activities which would enhance sustainability by encouraging others to get involved on a wider scale.

167. This will be complemented by strengthening local institutions and ensuring that all participants and stakeholders are fully engaged and that partnerships and institutional linkages are solid and that cross-sectoral platforms and working groups established within the project continue after completion. Together with the accessible and comprehensive national information systems, this will ensure continued implementation of the positive policy and regulatory enabling environment established by the project and the ongoing mainstreaming of agrobiodiversity into Management Plans of project Reserves.

168. The firm commitment of civil society stakeholders, family farms, farmers associations, local market and tourism agents is matched and encouraged by government agricultural and environment policies and agencies. In the case of family farmers involved in the project, stakeholder involvement is in support of Cuban national policy on food sovereignty based on small scale ecoagriculture and increased production of indigenous food plants and local crop varieties. These are also main focus of the livelihood benefits and mainstreaming activities of the


63

project. Participation of other stakeholders such as ecotourism agents and local markets in MaB reserves is also consistent with Cuban policy to promote the financial sustainability of its large protected area system. It also supports the diversification of income from tourism and the increase of added value from local products and services not usually captured in mass tourism. In sum, the project secures stakeholder participation in line with government policy and trends toward liberalisation of agriculture, food sovereignty, and sustainability of the protected area system

169. The government agency responsible for the Protected Areas, SNAP, will enable project activities to continue after the end of the proposed project. The focus of Component 2, Improving Management Plans (Planes de Manejo) of Biosphere Reserves, has the specific aim to ensure that project outcomes, including local planting materials for restoration of degraded areas, tools, practices, and guidelines are incorporated in the national 5 year plan for PA management, which also includes adaptation to climate change. There is a strong commitment of the Cuban Government that project outputs from component 1 and 3 will be taken up by the Ministry of Agriculture 10 year programme (2011-2020) to achieve food sovereignty based on local varieties and small farms practicing ecoagriculture.

170. The project’s substantial awareness and outreach activities will be an important element of sustainability and will facilitate ongoing scaling-up in other reserves both in Cuba and in other countries of the Region (Latin America and Caribbean). This will include best practices for using and conserving agrobiodiversity in protected areas as part of food sovereignty and security and other relevant development initiatives, especially for value adding and improving livelihoods. The efforts which are built into the project are designed to capture, analyse and document the lessons learned and to upscale them to contribute to the overall sustainability of the project. Further, project outputs and outcomes will be closely linked with national priorities and action plans.

171. Project information will be made available for use by the global MaB network This will help implement national commitments in accordance with the Madrid Action Plan for Biosphere Reserves 2008-2013 Specifically the project focus on agrobiodiversity will contribute to the “buffering function related to the core areas, buffer zones can have their own intrinsic, ‘stand alone’ functions for maintaining anthropogenic, biological and cultural diversity. Buffer zones can also have an important connectivity function in a larger spatial context as they connect biodiversity components within core areas with those in transition areas. People live and make a living in transition areas which are characterized by multiple land uses [especially agriculture] that contribute to socio-economic development” . (http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0016/001633/163301e.pdf, p.16)

172. The project will also benefit from Bioversity International’s, UNEP’s and other key international partners’ relationship with the existing regional and international networks to reach broader audiences with project outputs and impact.

173. In addition to the above mentioned strategies which link to financial sustainability, the project will support other measures to improve the financial sustainability of project initiatives. The economic, financial and sustainability analyses of the different components are closely related. One such example is the efforts of the project to strengthen producer linkages to private markets, to the network of National Urban and Sub-Urban Agricultural Program markets and through the creation of niche markets for traditional agrobiodiversity products within the tourist circuit.


64

3.9. Replication

174. The selected landscapes and farming communities in the two reserves will be focal points for capacity building and knowledge exchange with farmer and communities in all Reserves. Knowledge and capacity building will also take place with family farms and home gardens enrolled in the Suburban Agriculture Programme thus replicating and extending the sustainable use of Biosphere agrobiodiversity. The lessons, best practices and social-ecological indicators acquired and developed the Sierra el Rosario y Cuchillas del Toa Biosphere reserves will be produced in simple guides and extension materials for use throughout the entire system of Biosphere Reserves in Cuba.

175. By extending the lessons across the entire protected area systems where managed landscapes are found, and by mainstreaming these lessons into the wider set of agricultural landscapes the project intends to achieve a self-sustaining system of replication as the lessons, tools and indicators produced by the project are adopted within agricultural extension systems, protected area management plans, and environment, food and agriculture, and tourism policies. Replication and outreach will continue to focus on small family farms and rural households in the Reserves as they are among the most marginal and thus the project would ensure equity in access to biodiversity benefits in accordance with Cuba’s CBD obligations and national policies.

176. The National System of Protected Areas (SNAP) and the Cuban National Committee hosted by UNESCO-Havana will create the platforms and mechanisms so that farmers have the capacity to formulate and present technical question and administrative issues that address problems and constraints to ecoagriculture and the management of bio-cultural landscapes within Reserves. The project will play an important role in creating a climate of participation and trust built upon respect for farmer’s knowledge and rights, and to foster receptivity on all sides to adopt creative solutions that build synergies between healthy small scale traditional farms, the protected area system, and agrobiodiversity scientists. The project will assure easier flow and exchange of knowledge and experience among regions and stakeholders for more sustained replication of project outputs and outcomes.

177. The Farmer to Farmer Movement (El Movimiento de Campesino a Campesino), lead by ANAP (Asociación Nacional de Agricultores Pequeños) has been successfully operating in Cuba for several years and will incorporate rural communities in or linked to Biosphere reserves which will enable the project to disseminate lessons and knowledge developed ast a small scale and extend them though upscaling and outscaling. Farmer to farmer knowledge networks have proven to be efficient and effective mechanisms to communicate and disseminate new knowledge and techniques to rural folk. ANAP’s network has gained both popular trust and technical know-how on these techniques and will be able to provide major support to the project in designing and implementing its replication strategy.

178. Farmer to farmer capacity building, knowledge exchange among farmer, conservation, and agrobiodiversity scientists will be the two key pathways for replication. In Cuba, establishing well placed demonstrations and examples among peers and building greater trust between small scale farmers and government agencies have been key to replicating innovations and more sustainable practices for resource use. These will be the main foundations of the project replication approach to reach the bulk of the country’s rural households whose livelihood activities intersect with protected areas.


65

179. The outputs generated by the project will be relevant to other tropical island biomes and will be disseminated for uptake through UNESCO/MaB's south-south cooperation programme, as well as through global networking activities on biodiversity and ecosystem services. The UNESCO MAB programme and global network has several mechanisms that will contribute to the global mainstreaming of the project. One is the Agro-Cultures programme which supports case studies and dissemination of best practices that "conciliate farming systems productivity and the conservation of natural resources through the development of agro-ecological practices". The tools and indicators developed in this project will be mainstreamed globally with the support of the Biosphere Reserve Integrated Monitoring (BRIM) that compiles and shares abiotic, biodiversity, socio-economic and integrated monitoring in the World Network, and provided platforms for the integration of the resulting information/data. Thus the projects new information on agricultural biodiversity and sustainable management practices along with the corresponding socioeconomnic data will be available to the global network. Furthermore UNESCO will support the scaling up of lessons from the proposed project up to the sub-region and to replicate them in other countries facing similar difficulties but also opportunities in the area of genetic resources for food and agriculture.Finally the project will provide methods, tools and best practices for the implementation of the UNESCO MaB Madrid Action Plan that seeks to mainstream and increase the benefits of biodiversity and ecosystem services in protected areas to society.

3.10. Public awareness, communications and mainstreaming strategy

180. All three elements – awareness, communication and mainstreaming – will be supported by strategies at the local, national and global level with effective links to partners at all levels. An important element of public awareness and communications will be capacity building in the area of community documentation. Public awareness planning and implementation will be an integral component of the project’s overall communications strategy. As highlighted in Output 2.2 (see Section 3.3) the mainstreaming focus for the project will target Biosphere Reserve management which will include agrobiodiversity, its use and conservation as strategic components. INIFAT, and other technical development agencies within the Ministry of Agriculture, and the Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (CITMA) will take the lead role in developing a communication strategy in accordance with existing methodology (Annex I). The project will seek to influence the management plans (Planes de Manejo) of the two project reserves, revised every five years, taking into consideration the inputs from leaders of the local communities living within the reserves to enhance the maintenance and use of agrobiodiversity, and associated local knowledge through the development and adoption of appropriate management models the use and conservation of agrobiodiversity.

181. Training of a wide range of stakeholders as well as national policy-makers and provincial and local officials will have to be carried out to make sure a common framework is developed and shared and informed decisions regarding conservation and sustainable use of agrobiodiversity to improve the sustainability of the National System of Protected Areas are taken. informational material of different kinds will be produced to ensure maximum dissemination of project main goal and activities.

182. Components 2 and 3 aim at establishing appropriate cross-sectoral partnerships aimed at fostering the respective national enabling environments for the promotion of agrobiodiversity conservation and sustainable utilization for. This will include a strong focus on policy, regulatory and mainstreaming issues. A focus of mainstreaming will have to be internal (to the project core team) and external (with other partners). Internal mainstreaming, in addition to building


66

knowledge, will need to focus on building mainstreaming capacity, mentoring and on-going support. External mainstreaming will require on-going dialogue, promotion and advocacy with partners and donors, building strategic networks and alliances related to priority issues. Documentation and dissemination of tools and methods for mainstreaming biodiversity will be produced. Management practices will be identified that can be scaled and adapted for use at the local and national levels but also in other regional and international contexts.

183. A strategy will be developed for communication and awareness raising campaigns that will devote particular attention to:

selection of communications methodologies to be used and choice of main beneficiaries/target groups to be reached;

disseminating messages that are easily understandable and differentiated according to the specificity of the beneficiaries;

identifying the most appropriate and effective channels of communication and media, including social media and cultural events;

elaboration of simple information and communication materials addressed to the specific purpose and focused on different needs of the target groups of beneficiaries.

3.11. Environmental and social safeguards

184. The project poses few environmental or social risks. The biodiversity which will be promoted and mainstreamed is locally adapted and should result in fewer external outputs, such as pesticides, and will be important in helping local communities to market and mainstream products and practices from their agricultural landscapes as organic and healthy products. The biodiversity and associated practices being promoted have proved to add resilience to extreme weather events such as hurricanes and thus posed no risk to expected increase in extreme events due to climate change. The project focus will pose few threats to the social and economic conditions of the community as resilience will be increased and participatory approaches will take account of prior concerns and traditional community safety nets, such as neighborhood associations, kin and other networks. In Cuba, a strong sense of national pride in national bio-cultural patrimony offers a strong basis of social support and positive engagement with project activities that will provide a set of social and environmental safeguards for the project. The project will actively seek to enhance national pride and engagement with biocultural patrimony and also build on the national UNESCO programmes in this area.

185. Possible environmental dangers of a project of this nature could arise as a result of the promotion of a specific agrobiodiversity product or through enhanced access by farmers to markets in order to improve income. Firstly, this may put pressure on a ‘key biodiversity feature’45 leading to possible over-harvesting and depletion and compromising other biodiversity management objectives. Secondly, focusing on markets and commercialisation of a particular species, food or product introduces the possibility of influencing the dynamic on farmers fields possibly reducing the overall biodiversity maintained. Thirdly, with marketing and commercialization also comes the risk of increased use of inputs especially pesticides, herbicides that damage other biodiversity; or increase in the cultivated surface beyond the thresholds that promote synergies between wild and cultivated biodiversity in the protected areas. This has the

45 Protected Areas for the 21st Century, GEF. Glossary p. 118


67

potential to introduce both environmental and social problems through leaching and build-up in soils and waterways as well as damage to human health. The proposed Project will ensure environmental safeguards are provided through the close connectivity between the areas of production and employment of sustainable use tools. Project certification schemes and compliance with general eco-trade principles which ensure sustainable harvesting and sustainable management and production. In addition, the Project will monitor the biodiversity in both cultivated and contiguous wild areas to establish optimal thresholds and indicators for both landscape components of biodiversity. Similarly, participatory monitoring of agrobiodiversity products from reserves will ensure that products for market are coming from farms where biodiversity is not being affected negatively. The participatory monitoring will include farmers, protected area managers, extension services and market or certification agents.

186. By focusing on rural communities and smallholders as target beneficiaries of nutritional and linking farmers to markets the project ensures the involvement of a high percentage of the marginalized population in rural areas, including traditional AfroCuban communities and family farmers, and women and young people in the two selected Biosphere reserves and surrounding landscapes that otherwise might not have access to income or a strong voice in rural development programmes. Strong farmer alliances should guarantee a more equitable distribution of income from marketing. Strengthening their income base, as well as their empowerment and social capital and linking them to relevant agencies and initiatives can be seen as social safeguards in their own right.


68

SECTION 4: INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS

187. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) will implement the Project and bring to bear its combined body of scientific and empirical experience of critical relevance to the objectives of the project. UNEP has provided global leadership and encourages partnership in biodiversity conservation including agricultural biodiversity conservation as well as a wealth of experience on mainstreaming biodiversity into policies, programmes and practice. Over the last decade, UNEP through the Global Environment Facility (GEF) has partnered with national and international organizations on a set of national and multi-country projects, focusing on different components of agricultural biodiversity adopting a sectoral approach supporting the improved conservation and use of crop traditional varieties, traditional fruit trees, below ground biodiversity, pollinators, livestock and the use of crop diversity to manage pests and diseases and to improve nutrition46. As highlighted, it is the aim of this current project to evaluate the results and outputs of these recent projects, building on the knowledge and methodologies developed, and explore approaches that better integrate the many elements of the agricultural biodiversity in question focusing on mainstreaming conservation and use of agricultural biodiversity for the benefit of small scale farmers and the global community. UNEP will be a knowledge partner in providing technical support in the initiative and expertise in coordinating the development of environmental policy consensus through sharing experiences of its other projects being supported by GEF or other agencies. As the GEF Agency for this project UNEP will provide a platform for a collaborative partnership between several national and international organizations which will bring the best available expertise in science and knowledge from the scientific community to partners who are working at the development interface at the national level, with the overall aim of mainstreaming biodiversity into sustainable development and specifically climate change planning and management. This platform will help to adopt at national level the policy frameworks that link biodiversity conservation, adaptation to climate change and improved rural livelihoods.

188. UNEP, as the GEF Implementing Agency for this Project will provide: overall coordination of the activities of national, and any international partners; technical and scientific expertise and enhancement of regional and international cooperation. UNEP will be responsible for overall project supervision to ensure consistency with GEF and UNEP policies and procedures and will provide guidance on linkages with related UNEP and GEF-funded activities. UNEP will also monitor implementation of the activities undertaken during the execution of the project and will provide the overall coordination and ensure that the project is in line with UNEP Medium-Term Strategy and its Program of Work (PoW), as approved by the UNEP Governing Council.

189. More specifically UNEP shall:

Provide project oversight to ensure that GEF policies and criteria are adhered to and that the project meets its objectives and achieves expected outcomes in an efficient and effective manner. Project supervision is entrusted to the UNEP/GEF Task Manager and Fund Management Officer. Project supervision missions by the Task Manager and/or Fund Management Officer will be stipulated in the project supervision plan to be developed during project appraisal phase;

46 See ‘Securing sustainability through the conservation and use of agricultural biodiversity – the UNEP-GEF contribution’ (http://www.unep.org/dgef/Portals/43/AgBD_publication_FINAL.pdf)


69

Enter into an Execution Agreement with Bioversity International as the lead executing agency for the provision of services to the project;

Have a representative on the project steering committee; Report to the GEF Secretariat on the progress against milestones outlined in the CEO

approval letter; Inform the GEF Secretariat whenever there is a potentially substantive co-financing change

(i.e. one affecting the project objectives, the underlying concept, scale, scope, strategic priority, conformity with GEF criteria, likelihood of project success, or outcome of the project);

Be responsible to submit the overall annual Project Implementation Review report to the GEF Secretariat and Evaluation Office and rate the project on an annual basis in terms of progress in meeting project objectives, project implementation progress, risk, and quality of project monitoring and evaluation, and report to the GEF Secretariat through the Project implementation Review (PIR) report;

Review and clear manuscripts prepared by the Executing Agency before publication, and review and agree any publishing contracts;

Undertake a mid-term management review of the entire project or request the Evaluation and Oversight Unit (EOU) to perform an independent mid-term evaluation;

Ensure that EOU of UNEP arrange for an independent terminal evaluation and submits its report to the GEF Evaluation Office;

As deemed appropriate, facilitate access to information, advisory services, technical and professional support available to UNEP and assist the Executing Agency to access the advisory services of other United Nations Organizations, whenever necessary;

Manage and disburse funds from GEF in accordance with the rules and procedures of UNEP.

190. Bioversity International supported by the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment will be the Project Executing Agency. Bioversity will be responsible for overall execution of the project and will provide appropriate scientific support and technical expertise as required by the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment and project partners in accordance with the objectives and key activities outlined in Section 3 of this document. Bioversity will undertake this task by making full use of relevant expertise at their Headquarters in Rome and the Regional office for the America. Bioversity will identify an appropriate staff member to act as Project Director with responsibilities for ensuring the above and linking with the Project Management Unit in Cuba.

191. The Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment will co-execute the project through the National Institute for Fundamental Research on Tropical Agriculture (INIFAT) in consultation with National Center for Protected Areas (CNAP). INIFAT will establish and host a Project Management Unit (PMU), under the direct supervision of the Director of INIFAT, which will be in charge of implementing project activities in Cuba. The PMU will consist of the National Project Coordinator (NPC), Project Assistant and thematic consultants (on a needs basis). The TORs for national staff in the PMU are provided in Appendix 11. The full time National Project Coordinator in charge of the PMU will facilitate the execution of project activities by the project partners involved. The PMU will serve as the critical link between the project sites and the partner national agencies, civil society organizations, local authorities and the lead Project Executing Agency, Bioversity International, to ensure that lessons learned are shared among sites and within national committees and to provide visibility of the project at the national and international level. The


70

PMU and Bioversity International will be responsible for ensuring adequate communication of information to all national and international partners.

192. The project will establish a Project Steering Committee (PSC) consisting of representatives of the partner institutions (and including UNEP and Bioversity), which will be co-chaired by the Director of INIFAT and the Director CNAP. Additional local and landscape-scale committees will be established as appropriate.

193. The PSC will be responsible for taking policy decisions about the implementation of the project. It is responsible in making, by consensus, management decisions for the project and holding periodic reviews. In order to ensure UNEP’s ultimate accountability, the final decision-making with UNEP will be in accordance with its applicable regulations, rules, policies and procedures. The PSC will meet physically once a year and its functions will be mainly to evaluate the overall progress of the project relative to the outputs and milestones expected, to provide strategic direction for the implementation of the project and to guarantee the necessary inter-institutional coordination. PSC meetings will be complimented with ongoing and more regular project meetings in Cuba. Continuous exchange of information through electronic means will be established from the outset, and steering committee meetings via telephone conference or other electronic means can be convened as needed. A detailed management plan for the PSC including roles, functions, meetings and consultations will be prepared within the first six months of the project. Reports and recommendations of all PSC meetings, and other relevant project meetings, will be prepared and disseminated no later than one month after the actual meeting. All partners will undertake to disseminate information about the project and its outputs through their various networks, conferences, meetings and other relevant consultations. Detailed description of the roles and responsibilities of the PSC, and other committees, are provided in Appendix 11. These formal implementation arrangements will ensure a constant exchange of information and experiences among the partners.

194. Given the cross-sectoral and inter-disciplinary nature of the project a Technical Advisory Committee will be established to provide expert guidance in relation to implementation of integrated agrobiodiversity approaches; facilitating collective action at landscape scale; development of improved sustainable management practices, developing policy and regulatory frameworks; determining market and non-market benefits; and strengthening institutional frameworks. Selected representatives from international partners will form the basis of the TAC and will participate in regular project steering committee meetings as observers and will provide ongoing backstopping to coordination.

195. The Project’s institutional framework is illustrated in the following organogram.

Annex 1: Project Document

71

UNESCO UNU-IAS


UNEP

Ministry of Agriculture (MINAG)

National Steering Committee (NSC)

Technical Advisory

Committee (TAC)

INIFAT CNAP

Ministry of Science Technology and Environment

(CITMA)

Project Management Unit

ANAP ACTAF ACPA CCS, CPA Div. & Dev.

NGOs

Univ. of HabanaUniversity of

Michigan, ISTOM-France, BOKU, Austria

Universities IGOs

Cuban Institute of Anthropology Museums (Natural History, Anthropology) Institute of Systematic Ecology Natl’ Prog. of Urban and Suburban Agr. School of Advanced Studies in Hotel and Tourism mng Institute of Tropical Geography

Other Ministries and Governmental Depts

MaB

Reserves


72

SECTION 5: STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION

196. The project will work collaboratively with stakeholders and beneficiaries across several sectors. Stakeholder participation and collaboration with beneficiaries includes government agencies and local authorities, particularly provincial and municipal administrations in areas with MaB reserves and the agricultural and sub-urban communities that will benefit from project outputs (See Annex G - Project Management and Public Involvement Plan). Participation will also be secured from government education and planning authorities, including those responsible for primary and secondary education, adult and community education, and cultural agencies and NGOs responsible for or conducting programmes on cultural and social communication of Cuban natural patrimony and cultural heritage, two themes to which the project will link.

197. The local authorities, agencies, and projects included as stakeholders and beneficiaries are in addition to those already included as partners in the implementation of the project within the MaB reserves. For example, the association of small family famers, ANAP, is national in scope; at the local scale of the MaB reserves, famers will participate as direct partners in implementation. At the national scale, ANAP’s chapters in sub-urban agriculture and areas outside the MaB reserve system will act as stakeholders and beneficiaries in communicating results and adopting best practices on sustainable use of agobiodiversity and genetic resources. An important NGO stakeholder, as well as beneficiary, is the Campesino-a-Campesino Agroecological Movement in Cuba (MACAC) which will also take up and disseminate project outputs.

198. Local governments are important stakeholders and beneficiaries in proving spaces and opportunities to share results and information on agrobiodiversity practices with small farmers in the suburban and rural areas of the municipios. Local governments are responsible for authorising and regulating local market spaces, which the project intends to use to demonstrate and communicate values and benefits of agricultural biodiversity to the wider production landscapes in the country thus extending the base of beneficiaries. Local governments are also responsible to providing administrative and logistical support to the National Programme of Urban and Suburban Agriculture (Programa Nacional de Agricultura Urbana y Sub-Urbana - PNAU/ASU) of the Ministry of Agriculture, which is a project partner in the implementation of component 3. Projects operating in the MaB reserves where the project is intervening will also be consulted as stakeholders and beneficiaries to establish complementarities and build synergies among the activities. These include Brod Fur de Werldt in RBCT, and Birdlife International in both RBSR and RBCT along with international and national NGO projects that will be identified in the first six months of project implementation.

199. International organisations and networks provide a particularly strong platform of stakeholders and globally significant beneficiaries for the project. International stakeholders that have been identifies are the International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative, hosted at the Institute for Advanced Studies of UNU in Tokyo, the International Council for Science (ICSU) Programme on Ecosystem Change and Society hosted at the Stockholm Resilience Centre. These international programmes are keen to collaborate in project activities that establish synergies between social ecological production landscapes and biodiversity conservation, and that produce and apply indicators of resilience to agriculture, conservation and community livelihoods in protected areas. Other international stakeholders include the initiative on Landscapes for People Food and Nature led by Ecoagriculture Partners with Bioversity International, Conservation International, World Agroforestry Center, among others. Leading centres of scientific expertise


73

in universities have expressed intention to collaborate with the project including the Austrian University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences , Institute of Ecological Agriculture; the University of Michigan, School of Natural Resources and the Environment; and ISTOM-France, Graduate School for Agricultural Development International.

200. Clear mechanisms for participation, partnership building and effective communication will be essential and will be considered at the outset of project implementation to ensure full inclusion of all relevant stakeholders, that spaces are created to facilitate buy-in, create a sense of ownership and enable them to work together effectively and that all stakeholders are kept fully informed of project progress. The main target beneficiaries of this project will be family farming households and communities in the MaB reserves and the communities of family farmers in the production landscapes of the municipios that encompass and border the BRSR and BRCT MaB Reserves. Farmers will beneficiaries through the improved ecoagriculture practices and linkages to markets and the consequent contribution that this will make to their livelihoods. Communities in general will benefit from enhanced ecosystem services as a result of improved conservation of agricultural biodiversity. Farmers and communities will also gain in terms of enhanced community capacity to manage and sustainably utilize agricultural biodiversity much improved. Further, farmers will have a much greater appreciation of how agriculture can benefit from the many ecosystem services that biodiversity provides, as well as how they can use their various natural assets and knowledge in developing strategies to improve small family farming and ecoagriculture. The project will focus on working with and building the capacity of already existing state and non-state institutional mechanisms to ensure the participation of local farmers, farmer groups, women and youth groups, and other self-help groups. The project will build upon the strong linkages that exist between state and non-state actors in the selected MaB reserves to improve the quality of service delivery and support to farmers and communities.

201. The two Reserves in Sierra del Rosario and Cuchillas del Toa already have farmer organizations that are active within ANAP and in the Campesino a Campesino Movement. These farmer organizations are recognized by the Ministry of Agriculture and the provincial and municipal governments. The farmer organisations are very active and vital in community affairs. At the national level, they are influential in national agrarian policies and incentives to small family farmers and producers. Government schools in the areas where the project is to be implemented will be important stakeholders in communicating the biodiversity values and practices that are beneficial to small scale agriculture and the conservation of natural and biocultural patrimony. The Ministry of Agriculture extension services conduct regular meetings with farmer organizations throughout the agricultural cycle. Farmer organizations that are partners in the project will explore how these already established institutional mechanisms can be utilized to encourage participation of farming communities within the agricultural landscapes identified through the MaB project activities. During the first six months of project implementation, other non-agricultural stakeholders and beneficiaries including public and private sector ecotourism operators and food culture/culinary tours will be identified as stakeholders and beneficiaries.


74

SECTION 6: MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN

202. The project will follow UNEP standard monitoring, reporting and evaluation processes and procedures. Substantive and financial project reporting requirements are summarized in Appendix 8. Reporting requirements and templates are an integral part of the UNEP legal instrument to be signed by Bioversity and UNEP.

203. The Project Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) plan is consistent with the GEF Monitoring and Evaluation policy. The Project Results Framework presented in Appendix 4 includes SMART indicators for each expected outcome, as well as mid-term and end-of-project targets. These indicators, along with the key deliverables and benchmarks included in Appendix 6, will be the main tools for assessing project implementation progress and whether project results are being achieved. The means of verification and the costs associated with obtaining the information to track the indicators are summarized in Appendix 7. Other M&E related costs are also presented in the Costed M&E Plan and are fully integrated in the overall project budget.

204. The M&E plan will be reviewed and revised as necessary during the project inception workshop to ensure project stakeholders understand their roles and responsibilities vis-à-vis project monitoring and evaluation. Indicators and their means of verification may also be fine-tuned at the inception workshop. Day-to-day project monitoring is the responsibility of the Project Management Unit with oversight and backstopping from Bioversity. Other project partners will have responsibilities to collect specific information to track the indicators. It is the responsibility of the Project Director to inform UNEP and Bioversity International of any delays or difficulties faced during implementation so that the appropriate support or corrective measures can be adopted in a timely fashion. Bioversity International will also monitor progress and ensure that UNEP is advised of any delays and support the development of any necessary corrective measures.

205. The Project’s Steering Committee will receive periodic reports on progress and will make recommendations to UNEP concerning the need to revise any aspects of the Results Framework or the M&E plan. Project oversight to ensure that the project meets UNEP and GEF policies and procedures is the responsibility of the UNEP Task Manager. The Task Manager will also review the quality of draft project outputs, provide feedback to the project partners, and establish peer review procedures to ensure adequate quality of scientific and technical outputs and publications.

206. At the time of project approval approximately 50 percent of baseline data are available. Further baseline data collection, specifically on landscape connectivity, community perceptions of vulnerability and risks of genetic erosion, resilience of the agricultural landscapes and their thresholds with respect to impact of agricultural activities on wild biodiversity, laws and policies on marketing opportunities and new policy frameworks will be completed during the first two years of project implementation. Plans for collecting the necessary additional baseline data are presented in Appendix 5. baseline data collection at pilot sites is specifically addressed by activities 1.1.1-1.1.4, 1.2.1, 2.1.5, 2.2.1, 2.1.8 3.2.1, 3.2.2, and 3.3.1.

207. Project supervision will take an adaptive management approach. At project inception the UNEP Task Manager, in collaboration with Bioversity, will facilitate the development of a project supervision plan, which will be communicated to all project partners during and after the inception workshop. The emphasis of the UNEP Task Manager supervision will be on outcome monitoring but without neglecting project financial management and implementation monitoring. Progress, vis-à-vis delivering the agreed project global environmental benefits, will be assessed


75

with the project’s Steering Committee at agreed intervals. Project risks and assumptions will be regularly monitored by project partners, UNEP and Bioversity. Risk assessment and rating is an integral part of the Project Implementation Review (PIR) process. The quality of project monitoring and evaluation will also be reviewed and rated as part of the PIR. Key financial parameters will be monitored quarterly to ensure cost-effective use of financial resources. Monitoring will also include periodic assessments of the project’s performance in relation to the environment and social safeguards put in place by GEF Implementing Agencies.

208. A mid-term management review or evaluation will take place in Project year 3, as indicated in the project milestones. The review will include all parameters recommended by the GEF Evaluation Office for terminal evaluations and will verify information gathered through the GEF tracking tools, as relevant. It will, inter alia:

a) review the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of project implementation;

b) analyze effectiveness of implementation and partnership arrangements;

c) identify issues requiring decisions and remedial actions;

d) identify lessons learned about project design, implementation and management;

e) highlight technical achievements and lessons learned; and

f) propose any mid-course corrections and/or adjustments to the implementation strategy as necessary.

209. The review will be carried out using a participatory approach whereby parties that may benefit or be affected by the project will be actively consulted. Such parties were identified during the stakeholder analysis (see section 2.5 of the project document). The Project Steering Committee will provide inputs to the evaluation and have the opportunity to review the draft report and develop a management response to the evaluation recommendations, along with an implementation plan, with the main aim of improving the remaining time period of the project. It is the responsibility of the UNEP Task Manager to monitor whether the agreed recommendations are being implemented.

210. An independent terminal evaluation will take place at the end of project implementation. The terminal evaluation will review project impact, analyze sustainability of results and whether the project has achieved its objectives, in addition to point d) and e) above. The evaluation will furthermore provide recommendations for follow-up activities. The Evaluation and Oversight Unit (EOU) will manage the terminal evaluation process. A review of the quality of the evaluation report will be undertaken by both UNEP and submitted along with the report to the GEF Evaluation Office no later than 6 months after the completion of the evaluation. The standard terms of reference for the terminal evaluation are included in Appendix 9. These will be adjusted to take into consideration the special needs of the project and the evolving guidance from the GEF Evaluation Office.

211. The following main reports will be prepared by Bioversity International based on inputs provided by the Project Management Unit and other partners: (i) Project inception report; (ii) semi-annual project progress reports; (iii) co-financing reports; and (iv) terminal report. All reports will be submitted to the Project Steering Committee through UNEP. UNEP, with inputs from Bioversity International, will prepare and submit annual Project Implementation Review reports to the GEF Secretariat and Evaluation Office. These reports will reflect the performance of the project and the stage of compliance of the products with the project and their contribution to the tracking tools. In addition to the reports mentioned, and as part of financial management


76

and reporting on the use of GEF resources, Bioversity International shall prepare financial reports for submission to UNEP in accordance with the respective Letters of Agreement/Execution Agreements and following Bioversity International agreed procedures.

212. The GEF tracking tools are attached as Appendix 15. These will be updated at mid-term and at the end of the project and will be made available to the GEF Secretariat along with the Project Implementation Report (PIR). As mentioned above, the mid-term evaluation will contribute to project performance improvement, while the terminal evaluation aims at verifying the information of the tracking tool.

SECTION 7: PROJECT FINANCING AND BUDGET

7.1 Overall Project budget 213. The overall project budget is US$ 4,148,208 comprising US$ 1,368,182 from GEF and US$ 2,780,026 from co-financing. Details of budget according to UNEP budget lines are enclosed in Appendix 1 and 2. Table 1 financial summary

Baseline Alternative Increment GEF Co-

financing Component 1 Mainstreaming mechanisms 332,494 1,600,039 1,267,545 454,391 813,154 Component 2 Improved protected area management 320,586 1,372,536 1,051,950 400,906 651,044

Component 3 Improved livelihoods 225,219 1,227,693 1,002,474 294,885 707,589

Component 4 M&E 0 373,313 373,313 111,200 262,113

Component 5 Project Managemnet 0 452,926 452,926 106,800 346,126

TOTAL 878,299 5,026,507 4,148,208 1,368,182 2,780,026 7.2. Project co-financing

214. A total of US$ 2,780,026 is committed as co-finance from 6 sources. Of this, US$860,936 is in cash and US$1,919,090 in-kind (see Table 2 below for details). The breakdown per project component activities is given in Appendix 2. The co-finance committed for the project includes two elements: commitment from national partners and commitment from international partners that are not country-specific. The sources and type of co-financing mobilized is indicated in the table below.


77

Table 2: co-financing by sources and component in USD.

Name of Co-financier (source)

Classification Cash In Kind

Component 1 285,150 528,004

INIFAT Nat. Gov. EA 51,303 266,191

Bioversity EA 173,847 191,813

UNESCO UN Agency 0 40,000

INIFAT PGR&PB Department

University 30,000 0

FAO Multilateral Agency

30,000 30,000

Component 2 226,205 424,839



UNESCO Multilateral Agency

0 40,000

Pronaturaleza NGO 53,509 0

INIFAT PGR&PB Department

University 20,000 0

Component 3 266,165 441,424




0 40,000

Pronaturaleza NGO 53,509 0

FAO Multilateral Agency

30,000 30,000

Diversity&Development NGO 0 45,000

Component 4 55,117 206,996




0 40,000

Component 5 28,299 317,827INIFAT Nat. Gov. EA 5,813 115,000



0 40,000

TOTAL 860,936 1,919,090


78

7.3. Project cost-effectiveness

215. The cost-effectiveness of the project is due to two key factors. First, the project is embedded in a regional and global network of MaB reserves coordinated under UNESCO. The network has shared objectives to enhance biodiversity’s contribution to development and provide mechanisms for the exchange of approaches, techniques and experiences. Cuban MaB reserves are active in the IberoMaB regional network that supports the exchange of expertise and best practices among reserves. The Cuban MaB Reserves are also part of the Caribbean Biodiversity Corridor and UNESCO’s Caribbean Capacity Building Programme which provides capacity building and information exchange for the management of natural landscapes and for the management of natural heritage. As the reserves targeted by the project are members of the UNESCO-MaB global network, the project will have access to a wide range of experience and scientific information from around the world. In addition, UNESCO and Bioversity are recognized leaders in contributing expertise and in mobilizing resources for work on bio-cultural landscapes for biodiversity conservation and use and can deliver specific information to support the implementation of project activities. The access to state of the art methodologies and practices provided by the MaB network and the project’s international partners provides a comparative set of benchmarks that the project can build on to ensure the timeliness and quality of the results. In addition, the networks and international partners will aid in the mainstreaming the globally relevant biodiversity conservation lessons and benefits.

216. Second, the project is cost-effective because it has been planned by the two main sectors concerned agrobiodiversity in protected areas, the Environment and the Agriculture. Inclusion of these two key sectors enhances cost effectiveness by mobilizing expertise and resources across several institutions in biological science, behavioural and social science, and culture to be partners in the project and contribute directly to its implementation. The high level of co-funding in terms of allocated full time staff and facilities made by Cuban ministries at a time of severe financial constraints, ensures the cost-effectives as there will be less need for external resources in staff and expertise.

217. The participation of ANAP, a leading civil society partner, in project implementation Cuba confers high levels of cost-effectiveness as it is a self-sustaining association of small agricultural producers. ANAP can raise and manage funds for project activities in which it is engaged. Furthermore, the project will link with private sector stakeholders in the tourism and culinary sectors that will be able to use project outputs and outcomes to build upon and expand project activities through private sector entrepreneurship and initiatives (Section 3). Partnership with universities within and outside of Cuba will allow the project to access highly motivated young biodiversity scientists to work implementing project activities with lower costs and greater benefits as they will contribute to building the management capacity and knowledge base for Cuban biodiversity conservation and sustainable use.

218. In the area of developing and communicating the global benefits of the project, the high level of engagement and participation of international partners is crucial for cost-effectiveness. This project has been accepted as a key member and important case study in the International Partnership of the Satoyama Initiative at the CBD/SBSTTA 15 meeting in Montreal in November 2011. This will provide a global platform and high visibility to the project lessons and outcomes to other CBD signatories concerned to conserve biodiversity in social-ecological production landscapes and protected areas. The ability to replicate, scale-up and mainstream project results


79

for global benefit and to secure continuing support for the sustainable management and conservation practices identified by the project is greater as a result of active participation in IPSI. Support from IPSI will contribute to cost-effectiveness in concrete ways through the development and application of indicators of ecosystem services, benefits and wellbeing of communities using agrobiodiversity in the Reserves.

219. UNEP, Bioversity, and UNESCO are active in the relevant global processes and mechanisms to ensure that project results and outcomes feed into the achievement of the CBD Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and monitoring of relevant global indicators, such as the new Aichi Biodiversity Targets, the revised Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC) indicators, the indicators on agrobiodiversity embedded in the Global Plan of Action (GPA) of the ITPGRFA, as well as the relevant core indicators of the Millennium Development Goals. The Bioversity team assigned to the project is active in key global Earth Science Partnerships including International Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and the related ICSU Programme on Ecosystem Change and Society (PECS) hosted at the Stockholm Resilience Centre which has biodiversity conservation in social ecological landscapes as a key focus. These combined linkages increase cost effectiveness of the project by creating opportunities for wider impact from the dissemination of the project lessons and outcomes. Bioversity’s involvement in the new CGIAR Research Programmes (CRPs) Water, Land and Ecosystems (CRP5) will also contribute to the dissemination and scaling up of results and outcomes in the wider agricultural landscapes in tropical areas where forests are a key component of biodiversity.

Project title: Agricultural biodiversity conservation and Man and Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: Bridging managed and natural landscapes Project number: 510Project executing partner: Bioversity InternationalProject implementation period:

From: December 2012To: December 2017

1 2 3 4 5 Total YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 TotalUNEP BUDGET LINE/OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE Integrate ABD Impr. Mng. Mab Impr. Livelihoods M&E Mng

PROJECT PERSONNEL COMPONENT1100 Project Personnel 1101 Project Director 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01102 Project Coordinator 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01103 National Researchers (Agronomist, Ecologist, ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01104 Scientific/Programme Assistant 0 0 0 0 48,000 48,000 0 0 0 0 0 01105 Project Technical Coordination 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01199 Sub-Total 0 0 0 0 48,000 48,000 0 0 0 0 0 01200 Consultants 1201 Agricultural socioeconomis 0 0 10,000 0 0 10,000 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 0 10,0001202 Landscape Ecologist 0 10,000 0 0 0 10,000 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 0 10,0001203 Plant Physiologist/Soil biologist 10,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 0 10,0001299 Sub-Total 10,000 10,000 10,000 0 0 30,000 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 0 30,0001300 Administrative support 1301 Administrative Assistant 0 0 0 0 0 0 9,500 9,500 9,500 9,500 10,000 48,0001302 Financial management 0 0 0 0 10,000 10,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 10,0001399 Sub-Total 0 0 0 0 10,000 10,000 11,500 11,500 11,500 11,500 12,000 58,0001600 Travel on official business (above staff)1601 International project staff 5,500 3,500 4,000 13,500 0 26,500 5,300 5,300 5,300 5,300 5,300 26,5001602 National project Staff 5,000 4,700 4,500 2,800 1,900 18,900 3,780 3,780 3,780 3,780 3,780 18,9001699 Sub-Total 10,500 8,200 8,500 16,300 1,900 45,400 9,080 9,080 9,080 9,080 9,080 45,4001999 Component Total 20,500 18,200 18,500 16,300 59,900 133,400 28,080 28,080 28,080 28,080 21,080 133,400

SUB-CONTRACT COMPONENT

2200Sub-contracts (MoU's/LA's for non- profit supporting organizations)

2201Agricultural biodiversity, Socio-cultural, ethnobothany assessment and baseline data collection

61,040 42,510 5,450 10,000 0 119,000 37,500 51,492 20,500 3,500 6,008 119,000

2202 Information and database managemen 5,500 6,500 0 0 0 12,000 0 4,000 4,000 4,000 0 12,000

2203Technical documents production, Knowledge sharing, and dissemination

21,600 23,196 19,920 0 0 64,716 7,800 7,816 14,400 21,700 13,000 64,716

2204Identification and testing of indicators (agricultural biodiversity, ecological, practices

7,380 20,890 1,000 6,000 0 35,270 0 10,000 8,743 12,270 4,257 35,270

2205Best practices (agricultural, ecological, etc.) identification and implementation

6,628 24,600 9,390 0 0 40,618 0 0 12,000 15,965 12,653 40,618

2206Environmental impact of agricultural biodiversity management practices

0 30,600 0 7,000 0 37,600 6,500 11,100 10,200 8,700 1,100 37,600

2207 Policy, legal and benefit sharing analysi 0 12,600 23,070 0 0 35,670 6,495 9,200 7,625 7,650 4,700 35,6702208 Economic analysis and income generation 0 0 18,330 0 0 18,330 8,055 5,100 2,850 1,725 600 18,3302209 ABD management use and conservation 83,559 21,600 2,000 0 0 107,159 12,084 18,000 32,575 34,500 10,000 107,1592210 Community Seed Banks and Diversity Fair 3,200 6,200 16,625 0 0 26,025 0 5,200 11,300 5,025 4,500 26,025

2211Strengthening local Institutions (links to farmers' needs) 5,600 0 18,240 0 0 23,840 0 9,090 5,850 5,550 3,350 23,840

2299 Sub-Total 194,507 188,696 114,025 23,000 0 520,228 78,434 130,998 130,043 120,585 60,168 520,2282999 Component Total 194,507 188,696 114,025 23,000 0 520,228 78,434 130,998 130,043 120,585 60,168 520,228

APPENDIX 1 - RECONCILIATION BETWEEN GEF ACTIVITY BASED BUDGET AND UNEP BUDGET LINE (GEF FUNDS ONLY US$)

EXPENDITURE BY PROJECT COMPONENT/ACTIVITY EXPENDITURE BY CALENDAR YEAR

1 2 3 4 5 Total YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 TotalUNEP BUDGET LINE/OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE Integrate ABD Impr. Mng. Mab Impr. Livelihoods M&E Mng

EXPENDITURE BY PROJECT COMPONENT/ACTIVITY EXPENDITURE BY CALENDAR YEAR

TRAINING COMPONENT3200 Group training

3201Capacity building of local communities (producers, processors, etc)

21,600 19,000 14,320 0 0 54,920 4,170 16,700 14,025 13,625 6,400 54,920

3202 Participatory methodologies 5,000 21,700 8,160 0 0 34,860 6,510 9,650 8,150 8,150 2,400 34,8603203 GIS application in Locating and monitoring diversit 15,404 0 0 0 0 15,404 3,404 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 15,4043204 Farmers/staff exchange visits and training 8,500 10,000 8,500 0 0 27,000 0 6,750 6,750 6,750 6,750 27,0003299 Sub-Total 50,504 50,700 30,980 0 0 132,184 14,084 36,100 31,925 31,525 18,550 132,1843300 Meetings/conferences

3301Conferences on agricultural biodiversity and MAB management

6,000 6,000 2,000 0 0 14,000 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 14,000

3302 Steering Committee 5,000 8,000 4,000 12,200 4,000 33,200 6,640 6,640 6,640 6,640 6,640 33,2003303 Inception meeting 3,350 4,250 1,000 2,000 2,500 13,100 13,100 0 0 0 0 13,1003304 Local Site technical Level meetings 6,000 8,900 6,500 0 0 21,400 4,280 4,280 4,280 4,280 4,280 21,4003399 Sub-Total 20,350 27,150 13,500 14,200 6,500 81,700 26,820 13,720 13,720 13,720 13,720 81,7003999 Component Total 70,854 77,850 44,480 14,200 6,500 213,884 40,904 49,820 45,645 45,245 32,270 213,884

EQUIPMENT & PREMISES COMPONENT4100 Expendable equipment (items under $1,000 each)4101 Laboratory equipment 3,000 3,000 1,200 0 0 7,200 2,500 2,000 1,000 1,000 700 7,2004102 Office supplies 2,000 4,500 3,000 0 0 9,500 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 9,5004103 Library acquisitions 2,500 2,500 2,000 0 0 7,000 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 7,0004104 Computer software 2,000 500 500 0 0 3,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 0 0 3,0004105 Field equipment 7,500 7,000 5,500 0 0 20,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 20,0004199 Sub-Total 17,000 17,500 12,200 0 0 46,700 10,800 10,300 9,300 8,300 8,000 46,7004200 Non-expendable equipment (items above US$ 1,000 4201 Vehicles 38,000 38,000 38,000 0 0 114,000 114,000 0 0 0 0 114,0004202 Computers 37,200 15,330 16,240 0 2,000 70,770 33,590 24,180 13,000 0 0 70,7704203 Office equipment 15,600 7,200 8,300 0 900 32,000 15,000 9,000 7,000 1,000 0 32,0004204 Field equipment 12,280 7,280 19,780 0 0 39,340 26,000 13,340 0 0 0 39,3404205 Laboratory equipment 27,000 8,750 3,000 0 0 38,750 25,000 13,750 0 0 0 38,7504299 Sub-Total 130,080 76,560 85,320 0 2,900 294,860 213,590 60,270 20,000 1,000 0 294,860

4300 Premises (office rent, maintenance of premises etc)

4301 Office charges, maintenance and ren 0 0 0 0 12,500 12,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 12,5004302 Rental of meeting and conference rooms 0 0 0 0 7,800 7,800 1,560 1,560 1,560 1,560 1,560 7,8004399 Sub-Total 0 0 0 0 20,300 20,300 4,060 4,060 4,060 4,060 4,060 20,3004999 Component Total 147,080 94,060 97,520 0 23,200 361,860 228,450 74,630 33,360 13,360 12,060 361,860

MISCELLANEOUS COMPONENT5100 Operation and maintenance of equip.

5101Maintenance of computers, printers, scanners and other related equipments

0 0 0 0 2,000 2,000 400 400 400 400 400 2,000

5102 Maintenance of field and laboratory equipmen 2,500 0 0 0 0 2,500 500 500 500 500 500 2,500

5103Repair, maintenance and running cost of vehicle and motor bikes and their insurance

6,600 3,600 4,760 0 1,840 16,800 2,800 5,600 2,800 2,800 2,800 16,800

5199 Sub-Total 9,100 3,600 4,760 0 3,840 21,300 3,700 6,500 3,700 3,700 3,700 21,3005200 Reporting costs 5201 Reports 2,500 2,500 3,500 5,000 5,400 18,900 3,780 3,780 3,780 3,780 3,780 18,9005202 Publications 3,400 5,100 7,100 2,200 0 17,800 2,560 3,810 3,810 3,810 3,810 17,8005203 Media publications and information networks 3,500 7,900 3,500 0 0 14,900 1,000 2,750 5,650 2,750 2,750 14,9005299 Sub-Total 9,400 15,500 14,100 7,200 5,400 51,600 7,340 10,340 13,240 10,340 10,340 51,6005300 Sundry 5301 Communication 2,500 2,500 1,000 6,500 3,700 16,200 3,240 3,240 3,240 3,240 3,240 16,2005302 Postage, quarantine, clearance charges 450 500 500 2,600 4,260 8,310 1,662 1,662 1,662 1,662 1,662 8,3105399 Sub-Total 2,950 3,000 1,500 9,100 7,960 24,510 4,902 4,902 4,902 4,902 4,902 24,5105500 Evaluation 5501 Mid term evaluation 0 0 0 15,000 0 15,000 0 0 15,000 0 0 15,0005502 Final Evaluation 0 0 0 24,400 0 24,400 0 0 0 0 24,400 24,4005503 Audit report 0 0 0 2,000 0 2,000 0 0 0 0 2,000 2,0005599 Sub-Total 0 0 0 41,400 0 41,400 0 0 15,000 0 26,400 41,4005999 Component Total 21,450 22,100 20,360 57,700 17,200 138,810 15,942 21,742 36,842 18,942 45,342 138,810

TOTAL COSTS 454,391 400,906 294,885 111,200 106,800 1,368,182 391,810 305,270 273,970 226,212 170,920 1,368,182

APPENDIX 2 RECONCILIATION BETWEEN GEF BUDGET AND COFINANCE BUDGET (TOTAL GEF & CO-FINANCE US$) CONSOLIDATEDProject title: Agrobiodiversity Conservation and Man and the Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: Bridging Managed and Natural LandscapesProject number: 510Project executing partner: Bioversity InternationalProject implementation period::From: December 2012To: December 2017

GEF cash TOTAL TOTAL

Co-finance GEF+Co-finance

Cash In-kind Cash In-kind TOTAL Cash In-kind TOTAL Cash In-kind TOTAL Cash In-kind TOTAL Cash In-kind TOTAL Cash In-kindPROJECT PERSONNEL COMPONENT

1100 Project Personnel1101 Project Director - 204,585 274,585 59,347 79,653 139,000 59,347 79,653 139,000 58,920 79,080 138,000 15,157 20,343 35,500 11,814 15,856 27,670 479,170 479,170 1102 Project Coordinator - - 35,000 - 5,504 5,504 - 6,000 6,000 - 6,496 6,496 - 7,400 7,400 - 9,600 9,600 35,000 35,000 1103 National Researchers - - 453,852 - 118,910 118,910 - 140,692 140,692 - 104,000 104,000 - 23,996 23,996 - 66,254 66,254 453,852 453,852 1104 Scientific/Programme Assistant - 74,865 74,865 25,000 25,000 50,000 24,933 24,933 49,865 24,933 24,933 49,865 - - - - - - 149,730 149,730 1199 Sub-Total - 279,450 838,302 84,347 229,067 313,414 84,280 251,277 335,557 83,853 214,508 298,361 15,157 51,739 66,896 11,814 91,710 103,524 1,117,752 1,117,752 1200 Consultants1201 Agricultural socioeconomist 10,000 - 7,161 - 1,000 1,000 - 1,000 1,000 - 5,161 5,161 - - - - - - 7,161 17,161 1202 Landscape Ecologist 10,000 - 8,459 - 4,459 4,459 - 2,000 2,000 - 2,000 2,000 - - - - - - 8,459 18,459 1203 Plant Physiologist/Soil biologist 10,000 - 7,760 - 5,260 5,260 - 1,500 1,500 - 1,000 1,000 - - - - - - 7,760 17,760 1299 Sub-Total 30,000 - 23,380 - 10,719 10,719 - 4,500 4,500 - 8,161 8,161 - - - - - - 23,380 53,380 1300 Administrative Support1301 Administrative Assistant 48,000 - 23,358 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 23,358 23,358 23,358 71,358 1302 Financial management 10,000 - 38,500 - 1,900 1,900 - 1,800 1,800 - 1,800 1,800 - - - - 31,500 31,500 37,000 47,000 1399 Sub-Total 58,000 - 61,858 - 1,900 1,900 - 1,800 1,800 - 1,800 1,800 - - - - 54,858 54,858 60,358 118,358 1600 Travel on official business1601 International project staff 26,500 5,000 15,000 2,500 2,500 5,000 - - - 2,500 2,500 5,000 - - - - 10,000 10,000 20,000 46,500 1602 National project Staff 18,900 - 15,000 - 3,000 3,000 - 2,500 2,500 - 2,500 2,500 - 3,500 3,500 - 5,000 5,000 16,500 35,400 1699 Sub-Total 45,400 5,000 30,000 2,500 5,500 8,000 - 2,500 2,500 2,500 5,000 7,500 - 3,500 3,500 - 15,000 15,000 36,500 81,900 1699 Component Total 133,400 284,450 953,540 86,847 247,186 334,033 84,280 260,077 344,357 86,353 229,469 315,822 15,157 55,239 70,396 11,814 161,568 173,382 1,237,990 1,371,390

SUB CONTRACT COMPONENT2200 Sub-contracts (MoU's/LA's for 2201 Agricultural biodiversity, Socio-cultural,

ethnobothany assessment and baseline data collection

119,000 65,094 62,940 33,684 40,090 73,774 6,000 - 6,000 10,463 9,137 19,600 15,174 14,486 29,660 - - - 129,034 248,034

2202 Information and database management 12,000 14,752 50,057 6,278 37,704 43,982 8,474 7,353 15,827 - 5,000 5,000 - - - - - - 64,809 76,809 2203 Technical documents production, Knowledge

sharing, and dissemination 64,716 18,884 64,723 2,670 25,330 28,000 11,607 18,993 30,600 4,607 20,400 25,007 - - - - - - 83,607 148,323

2204 Identification and testing of indicators (agricultural biodiversity, ecological, practices)

35,270 26,843 58,063 4,007 12,323 16,330 1,840 4,560 6,400 10,274 13,392 23,666 9,886 29,624 39,510 - - - 85,906 121,176

2205 Best practices (agricultural, ecological, etc.) identification and implementation

40,618 8,412 25,326 3,651 8,349 12,000 3,367 4,933 8,300 3,438 10,000 13,438 - - - - - - 33,738 74,356

2206 Environmental impact of agricultural biodiversity management practices

37,600 33,149 63,988 11,901 18,859 30,760 871 4,226 5,097 11,635 11,865 23,500 9,126 29,654 38,780 - - - 98,137 135,737

2207 Policy, legal and benefit sharing analysis 35,670 35,123 25,228 5,000 - 5,000 23,623 25,228 48,851 6,500 - 6,500 - - - - - - 60,351 96,021 2208 Economic analysis and income generation 18,330 47,082 43,354 8,000 8,000 16,000 6,740 2,879 9,619 32,342 32,475 64,817 - - - - - - 90,436 108,766 2209 Agricultural biodiversity management use and

conservation 107,159 103,503 79,256 57,373 21,347 78,720 17,320 22,319 39,639 28,810 35,590 64,400 - - - - - - 182,759 289,918

2210 Community Seed Banks and Diversity Fairs 26,025 49,009 25,458 21,323 9,177 30,500 9,179 941 10,120 18,507 15,340 33,847 - - - - - - 74,467 100,492 2212 Strengthening local Institutions (links to farmers'

needs) 23,840 7,995 18,213 5,000 5,000 10,000 2,995 13,213 16,208 - - - - - - - - - 26,208 50,048

2299 Sub-Total 520,228 409,846 516,606 158,887 186,179 345,066 92,016 104,645 196,661 126,575 153,200 279,775 34,186 73,764 107,950 - - - 929,452 1,449,680 2999 Component Total 520,228 409,846 516,606 158,887 186,179 345,066 92,016 104,645 196,661 126,575 153,200 279,775 34,186 73,764 107,950 - - - 929,452 1,449,680

TRAINING COMPONENT3200 Group Training3201 Capacity building of local communities (producers,

processors, etc) 54,920 17,816 8,500 - - - 5,313 2,003 7,316 12,503 6,497 19,000 - - - - - - 26,316 81,236

3202 Participatory methodologies 34,860 18,200 6,200 2,500 2,500 5,000 9,200 1,200 10,400 6,500 2,500 9,000 - - - - - - 24,400 59,260 3203 GIS application in Locating and monitoring

diversity 15,404 - 2,000 - - - - 2,000 2,000 - - - - - - - - - 2,000 17,404

3204 Farmers/staff exchange visits and training (Conservation methodology an sustainable agricultural practices)

27,000 13,600 3,500 1,615 1,885 3,500 4,090 - 4,090 7,895 1,615 9,510 - - - - - - 17,100 44,100

3299 Sub-Total 132,184 49,616 20,200 4,115 4,385 8,500 18,603 5,203 23,806 26,898 10,612 37,510 - - - - - - 69,816 202,000 3300 MEETING AND CONFERENCES3301 Conferences on agricultural biodiversityt and

MAB management 14,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 14,000

3302 Steering Committee 33,200 - 38,030 - 2,743 2,743 - 2,743 2,743 - 2,744 2,744 - 14,800 14,800 - 15,000 15,000 38,030 71,230 3303 Inception meeting 13,100 - 18,780 - 800 800 - 600 600 - 600 600 - 6,100 6,100 600 10,080 10,680 18,780 31,880 3304 Local technical 21,400 26,500 34,655 2,000 5,600 7,600 16,741 4,959 21,700 5,300 4,300 9,600 - 13,455 13,455 1,000 7,800 8,800 61,155 82,555 3399 Subtotal 81,700 26,500 91,465 2,000 9,143 11,143 16,741 8,302 25,043 5,300 7,644 12,944 - 34,355 34,355 1,600 32,880 34,480 117,965 199,665 3999 Component total 213,884 76,116 111,665 6,115 13,528 19,643 35,343 13,506 48,849 32,198 18,256 50,454 - 34,355 34,355 1,600 32,880 34,480 187,781 401,665

EQUIPMENT & PREMISES COMPONENT4100 Expendable equipment (items under US$ 1000

each)

Component 3 Improved livelihoods

Total Co-finance Total Co-finance

Component 1 Mainstreaming ABD

Component 4 Monitoring & Evaluation

Component 5 Project Management

Component 2 Improved mng systems

4101 Laboratory equipment 7,200 7,000 8,562 7,000 8,562 15,562 - - - - - - - - - - - - 15,562 22,762 4102 Office supplies 9,500 - 5,675 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5,675 5,675 5,675 15,175 4103 Library acquisitions 7,000 4,500 6,000 1,714 2,286 4,000 2,069 2,931 5,000 1,500 - 1,500 - - - - - - 10,500 17,500 4104 Computer software 3,000 3,800 3,000 1,900 1,500 3,400 1,900 1,500 3,400 - - - - - - - - - 6,800 9,800 4105 Field equipment 20,000 7,700 15,000 5,088 9,912 15,000 - - - 2,612 5,088 7,700 - - - - - - 22,700 42,700 4199 Sub total 46,700 23,000 38,237 15,702 22,260 37,962 3,969 4,431 8,400 4,112 5,088 9,200 - - - - 5,675 5,675 61,237 107,937

4200 Non-expendable equipment (items above US$ 1000 each)

4201 Vehicles 114,000 - 3,500 - 1,000 1,000 - 1,500 1,500 - 1,000 1,000 - - - - - - 3,500 117,500 4202 Computers 70,770 - 13,071 - 3,000 3,000 - 7,071 7,071 - 3,000 3,000 - - - - - - 13,071 83,841 4203 Office equipment 32,000 - 7,371 - 2,000 2,000 - 3,371 3,371 - 2,000 2,000 - - - - - - 7,371 39,371 4204 Field equipment 39,340 - 22,571 - 15,000 15,000 - 1,000 1,000 - 6,571 6,571 - - - - - - 22,571 61,911 4205 Laboratory equipment 38,750 - 5,600 - 5,600 5,600 - - - - - - - - - - - - 5,600 44,350 4299 Sub total 294,860 - 52,113 - 26,600 26,600 - 12,942 12,942 - 12,571 12,571 - - - - - - 52,113 346,973

4300 Premises (office rent, maintenance of premises etc)

4301 Office charges, maintenance and rent 12,500 6,700 101,255 1,123 1,877 3,000 1,587 2,013 3,600 2,028 2,572 4,600 - - - 1,887 94,868 96,755 107,955 120,455 4302 Rental of meeting and conference rooms 7,800 5,000 5,500 1,190 1,310 2,500 - 6,000 6,000 952 1,048 2,000 - - - - - - 10,500 18,300 4299 Sub total 20,300 11,700 106,755 2,313 3,187 5,500 1,587 8,013 9,600 2,980 3,620 6,600 - - - 1,887 94,868 96,755 118,455 138,755

4999 Component total 361,860 34,700 197,105 18,016 52,047 70,062 5,556 25,386 30,942 7,092 21,279 28,371 - - - 1,887 100,543 102,430 231,805 593,665 MISCELLANEOUS COMPONENT5100 Operation and maintenance of equip

5101 Maintenance of computers, printers, scanners and other related equipments 2,000

- 3,500 - 600 600 - 2,300 2,300 - 600 600 - - - - - - 3,500 5,500

5102 Maintenance of field and laboratory equipment 2,500 - 4,200 - 4,200 4,200 - - - - - - - - - - - - 4,200 6,700 5103 Repair, maintenance and running cost of vehicle

and motor bikes and their insurance 16,800 - 7,800 - 4,000 4,000 - 2,600 2,600 - 1,200 1,200 - - - - - - 7,800 24,600

5199 Sub total 21,300 - 15,500 - 8,800 8,800 - 4,900 4,900 - 1,800 1,800 - - - - - - 15,500 36,800 5200 Reporting costs

5201 Reports 18,900 25,992 18,996 4,107 3,053 7,160 1,107 553 1,660 3,607 3,053 6,660 5,774 2,000 7,774 11,398 10,336 21,734 44,988 63,888 5202 Publications 17,800 19,532 43,796 8,493 9,507 18,000 3,856 4,976 8,832 6,864 8,136 15,000 - 8,996 8,996 - 12,500 12,500 63,328 81,128 5203 Media publications and information networks 14,900 5,800 18,496 1,516 2,484 4,000 2,767 4,533 7,300 1,516 2,484 4,000 - 8,996 8,996 - - - 24,296 39,196 5299 Sub total 51,600 51,324 81,288 14,116 15,044 29,160 7,730 10,062 17,792 11,987 13,673 25,660 5,774 19,992 25,766 11,398 22,836 34,234 132,612 184,212

5300 Sundry (communications, postage, freight, clearance charges, etc.)

5301 Communication 16,200 2,500 14,240 743 4,687 5,430 1,280 5,283 6,563 1,000 3,747 4,747 - - - - - - 16,740 32,940 5302 Postage, quarantine, clearance charges 8,310 2,000 2,500 427 533 960 - 980 980 960 - 960 - - - 1,600 - 1,600 4,500 12,810

5399 Sub-Total 24,510 4,500 16,740 1,170 5,220 6,390 1,280 6,263 7,543 1,960 3,747 5,707 - - - 1,600 - 1,600 21,240 45,750 5500 Evaluation

5501 Mid term evaluation 15,000 - 9,575 - - - - - - - - - - 9,575 9,575 - - - 9,575 24,575 5502 Final Evaluation 24,400 - 10,071 - - - - - - - - - - 10,071 10,071 - - - 10,071 34,471 5503 Audit report 2,000 - 7,000 - - - - - - - - - - 4,000 4,000 - - - 4,000 6,000 5599 Sub-Total 41,400 - 26,646 - - - - - - - - - - 23,646 23,646 - - - 23,646 65,046

5299 Component Total 138,810 55,824 140,174 15,286 29,064 44,350 9,011 21,224 30,235 13,947 19,220 33,167 5,774 43,638 49,412 12,998 22,836 35,834 192,998 331,808

TOTAL COSTS 860,936 1,919,090 285,150 528,004 813,154 226,205 424,839 651,044 266,165 441,424 707,589 55,117 206,996 262,113 28,299 317,827 346,126 2,780,026 4,148,208

Annex1. Project Document

1

APPENDIX 3. Incremental Cost Analysis The incremental costs and benefits of the proposed project are summarized in the following incremental cost matrix. The baseline expenditures amount to US$ 878,299, while the alternative has been estimated at US$ 5,026,507. The incremental cost of the project, US$ 4,148,208 is required to achieve the project’s global environmental objectives of which the amount of US$ 1,368,182 is requested from GEF. This amounts to 32.98% of the total cost of the increment. The remaining amount of the total incremental cost, US$ 2,780,026 (67.02%) will be raised by the national and international partners and other donors. The table includes in-kind and cash contributions.

Cost/Benefit Baseline (B) Alternative (A) Increment (A-B)

Global Benefits Unique agrobiodiversity is threatened in MaB Reserves

Sustainable agricultural practices are unknown or not applied

Agricultural production involves practices that are unsustainable and reduce ecosystem service function

Practices and knowledge management tools that can sustain agrobiodiversity and protect are unknown or not available

Conservation of unique agrobiodiversity contained in the two MaB Reserves.

Conservation of associated organisms essential for sustainable agricultural production systems.

Protection through sustainable management practices of agrobiodiversity under threat of extinction.

Agricultural practices that favour greater resilience and adaptive capacity to environmental shocks, particularly those prevalent in the Caribbean zone, such as periodic hurricanes and the increasing severity and unpredictability of climate change impacts

Strengthening of important ecosystem services such as pollination, organic matter recycling,


2

Baseline $878,299

reduction of soil erosion.

Methods, tools and best practices for mainstreaming agrobiodiversity and increasing the benefits of biodiversity and ecosystems services in protected areas to society.

Alternative $ 5,026,507

Increment $ 4,148,208

Domestic Benefits Agricultural biodiversity is not directly considered in the management plans of buffer and transition zones of Cuba MaB Reserves

Food security in the project MaB Reserve communities is still inadequate and dietary diversity is undervalued

Expertise is available but remains untapped or underutilized

Inadequate sectoral integration and mainstreaming of agricultural biodiversity

Ongoing genetic erosion of relevant biodiversity species and loss of their habitats

Limited opportunities for famers and local communities to diversify livelihoods and income

Inadequate support to promote use and conservation of agricultural biodiversity within MaB Reserves

Agricultural biodiversity management practices are integrated into project MaB Reserve management plans and farming practices in and around project MaB Reserves

Food security (and dietary diversity) in the communities living in the buffer and transition zones of project MaB Reserves is sustainably improved

Enhanced common scientific framework and tools to work across sectors to produce integrated management plans

Restoration and reforestation plans are reviewed to include agricultural local species to favor a greater resilience and adaptive capacity of the protected areas

Local communities will practice alternative livelihoods and friendly production systems thereby reducing pressures on natural systems and


3

associated biodiversity resources

Enhanced policy and regulatory enabling environment to support maintenance and commercialization of local products

Component 1 Mainstreaming agricultural biodiversity

Local varieties are not prioritized within agricultural extension and seed distribution, and therefore lack distribution around project MaB Reserves

There are no databases for cataloguing and maintaining information about agricultural biodiversity within project MaB Reserves

Detailed location and abundance of agricultural biodiversity within project MaB Reserves is relatively unknown Only preliminary inventory of agricultural species per zone exists

Genetic resources of crop varieties and wild relatives present in MaB reserves are not documented and maintained in protected areas conservation strategies and national crop genetic resources conservation programmes

Local varieties are undervalued, particularly their biocultural significance

Greater diversity and number of agricultural local species are maintained by farmers in project MaB reserves

Inventories on distribution, and use of agricultural biodiversity are produced and used for documenting its role in protected areas

Local seed systems are maintained and planting material of traditional varieties is distributed to farmers in project MaB Reserves

Cross-cutting documents on conservation of agricultural biodiversity and sustainable traditional agricultural practices within protected areas are produced and made available;

Scientifically validated methods and tools for in situ conservation of local agricultural biodiversity are available to farmers

Traditional varieties with high socioeconomic value are promoted within the seed systems of the project MaB Reserves


4

Total cost $332,494

Alternative $1,600,039

Co-financing $813,154 Cost to GEF $ 454,391 Total cost $ 1,267,545

Component 2 Improved management systems

Management plans of project MaB Reserves do not consider agricultural biodiversity as a resource of MaB Reserves

Traditional agricultural systems within the project MaB Reserves do not specifically incorporate practices supporting the restoration and maintenance of the natural and managed landscapes

The project MaB Reserves management lacks the capacity to help farmers adapt to changing environments and explore new opportunities

Capacity-building programmes related to the conservation of agricultural biodiversity within project MaB Reserves do not exist

Total cost $320,586

New management plans that incorporate agricultural biodiversity are finalized and implemented

An outreach plan and guide for best management practices for national social networks and institutions regarding management of project MaB Reserves is created

Local reserve communities, CNAP and MINAG have a common understanding on the importance of agricultural biodiversity and work together on the management of protected areas

Alternative $1,372,536

Co-financing $651,044 Cost to GEF $400,906 Total cost $ 1,051,950

Component 3 Improved livelihoods

Income within communities in and around the reserves is limited by a lack of market opportunities

Opportunities for income generation through the commercialization of agricultural biodiversity products have not been explored

No markets for selling and exchanging products of local agricultural biodiversity

New market opportunities are tested, monitored, and evaluated and high-value traditional agricultural biodiversity products are promoted

Markets for exchange and sale of products derived from local agricultural biodiversity function and are evaluated in each project MaB


5

exist No certification model for agricultural

biodiversity products of the project MaB Reserves exists

National, provincial, and local decision-makers and stakeholders are relatively uninformed regarding agricultural biodiversity conservation and therefore cannot (and do not) consider it in their decision- and policy-making processes

Total cost $225,219

Reserve

A certification model for agricultural biodiversity products is designed, implemented

Training programmes for participatory certification schemes are implemented, monitored, and evaluated in each project MaB Reserve and at least 2 are disseminated to the global MaB network

Material regarding the economic value of agricultural biodiversity is produced and utilized by decision-makers and stakeholders for informed decision-making

National policy-makers and provincial and local officials make informed decisions regarding conservation and sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity to improve the sustainability of the National System of Protected Areas

Alternative $ 1,227,693

Co-financing $707,589

Cost to GEF $294,885

Total cost $ 1,002,474

Component 4

Project Management

Effective cooperation to achieve project outputs in accordance with established standards of project management and implementation and active participation of key stakeholders in project activities.


6

Total cost $0 Alternative $373,313



Total cost $373,313

Component 5 Monitoring and Evaluation

Total cost $0

Project outputs achieved in accordance with established standards of monitoring and evaluation

Alternative $452,926



Total cost $452,926


1

APPENDIX 4. Results Framework

Project Strategy Objectively verifiable indicators

Indicator Baseline Mid-term target Target Sources of verification Assumptions

Project Objective To conserve the diversity within and around protected areas through mainstreaming agricultural biodiversity into the management of the Cuban MaB Reserve System

• Revised Management and implementation Plans of project MAB reserves include agricultural biodiversity • Increased area of globally significant species varieties and populations that are unique to Cuban agricultural ecosystems • Globally applicable scientifically validated methods and tools for mainstreaming agricultural biodiversity available for replication

• Agricultural biodiversity is present in Cuba MaB Reserves, but is not directly considered in the management plans

• Appropriate agricultural biodiversity management practices for each project MaB Reserve are determined • Agrobiodiversiy component is identified and included in first drafts of revised Management and Action plans

• Revised Management and Action Plans are implemented in project MaB reserves • Richness (numbers) and/or evenness (distribution) of populations and varieties of at least 5 species in each project site increased by 20% • Globally applicable methods and tools for mainstreaming agricultural biodiversity available to global MaB network

• Revised MaB management plans Technical documents and publications Agricultural biodiversity is conserved and available Survey data measuring richness and evenness of target species Documentation on globally applicable methods submitted to global MaB network

• Traditional agricultural biodiversity present in the buffer and transition zones within project MaB Reserves • National interest in increasing the income and improving the livelihoods of rural communities

Component 1: Mainstreaming mechanisms that integrate high levels of agrobiodiversity into MaB buffer and transition zones Outcome 1 Increased agricultural biodiversity in the buffer and transition zones of the 2 project MaB Reserves

• Increased number of species and varieties of global significance at farm level • 1500 ha of the project MaB Reserves are regenerated and /or restored using traditional varieties (including high priority

• Local agricultural tropical species, are not well distributed or used by farmers in and around project MaB Reserves

• Local agricultural tropical species are identified within each project MaB Reserve • Surveys of local food markets

• Increased number of species and varieties of global importance by 20% in project MAB reserves family farms • A set of indicators identified to monitor agricultural biodiversity

• Review and assessment of agricultural biodiversity inventories in the project MaB Reserves are published • Technical documents and publications • Surveys

• Farmers’ interest in conservation, use, and management of local agricultural biodiversity • National authorities are sensitive to conservation of local agricultural species in the MaB Reserves


2



and endemic species) and wild species

distribution, role and uses are in place and available for local and national stakeholders

• Documented monitoring procedures

Output 1.1 Assessment of the existing agricultural biodiversity and its role and use in protected areas

• Abundance and distribution of agricultural biodiversity of different species within project MaB Reserves is identified and mapped

• Detailed location and abundance of agricultural biodiversity within project MaB Reserves is relatively unknown

• Specific locations of agricultural biodiversity within project MaB Reserves are identified and mapped

• Community-level maps showing agricultural biodiversity in project MaB Reserves are produced • Inventory by zone (by selecting the agricultural biodiversity richest areas in core, buffer and transition zones) of ADB species and varieties in each Project MaB reserve

• Local varieties from MaB Reserves with economic potential identified and mapped

• Products of the reserves’ agricultural biodiversity are not present in local markets

• Locations and size of food markets and their products are identified in collaboration with farmers’ association

• Local markets include at least 3 local varieties from MaB reserves

• A set of globally applicable methods and tools to assess the role of agricultural ecosystems as biological corridors in MaB Reserves produced.

• The role of agroecosystems as biological corridors is still being investigated and indicators and options are still to be determined

• A literature review on agricultural ecosystems as biological corridors for threatened species is conducted and an assessment for their function in providing connectivity and extending the range for key and threatened species is produced • Methodology designed

• Tools developed and scientifically validated through 3 case studies that demonstrate the role and the impact of agroecosystems and agro-ecological practices and their function as biological corridors

• Informational material • Scientific publications • Progress reports •Inventories •Management and use strategies • Consultation with IBEROMaB and other PA networks • Technical documents on conservation of ABD and sustainable traditional agricultural practices within project MaB Reserves

• Coordination with experts on biological corridors in the Caribbean region • Ability to overcome logistical constraints in access to different zones


3



• A set of globally applicable scientifically validated methods and tools to assess the role of globally important agricultural biodiversity to combat biotic and abiotic stresses are produced

• The project MaB Reserves management lacks the capacity to help farmers adapt to changing environments and explore new opportunities

• A literature review on the role of local agricultural biodiversity to combat biotic and abiotic stresses is conducted • Methodology designed

• Cross-cutting technical guidelines and methodologies on conservation of ABD and sustainable traditional agricultural practices within protected areas are produced and made available • At least 3 sustainable practices (traditional and non ) are tested in both project reserves

Output 1.2 Increased use and conservation of traditional varieties and wild species

• Targeted farmers add at least 5 local agricultural species (including neo-tropical fruit trees, roots, and tubers, grain legumes, and endemic medicinal, aromatic, and ornamental species) to their production systems

• Genetic resources of crop varieties and wild relatives present in MaB reserves are not documented or maintained in protected areas conservation strategies and national crop genetic resources conservation programmes • Many local varieties (wild relatives and underutilized) are present in farms and home gardens in the project MaB Reserves but not well distributed among farmers

• Collaboration between National Gene Banks and community seed banks is well established and functioning • Synergies and opportunities for collaboration between in situ and ex situ conservation of crops varieties and wild relatives in project MaB Reserves are defined

• MINAG and CITMA nurseries use local agricultural biodiversity species for regeneration and restoration • The number of community seed banks and nurseries are increased by 2 per 20 farms in project MaB reserves • Biocultural patrimony (e.g. traditional management practices, culinary traditions) is documented, disseminated, and

• A community seed bank and network of farmers • Technical documents, methods, and tools • Workshops and trainings • Progress reports • Methods and tools are used by farmers. • Annual meeting between national genebanks, herbaria, botanic gardens and community seed banks and nurseries of project

• Cooperation of the farmers within project MaB Reserves • National institutions have the capacity to collaborate with communities • National institutions are willing to promote the commercialization and valorization of MaB Reserves local products • Farmers are able to create community seed banks on their farms


4



globally available through UNESCO network

• Local species and varieties are mainstreamed into the Urban and Suburban Agriculture Programme production plan

• The Urban and Suburban Agriculture Programme only includes few traditional varieties and neglects most of the local species and varieties maintained by the small farmers in the reserves

• The importance of local species and varieties from the reserves is recognized and planting material from project MaB reserves is available to Urban and Suburban Agriculture Programme

• At least 3 local varieties from the reserves are mainstreamed into the Urban and Suburban Agriculture Programme

MaB Reserves • Planting material from project MaB reserves is available and used within Urban and Suburban Agriculture Programme

Output 1.3 Local seed systems are maintained and planting material of traditional varieties is distributed to farmers in project MaB Reserves

• Fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources • Exchanges between community seed banks are promoted in support of community seed banks

• Local varieties are undervalued, particularly their biocultural significance

• Socioeconomic value of traditional varieties, including their value as national food culture, are identified and communicated

• Seed and other planting materials of populations and varieties of at least 5 species are available to farmers and communities in the two target areas • 30% of the farmers within project MaB reserves have appropriate and affordable access to seeds of traditional varieties

• Local varieties are distributed through extension programmes

• Local varieties are not prioritized with in agricultural extension and seed distribution

• Two economically valuable varieties are identified and distributed

• At least 5 local varieties are incorporated into extension programmes and distributed

•Seed fairs • Progress reports • Scientific publications • Seed flow mapping; Catalogues and exchange data from seed fairs

• National agricultural extension programmes promote traditional cultivars • Seed multiplication facilities and nurseries are able to scale-up production of a larger number of local varieties

Component 2. Improved protected area management systems and capacity building


5



Outcome 2 Improved management of Cuban Man and Biosphere (MaB) Reserve system through enhanced leadership and decision-making capacity of all stakeholders.

• Revised Management and Action plans that incorporate agricultural biodiversity are finalized and implementation plan is designed

• Management plans of project MaB Reserves do not consider agricultural biodiversity as a resource of MaB Reserves

• Revised Management and Action plans that incorporate agricultural biodiversity are drafted

• “Species, Habitats, and Ecosystems Programme” of the Management and Action Plans of project MaB Reserves revised to include agricultural biodiversity

• Mechanism in place for Stakeholders to be part of decision-making process of the project MaB Reserves administration and awareness programmes

• Stakeholders’ interests are generally excluded from the decision-making processes of the MaB Reserve administration

• Individual stakeholder interests are documented and opportunities for their incorporation into decision-making processes are identified

• Stakeholders (family farms, agro and ecotourism, cultural organizations) are included in gender sensitive decision making processes and regularly attend management planning meetings

• Good agricultural management practices are tested and implemented

• Management of project MaB Reserves is not well known by Cuban social networks and institutions outside of those directly involved

• Good agricultural management practices that support ecosystem functions and conservation of biodiversity are identified and tested

• At least 4 agricultural practices known to improve sustainability (i.e. ecoagriculture approaches, mulching, inter-cropping etc.) have been tested by 40% of the farmers in the project areas and are adopted by at least 20% of farmers in at least 1 project reserve

• Technical documents and publications • Participation of the local leaders and specialists in workshops and meetings on MaB Reserves management • Project information dispersed through multimedia

Interest by MaB Reserves to incorporate agricultural biodiversity into the management plans


6



Output 2.1 Agricultural biodiversity management actions are integrated and applied in the management plans of the project MaB Reserves system

• A set of mitigation measures to reduce negative impacts of agricultural practices on coastal areas in Cuchillas del Toa are implemented, monitored, and evaluated • Revised Management Plans promote sustainable agriculture which includes the use of local agrobiodiversity

• Non sustainable agricultural practices continue to impact coastal areas within the Cuchillas del Toa MaB Reserve • Alternatives to extractive land use practices are not recognized

• Negative impacts of agricultural practices on coastal areas of Cuchillas del Toa are identified and mitigation measures are designed

• Potential benefits of sustainable agriculture versus non sustainable agriculture and other land use practices are incorporated within the Management Plans • At least two traditional varieties per reserve are registered in the National Registry of Commercial Varieties of Cuba

• Traditional agricultural systems within project MaB Reserves incorporate practices that support the restoration and maintenance of natural and managed landscapes

• Traditional agricultural systems within the project MaB Reserves do not specifically incorporate practices supporting the restoration and maintenance of the natural and managed landscapes

• Degraded areas within project MaB Reserves are identified and the appropriate agricultural native species selected for dispersal • Ways to incorporate natural and managed landscapes within the management of MaB reserves are identified

• Local agricultural species are planted in degraded areas within project MaB Reserves • At least one Restoration and reforestation plan per targeted reserve are reviewed to include agricultural traditional varieties, local species and sustainable agricultural practices

• A manual on mitigation measures of unsustainable agricultural practices • National reports and publications • Plans for restoration of degraded soils of cultivated areas and maintenance of landscapes • Documentation of agricultural sustainable practices

• Decision-makers and administrators are receptive to incorporating agricultural biodiversity into management plans and decisions • Farmers willing to register traditional varieties

Output 2.2 National policy-makers and provincial and local officials make informed decisions

• A set of national guidelines and policy recommendations on the economic value of agrobiodiversity developed

• National policies and programmes show low levels of appreciation for role of ABD conservation and use for improved livelihoods. No

• At least one evidence-based document regarding the economic value of agricultural biodiversity conservation for decision-makers is prepared

• Policy guidelines on the economic value of agricultural biodiversity are finalized, distributed and utilized by

• Guidelines and policy recommendations • Workshops to inform decision-makers on pathways that link

• Policy makers at all levels recognize and understand the role of MaB Reserves in local food security, national


7



regarding conservation and sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity to improve the sustainability of the National System of Protected Areas

specific guidelines currently exist. • No information mechanism for decision-makers on linkages between agricultural biodiversity conservation and sustainable livelihoods strategies is in place

decision-makers

• A set of indicators of the economic incentives of agrobiodiversity

• No methodologies to assess economic value of agrobiodiversity exit

• Provisional set of indicators to measure the economic value of agrobiodiversity are identified and tested with communities

• A set of indicators is developed, tested and made available

agricultural biodiversity conservation and sustainable livelihoods strategies

food sovereignty, development goals, and human well-being

Output 2.3 Government Institutions put in place capacity building programmes

• Government Institutions create at least two specific support and training programmes regarding agrobiodiversity conservation for Governament Staff and MaB communities

• Agricultural extensionists and other staff have no formal training in agrobiodiversity conservation in protected areas • MINAG has limited interaction with MaB communities and their needs are not always taken into account (e.g. soils and pest and disease control programmes, seed and extensions services)

• Training plan and curriculum developed and first training courses undertaken • Government institutions and reserves communities (farmers and other stakeholders) work together and support needs are identified

• Two Training programmes in place for agricultural extensionists and other relevant government staff • Support programmes are developed and implemented • Community centers for biocultural learning and exchange are established in each project MaB Reserve

• Focus group discussions and informational documents • Support programmes designed • Training courses and other support programmes • Informational manuals

• Government institutions’ and communities’ interest exists


8



• ANAP mandate includes a programme to train farmers of project MaB Reserves

• Local farmer association don’t provide training on conservation of agricultural biodiversity within project MaB

• Local structures and organizations needed to build agricultural biodiversity conservation capacity are identified and training strategies are prepared

• The strategies for implementing capacity-building activities through local structures and organizations are tested and applied • Farmers’ training programme on agricultural biodiveristy conservation and its importance at national level established

Output 2.4 Information on agricultural biodiversity conservation in project MaB Reserves is made available to the global MaB network coordinated by UNESCO

• The importance of agrobiodiversity in protected areas is demonstrated through case studies relevant to the global MaB network

• Agricultural biodiversity conservation is not well integrated into the global MaB programme

• Case studies on agricultural biodiversity conservation are implemented and evaluated

• Globally applicable guidelines produced and made available for other countries within the UNESCO global MaB network of reserves

• A webpage with information about the project is created and kept up-to-date

• Information about the project is only available through the GEF Project website

• A webpage dedicated entirely to the project is created

• A webpage dedicated entirely to the project is made public

• An agrobiodiversity Database jointly maintained and updated by project MaB Reserves and

• There are no databases for cataloguing and maintaining information about agricultural biodiversity within

• Information about agricultural biodiversity within project MaB Reserves is catalogued and a database is designed

• A database containing information about agricultural biodiversity within project MaB Reserves

• Results of case studies on the role of agrobiodiversity and agricultural management practices are published • Informational and scientific documents • Project information diffused through multimedia and the web • Data from national information systems


9



INIFAT project MaB Reserves is created and mechanisms for systematic updates are established

Component 3: Improved livelihoods from increased benefit flow within protected areas

Outcome 3 Improved livelihoods of communities living in and around the project MaB Reserves through benefit-sharing mechanisms that support the sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity

• Marketing of Project MaB Reserves traditional agricultural biodiversity varieties and products with economic potential is increased

• Food produced in project MaB reserves is not available outside the farms where they are producing

• Data collection and analysis of the food production and marketing of products coming from project MaB Reserves

• Income is increased by 10% in 20% of project households in the project MaB Reserves through the sustainable use of traditional agricultural biodiversity •Marketing of food produced in project MaB reserve is increased by 10%

• Fairs and workshops • Agroecotourism is incorporated into 2 existing tourist circuits • Technical documents and publications • Surveys and data collection

• National interest in improving livelihoods of rural communities • Existing tourist circuits • The existence and successful implementation of the national Urban and Suburban Agriculture Programmes

Output 3.1 Identify and strengthen income generation and other benefits from agricultural biodiversity management

• Local products with the highest economic potential are commercialized through the Urban and Suburban Agriculture Programme, local markets and tourist circuits

• Income within communities in and around the reserves is limited by a lack of market opportunities

• Potential new market opportunities are identified and traditional agricultural biodiversity products are selected in close coordination with the implementation of the National Urban and Suburban Agriculture Programme • Data on income in communities in and around the reserves is collected and analyzed and a study of the potential commercialization of local

• At least five agricultural biodiversity products are commercialized through Urban and Suburban Agriculture Programme, local markets and tourist circuits

• Surveys and data collection • Marketing and outreach plan • Communication campaigns on the importance of agricultural biodiversity, traditional gastronomy, and the products and services from project MaB Reserves •Gastronomic tours

• The existence and successful implementation of the National Urban and Suburban Agriculture Programme • National interest in improving the income of rural communities • Interest and support from MINTUR


10



products is conducted

• Cuba’s tourist circuits contain a new agroecotourism and agricultural biodiversity conservation option.

• Tourist circuits in project MaB Reserves do not include agriculture or agricultural biodiversity conservation • No products from the MaB Reserves are processed or commercialized for local markets and there is nowhere and no way for tourists to purchase them

• Tourist circuits in project MaB Reserves that would be good candidates for incorporating agricultural biodiversity conservation into their programmes are identified

• At least 2 tourist circuits are selected and an attractive programme for integrating agricultural biodiversity conservation into mainstream tourist activities is designed, implemented, monitored, and evaluated • At least 1 selling place of local agricultural biodiversity products in each project MaB Reserve is set up and running

• Methodology based quantitative targets and indicators for income generation and environmental services produced is available

• Ecosystem services generated by agricultural biodiversity are not well known and taken into consideration

• Ecosystem service generated by local agrobiodiversity are identified

• Methodology, for joint valuation of agricultural products and ecosystem services tradeoffs from the Reserves developed

emphasizing local, sustainably-produced agricultural products

Output 3.2 Methodologies and tools for national participatory certification schemes that

• Participatory certification scheme to support management and conservation of agricultural biodiversity landscapes

• No certification model for agricultural biodiversity landscapes and products of the project MaB Reserves exists

• External experts on agricultural product certification are consulted and certification schemes from the global and regional MaB network are

• At least one certification model for agricultural biodiversity landscapes and products is designed,

• A report on the national legal and regulatory framework related to the commercialization and certification of

• Experience with certification of agricultural products • Certification schemes in the region and/or


11



support sustainable agricultural biodiversity management practices and products

with global applicability developed

• Participatory certification schemes do not exist within project MaB Reserves

analyzed for their applicability to products from project MaB Reserves • Action plan and training programme to provide capacity to develop national strategy in place

implemented, monitored, and evaluated for its success in promoting and managing agricultural biodiversity • Training programmes for participatory certification schemes are developed implemented, monitored, and evaluated in each project MaB Reserve and at least 2 are disseminated to the global MaB network • Guidelines for participatory certification and policy recommendations are developed

agricultural biodiversity products • A guide of good market practices that support product quality and biocultural landscapes • Workshops in each project MaB Reserve on commercialization and certification of products and services • Training documents

within the global MaB network


1

APPENDIX 5. Workplan and Timetable Activities and sub-activities Year

1 Year

2 Year

3 Year

4 Year

5 Component 1: Mainstreaming mechanisms that integrate high levels of agrobiodiversity into MaB buffer and transition zones Output 1.1

Assessment of the existing agrobiodiversity and its role and use in protected areas

1.1.1 Compile and update (through GIS) an inventory of existing agricultural and natural biodiversity and wild relatives of cultivated plants in project MaB reserves, including assessment of their use and the ecosystem services they provide

1.1.2 Identify the use of underutilized species that contribute to food and nutritious security

1.1.3 Identification of domestic and other important animals in selected farms / home gardens and evaluation of their role in the sustainability of these systems

1.1.4 Identification and mapping of flora and fauna species in farms that influence in the landscape connectivity

1.1.5 Carry out case study in project MaB reserve to develop and test indicators to monitor agrobiodiversity and its role and uses

1.1.6 Develop and test indicators for monitoring and assessment re. impact of management practices, knowledge, local customs and rituals on the health of the landscape and the wellbeing of farming communities.

1.1.7 Identify and promote practices that are most appropriate for the maintenance and/or restoration of landscapes in the reserves.

1.1.8 Identify, in a participatory manner, the main threats (biotic and abiotic), vulnerability, and risks of genetic erosion of cultivars and possible measures to mitigate risks

Output 1.2

Increased use of traditional varieties and wild species

1.2.1 Characterization and evaluation of cultivars to support in situ conservation of cultivated biodiversity and its wild relatives, and to provide formal seed systems and nurseries (MINAG and CITMA) with to healthy seeds of traditional varieties


2

Activities and sub-activities Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

1.2.2

Compile and / or retrieve information about culinary traditions to encourage the use or revival of interest in traditional crops (including underutilized (“forgotten”) and wild relative species) in order to strengthen the role of local cuisine in conservation of agrobiodiversity and food sovereignty

1.2.3 Create and maintain Community Biodiversity Registers to provide information on

maintenance and use of traditional varieties and monitor changes and threats over time.

1.2.4 Create and maintain community Seed Banks to strengthen local seed system.

1.2.5 Match traditional varieties in MaB reserves to high-potential areas and small farming systems outside the MaB reserves, urban suburban agriculture, and new and existing rural family farms. Tools include GIS and Farmer Participatory Planning.

1.2.6 Compile technical documents on agricultural conservation and sustainable agricultural practices (Descriptors)

Output 1.3

Local seed systems are maintained and planting material of traditional varieties is distributed to farmers in project MAB Reserves

1.3.1 Define model crops with intraspecific variability in order to study seed exchange between and within communities.

1.3.2 Identification of the biotic, abiotic and social issues that affect or favor local seed systems and of possible measures to mitigate its effects ( DAFO matrix)

1.3.3 Organize and hold Diversity Seed Fairs in the project MaB reserves to revitalize the biocultural significance of local varieties and disseminate

1.3.4 Promote and support exchange and conservation of seeds among community seedbanks

1.3.5 Mainstream the propagation and distribution of planting material from project sites throughout the agricultural landscapes and family farms in the Reserves and Ag. Extension Services

Component 2: Improved protected area management systems and Capacity building Output 2.1

Agrobiodiversity management actions are integrated and applied in the Management Plans of the Cuban MaB Reserves system


3


Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

2.1.1 Case studies examining demographic patterns and agricultural carrying capacity and identify thresholds of agricultural activities in project MAB reserves

2.1.2

Produce a guideline for reintegration of local species or those species with traditional uses into degraded ecosystems

2.1.3 Compile policy brief describing negative impacts of different management practices (e.g. soil run off in coastal areas) and promoting alternative sustainable agricultural practices

2.1.4 Develop terms of reference (TORs) for cross-sectoral national working group with core mandate for development of policies and strategies that promote the mainstreaming of local biodiversity into project reserves Management Plans

2.1.5 Establish cross-sectoral national working group with core mandate for development of policies and strategies that promote the mainstreaming of local biodiversity into project reserves and Management Plans

2.1.6 Develop a list of stakeholders to be involved in the policy and strategy development process and conduct wide consultation with identified stakeholders

2.1.7 Draft a strategy to promote the mainstreaming of agrobiodiversity in project reserves

2.1.8 Identify key ‘change agents’, potential champions and policy leverage points

2.1.9 Host Policy Learning Events to disseminate best practices, current thinking and to share lessons

2.1.10 Draft relevant components of management plans for agrobiodiversity conservation and use

2.1.11 Carry out internal consultation on draft plans and revise as appropriate

2.1.12 Develop implementation strategy and priority actions for plans, guidelines, and strategies that promote the mainstreaming of agrobiodiversity into project reserves Management Plans

Output 2.2

National policy-makers and provincial and local officials make informed decisionsregarding conservation and sustainable use of agrobiodiversity to improve the sustainability of the National System of Protected Areas

2.2.1 Establish a platform to involve different ministries (MINTUR, MINAG, CITMA) to work on the design of a value adding strategy


4


Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

2.2.2 Identify factors for the recognition, communication, and legal protection of agrobiodiversity resources and traditions associated with its use.

2.2.3 Sensitization of decision-makers and actors at different levels to the need for adopting new policies and management strategies for the conservation of agrobiodiversity in project MAB reserves.

2.2.4 Inventory of existing legal and regulatory frameworks related to management of agriculture biodiversity

Output 2.3

Government Institutions put in place capacity building programme

2.3.1 Develop capacity building plan to address agrobiodiversity maintenance and utilization including action plan to implement training for extension workers, technicians and local communities

2.3.2 Develop a manual or a methodological guide on agrobiodiversity to be used for the administration of MAB reserves

2.3.3 Monitor and evaluate the capacity building plans

2.3.4 Assess farmers’ training needs on technical services (e.g. soils seeds, and pest and disease control) to be addressed by the Ministry of Agriculture and the local authorities (municipal and provincial)

2.3.5 Develop and implement capacity building and exchange programs in the rural communities of the intervention sites on the use, conservation and management of agrobiodiversity

2.3.6 Collaborate with ANAP to develop a training programme to support maintenance and utilization of local varieties

2.3.7 Identify appropriate local structures and institutions to facilitate the development and institutionalization of capacity building strategies

2.3.8 Hold diversity Field Fora (to assess local varieties, share information and technologies for crop improvement and dissemination)

Output 2.4

Information on agrobiodiversity conservation in project MaB Reserves is made available to the global MaB network coordinated by UNESCO


5


Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

2.4.1 Develop a communication strategy to disseminate project results on value of agricultural diversity (including good agricultural practices) to other Cuban reserves and stakeholders.

2.4.2 Project partners participate in IBEROMAB networks to share and exchange information, as well as other UNESCO and other agriculture biodiversity international networks (e.g. Neotropical Fruit Trees)

2.4.3 Update and/or complete existing MAB biodiversity databases to incorporate agrobiodiversity found in project sites.

2.4.4 Include agrobiodiversity in the Geographic Information System of Protected Areas (SIGAP).

2.4.5 Create, maintain and updated a webpage to disseminate project information (activities, results).

2.4.6 Create an information sharing mechanism to disseminate information by means of a network between institutions and agencies participating in the project

Component 3: Improved livelihoods from increased benefit flow within protected areas Output 3.1

Identify and strengthen income generation and other benefits from agrobiodiversity management

3.1.1 Analysis of main needs related to income generation and other livelihood benefits to improve the wellbeing of farming communities in the project MAB reserves

3.1.2 Analysis of the potential of commercialization and income generation of main agrobiodiversity products in each project reserve in close collaboration with Urban and Suburban Agriculture Programme

3.1.3 Support Community-Based Organizations for marketing and distribution of local varieties

3.1.4 Develop a methodology to promote valuation lo local products together with environmental services (Basket of Goods and Services)

3.1.5 Carry out case study to highlight the benefits generated by conservation and use of agrobiodiversity to the rural communities: social, economic, and cultural incentives, developing the existing ecotourism systems.

3.1.6 Compile practices for quality control of Biosphere products, including traditional processing, preservation, and commercialization practices.


6


Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

3.1.7 Promote the goods and services coming from agrobiodiversity in the biosphere to national and international tourist operators to include them into tourist packages

3.1.8 Facilitate farmers’ awareness and access to funds for environmental services Output 3.2

Methodologies and tools for national participatory certification schemes that support sustainable agrobiodiversity management practices and products

3.2.1 Inventories of products, practices and services that can be candidates for participatory certification

3.2.2 Carry out comparative analysis of the different value chain of the existing production systems

3.2.3 Analysis of national laws (regulatory instruments) related to marketing and possible certification schemes in the Biosphere reserves

3.2.4 Organize workshops to show successful national and international initiatives related to marketing and the certification of agrobiodiversity-related products and services.

3.2.5 Development of a participatory certification model apt for Cuban conditions

Component 4: Monitoring and Evaluation

4.1 Finalise and disseminate project Monitoring and Evaluation Framework 4.2 Implement participatory Monitoring and Evaluation plan, tools, and methods with

targeted communities, including necessary training 4.3 Establish reporting plan and requirements 4.4 Submit project and financial reports to UNEP 4.5 Provide input to the project Mid-Term Evaluation 4.6 Provide input to the project Final Evaluation

Component 5: Project Management


7


Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

5.1 Establish arrangements for overall project administration and implementation infrastructure including coordination units

5.2 Establish and operate project budgeting and accounting system 5.3 Review and refine work plans with partners to better understand local context 5.4 Establish project National Steering Committees and conduct regular meetings 5.5 Establish International Technical Advisory Committee to provide backstopping and

guidance to technical components and define roles and responsibilities of project international partners

5.6 Finalise and disseminate project Communication Strategy 5.7 Establish overall project Capacity Building Plan, including essential project

management process-related training such as developing effective partnerships


APPENDIX 6. Deliverables and Benchmarks

Project Components

Deliverables (D) and Benchmark (B)

1. Mainstreaming agricultural biodiversity

Output 1.1 Assessment of the existing agricultural biodiversity and its role and use in protected areas

B Working agreements and arrangements between stakeholders and communities established. Month 6, Year 2.

B Classification of agricultural biodiversity landscapes produce. Month 6, Year 2 B Workshops on methods held. Month 5, Year 1. B Baseline situation reports prepared for each site. Month 12, Year 1. B Report prepared on key bicultural landscapes using GIS traditional knowledge and

biodiversity knowledge practices. Month 12 Year 2. B Assessment prepared for all agricultural biodiversity in the two reserves. Month 12,

Year 1. B Population sizes and distribution of agricultural biodiversity species identified. Month

12, Year 2. B Non sustainable farming practices and impact on agricultural biodiversity identified.

Month 6, Year 3. B Best practices identified. Month 6, Year 3. D Identified germplasm and mechanisms for propagation distribution including nurseries

and farmers seed banks and seed networks. Month 3, Year 3. D Survey methodology developed. Month 6, Year 1. D Participatory methods to match agricultural biodiversity products to market. Month

3,Year 3. D First draft of resilient landscape indicator produced. Month 12, Year 2. D Zonation for agricultural biodiversity and ecoagriculture in reserves produced. Month

12, Year 2. D Key studies and protocols for understanding synergistic functions of agricultural

landscapes as biological corridors. Month 9, Year 2. Output 1.2 Increased use of traditional varieties and wild species

B Characterization and evaluation of traditional varieties. Month 6, Year 3. B Social and cultural value of traditional varieties identified and documented. Month 6,

Year 2. B Community Biodiversity Registers established. Month 3,Y ear 2, ongoing. B Seed Banks established and running. Month 9, Year 3 – ongoing.

D Methodology for variety characterization developed. Month 12, Year 1. D Descriptors of Biosphere traditional varieties, wild relatives, and farmers’ knowledge

are produced. Month 9, Year 1. Output 1.3 Local seed systems are maintained and planting material of traditional

varieties is distributed to farmers in project MaB Reserves

B Model crops with intraspecific variability identified. Month 12, Year 1. B Diversity fairs established and operational. Month 9, Year1 ongoing. B Traditional varieties conserved and disseminated through community seed banks

exchanges. Month 6, Year 2– ongoing.


Project Components


D Traditional varieties with high value included in community seed system and MaB reserves nurseries. Month 3, Year 2 – ongoing.

D Local seed systems understood and supported. Month 12, Year 1. 2. Management systems

Output 2.1 Agricultural biodiversity management actions are integrated and applied in the management plans of the project MaB Reserves

B Risks and thresholds for different agricultural activities within project MaB reserves identified. Month 6, Year 2.

B Policy briefs with impacts (positive and negative) of management practices drafted. Month 3, Year 2 - on going.

D Terms of reference for cross sectoral working groups for mainstreaming agricultural biodiversity developed. Month 6, Year 2. D Strategy for including agricultural Biodiversity in project reserves Management plans Month 2, Year 5. D Key studies and protocols for understanding synergistic functions of agricultural landscapes as biological corridors. Month 9, Year 1.

Output 2.2 National policy-makers and provincial and local officials make informed decisions regarding conservation and sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity to improve the sustainability of the National System of Protected Areas

B Potential benefits of using agricultural biodiversity over land use practices identified. Month 9, Year 1.

B National Integrated Agrobiodiversity working group established. Month 6, Year 2. B Social ecological indicators for biosphere agricultural landscapes published and

adopted and included in management and monitoring plans. Month 6, Year 32 - on going.

D Guidelines and recommendations on the economic value of agrobiodiversity developed. Month 6, Year 2.

D National review of legal and regulatory framework undertaken. Month 12, Year 1. Output 2.3 Government Institutions put in place capacity building programmes

B Capacity building programmes (extensionists, and government staff, farmers)

developed and implemented. Month 12, Year 1and ongoing. B ANAP mandate includes a programme to train farmers of project MaB Reserves.

Month 6 Year 3 – ongoing.

D Specific support programmes of the MINAG for MaB communities in place. Month 9, Year 1 – ongoing.

D Monitoring procedures developed. Month 9, Year 3. Output 2.4 Information on agricultural biodiversity conservation in project MaB

Reserves is made available to the global MaB network coordinated by UNESCO B Project partners participate in agricultural international networks. Month 1, Year 2 –

on going.


Project Components


B Include agrobiodiversity in the Geographic Information System of Protected Areas (SIGAP). Month 3, Year 4.

D An agrobiodiversity Database created and maintained. Month 9, Year 2.

D National Agrobiodiversity Information System developed. Month 6, Year 3. 3. Improving livelihoods

Output 3.1 Identify and strengthen income generation and other benefits from agricultural biodiversity management

B Market studies completed and opportunities identified. Month 6, Year 2

B Identify priority issues and strategies for market development of key high value agrobiodiversity products. Month 12, Year 1 – ongoing. B Agricultural biodiversity products with high value identified. Month 6, Year 2 D Key steps and actors identified. Month 6, Year 2. D Basket of goods and services from biosphere reserve farms identified Month 6, Year 3 D Agro-ecotourism and gastronomic roots are established. Month 6, Year 4.

Output 3.2 Methodologies and tools for national participatory certification schemes that support sustainable agricultural biodiversity management practices and products

B Guidelines for participatory certification and recommendations are developed. Month 3, Year 5.

B Comparative analysis of the different value chain of the existing production systems. Month 3, Year 3.

D Participatory certification model for agricultural biodiversity products developed. Month 6, Year 4.

D Review of legal and regulatory framework on marketing and certification undertaken. Month 9, Year 1.

4. Monitoring and Evaluation

B Mid-term evaluation completed with recommendations for project performance improvement. Month 6, Year 3. B Project Final Evaluation completed. Month 12, Year 5. D Project Monitoring and Evaluation Framework developed. Month 4, Year 1 – ongoing. D Participatory M&E framework developed. Month 8, Year 1 – ongoing. D Reporting systems developed and implemented. Month 3, Year 1. D Reports submitted. Commencing Month 6, Year 1 – ongoing.

5. Project Management

B Project personnel, infrastructure and processes in place. Month 3, Year 1. B Inception Workshop planned and implemented. Month 4, Year 1. B Project Steering Committee established and first meeting held. Month 4, Year 1 – ongoing. B Technical Advisory Committee established and formalised. Month 4, Year 1. D Budgeting and accounting system established. Month 5, Year 1. D Workplans prepared collaboratively. Month 3, Year 1 – ongoing. D Project Communication Strategy developed. Month 10, Year 1. D Project Capacity Building Plan developed. Month 12, Year 1.


1

Appendix 7. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan, with Indicative costs

Monitoring and evaluation of the project will be conducted in accordance with established procedures laid out in the GEF’s ‘Minimum Requirements for Project M&E and will be provided by the Project Management Unit (PMU) under the guidance of the Project Steering Committee. The Project Results Framework (Appendix 4) will form the basis for the project’s monitoring and evaluation system. The detailed monitoring, evaluation and reporting plan, presented in Table G2, including indicators, tracking tools and needs for specific baseline information against which to monitor changes, will be refined and finalized at the project’s inception workshop. An indicative M&E budget plan is presented. The Project Management Unit/Institute of Biodiversity Conservation, Project Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and the Project Steering Committee (PSC) are the three bodies with overall responsibility for monitoring and evaluating the project, and for reporting. Their roles and responsibilities in M&E and reporting are laid out in Table 7.

The project will be evaluated on the basis of: (i) execution performance, (ii) output delivery, and (iii) project impact

Execution performance Execution monitoring will assess whether the management and supervision of project activities is efficient and seek to improve efficiencies when needed so as to improve overall effectiveness of project implementation. It is a continuous process, which will collect information about the execution of activities programmed in the annual work plans, advise on improvements in method and performance, and compare accomplished with programmed tasks. This activity will be the direct responsibility of the Project Management Unit (PMU), under the supervision of the Project Steering Committee. See Table 6 for the execution performance indicators. The UNEP Task Manager will, in collaboration with the PMU, track these indicators. Delivered outputs Ongoing monitoring will assess the project’s success in producing each of the programmed outputs, both in quantity and quality. Internal assessment will be continuously provided by the PMU, and mid-term and final evaluations of outputs will be carried out by external consultants contracted by UNEP. Project impact

Evaluation of the project’s success in achieving its outcomes will be monitored continuously throughout the project through quarterly progress reports, annual summary progress reports, and a mid-term and final evaluation all of which will use the following framework:


2

Table 1. Indicators for Evaluating Whether PMU/IBC and PSC are effectively operational.

Indicator Means of Verification

Quarterly and annual activity and progress reports are prepared in a timely and satisfactory manner

Arrival of reports to UNEP

Quarterly disbursement plans and quarterly and annual financial reports are prepared in a timely and satisfactory manner.

Arrival of reports to UNEP

Performance targets, outputs, and outcomes are achieved as specified in the annual work plans.

Quarterly and annual progress reports

Deviations from annual work plans are corrected promptly and appropriately.

Work plans, minutes of SC meetings

Disbursements are made on a timely basis, and procurement is achieved according to the procurement plan.

IMIS system at UNEP and Bank Account statements of IBC, executing agency

Audit reports and other reviews show sound financial practices.

Audit statements

PMU is tracking implementation progress and project impact, and providing guidance on annual work plans and fulfilling TOR.

Minutes of PMU meetings

Project Steering Committee is providing policy guidance, especially on achievement of project impact.

Minutes of PSC meetings

Table 2. Costed M&E plan

Type of M&E activity

Responsible Parties Budget (GEF & co-finance)

Time Frame

Component 5 Inception Workshop Project Director/Project

Coordinator/Project Management Unit (PMU)

UNEP

Total $8,100

GEF $2,000 Co-finance $6,100

Within 2 months of project start-up

Inception Report Project Director/Project Coordinator

PMU None

1 month after project inception meeting

Measurement of project indicators (outcome, progress and performance indicators, GEF tracking tools) including baseline data

Project Director Project Coordinator PMU/ Project team Consultants

Total $194,846

GEF $23,000 Co-finance $ 171,846

Outcome indicators: start, mid and end of project Progress/perform. Indicators: annually


3



Time Frame

collection Semi-annual Progress/ Operational Reports to UNEP

Project Director Project Coordinator/PMU

None

Within 1 month of the end of reporting period i.e. on or before 31 January and 31 July

Project Steering Committee (PSC) meetings

Project Director Project Coordinator PMU UNEP

Total $27,000


Once a year minimum

Reports of PSC meetings

Project Director Project Coordinator with

inputs from partners

None Annually

PIR Project Director Project oordinator/Project

Management Unit( NPMU) UNEP

None

Annually, part of reporting routine

Monitoring visits to field sites

Project Director Project Coordinator UNEP

Total $33,255

GEF US$16,300 Co-finance $16,955

As appropriate

Mid Term Review/Evaluation

Project Director Project Coordinator/PMU Domestic & External

consultant(s) UNEP

Total $24,575


At mid-point of project implementation

Terminal Evaluation UNEP External consultant(s)

Total $34,471


Within 6 months of end of project implementation

Audit PMT Project Executing Agency

Total $6,000

GEF $2,000 Co-finance US$4,000

Annually

Project Final Report Project Director Project Coordinator PMU

None

Within 2 months of the project completion date

Co-financing report Project Director Project Coordinator PMU

None

Within 1 month of the PIR reporting period, i.e. on or before 31 July

Publication of Lessons Learnt and other project documents

Project Director Project Coordinator/PMU

Total $42,066


Annually, part of Semi-annual reports & Project Final Report

Total M&E Plan cost Total $373,313


4



Time Frame


Table G2. Monitoring and evaluation reports Administrative and financial reports to be produced are detailed in the table below. Standard UNEP format will be used.

Report Content Timing Responsibility

Progress Reports

(Using UNEP format)

Describe the completion of planned activities and progress in relation to the Ethiopia ABS-CSUMP project plan Document any constraints and potential consequences for project performance Provide information and data for annual progress reports

The Project Implementation Review (PIR) reports

Person reporting and date Activity name and accomplishments within each activity this half-year Targets for the next half-year Comment on performance on progress toward project goals, and problems/constraints Report on any unanticipated results and opportunities, and on any checks to project progress Summary of Partner lead’s reports and participating institutions

Every 6 months Yearly

PMU/Bioversity UNEP Task Manager / UNEP GEF to GEF Secretariat

Financial reports (UNEP Format) Details project expenses and disbursements

Disbursements and expenses in categories and format as set out by the agreed budgets and sub-contracts together with supporting documents

Quarterly PMU/Bioversity

Financial audits

Annual audit by IBC approved External Auditors

Audit of IBC project accounts accounts for project management and expenditures

Annual PMU/Bioversity


5

The supervision arrangements for the project are presented in Table 7 which summarizes the responsibilities of the project management entities regarding monitoring and reporting. Detailed descriptions of the terms of references for the various structures involved in the implementation of this project are given in Section 4. Table 7: Supervision and M&E Roles

UNEP Project Management Unit/Institute of Biodiversity Conservation

Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC)

Project Steering Committee (PSC)

Monitor the overall project and provide link with the GEF

Monitor the agreed M&E plan in accordance with the terms of agreement with GEFSEC

Receive quarterly progress and annual summary progress reports, quarterly financial reports and copies of all substantive reports from Project Management Unit Task manager to attend and participate fully in meetings of the RSC Task Manager to conduct supervision missions with member(s) of the PMU to selected project sites: identifies implementation problems and suggests remedies to RSC meetings Engage and prepare terms of reference for independent M&E consultants to conduct the mid-term and final evaluations

Oversee the project both at regional and country levels with respect to adherence to the project proposal in terms of content and finances

Establish reporting guidelines for all partners in the project and ensure that they meet reporting dates and provide reports of suitable quality Prepare quarterly progress reports and annual summary progress reports for UNEP, and forward substantive and quarterly financial reports, with supporting documentation as appropriate, in a timely manner to UNEP Carry out a programme of regular visits to project sites to supervise activities, and pay special attention to those sites with serious implementation problems

Provide technical and methodological expertise to the project: backstop the project at overall and national levels

Receive quarterly progress reports, annual summary progress reports and all substantive reports and outputs and use them to annually review the progress of work in the project as a whole Advise Project Management Unit on implementation problems that emerge, and on desirable modifications to the work plan for the succeeding year Monitor progress in the capacity-building aspects of the project, and advise the Project Management Unit on steps to enhance this aspect of the project

Provide overall guidance for the project implementation

Receive quarterly progress reports, annual summary progress reports, quarterly financial reports and all substantive reports, and provide policy guidance to the project on any matters arising from a reading of these reports Assist the Project Management Unit in developing linkages with other projects, thus ensuring the wider impact of project work


1

APPENDIX 8. Summary of reporting requirements

Reporting requirements Due date Responsibility of

Procurement plan (goods and services)

2 weeks before project inception meeting

Project Director Project Coordinator

Inception Report 1 month after project inception meeting


Expenditure report accompanied by explanatory notes

Quarterly on or before 30 April, 31 July, 31 October, 31 January


Cash Advance request and details of anticipated disbursements

Quarterly or when required Project Director Project Coordinator

Progress report Half-yearly on or before 31 January


Audited report for expenditures for year ending 31 December

Yearly on or before 30 June Executing partner to contract firm

Inventory of non-expendable equipment

Yearly on or before 31 January Project Coordinator

Co-financing report Yearly on or before 31 July Project Coordinator

Project implementation review (PIR) report

Yearly on or before 31 August Project Coordinator, Task Manager (TM), Fund Management Officer (FMO)

Minutes of steering committee meetings

Yearly (or as relevant) Project Coordinator

Mission reports and “aide memoire” for executing agency

Within 2 weeks of return TM, FMO

Final report Project Coordinator

Final inventory of non-expendable equipment

Project Coordinator

Equipment transfer letter

2 months of project completion date

Project Coordinator

Final expenditure statement 3 months of project completion date

Project Coordinator

Mid-term review or Mid-term evaluation

Midway though project TM or Evaluation and Oversight Unit (EOU) (as relevant)

Final audited report for expenditures of project


Executing partner to contract firm

Independent terminal evaluation report


EOU


2

Project Publications: will form a key method of crystallizing and disseminating the results and achievements of the Project. These publications may be scientific or informational texts on the activities and achievements of the Project, in the form of journal articles, multimedia publications, etc. These publications can be based on Technical Reports, depending upon the relevance, scientific worth, etc. of these Reports, or may be summaries or compilations of a series of Technical Reports and other research. The PT, under the PM, will determine if any of the Technical Reports merit formal publication, and will also (in consultation with UNEP, the government and other relevant stakeholder groups) plan and produce these Publications in a consistent and recognizable format. Project resources have been allocated for these activities as appropriate and in a manner commensurate with the project's budget.


1

APPENDIX 9. Standard Terminal Evaluation TOR

Terminal Evaluation of the UNEP GEF project “Mainstreaming agrobiodiversity conservation and use in Sri Lankan agro-ecosystems for livelihoods and adaptation to climate change” 1. PROJECT BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW Project rationale The objective was stated as: The indicators given in the project document for this stated objective were: Relevance to GEF Programmes The project is in line with: Executing Arrangements The implementing agency(ies) for this project was (were) UNEP and { }; and the executing agencies were: The lead national agencies in the focal countries were: Project Activities The project comprised activities grouped in {number} components. Budget

At project inception the following budget prepared: GEF Co-funding Project preparation funds: GEF {Medium/Full} Size Grant TOTAL (including project preparation funds) Co-funding sources: Anticipated:


2

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE EVALUATION 1. Objective and Scope of the Evaluation The objective of this terminal evaluation is to examine the extent and magnitude of any project impacts to date and determine the likelihood of future impacts. The evaluation will also assess project performance and the implementation of planned project activities and planned outputs against actual results. The evaluation will focus on the following main questions:

1. Did the project help to { } among key target audiences (international conventions and initiatives, national level policy-makers, regional and local policy-makers, resource managers and practitioners).

2. Did the outputs of the project articulate options and recommendations for { }? Were these options and recommendations used? If so by whom?

3. To what extent did the project outputs produced have the weight of scientific authority and credibility necessary to influence policy makers and other key audiences?

Methods

This terminal evaluation will be conducted as an in-depth evaluation using a participatory approach whereby the UNEP/DGEF Task Manager, key representatives of the executing agencies and other relevant staff are kept informed and consulted throughout the evaluation. The consultant will liaise with the UNEP/EOU and the UNEP/DGEF Task Manager on any logistic and/or methodological issues to properly conduct the review in as independent a way as possible, given the circumstances and resources offered. The draft report will be circulated to UNEP/DGEF Task Manager, key representatives of the executing agencies and the UNEP/EOU. Any comments or responses to the draft report will be sent to UNEP/EOU for collation and the consultant will be advised of any necessary or suggested revisions.

The findings of the evaluation will be based on the following:

1. A desk review of project documents including, but not limited to: (a) The project documents, outputs, monitoring reports (such as progress and financial

reports to UNEP and GEF annual Project Implementation Review reports) and relevant correspondence.

(b) Notes from the Steering Group meetings. (c) Other project-related material produced by the project staff or partners. (d) Relevant material published on the project web-site:{ }.

2. Interviews with project management and technical support including {NEED INPUT FROM

TM HERE}

3. Interviews and Telephone interviews with intended users for the project outputs and other stakeholders involved with this project, including in the participating countries and international bodies. The Consultant shall determine whether to seek additional information and opinions from representatives of donor agencies and other organizations. As appropriate, these interviews could be combined with an email questionnaire.

4. Interviews with the UNEP/DGEF project task manager and Fund Management Officer, and

other relevant staff in UNEP dealing with {relevant GEF focal area(s)}-related activities as necessary. The Consultant shall also gain broader perspectives from discussions with relevant GEF Secretariat staff.

5. Field visits1 to project staff

1 Evaluators should make a brief courtesy call to GEF Country Focal points during field visits if at all possible.


3

Key Evaluation principles In attempting to evaluate any outcomes and impacts that the project may have achieved, evaluators should remember that the project’s performance should be assessed by considering the difference between the answers to two simple questions “what happened?” and “what would have happened anyway?”. These questions imply that there should be consideration of the baseline conditions and trends in relation to the intended project outcomes and impacts. In addition it implies that there should be plausible evidence to attribute such outcomes and impacts to the actions of the project. Sometimes, adequate information on baseline conditions and trends is lacking. In such cases this should be clearly highlighted by the evaluator, along with any simplifying assumptions that were taken to enable the evaluator to make informed judgements about project performance. 2. Project Ratings The success of project implementation will be rated on a scale from ‘highly unsatisfactory’ to ‘highly satisfactory’. In particular the evaluation shall assess and rate the project with respect to the eleven categories defined below:2 A. Attainment of objectives and planned results:

The evaluation should assess the extent to which the project's major relevant objectives were effectively and efficiently achieved or are expected to be achieved and their relevance. Effectiveness: Evaluate how, and to what extent, the stated project objectives have been met,

taking into account the “achievement indicators”. The analysis of outcomes achieved should include, inter alia, an assessment of the extent to which the project has directly or indirectly assisted policy and decision-makers to apply information supplied by biodiversity indicators in their national planning and decision-making. In particular:

Evaluate the immediate impact of the project on {relevant focal area} monitoring and in national planning and decision-making and international understanding and use of biodiversity indicators.

As far as possible, also assess the potential longer-term impacts considering that the evaluation is taking place upon completion of the project and that longer term impact is expected to be seen in a few years time. Frame recommendations to enhance future project impact in this context. Which will be the major ‘channels’ for longer term impact from the project at the national and international scales? Relevance: In retrospect, were the project’s outcomes consistent with the focal

areas/operational program strategies? Ascertain the nature and significance of the contribution of the project outcomes to the {relevant Convention(s)} and the wider portfolio of the GEF.

Efficiency: Was the project cost effective? Was the project the least cost option? Was the project implementation delayed and if it was, then did that affect cost-effectiveness? Assess the contribution of cash and in-kind co-financing to project implementation and to what extent the project leveraged additional resources. Did the project build on earlier initiatives, did it make effective use of available scientific and / or technical information. Wherever possible, the evaluator should also compare the cost-time vs. outcomes relationship of the project with that of other similar projects.

B. Sustainability: Sustainability is understood as the probability of continued long-term project-derived outcomes and impacts after the GEF project funding ends. The evaluation will identify and assess the key conditions or factors that are likely to contribute or undermine the persistence of benefits after the project ends. Some of these factors might be outcomes of the project, e.g. stronger institutional capacities or better informed decision-making. Other factors will include contextual circumstances or developments that are not outcomes of the project but that are relevant to the sustainability of

2 However, the views and comments expressed by the evaluator need not be restricted to these items.


4

outcomes. The evaluation should ascertain to what extent follow-up work has been initiated and how project outcomes will be sustained and enhanced over time. Five aspects of sustainability should be addressed: financial, socio-political, institutional frameworks and governance, environmental (if applicable). The following questions provide guidance on the assessment of these aspects:

Financial resources. Are there any financial risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes? What is the likelihood that financial and economic resources will not be available once the GEF assistance ends (resources can be from multiple sources, such as the public and private sectors, income generating activities, and trends that may indicate that it is likely that in future there will be adequate financial resources for sustaining project’s outcomes)? To what extent are the outcomes of the project dependent on continued financial support?

Socio-political: Are there any social or political risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes to be sustained? Do the various key stakeholders see that it is in their interest that the project benefits continue to flow? Is there sufficient public / stakeholder awareness in support of the long term objectives of the project?

Institutional framework and governance. To what extent is the sustenance of the outcomes of the project dependent on issues relating to institutional frameworks and governance? What is the likelihood that institutional and technical achievements, legal frameworks, policies and governance structures and processes will allow for, the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained? While responding to these questions consider if the required systems for accountability and transparency and the required technical know-how are in place.

Environmental. Are there any environmental risks that can undermine the future flow of project environmental benefits? The TE should assess whether certain activities in the project area will pose a threat to the sustainability of the project outcomes. For example; construction of dam in a protected area could inundate a sizable area and thereby neutralize the biodiversity-related gains made by the project; or, a newly established pulp mill might jeopardise the viability of nearby protected forest areas by increasing logging pressures; or a vector control intervention may be made less effective by changes in climate and consequent alterations to the incidence and distribution of malarial mosquitoes.

C. Achievement of outputs and activities: Delivered outputs: Assessment of the project’s success in producing each of the

programmed outputs, both in quantity and quality as well as usefulness and timeliness. Assess the soundness and effectiveness of the methodologies used for developing the

technical documents and related management options in the participating countries Assess to what extent the project outputs produced have the weight of scientific authority /

credibility, necessary to influence policy and decision-makers, particularly at the national level.

D. Catalytic Role Replication and catalysis. What examples are there of replication and catalytic outcomes? Replication approach, in the context of GEF projects, is defined as lessons and experiences coming out of the project that are replicated or scaled up in the design and implementation of other projects. Replication can have two aspects, replication proper (lessons and experiences are replicated in different geographic area) or scaling up (lessons and experiences are replicated within the same geographic area but funded by other sources). Specifically:

Do the recommendations for management of {project} coming from the country studies have the potential for application in other countries and locations?


5

If no effects are identified, the evaluation will describe the catalytic or replication actions that the project carried out.

E. Assessment monitoring and evaluation systems. The evaluation shall include an assessment of the quality, application and effectiveness of project monitoring and evaluation plans and tools, including an assessment of risk management based on the assumptions and risks identified in the project document. The Terminal Evaluation will assess whether the project met the minimum requirements for ‘project design of M&E’ and ‘the application of the Project M&E plan’ (see minimum requirements 1&2 in Annex 4 to this Appendix). GEF projects must budget adequately for execution of the M&E plan, and provide adequate resources during implementation of the M&E plan. Project managers are also expected to use the information generated by the M&E system during project implementation to adapt and improve the project.

M&E during project implementation

M&E design. Projects should have sound M&E plans to monitor results and track progress towards achieving project objectives. An M&E plan should include a baseline (including data, methodology, etc.), SMART indicators (see Annex 4) and data analysis systems, and evaluation studies at specific times to assess results. The time frame for various M&E activities and standards for outputs should have been specified.

M&E plan implementation. A Terminal Evaluation should verify that: an M&E system was in place and facilitated timely tracking of results and progress towards projects objectives throughout the project implementation period (perhaps through use of a logframe or similar); annual project reports and Progress Implementation Review (PIR) reports were complete, accurate and with well justified ratings; that the information provided by the M&E system was used during the project to improve project performance and to adapt to changing needs; and that projects had an M&E system in place with proper training for parties responsible for M&E activities.

Budgeting and Funding for M&E activities. The terminal evaluation should determine whether support for M&E was budgeted adequately and was funded in a timely fashion during implementation.

F. Preparation and Readiness Were the project’s objectives and components clear, practicable and feasible within its timeframe? Were the capacities of executing institution and counterparts properly considered when the project was designed? Were lessons from other relevant projects properly incorporated in the project design? Were the partnership arrangements properly identified and the roles and responsibilities negotiated prior to project implementation? Were counterpart resources (funding, staff, and facilities), enabling legislation, and adequate project management arrangements in place?

G. Country ownership/driveness: This is the relevance of the project to national development and environmental agendas, recipient country commitment, and regional and international agreements. The evaluation will:

Assess the level of country ownership. Specifically, the evaluator should assess whether the project was effective in providing and communicating biodiversity information that catalyzed action in participating countries to improve decisions relating to the conservation and management of the focal ecosystem in each country.

Assess the level of country commitment to the generation and use of biodiversity indicators for decision-making during and after the project, including in regional and international fora.

H. Stakeholder participation/public awareness: This consists of three related and often overlapping processes: information dissemination, consultation, and “stakeholder” participation. Stakeholders are the individuals, groups,


6

institutions, or other bodies that have an interest or stake in the outcome of the GEF- financed project. The term also applies to those potentially adversely affected by a project. The evaluation will specifically:

Assess the mechanisms put in place by the project for identification and engagement of stakeholders in each participating country and establish, in consultation with the stakeholders, whether this mechanism was successful, and identify its strengths and weaknesses.

Assess the degree and effectiveness of collaboration/interactions between the various project partners and institutions during the course of implementation of the project.

Assess the degree and effectiveness of any various public awareness activities that were undertaken during the course of implementation of the project.

I. Financial Planning Evaluation of financial planning requires assessment of the quality and effectiveness of financial planning and control of financial resources throughout the project’s lifetime. Evaluation includes actual project costs by activities compared to budget (variances), financial management (including disbursement issues), and co- financing. The evaluation should:

Assess the strength and utility of financial controls, including reporting, and planning to allow the project management to make informed decisions regarding the budget and allow for a proper and timely flow of funds for the payment of satisfactory project deliverables.

Present the major findings from the financial audit if one has been conducted. Identify and verify the sources of co- financing as well as leveraged and associated

financing (in co-operation with the IA and EA). Assess whether the project has applied appropriate standards of due diligence in the

management of funds and financial audits. The evaluation should also include a breakdown of final actual costs and co-financing for

the project prepared in consultation with the relevant UNEP/DGEF Fund Management Officer of the project (table attached in Annex 1 to this Appendix Co-financing and leveraged resources).

J. Implementation approach: This includes an analysis of the project’s management framework, adaptation to changing conditions (adaptive management), partnerships in implementation arrangements, changes in project design, and overall project management. The evaluation will:

Ascertain to what extent the project implementation mechanisms outlined in the project document have been closely followed. In particular, assess the role of the various committees established and whether the project document was clear and realistic to enable effective and efficient implementation, whether the project was executed according to the plan and how well the management was able to adapt to changes during the life of the project to enable the implementation of the project.

Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency and adaptability of project management and the supervision of project activities / project execution arrangements at all levels (1) policy decisions: Steering Group; (2) day to day project management in each of the country executing agencies and {lead executing agency}.

K. UNEP Supervision and Backstopping Assess the effectiveness of supervision and administrative and financial support provided

by UNEP/DGEF. Identify administrative, operational and/or technical problems and constraints that

influenced the effective implementation of the project. The ratings will be presented in the form of a table. Each of the eleven categories should be rated separately with brief justifications based on the findings of the main analysis. An overall rating for the project should also be given. The following rating system is to be applied:

HS = Highly Satisfactory


7

S = Satisfactory MS = Moderately Satisfactory MU = Moderately Unsatisfactory U = Unsatisfactory HU = Highly Unsatisfactory 3. Evaluation report format and review procedures The report should be brief, to the point and easy to understand. It must explain; the purpose of the evaluation, exactly what was evaluated and the methods used. The report must highlight any methodological limitations, identify key concerns and present evidence-based findings, consequent conclusions, recommendations and lessons. The report should be presented in a way that makes the information accessible and comprehensible and include an executive summary that encapsulates the essence of the information contained in the report to facilitate dissemination and distillation of lessons. The evaluation will rate the overall implementation success of the project and provide individual

ratings of the eleven implementation aspects as described in Section 1 of this TOR. The ratings

will be presented in the format of a table with brief justifications based on the findings of the main

analysis.

Evidence, findings, conclusions and recommendations should be presented in a complete and balanced manner. Any dissident views in response to evaluation findings will be appended in an annex. The evaluation report shall be written in English, be of no more than 50 pages (excluding annexes), use numbered paragraphs and include:

i) An executive summary (no more than 3 pages) providing a brief overview of the main conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation;

ii) Introduction and background giving a brief overview of the evaluated project, for example, the objective and status of activities; The GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy, 2006, requires that a TE report will provide summary information on when the evaluation took place; places visited; who was involved; the key questions; and, the methodology.

iii) Scope, objective and methods presenting the evaluation’s purpose, the evaluation criteria used and questions to be addressed;

iv) Project Performance and Impact providing factual evidence relevant to the questions asked by the evaluator and interpretations of such evidence. This is the main substantive section of the report. The evaluator should provide a commentary and analysis on all eleven evaluation aspects (A − K above).

v) Conclusions and rating of project implementation success giving the evaluator’s concluding assessments and ratings of the project against given evaluation criteria and standards of performance. The conclusions should provide answers to questions about whether the project is considered good or bad, and whether the results are considered positive or negative. The ratings should be provided with a brief narrative comment in a table (see Annex 1 to this Appendix);

vi) Lessons (to be) learned presenting general conclusions from the standpoint of the design and implementation of the project, based on good practices and successes or problems and mistakes. Lessons should have the potential for wider application and use. All lessons should ‘stand alone’ and should:

Briefly describe the context from which they are derived State or imply some prescriptive action; Specify the contexts in which they may be applied (if possible, who when

and where)


8

vii) Recommendations suggesting actionable proposals for improvement of the current project. In general, Terminal Evaluations are likely to have very few (perhaps two or three) actionable recommendations.

Prior to each recommendation, the issue(s) or problem(s) to be addressed by the recommendation should be clearly stated.

A high quality recommendation is an actionable proposal that is: 1. Feasible to implement within the timeframe and resources available 2. Commensurate with the available capacities of project team and partners 3. Specific in terms of who would do what and when 4. Contains results-based language (i.e. a measurable performance target) 5. Includes a trade-off analysis, when its implementation may require utilizing significant resources that would otherwise be used for other project purposes.

viii) Annexes may include additional material deemed relevant by the evaluator but must include:

1. The Evaluation Terms of Reference, 2. A list of interviewees, and evaluation timeline 3. A list of documents reviewed / consulted 4. Summary co-finance information and a statement of project expenditure by activity 5. The expertise of the evaluation team. (brief CV).

TE reports will also include any response / comments from the project management team and/or the country focal point regarding the evaluation findings or conclusions as an annex to the report, however, such will be appended to the report by UNEP EOU.

Examples of UNEP GEF Terminal Evaluation Reports are available at www.unep.org/eou Review of the Draft Evaluation Report Draft reports submitted to UNEP EOU are shared with the corresponding Programme or Project Officer and his or her supervisor for initial review and consultation. The DGEF staff and senior Executing Agency staff are allowed to comment on the draft evaluation report. They may provide feedback on any errors of fact and may highlight the significance of such errors in any conclusions. The consultation also seeks feedback on the proposed recommendations. UNEP EOU collates all review comments and provides them to the evaluators for their consideration in preparing the final version of the report. 4. Submission of Final Terminal Evaluation Reports. The final report shall be submitted in electronic form in MS Word format and should be sent to the following persons:

Segbedzi Norgbey, Chief, UNEP Evaluation and Oversight Unit P.O. Box 30552-00100 Nairobi, Kenya Tel.: +(254-20)762-4181 Fax: +(254-20)762-3158 Email: [email protected]

With a copy to:

Maryam Niamir-Fuller, Director UNEP/Division of GEF Coordination P.O. Box 30552-00100 Nairobi, Kenya


9

Tel: +(254-20)762-4166 Fax: +(254-20)762-4041/2 Email: [email protected]

Marieta Sakalian,PhD

Senior Programme Management /Liaison Officer (CGIAR/FAO), Biodiversity United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) c/o FAO Headquarters TCID Unit , D 668 Viale Delle Terme di Caracalla 00153 Rome,Italy Tel: +39 06 5705 5969 FAX: +39 06 5705 4351 E-mail 1: [email protected] E-mail 2: [email protected]

The Final evaluation will also be copied to the following GEF National Focal Points.

{Insert contact details here} The final evaluation report will be published on the Evaluation and Oversight Unit’s web-site www.unep.org/eou and may be printed in hard copy. Subsequently, the report will be sent to the GEF Office of Evaluation for their review, appraisal and inclusion on the GEF website. 5. Resources and schedule of the evaluation This final evaluation will be undertaken by an international evaluator contracted by the Evaluation and Oversight Unit, UNEP. The contract for the evaluator will begin on ddmmyyy and end on ddmmyyyy (# days) spread over # weeks (# days of travel, to {country(ies)}, and # days desk study). The evaluator will submit a draft report on ddmmyyyy to UNEP/EOU, the UNEP/DGEF Task Manager, and key representatives of the executing agencies. Any comments or responses to the draft report will be sent to UNEP / EOU for collation and the consultant will be advised of any necessary revisions. Comments to the final draft report will be sent to the consultant by ddmmyyyy after which, the consultant will submit the final report no later than ddmmyyyy. The evaluator will after an initial telephone briefing with EOU and UNEP/GEF conduct initial desk review work and later travel to (country(ies)} and meet with project staff at the beginning of the evaluation. Furthermore, the evaluator is expected to travel to {country(ies)} and meet with representatives of the project executing agencies and the intended users of project’s outputs. In accordance with UNEP/GEF policy, all GEF projects are evaluated by independent evaluators contracted as consultants by the EOU. The evaluator should have the following qualifications: The evaluator should not have been associated with the design and implementation of the project in a paid capacity. The evaluator will work under the overall supervision of the Chief, Evaluation and Oversight Unit, UNEP. The evaluator should be an international expert in { } with a sound understanding of { } issues. The consultant should have the following minimum qualifications: (i) experience in {} issues; (ii) experience with management and implementation of { } projects and in particular with { } targeted at policy-influence and decision-making; (iii) experience with project evaluation. Knowledge of UNEP programmes and GEF activities is desirable. Knowledge of {specify language(s)} is an advantage. Fluency in oral and written English is a must. 6. Schedule Of Payment The consultant shall select one of the following two contract options: Lump-Sum Option


10

The evaluator will receive an initial payment of 30% of the total amount due upon signature of the contract. A further 30% will be paid upon submission of the draft report. A final payment of 40% will be made upon satisfactory completion of work. The fee is payable under the individual Special Service Agreement (SSA) of the evaluator and is inclusive of all expenses such as travel, accommodation and incidental expenses. Fee-only Option The evaluator will receive an initial payment of 40% of the total amount due upon signature of the contract. Final payment of 60% will be made upon satisfactory completion of work. The fee is payable under the individual SSAs of the evaluator and is NOT inclusive of all expenses such as travel, accommodation and incidental expenses. Ticket and DSA will be paid separately. In case, the evaluator cannot provide the products in accordance with the TORs, the timeframe agreed, or his products are substandard, the payment to the evaluator could be withheld, until such a time the products are modified to meet UNEP's standard. In case the evaluator fails to submit a satisfactory final product to UNEP, the product prepared by the evaluator may not constitute the evaluation report.

APPENDIX 9 ANNEX 1 TO APPENDIX 9

XI

Annex 1 to Appendix 9: OVERALL RATINGS TABLE

Criterion Evaluator’s Summary Comments Evaluator’

s Rating

A. Attainment of project objectives and results (overall rating) Sub criteria (below)

A. 1. Effectiveness A. 2. Relevance A. 3. Efficiency

B. Sustainability of Project outcomes (overall rating) Sub criteria (below)

B. 1. Financial B. 2. Socio Political B. 3. Institutional framework and governance

B. 4. Ecological C. Achievement of outputs and activities

D. Monitoring and Evaluation (overall rating) Sub criteria (below)

D. 1. M&E Design D. 2. M&E Plan Implementation (use for adaptive management)

D. 3. Budgeting and Funding for M&E activities

E. Catalytic Role F. Preparation and readiness G. Country ownership / drivenness H. Stakeholders involvement I. Financial planning J. Implementation approach K. UNEP Supervision and backstopping

RATING OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND RESULTS

Highly Satisfactory (HS): The project had no shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Satisfactory (S): The project had minor shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Moderately Satisfactory (MS): The project had moderate shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU): The project had significant shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.


XII

Unsatisfactory (U) The project had major shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Highly Unsatisfactory (HU): The project had severe shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Please note: Relevance and effectiveness will be considered as critical criteria. The overall rating of the project for achievement of objectives and results may not be higher than the lowest rating on either of these two criteria. Thus, to have an overall satisfactory rating for outcomes a project must have at least satisfactory ratings on both relevance and effectiveness.

RATINGS ON SUSTAINABILITY A. Sustainability will be understood as the probability of continued long-term outcomes and impacts

after the GEF project funding ends. The Terminal evaluation will identify and assess the key conditions or factors that are likely to contribute or undermine the persistence of benefits after the project ends. Some of these factors might be outcomes of the project, i.e. stronger institutional capacities, legal frameworks, socio-economic incentives /or public awareness. Other factors will include contextual circumstances or developments that are not outcomes of the project but that are relevant to the sustainability of outcomes.

Rating system for sustainability sub-criteria On each of the dimensions of sustainability of the project outcomes will be rated as follows.

Likely (L): There are no risks affecting this dimension of sustainability.

Moderately Likely (ML). There are moderate risks that affect this dimension of sustainability.

Moderately Unlikely (MU): There are significant risks that affect this dimension of sustainability

Unlikely (U): There are severe risks that affect this dimension of sustainability.

According to the GEF Office of Evaluation, all the risk dimensions of sustainability are deemed critical. Therefore, overall rating for sustainability will not be higher than the rating of the dimension with lowest ratings. For example, if a project has an Unlikely rating in any of the dimensions then its overall rating cannot be higher than Unlikely, regardless of whether higher ratings in other dimensions of sustainability produce a higher average.

RATINGS OF PROJECT M&E Monitoring is a continuing function that uses systematic collection of data on specified indicators to provide management and the main stakeholders of an ongoing project with indications of the extent of progress and achievement of objectives and progress in the use of allocated funds. Evaluation is the systematic and objective assessment of an on-going or completed project, its design, implementation and results. Project evaluation may involve the definition of appropriate standards, the examination of performance against those standards, and an assessment of actual and expected results.

The Project monitoring and evaluation system will be rated on ‘M&E Design’, ‘M&E Plan Implementation’ and ‘Budgeting and Funding for M&E activities’ as follows:

Highly Satisfactory (HS): There were no shortcomings in the project M&E system. Satisfactory(S): There were minor shortcomings in the project M&E system.

Moderately Satisfactory (MS): There were moderate shortcomings in the project M&E system.

Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU): There were significant shortcomings in the project M&E system.

Unsatisfactory (U): There were major shortcomings in the project M&E system.

Highly Unsatisfactory (HU): The Project had no M&E system.


XIII

“M&E plan implementation” will be considered a critical parameter for the overall assessment of the M&E system. The overall rating for the M&E systems will not be higher than the rating on “M&E plan implementation.”

All other ratings will be on the GEF six point scale.

GEF Performance Description Alternative description on the same scale

HS = Highly Satisfactory Excellent

S = Satisfactory Well above average

MS = Moderately Satisfactory Average

MU = Moderately Unsatisfactory Below Average

U = Unsatisfactory Poor

HU = Highly Unsatisfactory Very poor (Appalling)


XIV

Annex 2 to Appendix 9: Co-financing and Leveraged Resources

Co-financing (basic data to be supplied to the consultant for verification)

* Other is referred to contributions mobilized for the project from other multilateral agencies, bilateral development cooperation agencies, NGOs, the private sector and beneficiaries. Leveraged Resources Leveraged resources are additional resources—beyond those committed to the project itself at the time of approval—that are mobilized later as a direct result of the project. Leveraged resources can be financial or in-kind and they may be from other donors, NGO’s, foundations, governments, communities or the private sector. Please briefly describe the resources the project has leveraged since inception and indicate how these resources are contributing to the project’s ultimate objective.

IA own Financing (mill US$)

Government

(mill US$)

Other*

(mill US$)

Total

(mill US$)

Total Disbursement

(mill US$) Co financing

(Type/Source) Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual

Grants Loans/Concessional

(compared to market rate)

Credits Equity investments In-kind support Other (*) - - - - -

Totals


XV

Table showing final actual project expenditure by activity to be supplied by the UNEP Fund management Officer. (insert here)


XVI

Annex 3 to Appendix 9

Review of the Draft Report Draft reports submitted to UNEP EOU are shared with the corresponding Programme or Project Officer and his or her supervisor for initial review and consultation. The DGEF staff and senior Executing Agency staff provide comments on the draft evaluation report. They may provide feedback on any errors of fact and may highlight the significance of such errors in any conclusions. The consultation also seeks agreement on the findings and recommendations. UNEP EOU collates the review comments and provides them to the evaluators for their consideration in preparing the final version of the report. General comments on the draft report with respect to compliance with these TOR are shared with the reviewer.

Quality Assessment of the Evaluation Report All UNEP GEF Mid Term Reports are subject to quality assessments by UNEP EOU. These apply GEF Office of Evaluation quality assessment and are used as a tool for providing structured feedback to the evaluator.

The quality of the draft evaluation report is assessed and rated against the following criteria: GEF Report Quality Criteria UNEP EOU

Assessment Rating

A. Did the report present an assessment of relevant outcomes and achievement of project objectives in the context of the focal area program indicators if applicable?

B. Was the report consistent and the evidence complete and convincing and were the ratings substantiated when used?

C. Did the report present a sound assessment of sustainability of outcomes? D. Were the lessons and recommendations supported by the evidence presented?

E. Did the report include the actual project costs (total and per activity) and actual co-financing used?

F. Did the report include an assessment of the quality of the project M&E system and its use for project management?

UNEP EOU additional Report Quality Criteria UNEP EOU Assessment

Rating

G. Quality of the lessons: Were lessons readily applicable in other contexts? Did they suggest prescriptive action?

H. Quality of the recommendations: Did recommendations specify the actions necessary to correct existing conditions or improve operations (‘who?’ ‘what?’ ‘where?’ ‘when?)’. Can they be implemented? Did the recommendations specify a goal and an associated performance indicator?

I. Was the report well written? (clear English language and grammar)

J. Did the report structure follow EOU guidelines, were all requested Annexes included?

K. Were all evaluation aspects specified in the TORs adequately addressed? L. Was the report delivered in a timely manner

GEF Quality of the MTE report = 0.3*(A + B) + 0.1*(C+D+E+F) EOU assessment of MTE report = 0.3*(G + H) + 0.1*(I+J+K+L)


XVII

Combined quality Rating = (2* ‘GEF EO’ rating + EOU rating)/3 The Totals are rounded and converted to the scale of HS to HU

Rating system for quality of terminal evaluation reports A number rating 1-6 is used for each criterion: Highly Satisfactory = 6, Satisfactory = 5, Moderately Satisfactory = 4, Moderately Unsatisfactory = 3, Unsatisfactory = 2, Highly Unsatisfactory = 1, and unable to assess = 0.


18


GEF Minimum requirements for M&E Minimum Requirement 1: Project Design of M&E3

All projects must include a concrete and fully budgeted monitoring and evaluation plan by the

time of Work Program entry (full-sized projects) or CEO approval (medium-sized projects). This

plan must contain at a minimum:

SMART (see below) indicators for project implementation, or, if no indicators are identified,

an alternative plan for monitoring that will deliver reliable and valid information to

management

SMART indicators for results (outcomes and, if applicable, impacts), and, where appropriate,

corporate-level indicators

A project baseline, with:

a description of the problem to address

indicator data

or, if major baseline indicators are not identified, an alternative plan for addressing this

within one year of implementation

An M&E Plan with identification of reviews and evaluations which will be undertaken, such

as mid-term reviews or evaluations of activities

An organizational setup and budgets for monitoring and evaluation.

3 http://gefweb.org/MonitoringandEvaluation/MEPoliciesProcedures/MEPTools/meptstandards.html


19

Minimum Requirement 2: Application of Project M&E

Project monitoring and supervision will include implementation of the M&E plan, comprising:

Use of SMART indicators for implementation (or provision of a reasonable explanation if not used)

Use of SMART indicators for results (or provision of a reasonable explanation if not used)

Fully established baseline for the project and data compiled to review progress

Evaluations are undertaken as planned

Operational organizational setup for M&E and budgets spent as planned.

SMART INDICATORS GEF projects and programs should monitor using relevant performance

indicators. The monitoring system should be “SMART”:

1. Specific: The system captures the essence of the desired result by clearly and directly

relating to achieving an objective, and only that objective.

2. Measurable: The monitoring system and its indicators are unambiguously specified so

that all parties agree on what the system covers and there are practical ways to measure

the indicators and results.

3. Achievable and Attributable: The system identifies what changes are anticipated as a

result of the intervention and whether the result(s) are realistic. Attribution requires that

changes in the targeted developmental issue can be linked to the intervention.

4. Relevant and Realistic: The system establishes levels of performance that are likely to

be achieved in a practical manner, and that reflect the expectations of stakeholders.

5. Time-bound, Timely, Trackable, and Targeted: The system allows progress to be

tracked in a cost-effective manner at desired frequency for a set period, with clear

identification of the particular stakeholder group to be impacted by the project or

program.


20


List of intended additional recipients for the Terminal Evaluation (to be completed by the IA Task Manager)

Name Affiliation Email Aaron Zazuetta GEF Evaluation Office [email protected]

Government Officials GEF Focal Point(s) Executing Agency Implementing Agency Carmen Tavera UNEP DGEF Quality Assurance

Officer

Appendix 10. Decision-making flowchart and organogram

UNESCO UNU-IAS


UNEP

Ministry of Agriculture (MINAG)

National Steering Committee (NSC)

Technical Advisory

Committee (TAC)

INIFAT CNAP

Ministry of Science Technology and Environment

(CITMA)

Project Management Unit

ANAP ACTAF ACPA CCS, CPA Div. & Dev.

NGOs

Univ. of HabanaUniversity of

Michigan, ISTOM-France, BOKU, Austria

Universities IGOs

Cuban Institute of Anthropology Museums (Natural History, Anthropology) Institute of Systematic Ecology Natl’ Prog. of Urban and Suburban Agr. School of Advanced Studies in Hotel and Tourism mng Institute of Tropical Geography

Other Ministries and Governmental Depts

MaB

Reserves


APPENDIX 11. Terms of Reference

GLOBAL LEVEL TERMS OF REFERENCE OF PROJECT DIRECTOR (PD) Bioversity International in consultation will UNEP will assign a suitably qualified person to provide primary support to the execution of the global UNEP implemented, GEF supported project Agricultural biodiversity conservation and Man and Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: bridging managed and natural landscapes. The Project Director will be a staff member of the Diversity for Livelihoods Programme (DfL) of the Institute, working under the overall supervision of its Director. Functions The Project Director will: Serve as the overall manager of the project; Provide scientific, technical and administrative leadership to the project team and act as the main

representative of the project at regional and international levels; Observe agreed project management procedures in order to facilitate project implementation and

ensure delivery of high quality outcomes; In consultation with the Project Coordinator and national partners, prepare work plans and annual

updates including budget allocations; Facilitate communications and linkages at regional and national levels, as well as with UNEP; Oversee in consultation with the Project Coordinator work among the project team; Manage the project budget in accordance with the agreed work plan and approved disbursal of

project funds, taking into account the decisions of the national steering committee; Review terms of reference of sub-contractors and conduct procedures for initiating sub-contracts; Co-ordinate, prepare and submit technical and financial reports, particularly:

ensure that UNEP and GEF norms and standards for project monitoring and reporting including achievement of project objectives and delivery of project outputs as specified in the project logframe are properly met;

assist UNEP GEF Senior Project Management Officer in conducting internal Midterm Project Review as required;

participate in monitoring and evaluation missions; monitor and evaluate performance of the Project Coordinator and the Project Management

Unit (PMU) including financial and administrative aspects of the project; Provide timely biannual, annual progress and financial reports to UNEP through the Science Writer

at DFL and Programme Budget Finance Assistant of the DfL Programme; Oversee public relations of the project; Maintain good communication with the project donors and secure additional finances, including

availing of opportunities for private sector co-financing, for the approved work plan as necessary; Coordinate provision of committed in-kind and in-cash contributions for the project; Coordinate provision of specific technical and scientific inputs as required; Contribute to the preparation of generic tools and resources for the Project coordinator and partner

organizations; Contribute to the preparation and publication of scientific and technical outputs from the Project; Identify suitable technical experts to provide scientific and technical backstopping to the Project;


Oversee the development and maintenance of the project web-site; Identify suitable technical experts to provide scientific and technical backstopping to the Project.

Relationships The Bioversity International Project Coordinator (BIPC) will: Be accountable to Bioversity International (Executing Agency), for the achievement of project

objectives, results, and all fundamental aspects of project execution; Maintain regular communication with the Project Steering Committee (PSC); Maintain regular communication with the UNEP GEF Project Management Officer; Supervise the work of the Project Coordinator, Scientific Assistant and Programme Assistant; Supervise the work of any project consultants.

Outputs

National project management staff recruited; Scheduled project activities completed successfully; Project activities well coordinated internally; Project implementation well coordinated with external organizations; Annual operational plan including budget prepared and submitted to PSC for approval; Annual operational plan including budget prepared and submitted to UNEP on a timely basis; Quarterly and annual technical and financial reports prepared and submitted to PSC and UNEP

completely and timely; Transfers of GEF funds efficiently accomplished; Inception, Mid Term and Project Completion Workshops convened; Inception, Mid-Term , Project Completion Technical Workshops and Steering Committee

Meetings convened and are of satisfactory financial and administrative standards. Project objectives successfully met; UNEP GEF norms applied for monitoring and evaluation; Effective public relations and public awareness; Project activities are sustainably funded; Project website well designed and maintained. Project objectives successfully met; UNEP and GEF norms applied for monitoring and evaluation;

Qualifications

Advanced university degree (Ph.D. or Master’s) in Biodiversity conservation, agriculture, plant biology, or anthropology;

Minimum of ten years experience in administration/management of international projects preferably as team leader or global coordinator;

Proven experience in project management and administrative management; Proven experience in facilitating meetings or discussions; Experience with GEF policies and procedures including logframe and similar project planning

tools; Willingness and ability to travel frequently to the participating countries; Ability to work with senior government officials, research institutes, non-governmental

organizations (NGOs), and local communities, etc.; Proven ability to manage budgets; Demonstrated experience working in an international and/or multi-cultural environment; Fluency in written and spoken English with strong communication skills.


TERMS OF REFERENCE OF PROGRAMME SCIENTIFIC ASSISTANT (PA) Bioversity International will appoint a suitably qualified person to provide primary support to execution of the global UNEP implemented, GEF supported project Agricultural biodiversity conservation and Man and Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: bridging managed and natural landscapes. The appointee will be based at headquarters of Bioversity International in Rome, Italy and will work under the supervision of the Bioversity International Project Coordinator. Functions

Review and edit project documents, including national reports, quarterly progress/technical reports, meeting reports and other related project documents.

Assist in the coordination of technical and scientific inputs from Bioversity International, and other international partner staff

Undertake research and reviews in technical areas related to the Project Technical review of project documents and outputs Assist in the preparation of scientific papers and books Assist in the preparation of technical and scientific materials for workshops and training Maintain technical and scientific content of project website is developed and maintained. Edit correspondence and reports in English. Provide support to the Project Director and Project Coordinator in the financial and

administrative management of the project; Assist in project administration by assembling and preparing necessary documentation; helping to

prepare letters of agreement for research and consultancy services; monitor budgets and liaise with accounting staff about payments and financial reports; interact with external agencies on nontechnical and administrative matters;

Assist in recording and monitoring project expenditures and funds availability in close consultation with the Programme Budget Finance Assistant (PBFA).

Reconcile Bioversity International and UNEP financial procedures to ensure accurate and timely financial reporting in close consultation with the PBFA.

Assist the Bioversity International Coordinator in preparing quarterly financial reports and reimbursement claims for submission to Bioversity International in close consultation with the PBFA.

Undertake office fixed assets inventory and its reporting to Bioversity International and UNEP; Translate and proof-read project documents, including national reports, quarterly

progress/technical reports, meeting reports and other related project documents; Format reports, proceedings and other relevant documents in Bioversity International and UNEP

GEF formats; Assist the Project director and the Project Coordinator in organizing and conducting SC Meetings

and National Workshops; Relationships The Programme Scientific Assistant will:

Report directly to the Project Director (PD); Maintain regular communication with the PD; Provide support to the Project Management Unit. Act as the focal point in information gathering/dissemination from/to partners.


Outputs Project activities are implemented successfully; Annual operational plan including budget prepared and submitted to Bioversity International and

UNEP a timely basis; Quarterly and annual technical and financial reports prepared and submitted to Bioversity

International, completely and timely; Bioversity International and UNEP norms applied to monitoring and evaluation; Transfer of GEF funds efficiently accomplished; Inception, Mid-Term and Project Completion Workshops convened and are of satisfactory

financial and administrative standards; Project website is developed and maintained. Papers and reports presenting project results are published in scientific journals

Qualifications

University degree (Master or Bachelor’s) in Biological sciences, conservation, plant science; Minimum of five years of professional relevant in international or government organizations; Experience in word processing and other relevant office applications software packages; Fluency in written and spoken English and Spanish and strong communication skills.

TERMS OF REFERENCE OF PROJECT COORDINATOR (PC) The Instituto de Investigaciones Fundamentales en Agricultura Tropical (INFAT) ) will appoint a suitably qualified person to provide primary support to the implementation of the GEF supported project Agricultural biodiversity conservation and Man and Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: bridging managed and natural landscapes. Functions The Project Coordinator (PC) will:

Serve as the overall manager of project activities in the country; Provide technical and administrative leadership to the national project team and act as the

national representative of the project at regional and international levels; Observe agreed project management procedures in order to facilitate project implementation

and ensure delivery of high quality outcomes; In consultation with local partners, prepare national work plans and annual updates including

national budget allocations; Facilitate communications and linkages at local national and regional levels as well as with

the Project Director (PD); Participate in PSC meetings and provide support as required; Organize national meetings, draft the agenda, and record decisions of national meetings; Coordinate work among Project Management Unit (PMU) staff and the national teams; Manage the project budget in accordance with the agreed work plan and approved disbursal

of project funds, taking into account the decisions of the national steering committees; Develop terms of reference of sub-contractors and assist in conduct procedures for initiating

subcontracts; Assist the PD in developing monitoring and evaluation reports: Provide timely biannual, annual progress and financial reports to Bioversity International Promote public relations of the project in the country;


Maintain good communication with project partners and others in the country for the approved work plan as necessary;

Coordinate country provision of committed in-kind and in-cash contributions for the project. Participate in the development of the project website; Coordinate the national scientific and technical team; Coordinate and contribute to the preparation of generic tools and resources for project partner

organizations; Coordinate and contribute to the preparation and publication of national scientific and

technical outputs from the Project; Organise national technical and scientific meetings as appropriate; Provide technical training and capacity building in relevant technical areas where appropriate Identify suitable national technical and scientific experts to provide backstopping to the

Project. Outputs

National and local project management staff recruited; Project management units fully functional; Project Steering Committee meetings held each year; Scheduled country committed project activities completed successfully; Project activities well coordinated with other relevant projects at national level; Project implementation well coordinated with Bioversity International and PSC; Annual operational plan including budget prepared and submitted on time to Bioversity

International; Quarterly and annual technical and financial reports prepared and submitted to Bioversity

International completely and timely; National, local and site level workshops and other monitoring meetings as needed convened; Assist UNEP GEF Senior Project Management Officer and the independent evaluator (to be

appointed by UNEP) in the Mid-Term Review and Final Evaluation of the project; Project objectives successfully met; Effective public relations and public awareness at country level; Project activities are sustainably funded; Project website well maintained.

Relationships The Project Coordinator (PC) will: The Project Coordinator (PC) will:

Be accountable at national level for the achievement of project objectives, results, and all fundamental aspects of project execution;

Report to the Project Steering Committee (PSC) Be accountable to the PD for the achievement of project objectives, results and all technical

aspects of national component execution; Maintain regular communication with the local and national project partners and others that

may be interested in furthering the project outcomes; Maintain regular communication with project site offices and the PD; Supervise the work of the national Project Assistant; Supervise the work of the national consultants and project partners.


Qualifications

Advanced university degree (Ph.D. or Master’s) in biodiversity conservation, agricultural or plant science, horticulture, or plant sciences ;

Minimum of 5 years experience in administration/management of international projects; Experience in project management and administrative management; Experience in facilitating meetings or discussions; Experience with GEF policies and procedures including logframes and similar project

planning tools; Experience with working with regional and international partners Willingness and ability to travel frequently within and outside the country Ability to work with senior government officials, research institutes, non-governmental

organizations (NGOs), and local communities, etc; Ability to manage budgets; Fluency in written and spoken English with strong communication.

TERMS OF REFERENCE OF NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT (AA) The Instituto de Investigaciones Fundamentales en Agricultura Tropical (INFAT), in consultation with Bioversity International, will appoint a suitably qualified person to provide support to the execution of the national aspects of the UNEP implemented, GEF supported project Agricultural biodiversity conservation and Man and Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: bridging managed and natural landscapes. This will include: Functions The National Administrative Assistant will undertake the following duties:

Provide support to the Project Coordinator and the Project Director in the financial and administrative management of the project;

Assist in project administration by assembling and preparing necessary documentation; helping to prepare letters of agreement for research and consultancy services; monitor budgets and liaise with accounting staff about payments and financial reports; interact with external agencies on nont`echnical and administrative matters;

Assist in recording and monitoring project expenditures and funds availability in close consultation with the PC

Assist Project Coordinator in preparing quarterly financial reports and reimbursement claims for submission to Bioversity International

Undertake office fixed assets inventory and its reporting to Bioversity International Format reports, proceedings and other relevant documents. Assist Project Coordinator in organizing and conducting Project Steering Committee Meetings

and National Workshops; Assist Project Coordinator in communication with national partners and local authorities by

phone, fax and other correspondence; Update project website. Assist Project Director assembling necessary information to prepare reports

Outputs

Project activities are implemented successfully; Annual operational plan including budget prepared and submitted in timely manner; Quarterly and annual technical and financial reports prepared and submitted in timely manner; UNEP/GEF norms for monitoring and evaluation of project performance, output delivery and

impact applied;


PMU functions effectively; Project website is developed and maintained.

Relationships The National Administrative Assistant will:

Report directly to the Project Coordinator (PC); Maintain regular communication with the PC; Be accountable to the PC for the functioning of the PMU; Provide administrative assistance to the PMU. Will act as the focal point in information gathering/dissemination from/to national partners.

Qualifications Minimum of five years of professional relevant in international or government organizations; Proven ability to manage budgets; Experience in word processing and other relevant office applications software packages;

. TERMS OF REFERENCE OF PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE (PSC) A Project Steering Committee (PSC) will be established to oversee project implementation. The PSC will comprise representation from: the Ministry of Agriculture; the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment; the National Institute for Fundamental Research on Tropical Agriculture, the National Center for Protected Areas (CNAP) and any other national project executing agencies, INIFAT and key sectors and institutions relevant to the project in Cuba that will ensure the project fits within national, regional and local needs and also in the global framework; UNEP project task Manager; Bioversity International (Project Director and other relevant staff), representatives from international partners. The PSC for the project will have overall responsibility for strategies, management procedures and plan of action developed to implement the UNEP/GEF supported project Agricultural biodiversity conservation and Man and Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: bridging managed and natural landscapes. The PSC will hold its meetings at least one time per year and its primary activities are to:

Provide general oversight and guidance to the project; Facilitate interagency coordination; Review and approve the annual work plans and annual technical reports; Review budget and co-financing status; Supervise the evaluation, monitoring and reporting aspects of the project; Review and advise on implementation of the project, as defined in the project logframe and work

plan, through the evaluation of bi-annual reports, records of meetings and other relevant documents; Monitor inputs of national partners, ensuring that project obligations are fulfilled in a timely and

coordinated fashion; Review and approve national components outputs.

The Project Management Unit will provide secretariat support to all PSC meetings, including recording of minutes and distribution of the minutes at least two weeks in advance of the next meeting to all participants and invited observers.


TERMS OF REFERENCE OF TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEES (TAC)

Technical Advisory Committees (TAC) will be established to provide expert guidance in the relevant disciplines and components of the full size project (Knowledge Base, Socio-ecological production landscapes, Management of Natural Patrimony, Conservation functions of Protected Areas, Impact of agriculture on biological corridors, Capacity Building, Public Awareness, Mainstreaming and Information Sharing). The TAC will provide ongoing technical advice to the Project and will participate in PSC meetings.

The role of the TAC would be to assist the Project management Unit and Executing agencies, and their partners in the execution and implementation of the Project and specifically to:

Promote awareness of relevant tools, resources, data sources and so forth which the Project might integrate and build on;

Provide backstopping and technical guidance on relevant issues and topics in areas where they have particular strengths and institutional expertise;

Explore how the Project can link up with initiatives partners have underway in Cuba, regionally an globally , or which might be relevant to consider during Project start-up;

Put national partners in touch with relevant counterparts and assist in networking; Assist in the development of approaches and methodologies and ensure harmonised and

standardised approaches are in place for implementation, monitoring and measuring impact; Provide training where appropriate; Participate in regular international meetings, to assist in reviewing progress and guiding future

implementation; Provide ongoing guidance and inputs to project execution; Explore ways in which the project approach can be better integrated and scaled-up. Assist in strengthening the project components where they have expertise.

Representatives from these international partners, including UNESCO, United Nations University, FAO, etc. will be the basis of the TAC and will participate in regular ISC meetings as observers and will provide ongoing backstopping to global and national coordination.

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR CONSULTANTS Consultants are hired to support project team to implement technical aspects of the project. These consultants will be hired in the following areas: AGRICULTURE SOCIO-ECONOMIST AND BIOCULTURAL LANDSCAPES CONSULTANT

Provide technical and scientific expertise on certification labeling and value adding schemes Carry out marketing analysis for Agricultural biodiversity products Evaluate impact of marketing on ecosystem services and conservation Link to regional and global initiatives

LANDSCAPE[E ECOLOGIST CONSULTANT

Assess ecosystem services und conservation ecological systems Identify agricultural biodiversity for use and restoration and enrichment f biological landscapes


Identify methods on landscape ecology for MaB management and planning PLANT PHYSIOLOGIST AND SOIL BIOLOGIST CONSULTANT

Provide technical and scientific expertise to assess ecosystem services to Agriculture Asses impacts of agricultural production on protected areas ecosystems and services Evaluate evolutionary changes and adaptation in target cultivated wild species


1

APPENDIX 12. Co-financing commitment letters from project partners

® IN IF AT

INSTITUTO DE INVESTIGACIONES FUNDAMENTALES EN AGRICULTURA TROPICAL "Alejandro de Humboldt" (INIFA T} Calle 379 esq. 188 Santiago de las Vegas, Ciudad de La Habana. Cuba. Tel: (7)- 683 9010 (7) - 683 4039 FAX. (7)- 683 9014. Email: [email protected]

Havana, October 14 2011

Dr. Emile Frison General Director Bioversity International Via del Tre Denari 472/a 00057 Maccarese (Rome) Italy

Dear Dr. Emile Frison

ORDINARIO Ejemplar No _ _

Co- financing Commitment for proposed GEF project on "Agricultural Biodiversity Conservation and UNESCO Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: Briding managed and natural

landscapes to achieve the Millennium Development Goals"

I am pleased to confirm you the following in kind and in cash co-financing Commitments from Cuban national partners (Nat ional Center of Protected Areas, Sierra del Rosario and Cuchillas del Toa Biosphere

Reserves, Ecology and Systematic Institute, Anthropological Museum - Biological School, Cuban Anthropological Institute, and others) to facilitate the five years implementation of the above project.

Component

Component 1 Integrate ABO

Component 2 Impr. Mng. MAB

Component 3 Impr. Livelihoods

Component 4 M&E

Component 5 Management

TOTAL (05 years) -

cc. Dr. Marieta Sakalian

\ . '"- .,

·~·~ ... ~ "- .... .I f•

"-. ':' ...... ..... .....:.· '

In cash In kind (CUP) Total (CUP) (CUP)

51,303 266,191 317,494

49,590 255,996 305,586

35,694 174,525 210,219

2,916 70,000 72,916

5,813 115,000 120,813

145,316 881,712 1 027,028

REGISTRO DE SALIDA

No . . .

I

Fecha: ... . .

UNEP Senior Programme Management/ Liaison Officer (CGIAR/FAO), Bioversity

Headquarters: Via dei Tre Denari, 472/a, 00057 Maccarese, Rome, Italy Tel.: (39) 0661181 Email: [email protected] www.bioversityinternational.org

27 January 2012 Marieta Sakalian Senior Programme Management /Liaison Officer (CGIAR/FAO), Biodiversity Regional Programme Coordinator Europe and CIS GEF Coordination United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) c/o FAO Headquarters TCID Unit , D 668 Viale Delle Terme di Caracalla 00153 Rome, Italy

Re: UNEP GEF Project “Agrobiodiversity Conservation and Man and the Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: Bridging Managed and Natural Landscapes”

Dear Dr. Sakalian,

Further to the submission of the above mentioned project by Bioversity International, I am pleased to confirm the following co-financing commitments:

Component Cash In-kind Total

Component 1 173,847 191,813 365,660 Component 2 103,106 128,843 231,949

Component 3 146,962 151,899 298,861 Component 4 52,201 96,996 149,197 Component 5 22,486 162,827 185,313

Total 498,602 732,378 1,230,980 Yours sincerely,

Emile Frison Director General

1, rue Miollis 75732 Paris Cedex 15, France

Tel.: +33 (0)1 45 68 40 78 Fax: +33 (0)1 45 68 58 01

www.unesco.org/science/

Natural Sciences Sector

Dr Emile Frison Director General Bioversity International Via dei Tre Denari 472/a 00057 Maccarese Rome Italy

13 January 2012

Ref. : SC/UBI/SA/GEF/Cuba

Dear Dr Frison, As you are aware, UNESCO has been working with Bioversity International over several years on the important components of agrobiodiversity in biosphere reserves under UNESCO’s Man and Biosphere Programme. Moreover, the General Conference of UNESCO at its 36th session in November 2011 adopted a UNESCO-wide Biodiversity Initiative, which will also deal with issues related to agrobiodiversity systems. Most recently, UNESCO has supported the formulation of a Bioversity project under UNEP-GEF, Agrobiodiversity Conservation and Man and the Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: Bridging Managed and Natural Landscapes, GFL/2328-2715-4B28. In my capacity of UNESCO Focal Point for Biodiversity in UNESCO, I have studied the final document and, by means of this message I would like to affirm our support for this project. In addition, the UNESCO Office in Havana has already expressed its strong interest in continuing to take part in and to support the implementation of the project in its future phases. Agrobiodiversity has been identified as an integral part of the MAB Programme of Work for some time now. The Madrid Action Plan for Biosphere Reserves 2008-2013 foresee the target to improve generation of profits and livelihood benefits in biosphere reserves through sustainable production, harvesting, processing and marketing of biosphere reserve products, including through encouraging national recognition of biosphere reserve zonation schemes as an important planning tool for programmes linked to protected areas in production landscapes. The fact that the Bioversity UNEP-GEF project will work within Cuban Biosphere Reserves, link to the IberoMAB Network and contribute to the implementation of the Madrid Action Plan for Biosphere Reserves 2008-2013 justifies continued in-kind support in terms of UNESCO expertise and site networking.

- 2 -

Our collaboration in this project’s activities and outcomes should enable us to develop similar global projects on agrobiodiversity and genetic resources in the World Network of Biosphere Reserves. This could include additional joint fundraising for the current project and related initiatives. Ultimately, we shall be able to scale the lessons from this project up to the sub-region and to replicate them in other countries facing similar difficulties but also opportunities in the area of genetic resources for food and agriculture and agrobiodiversity. Albeit it is difficult to estimate exactly our envisaged our in-kind contributions to the Cuban MAB Agrobiodiversity Project over the next five years, I believe that this will amount to an amount corresponding approximately to USD 40,000 per year. This would include mobilization of biosphere reserves, management, assessment, outreach, education, capacity building, convening functions, strategic and technical guidance, as well as monitoring & evaluation expertise. I suggest that this in-kind contribution be reflected on a project outcome basis, as per the table below:

UNESCO in-kind contribution

USD

Outcome 1 40,000Outcome 2 40,000Outcome 3 40,000Outcome 4 40,000Outcome 5 40,000

Total 200,000

I look forward to a continued and fruitful collaboration between our respective Organizations.

Sincerely,

Salvatore Aricò, PhD Sr. Programme Specialist Biodiversity Assessments and Inter-agency Coordination Leader, Cross-cutting Thematic Unit on Biodiversity Natural Sciences Sector

cc: - Ms Maryam Niamir-Fuller, Director, Division of Global Environment Facility

Coordination, UNEP - Mr Natarajan Ishwaran, Secretary, Man and the Biosphere Programme (MAB)

La Habana 11 de enero de 2012

Dr. Emile FrisonDirector General Bioversity International

Estimado Doctor,

En la Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra del Rosario actualmente se inician las actividades del Proyecto Contribución Comunitaria al Rescate y Conservación de los Recursos Fitogenéticos para Contribuir a la Seguridad Alimentaria en Cuba, segunda etapa, que dirige la Sociedad Cubana para la Protección del Medio Ambiente Pro-Naturaleza y se ejecuta conjuntamente con la Estación Ecológica Sierra del Rosario.

El mencionado Proyecto cuenta con el financiamiento de la ONG alemanaPan Para el Mundo ( ) con un aporte de 107´017.65 USD. Este monto puede considerarse una contribución in cash, ya que el mismo hará sinergia con las salidas 2 y 3 (50% para cada componente) del Proyecto UNEP/GEF Conservación de la biodiversidad agrícola en reservas de la biosfera de Cuba: Conectando los paisajes naturales y manejados.

Los resultados de ambos proyectos benefician a la comunidad campesina del territorio y a escuelas locales, entre ellas a una escuela UNESCO radicada en la Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra del Rosario. El trabajo a desarrollar por ambos proyectos ha sido concebido como un ejemplo de sinergia en el país.

Atentamente,

Dra. Teresita TelleriaDirectora Proyecto Contribución Comunitaria

c.c. Dr. Marieta SakalianUNEP Senior Programme Management/ Liaison Officer (CGIAR/FAO), Bioversity

Brot Für del Welt

I +~~ Dhrersity &J ._, Dev-elopmen.t:

Emile Frison Director General Bioverslty International Via dei Tre Oenari 472/a 00057 Macc-are$e, Rome ttaly

Oear EmUe Frison,

Tangier, Moroao December 511

', 2011

Ofver.sity & Development Is a think tank and a consulttng firm b&sed in Tangier, Morocco. We are specialized In the definition and promotion of s.ustaln.able territorial devetopment strategies relying on blocultural diversity conservation and tts sustainable use. We dedicate our activities to sustain the bTocultural diversity of life through research, policy development, knowledge management, capacity building, territorial strategic P.lannlng and on·the-ground actions Our team develops projects, models and tools to strengthen a-daptive management of bioculturat diversity for local communities and dedsion makers at the local, regional and natlonal l~vel.

As a member and co--founder of th:e Intercontinental platform on Territorial Development with Cultural lde.-ntlty, 8long with the Latin American Center for Rural Development (RIMJSP) and Slow Food -International, we develop South-south learning exchange progl'8ms and on~netd training sessions between local communities from Africa, the Medlterra·nean region and Latin America.

Diversity & Development, dve to its experience and the proximity of Its philosophy of work, express Its support to the UNEP/GEF -8/oversity Intem~ti0n8/ -UNESCO MA8 project: Agn'cuttural biodivers;ty conservation and Man and Biosphere Reserves In Cuba: Bridging manag~d 11nd natural landsupes, and looks forward to exchange experiences and methods on managing agricultural biodiversity In protected blo-cultuNJI landscapes. Llkew1se, Diversity Wvelopment Is particularly i nterested in supporting the lmpfementatlon of component three: Improved lfvelihoods of communities living in ~nd ~.round the project MA8 Reserves through benefit-sharing mechanisms that support the sustainable use of' agricultural biodiversity.

Moreover, beceuse of our exc:elfent relations with UNESCO and its Man and the Biosphere Program, we wru assist the project team In maJnstreamlng the project O\ltcomes throughout the World Network of Biosphere Reserves and all other international relevant networks dealing with bioculturat dlversjty conservation.

Diversity & Development will seek special funding to support the definition of methodological tools and the rmplementation of agricultural biodiversity valorization strategies adapted to the Cuban context.

2<1 ~ctS•ta..Appti"9, A'Y.MijAb4tftall, 110000 T&llftl TM£>C ; +'li2{"0)S.,l'9.8S.lii.S2 www.divl.~~ent.c.om

In addition, we will dedicate 20% staff time or a Diversity & DeveiOI)ment consultant during the three first years or the pro)«t to ensure the approprlote follow·up or the fund raising and project Implementation strategy. This will rep......,nt a totolln kind oontributton to the project or 15.000 USD/Year.

Looking forward to woriclng with you and the llioversltY team tn the implementation or this exCiting and Innovative project.

Sincerely yours,

4L= CMre<:tot

Diversity & ~lopmcnt

10 rft•dcnce:S.., J.wt t9. A• Mlr..u.l'*l\ 90000 T~ T(Lif.x . .. lUtO)J.JUi UJJ:

-~-

.. •

Havana, October 14 2011

Dr. Emile Frison General Director Bioversity International Via del Tre Denari 472/a 00057 Maccarese (Rome) Italy

Dear Dr. Emile Frison

Co- financing Commitment for proposed GEF project on "Agricultural Biodiversity Conservation and UNESCO Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: Briding managed and

natural landscapes to achieve the Millennium Development Goals"

I am pleased to confirm you the following in cash co-financing Commitments from the international project "Contribution of the traditional methods of conservation and management of in situ maize (Zea mays L.) and beans (Phaseolus sp.) variability to food security of fa rmer's families in Cuba" with The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture funds to facilitate activities in Outcome 1

and Outcome 2 of the above project.

Outcome

Outcome 1

Outcome 2 TOTAL

Yours,

Ora. Lian~e~ Granda Project Coordinator

In Cash (USD)

30 000

20 000

50000

Plant Genetic Resources & Plant Breeding Department INIFAT

cc. Dr. Marieta Sakalian

REGISTRO DE SALIDA

No.

Fecha:

UNEP Senior Programme Management/ Liaison Officer (CGIAR/ FAO), Bioversity

.i..o.J;.;.,o

.i.cl;j .. JI, -4ll~f o......o..i.l fill

Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy

Our Ref.:

Dear Dr Frison,

Food and Agriculture Organization of the

United !lations

Fax: +39 0657053152

Your Ref.:

Organisation des Nations Unies pour !'alimentation et

!'agriculture

npoAOBOnbCTBeHHaR J.t

cenbCKOX03RI1CTBeHHaR

opraHJ.t3i'ILVIR

06bep,J.tHeHHblX Ha1.111H

Tel: + 39 0657051

Rome, 30 January 2012

Organizaci6n de las Naciones Unidas para Ia

Alimentad6n yla Agricultura

www.fao.org

I have reviewed the proposal to Bioversity project under UNEP-GEF, Agrobiodiversity Conservation and Man and the Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: Bridging Managed and Natural Landscapes, GFL/2328-2715-4B28 and commend Bioversity and the Cuban institutions in agriculture and the environment for producing a solid proposal on bio-cultural diversity and conservation that is also of vital importance to the agricultural sector in Cuba and Caribbean agriculture more generally.

As you are aware, FAO's initiative on Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) has been addressing similar issues since it was launched in 2002. The experience acquired through GIAHS and our desire to share experiences, knowledge and resources from other bio-cultural agricultural landscapes provides a solid basis for us to support the UNEP-GEF supported project. In reviewing the proposal I note our common focus on the role of "ingenious agri-cultural systems built on local knowledge and experience that have resulted not only in outstanding landscapes, maintenance and adaptation of globally significant agricultural biodiversity, indigenous knowledge systems and resilient ecosystems, but, above all, in the sustained provision of multiple goods and services, food and livelihood security and quality of life" http://www.fao.org/nr/giahs/en/. By supporting the UNEP-GEF project in Cuba, FAO Land and Water Division should be able to foster greater collaboration and scaling up of results for both initiatives. Specifically, we can contribute to support activities in Component I, as it relates to GIAHS goal to support "dynamic conservation management approaches in agricultural systems and landscapes" for improved productivity and better management of land and water. We will also support activities in Component 3 aimed at mainstreaming sustainable practices from conservation areas into the larger agricultural production sector and to other networks of similar agricultural landscapes and systems worldwide.

I estimate the total contribution of both in-kind and in-cash to be approximately US$120,000.over five years. The proposed allocation according to project outcomes is as follows.

Contribution In kind Cash

Outcome I US$ 30,000 US$ 30,000 Outcome 3 US$ 30,000 US$ 30,000 TOTAL US$ 60,000 US$ 60,000

I look forward to further strengthening the collaboration between our two organizations.

Dr Emile Frison Director General Bioversity International Via dei Tre Denari 472/a 00057 Maccarese Rome, Italy

Yours sincerely,

Director Land and Water Division, F AO, Rome

GIAHS Global Coordinator


1

APPENDIX 13. Endorsement letters of GEF National Focal Points

MINISTERJO DE CIENClA, TECNOLOGiA Y MEDIO AMBIENTE Direccion de Colaboracion Internacional

0 CITMA

Dei: ~30 To: Maryam Niarnir-Fuller

Director Division of Global Environment Facility GEF Coordination, UNEP PO Box 30552 Nairobi, Kenya

Havana, March 12,2009.

Subject: Endorsement for: Agricultural Biodiversity Conservation and UNESCO Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: Briding managed and natural landscapes to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.

In my capacity as GEF Operational Focal Point for Cuba, I confirm that the above project proposal (a) is in accordance with the government's national priorities and the commitments made by Cuba under the relevant global environmental conventions and (b) has been discussed with relevant stakeholders, including the global environmental convention focal points, in accordance with GEF's policy on public involvement.

Accordingly, I am pleased to endorse the preparation of the above project proposal with the support of UNEP. If approved, the proposal will be prepared and implemented by lnstituto de Investigaciones f'undamentales en Agriculrora Tropical (fNIFAT). Further, I request UNEP to provide a copy of the project document for information of this office, before it is submined to the GEF Secretariat for CEO endorsement.

I understand that the total GEF financing being requested for this project is $ 1.61 S, which includes project preparation (PPG) and implementation, and I 0% of the project and PPG amount of fees to UNEP for project cycle management services associated with this project.

I consent to the utilization of the following indicative allocations available to Cuba in GEF-4 under the GEF Resource Allocation Framework to cover the GEF project preparation and implementation as well as the associated Agency fees for this project.

Biodiversity: SIS. I

Sincerely,

Copy to: Maricta Sakalian/ UNEP/OGEF Programme Senior Management /Liaison Officer (CGIAR/FAO), Biodiversity/, Maria Antonia Fem~ndez/Oirectora/ Oirecci6n de Colaboraci6n lntemacionaVMfNAG.

..

I

~'ERNACIO• 'lE .S

EHT .... - - --SiliDf No.

f "'CH~: I ~/...3j2m

RMH Capitolio Nacional, La Habana 10200, CUBA

Tel: (537) 867 06 06, Fax: (537) 8668054 e- mail: cltamero@l:itm£Lcu


1

APPENDIX 14. Draft Procurement Plan To be prepared during the project appraisal phase before the inception workshop

Appendix 15

I. General Data Please indicate your answer hereNotes

Project Title

Magrobiodiversity Conservation and Mand and the Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: Bridging

Managed and Natural LandscapesGEF Project ID 4158

Agency Project ID 510Implementing Agency UNEP

Project Type FSP FSP or MSPCountry CubaRegion LCR

Date of submission of the tracking tool January 31,2012 Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 201Name of reviewers completing tracking tool and completion date Paola De Santis Completion Date

Planned project duration 5 yearsActual project duration years

Lead Project Executing Agency (ies)

Instituo de Investigaciones Fundamentales en Agricultura Tropical (INIFAT), Bioversity International

Date of Council/CEO Approval March 19,2010 Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 201GEF Grant (US$) 1,368,182.00

Cofinancing expected (US$) 2,780,026.00

Please identify production sectors and/or ecosystem services directly targeted by project:

Agriculture 1

1: Primarily and directly targeted by the project 2: Secondary or incidentally affected by the project

Fisheries


Forestry 2


Tourism 2


Tracking Tool for Biodiversity Projects in GEF-3, GEF-4, and GEF-5

Important: Please read the Guidelines posted on the GEF website before entering your data

Objective 2: Mainstreaming Biodiversity Conservation in Production Landscapes/Seascapes and Sectors

Objective: To measure progress in achieving the impacts and outcomes established at the portfolio level under the biodiversity focal area. Rationale: Project data from the GEF-3, GEF-4, and GEF-5 project cohort will be aggregated for analysis of directional trends and patterns at a portfolio-wide level to inform the development of future GEF strategies and to report to GEF Council on portfolio-level performance in the biodiversity focal area. Structure of Tracking Tool: Each tracking tool requests background and coverage information on the project and specific information required to track portfolio level indicators in the GEF-3, GEF-4, and GEF-5 strategy. Guidance in Applying GEF Tracking Tools: GEF tracking tools are applied three times: at CEO endorsement, at project mid-term, and at project completion. Submission: The finalized tracking tool will be cleared by the GEF Agencies as being correctly completed.

Appendix 15

Mining 2


Oil


Transportation


Other (please specify): Education and cultural patrimony 2

Designations(please choose 1-3) 1 1: Foreseen at project start2: Foreseen at mid-term3: Foreseen at project closure

Landscape/seascape[1] area directly[2] covered by the project (ha) 2,200 hectares foreseen

Landscape/seascape area indirectly[3] covered by the project (ha) 3,000 hectares foreseen

Explanation for indirect coverage numbers:

It is expeted to have direct impact on approximately 10% of total area of the two targeted reserve, where agriculture is practiced and representative agricultural biodeverisy is present.Indrect coverage of additional 1,000 ha both in other protected ares and buffer zones of teh tergeted MABs will be achieved through sharing of methods, planting materials, income opportunities with agricultural communinty thourgh extension services, schools and public and private nurseries

NOT APPLICABLE

Name of Protected AreasIUCN and/or national category of PA

Extent in hectares of PA

1 Sierra del Rosario IV 250,0002 Cuchillas del Toa IV 2,023,00034

Not applicablePlease Indicate Environmental Service

Not applicable Extent in hectaresNot applicable Payments generated (US$)/ha/yr

[1] For projects working in seascapes (large marine ecosystems, fisheries etc.) please provide coverage figures and include explanatory text as necessary if reporting in hectares is not applicable or feasible. [2] Direct coverage refers to the area that is targeted by the project’s site intervention. For example, a project may be mainstreaming biodiversity into floodplain management in a pilot area of 1,000 hectares that is part of a much larger floodplain of 10,000 hectares.

[3] Using the example in footnote 5 above, the same project may, for example, “indirectly” cover or influence the remaining 9,000 hectares of the floodplain through promoting learning exchanges and training at the project site as part of an awareness raising and capacity building strategy for the rest of the floodplain. Please explain the basis for extrapolation of indirect coverage when completing this part of the table.

2. Are there Protected Areas within the landscape/seascape covered by the project? If so, names these PAs, their IUCN or national PA category, and their extent in hectares

3. Within the landscape/seascape covered by the project, is the project implementing payment for environmental service schemes? If so, please complete the table below. Example is provided.

1. What is the extent (in hectares) of the landscape or seascape where the project will directly or indirectly contribute to biodiversity conservation or sustainable use of its components? An example is provided in the table below.

II. Project Landscape/Seascape Coverage

Appendix 15

Test and disseminate diverse crops, enhancing species diversity

in production systems and eco-agriculture

Please indicate specific management practices that integrate BD

Territorial based certification system, participatory certification

Name of certification system being used (insert NA if no certification system is being applied)

2,000Area of coverage foreseen at start of project

Unit of measure of market impactName of the market that the project seeks to affect (sector and sub-

sector)NA

Agriculture 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Fisheries 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Forestry 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Tourism 0 Yes = 1, No = 0

Health 0Education 0 Yes = 1, No = 0

Agriculture 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Fisheries 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Forestry 0 Yes = 1, No = 0

Health 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Education 0 Yes = 1, No = 0





Agriculture 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Fisheries 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Forestry 0 Yes = 1, No = 0

Part IV. Market Transformation

5. For those projects that have identified market transformation as a project objective , please describe the project's ability to integrate biodiversity considerations into the mainstream economy by measuring the market changes to which the project contributed. The sectors and subsectors and measures of impact in the table below are illustrative examples, only. Please complete per the objectives and specifics of the project. (**See footnote below)

4. Within the scope and objectives of the project, please identify in the table below the management practices employed by project beneficiaries that integrate biodiversity considerations and the area of coverage of these management practices. Please also note if a certification system is being applied and identify the certification system being used. Note: this could range from farmers applying organic agricultural practices, forest management agencies managing forests per Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) guidelines or other forest certification schemes, artisanal fisherfolk practicing sustainable fisheries management, or industries satisfying other similar agreed international standards, etc.

Part III. Management Practices Applied

The implementation of regulations is enforced

The regulations are under implementation

Regulations are in place to implement the legislation

Biodiversity considerations are mentioned in sector policy through specific legislation

Foreseen at Project Start

Biodiversity considerations are mentioned in sector policy

Part V. Policy and Regulatory frameworks

6. For those projects that have identified addressing policy, legislation, regulations, and their implementation as project objectives, Please complete these tables for each sector that is a primary or a secondary focus of the project. Please answer (1 for YES or 0 for NO) to each statement under the sectors that are a focus of the project.

Appendix 15

Tourism 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Health 0

Education 0 Yes = 1, No = 0



All projects please complete this question at the project mid-term evaluation and at the final evaluation, if relevant: ��

Enforcement of regulations is monitored

7. Within the scope and objectives of the project, has the private sector undertaken voluntary measures to incorporate biodiversity considerations in production? If yes, please provide brief explanation and specifically mention the sectors involved. An example of this could be a mining company minimizing the impacts on biodiversity by using low-impact exploration techniques and by developing plans for restoration of biodiversity after exploration as part of the site management plan.

A - 1

Annex A. Baseline status of agrobiodiversity in Sierra del Rosario Biosphere Reserve (RBSR) and Chuchillas del Toa Biosphere Reserve (RBCT)

1. Introduction Natural biodiversity has a well recognized role in ecosystem health; its decline represents a threat to the maintenance of the ecological functions which sustain complex landscapes. Although less widely acknowledged, genetic variation within agricultural crops and man-made productive systems also provides a broad range of essential goods and services which further support ecosystem functioning, resilience and in turn, productivity (Tilman 2000). Over the past 50 years, agricultural systems worldwide have been oversimplified in the trend towards intensification and commercial crop varieties have replaced many local varieties over significant areas of agricultural production. This has resulted in significant losses of inter and intra specific genetic variation in farmers’ fields, variation which is instead crucial for adaptation to climate change as well as for providing breeders with potentially useful material. The contribution of agricultural biodiversity to improving food security and sustainability of complex ecosystems needs to be considered in terms not only of the role of diversity in the different components (plants, animals, micro-organisms) but mostly in terms of how integrated productive systems which capitalize on interactions between cultivated and wild components can strengthen productivity, resilience, adaptability and sustainability of agro-ecosystems at a landscape scale. The Man and Biosphere (MAB) programme of UNESCO incorporates the concept of conservation of both natural resources as well as of human influenced landscapes (and their associated agro-biodiversity) within protected areas, thus considering agricultural biodiversity an important component of local cultures and livelihoods and essential for ecosystem functions (Castiñeiras and García 2006). Indeed, balanced interactions between human communities and the wild and cultivated components of protected landscapes can provide important ecosystem services such as pollination, organic matter cycling, prevention of soil erosion, and conservation of biodiversity and income opportunities. In Cuba, the relation between small scale agricultural activities taking place in MAB reserves with the wider ecosystem and landscape of the protected area has not been the specific focus of any previous research effort. This focus is one of the challenges of the present project, which focuses on two of the island’s reserves, the Sierra del Rosario and the Cuchillas del Toa. The present section presents an overview of the available data on the status and use of agricultural biodiversity, traditional knowledge, and livelihoods in areas largely overlapping with the territory of the targeted MAB reserves. This information therefore provides a basis from which gaps in knowledge, threats and opportunities for future research and intervention may be identified. The reserves will be referred to with their acronyms (RBSR for Sierra del Rosario and RBCT for Cuchillas del Toa).

Annex 1. Project document

A - 2

BOX. 1 Cuban nature and conservation in the target MAB reserves Cuba's flora and fauna are characterized by high levels of diversity and high endemism, thanks to the country’s insularity and a variety of geological and soil formations. Around 8 000 species of plants (including many orchids), 7 500 species of insects, 963 of fish, 121 of reptiles, 46 of amphibians, 350 species of birds and 42 of mammals are known on the island. MAB reserves protect an important portion of Cuba’s wild floral and faunal species, whose interactions with the agricultural activities taking place in the reserves’ buffer areas should be better investigated and possible synergies enhanced and supported. The RBCT harbours significant populations of endemic and threatened bird species, representing a critical area for the ecology of Neotropical migrant birds that pass through the region to winter in Cuba. The elevated percentages of amphibian and reptile species present, given the relatively small size of the reserve (0.64% of the area of Cuba), demonstrate its importance for Cuba’s herpetological fauna. A wide diversity (298 species, belonging to 35 families) of important and significant hymenopterans (ants, bees, and wasps) inhabits the Park (Fong et al. 2005). Significant use of the forest resource is recorded in the reserve, either for wood for household consumption or for commercial use regulated by the Ministry of agriculture (MINAG 1998). Main species harvested are an endemic pine species (Pinus cubensis), Mexican cedar (Cedrela odorata), Cuban bast (Hibiscus elatus) and mahogany (Swietenia mahogani), among others. Rates of deforestation need to be carefully controlled as well as the distribution of invasive species, possibly through activities to increase awareness among the local population (Giraudy et al. 2006). Four vegetation formations exist in the area covered by the RBSR, with evergreen predominating. Of the 889 plant organisms identified, an 11% are endemic. Faunal populations include birds (115 species), reptiles (33 species), followed by anfibians and mammals. The communities within the reserve have an education centre, aimed at promoting environmental education towards enhancing conservation in the reserve and securing the respect and implementation of national environmental regulations (García et al. 2006). 2. Structure and composition of small farm and home garden systems in Cuba Understanding the environmental, socio-economic and policy factors that affect the management of farms and home gardens in Cuban MABs is crucial for achieving a successful integration of these systems as strategic components of in situ conservation of agrobiodiversity and ecological functions within the protected areas. Worldwide evidence exists on the importance of home gardens and small-scale, subsistence farms for the conservation of agricultural biodiversity and ecosystem services. These production systems are generally complex and dynamic: their structure, composition, species and cultivar diversity are influenced by changes in the socioeconomic circumstances and cultural values of the households (Hoogerbrugge and Fresco 1993; Marsh 1998; Eyzaguirre and Watson 2001; Hodgkin 2001; Eyzaguirre and Linares 2004).


A - 3

The Cuban rural “conuco” is the system mostly represented in protected areas and has been object of quite extensive investigations on its role in protecting agricultural biodiversity in a sustainable manner. Conucos host a high diversity of useful species, cultivated or wild. They occupy a relatively small space almost invariably in close proximity to the house although in some cases they may be shifted approximately every three years in search of rejuvenated soil while the previous area is left fallow (Castiñeiras et al. 2001). Although their structure varies depending upon the topography, conucos generally displays multistrata vegetation (subterranean, herbaceous, bushes and trees) with characteristic cultivated species, weeds and wild species in each stratum, although the cultivated species constitute the greatest proportion. As observed in other regions, this arrangement maximizes efficiencies in the use of water, nutrients and solar radiation (Troutner and Holle 1979; Guarino and Hoogendijk 2004). As observed in Cuba by (Esquivel and Hammer 1988), it is often difficult to differentiate the limits of the conuco and the forest. The same was stressed in studies of home gardens in Panama, where it was impossible to provide a clear differentiation between cultivated, protected and wild species in the complex home garden forest (Covich and Nickerson 1966). In larger conucos a more clearly defined separation may exist between the front garden, the area near the house, and a larger productive area where crops as often grown in a system of continuous rotation. As garden size increases, becoming more like a small farm system, it will contain several fields, in which intercropping of several species and varieties is most common (Esquivell and Hammer 1992). The separation from the natural area in this case is more pronounced and the extent to which positive interrelations and feedbacks are maintained could be explored. 3. Inter and intraspecific diversity in Cuban small farms Inventories of cultivated or useful wild plants carried out as part of national and international research efforts focusing mostly on home gardens reported a total of 419 species (Table 1) in the Eastern and Western regions of the island, with a 37% overlap between the two areas. The proportion of species used only for home consumption was found to be high and approximately 80 % of the reported diversity corresponded to cultivated species and the rest to wild ones used within the family (Castiñeiras et al. 2001). Table 1. Number of species found in Western (RBSR) and Eastern (RBCT) home gardens

Region West East Total

Species 320 258 419


A - 4

Table 2. Home garden species are used for a variety of purposes within the household (from Castiñeiras et al. 2001).

Use/Region West East

Ornamentals 138 87

Medicinal 64 56

Timber for housing 24 30

Fruit 32 21

Spices 17 17 Other (fuel, insecticide, honey, fencing, etc.) 9 4

Vegetables 9 7

Living fences 9 8

Timber for implements 1 8

Roots and tubers 8 6

Drink 4 5

Grains 7 8

Fodder 3 4

Total 325 261 Table 2 exemplifies how ornamental species were found to be most often located at the front and/or on one of the sides of the dwelling, combined with fruit trees, medicinal species and spices. Other species important for the household’s nutrition were usually located a little further from the house and cultivated in rotation, depending on the size of the property (Esquivel and Hammer 1988). Fruit trees play an important role in the supply of vitamins and minerals especially in areas and seasons where the limited water resource limit vegetable production. Widespread cultivation of crops such as cassava (Manihot esculenta), malanga (Colocasia sp. and Xanthosoma sp.), beans (Phaseolus spp.) and maize (Zea mays), represents the heritage of cultures indigenous to Meso- and Latin America where roots, tubers and grains are the main staples in both human and animal diets. Early occupants of the island, the Tainos, introduced or developed those early crops in their own conucos, adding locally sourced fruits such as sapote, papaya, guanábana, and guava (Eyzaguirre 2006). Nevertheless, Esquivel and Hammer (1988) describe a much higher variety of plants in present day Cuban gardens, representing nearly all regions of diversity of the world. 42% of the plants observed come from the South and Central American regions of diversity; other crops were imported by Europeans such as sugarcane mangoes (Mangifera indica) and bananas. Most medicinal plants are also of European origin, which translates in a relatively strong European footprint on Cuba’s ethnobotanical knowledge. Roots and tubers of African origin were introduced by African slaves who, upon receiving freedom, established their own conucos in mountain areas and cultivating crops such as okra, yam and cowpea. Still today yam, followed by malanga and sweet potato, is mostly represented in small production systems of the East. Some of these roots and tubers are found in conucos in semi-wild conditions (Esquivel and Hammer 1988).


A - 5

In terms of intra-specific diversity, farmers across all surveyed conucos indicated twenty-three crops as those harbouring the most significant infraspecific variability. Certain species, such as pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan), chilli and yam (Dioscorea spp.), exhibited more important levels of variability in the East compared to the West. For most other crops, reported intraspecific variability was similar across regions suggesting that farmers value and use comparable levels of intraspecific diversity (Castiñeiras et al. 2001). Table 3. Species observed in the majority of home gardens surveyed during an IPGRI led in situ conservation project (Castiñeiras et al. 2002). Crop West East

Cajanus cajan X

Capsicum annuum X

Citrus sinensis X X

Coffea arabica X X

Colocasia esculenta X

Cucurbita moschata X

Dioscorea alata X

Hibiscus rosa-sinensis X

Ipmea batatas X

Lycopersicum esculentum X

Mangifera indica X

Manihot esculenta

Musa spp. X X

Persea americana X

Phaseolus lunatus X

Phaseolus vulgaris X X

Portulaca grandiflora X

Pisdium guajava X X

Saccharum officinarum X X

Spondias purpurea X

Vigna unguiculata sbsp. Unguiculata

Xanthosoma sagittifolium X X

Zea mays X X

The high number of cultivars reported for each key species (data not shown) suggests the coexistence of traditional and modern cultivars in Cuban home gardens. If this coexistence is sustainable, which it appears to be, it would show that traditional cultivars are still maintained even after the introduction of modern varieties. This supports the potential of home gardens to conserve specific threatened diversity in situ; additional data on how this may happen more easily in protected areas would be useful to measure the specific contribution of these on agrobiodiversity which may otherwise be lost. For example, at least four maize landraces (Criollo, Canilla, Tusón y Argentino) out of the seven reported as typical Cuban material by Hatheway in 1957 were found in Cuban


A - 6

small farms surveyed in both the East and West (Fernández et al. 2004; Fernández et al. 2005) alongside modern varieties. Canilla (25%), Criollo and Tusa (20.8%) were the most represented, apparently for their greater adaptation to marginal, low-input conditions. Encouragingly, Tusón and Canilla are included in Cuba’s Ministry of Agriculture Official Varietal List but 18 additional traditional varieties represented in ex situ national collections and found in two areas surveyed for in situ germplasm are not registered in the Official List (MINAG 2007). Some of the traditional Cuban maize varieties are included in national production improvement programmes for hard as well as soft grain (MINAG 2004). Maize breeding programmes for creating improved varieties and hybrids have sometimes resulted in limited variety adoption by farmers both because of the high input costs required to cultivate this material and the fact it may not match family consumption preferences (CNRG 2007). This has been the case for improved varieties Gibara in the West and Yanelys in the East (Latournerie et al. 2009). In accordance with general observations by Jarvis et al. (2008), in certain crops Cuban farmers use a few predominant varieties for larger scale cultivation while also maintaining smaller populations of other varieties, as an insurance strategy against possible changes in environmental or market conditions. A clear example is the pattern of varietal presence detected for common bean in Eastern and Western small farms (Latournerie et al. 2009). Of the twenty-two varieties found, some have higher frequency (among which Negro sin brillo with 9.7%, Colorao with 8.2%) while most others remain below 1%. Nevertheless, the predominance of any variety over others was not dramatically pronounced (the few prized varieties are present at frequencies lower than 10%), indicating that farmers are interested in conserving a broad range of diversity to guarantee stable and diversified food sources and income throughout the year (Shagarodsky et al. 2004). Only four of the 41 bean varieties in the Official List are traditional; another four originally developed by commercial breeding programmes are now found and reproduced mainly in home gardens and small farms (CNRG 2007) where the great majority of non-registered landraces persist (Esquivel and Hammer 1988). Interestingly, yield tests on in situ bean landraces indicated that yields were comparable with or even higher than commercial varieties (Castiñieiras et al. 1991). These results confirmed the outcomes of tests carried out on cowpea collections from the ININFAT gene bank (Castellanos 1989) and evaluation of on-farm landrace material carried out elsewhere (Ceccarelli 1996) and clearly support the importance of conserving on farm diversity for its potential adaptation to local, marginal conditions. In all regions the coexistence of wild species (most importantly, Capsicum frutescens) and cultivated varieties was observed. In many cases the wild or weedy varieties are at first tolerated and then, if found useful, managed to a certain degree. Medicinal plants are taken in from the wild flora such as Lepidium virginicum in the dry areas of Yacabo Abajo Guantanamo and Peperomia pellucida in several 'conucos' and homegardens of the Guantanamo and Santiago de Cuba provinces (Esquivel et al. 1989). The surveys conducted in Eastern and Western gardens and farms revealed significant differences in the on-farm agrobiodiversity, reflecting agro-ecological and socio-economic differences.


A - 7

Western region agrobidiversity (relevant to the RBSR) Five crops were represented in all home gardens and small farms surveyed across the western region: chirimoya (Annona reticulata) common bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris) plantains and bananas ( Musa spp.) guava ( Psidium guajava) and coffee ( Coffea arabica). Other 12 crops were found in more tan 80 % of farms and gardens of the region: mango (Mangifera indica), guanábana (Annona muricata), coconut (Cocos nucifera), malanga (Xanthosoma sagittifolium), pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata), cassava (Manihot esculenta), Gliricidia (Gliricidia sepium), breadfruit (Artocarpus communis), sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum), orange (Citrus sinensis), “mamoncillo” (Melicoccus bijugatus) and “mamey Colorado” (Pouteria sapota)(García et al. 2006). Other studies reported gandul (Cajanus cajan) and grains such as maní (Arachis ipogaea) and sesame (Sesamun orientale) (Shagarodsky et al. 2004). Significant varietal diversity was observed and has been attributed to a variety of reasons. In some cases, diversity satisfies different gastronomic preferences (for black, white or red beans) and provides necessary ingredients for traditional recipes: the great majority of gardens contain more than one species and in some cases up to 10 different clones of banana, each of which require a specific preparation and use. In other cases it allows to extend the crop’s productive season across a wider period of time (García et al. 2006): farms growing a combination of cassava varieties differing in length of growth cycle (7, 9 and 12 months) were observed. Finally, certain varieties are mostly used for animal feed. Eastern region agrobidiversity (relevant to the RBCT) Previous surveys of farms and gardens in the Eastern region revealed that these tend to be more commercialized than in the West and production is mostly focused on coffee, legumes, roots and tubers (Giraudy et al. 2006). The isolation and difficult access to the Eastern region as a few unique social and cultural characteristics (among which the strong Haitian influence) appear to influence the management of local crop diversity. Musa x paradisica y Psidium guajaba were found in all selected conucos in the East. Other taxa were recorded in the great majority of surveyed home gardens (80% approx) were Allium chinense, Eryngium foetidum, Ipomea batatas, Dioscorea sp., Manihot esculenta, Phaseolus vulgaris, Persea americana, Saccharum officinarum, Zea mays, Coffea arabica and Citrus aurantium, Citrus sinensis, Lippia alba and Plecthranthus amboinicus. Three endemic species were recorded: Protium cubense (or copal, providing wood for construction), Garcinia aristata (or manajú used mainly for timber) and Piper aduncum subsp. ossanum (or Platanillo de Cuba, medicinal) (Castiñeiras et al. 2001). Gardens in the East have been found to contain less interspecific diversity (refer to Table 1), possibly because of stronger commercial orientation of the agricultural production, including of sugar cane and livestock. Also, the fact that a larger number of people benefit from each single garden in the East could explain the predominance of staples and a lower number of overall species, particularly fruits. Climate and landscape factors also limit fruit production, since the relatively high altitude of the area brings lower temperatures, heavier mists and less sunlight. Indeed, a negative correlation was found between altitude and fruit trees species (r=–0.51). Altitude, however, has a positive effect


A - 8

on roots and tubers (r=0.45), medicinal species (r=0.37), grains (r=0.35) and seasonings (r=0.41) due to the high rainfall (Castiñeiras et al. 2001). In any case, many of the eastern species appear to have higher intraspecific variability, possibly because of larger populations which allow for greater representation of within species variability. This is the case for roots and tubers (for example Dioscorea spp.), beans (Phaseolus vulgaris, Phaseolus lunatus, Cajanus cajan, Zea mays and Vigna umbellata) and maize (Fernández et al. 2007). Caupí (Vigna unguiculata) is a long lasting traditional crop in the East where, as Lima bean, it is grown during the summer rainy season when common bean does not perform well. Local preferences seem to prize white grained varieties, commonly named frijol carita or face bean because of the black pattern at the hilum and white background. In the Valle del Caujeri, Guantanamo, cultivars of Lima bean and chickpea for which commercial use had been abandoned were found (Esquivel et al. 1989). Farmers in the East place great importance in maize, both as human and animal food. Its intraspecific diversity is generally high, with 14 different types reported by farmers based on grain shape and colour (yellow, red and black). Some of the spices found here were not present in the West, such as thyme (Thymus vulgaris), false oregano (Lippia micromera), chilli (Capsicum frutescens) and culantro (Erygium foetidum), which grow well in mountain areas. Weedy or wild relatives, such as the tomate cimarrón (Lycopersicon esculentum var. cerasiforme), wild morphotypes of Capsicum frutescens and white mustard (Sinapis alba), are used as medicines or condiments, often in so-called compuestos, typical mixed dishes of this with vegetables and meat (Giraudy et al. 2006). 4. Insights into intra-specific diversity for key garden crops Given the marked differences among home garden crops in term of their use, the niche each occupies in space, their observed intra-specific variability and conservation status, the following three species were analyzed in greater detail throughout the IPGRI led project “Contribution of home gardens to in situ conservation of plant genetic resources in farming systems” (1998-2001): Lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus), chilli (Capsicum spp.), and sapote (Pouteria sapota), whose different biological characteristics and management practices were taken to exemplify possible different conservation needs and priorities.


A - 9

Pouteria sapote (mamey colorado) Even though it originates in southern central America and therefore Cuba is not centre of origin, it appears to harbour important genetic diversity in terms of fruit appearance and weight and, most importantly, in terms of harvesting season. Apart from isolated individuals conserved in botanical gardens and private collections, no formally recognized ex situ collection exists in the country, exposing the species to high risk of genetic erosion and making conucos essential for securing the species’ conservation. Other related species have been observed with low frequency in the Island: Pouteria campechiana, Chrysophyllum cainito and Manilkara sapota. Phaseolus lunatus (Lima bean, frijol caballero or pallar) Lima bean is usually planted when common bean has been harvested since its longer growth cycle (up to 8 months) allows a harvest of grain during a time when common bean is not available. Greater appreciation of intraspecific variation in Lima bean was recorded in the Eastern region while in the West only recently has its production been promoted (Latournerie et al. 2009). Nevertheless, the crop is mainly relegated to conucos where populations are small (often as small as five plants) and it’s not commercially marketed, not even in local markets in the Eastern region where the crop is mostly grown. There is no formal seed system for Lima bean and most seed is obtained as a present from relatives or neighbours. Nonetheless, Lima bean has high protein content, making it potentially an excellent crop for diversifying and strengthening local diets. Fifty-three populations from across the Island were analyzed based on morphological traits: intraspecific diversity analyses indicated that 42 populations corresponded to cultivar group Sieva (79,25%), six to Papa (11,34%), four to Lima (7,55%) while one appeared to be a weedy form. The most frequently encountered grain colours were white, red and cream, with secondary colours being mostly brown, black and red. Interestingly, Lima bean germplasm conserved in situ in home gardens covers the range of diversity formerly conserved ex situ in genebanks. Cuban ex situ collections of this species have been seriously damaged making home garden collections crucial for the species’ conservation and for possible restoration of genebank collections (Castiñeiras et al. 2001). Breeding programmes in Lima bean follow two avenues: small farmers breed for hard grain varieties, whereas INIFAT focuses on soft grain varieties for fresh pod production, known as habas de Lima (Muñoz et al. 1991). Chilli (Capsicum spp.) The main Capsicum species surveyed across the island were annuum, chinense, and frutescens. C. annuum is rarely found in the western region, while C. chinense rarely is in the east. The west is rich in varieties of C. chinense, like so called ají angolano, cachucha criollo and cachucha de punta (Latournerie et al. 2009). As for Lima bean, the diversity conserved in situ is representative of that conserved ex situ. Nevertheless, home gardens host a few notable types which were absent from ex situ collections, such as tarro de chivo and ají de jardín (C. annuum), chile blanco (C. frutescens) and wild type corazón de paloma (yet unidentified), normally eaten by birds and found in disturbed areas in or around gardens (tumbas). Following the surveys, these types were added to the genebank collection due to the high risk of genetic erosion.


A - 10

Nonetheless, since some of this material (for instance C. frutescens) may not express all characteristics during regeneration, in situ conservation is fundamental for conservation (García et al. 2005). Capsicum species have a variety of uses: large fruit types are consumed as a fresh vegetable (roasted or filled), medium sized fruits are dried to make sweet paprika or ground to purees, hot/spicy medium-sized fruits with thin pericarps are used for pickles (encurtidos), medium-sized fruits with a sweet-intermediate flavour and thin pericarp are used as seasoning, small fruits for medicines or ornamentals. Cubans do not consume the hot/spicy fruits as condiments for typical dishes, as in Mesoamerican countries (Mexico, Guatemala etc.): only six semi-domesticated varieties of C. frutescens are hot and are grown for edible purposes (Barrios et al. 2007). Intraspecific diversity is not very pronounced in the Capsicum complex, since the crop is maintained primarily in home gardens where small population sizes and scarce seed production from one generation to the next reduces variability (Castiñeiras et al. 2001). Comparatively greater intraspecific variation was observed in C. annuum with five cultivated morphotypes, followed by C. frutescens with two cultivated morphotypes with weedy characteristics and three wild types and finally C. chinense with three cultivated morphotypes (Castiñeiras and García 2006). It’s interesting to observe, however, that notwithstanding the relatively low intraspecific variability in Cuban gardens, it is still higher than that found in other countries where chilli cultivation is more widespread (Mexico and Peru) (Latournerie et al. 2009). Gene flow including between cultivated and wild species has been detected through the presence of hybrid populations, similarly to observations in home gardens elsewhere: Hernández (2000) highlighted the crosses between cultivated (C. annuum) and wild species in Cassavatán (Mexico) and how farmers in the majority of cases, took advantage of these. Hybrids tend to produce little or poor quality seed but may give higher yields in terms of fruit weight and carotenoid content (Sevilla and Holle 2004) and their conservation depends on the acceptance by farmers. Species C. chinense and C. frutescens are infrequent on Cuban markets, suggesting there is interesting potential for developing a market for the underutilized Capsicum diversity available in Cuban conucos (Castiñeiras et al. 2002). 5. Evolution of plant genetic diversity in small farm and conuco systems In determining how home gardens contribute to conservation of agro-biodiversity, all factors affecting its distribution, evolution and resilience over time need to be understood. As data on Capsicum point out, introgression is one of the most interesting processes occurring in the conucos and a great amount of the crop variability present in cultivated plants of Cuba stems from the long term process of introgressive hybridization (backcrossing an interspecific hybrid with one of its parent species). The Cuban wild tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum var. cerasiforme) is a weedy species often tolerated in fields and gardens and grown alongside landraces or commercial varieties. Under such conditions intermediate forms have arisen, which could be tested in pre-breeding, for their potential contribution of fruit characters or disease tolerance.


A - 11

Introgression of landraces of maize in Cuban farmers' fields is another interesting case. Hatheway (1957) studied landraces of maize in Cuba and stressed that the widespread inter-varietal hybridization caused complications for the classification of Cuban maize and forced him to make some modifications in his race concept. More recently, Esquivel and Hammer (1992) found pure maize landraces as Criollo, Canilla and Tuzon only in very isolated conucos whereas the vast majority of material collected in gardens forms mixed populations, showing variable degrees of introgression with modern dent maize. New types of dent maize have been collected in Central Cuba with high yields and relatively good popping qualities, possibly as a result of introgression between flint and pop types. On occasions, famers have adopted commercial cultivars of crops with high market potential (mostly maize) and this is the case of var. Yanelis in Guantánamo; nevertheless, the variety is not used within the family since its organoleptic characteristics are not appreciated for the traditional uses (Pinedo et al. 2009). In recent years, Cucurbita moschata commercial variety ‘RG’ virtually invaded Cuban markets causing the disappearance of landraces as Cuero de sapo and Sello de oro which were considered extinct. Hybrid populations between 'RG' and such landraces were found in conucos of Eastern provinces. Home gardens are a place for domestication and selection from wild or weedy forms (Kulpa and Hanelt 1981; Leiva et al. 2001). In Cuba, what is mostly recorded is rather the opposite process, or de-domestication, by which plants escape open field cultivation and readapt to semi-wild conditions in home gardens. Interesting cases are Brassica urbaniana, B. lanceolata and B. juncea, species reported as wild in Cuban home gardens. 6. Socioeconomic and cultural features of conucos in Eastern and Western regions The average family composition of the household managing the home gardens surveyed in Easter and Western regions of Cuba is 5 people. Nevertheless, a much larger number benefit directly or indirectly from home gardens produce. Men are those mostly involved in carrying out agricultural tasks, whereas women take care of specific plants (ornamentals, medicinal species) and animals (very often birds). Table 4 below describes the socio-economic characteristics of home gardens in the target regions (Castiñeiras et al. 2002).


A - 12

Table 4. Main socio-economic characteristics of home gardens in the target regions (Castiñeiras et al. 2002). Region

Elements West East

Predominant conuco

production system roots & tubers, grains, fruit roots & tubers, grains

Gender of conuco

owner 85% men; 15% women 93% men; 7% women

No of beneficiaries of

home garden 17 24

Percentage of families

selling garden produce 92.4 78.5

In the last decades, migratory fluxes from the countryside to cities have caused significant abandonment of rural properties. The increasing level of education among farmers’ children has accelerated this trend, with younger generations becoming involved in non-agricultural activities. Nevertheless, recent years have witnessed a halting and even a certain reversion of this process, favoured by both the adoption of specific agrarian State policies for land distribution, as well as by the better prices of agricultural produce on markets. Keeping more educated people on the land may influence the level of diversity, since a low but positive correlation (r=0.24) was found between the level of education of the owner of the garden, and the number of species. No relationship was observed between time dedicated to care and maintenance of the garden and the total number of species; however, a low but positive relationship was seen between time spent tending the conuco and number of different uses for garden species (r=0.22), satisfying families’ needs and providing more commercialization options (Castiñeiras et al. 2002). A study on the knowledge of the local fauna in the communities of La Melba and Piedra La Vela, both situated in rainforest areas within the RBCT, suggests that the level of human interaction with elements of the local fauna is relatively low. Fauna species most often reported as part of the local diet include hutias (with 21 responses), wild birds (for example, crows, hawks, parrots, with 17 responses), pigs (16), and Cuban boas (7). Therefore, hunting pressure on certain important native species, some of which are listed as Conservation Targets in this report, could be high. Community members also report consuming wild exotic species, like wild boars. Data regarding community knowledge of animals functioning as biological controls, and those acting as disease vectors show that awareness-raising environmental education programs are needed. These environmental education programs serve as a catalyst to involve more people in conservation planning and decision making (Fong et al. 2005).


A - 13

7. Farming practices and agrobiodiversity management The management of the agricultural tasks in most Cuban conucos has little adverse impact on the environment, since in general harvesting, seedbed preparation and weed control are all carried out manually. There is little use of irrigation water while fertilization and pest control is mostly based on the use of organic or organo-synthetic products (Castiñeiras et al. 2002). Of all the gardens surveyed in previous projects, those located in or around protected areas had the best environmental health (soil fertility and management, adequate and dynamic management of the different species within the system, attention to garden tending, no nearby sources of pollution). In non protected areas of the island, a more pronounced tendency towards the use of advanced in place of traditional cultivars was observed and farmers reported smaller proportions of intraspecific diversity. The management of irrigation and fertilization is based on higher, technologically more intensive inputs, especially in gardens located close to urbanized areas. Nevertheless, successful Urban Agriculture programmes include the promotion of underutilized and/or local species cultivated in sustainable systems (CNRG 2007). The greater sustainability in MAB gardens is first of all achieved through the adoption of polycultures, with rotations of species and varieties and then fallow. Common sequences involve maize and beans; maize and boniato (Ipomoea batatas); maize and cassava; maize, beans and pumpkin (Castiñeiras and García 2006). The relative isolation of home gardens in the transition area of the RSCT has determined a certain degree of experimentation with other, more innovative polycultures based on malanga and beans as well as on maní, beans and cassava. In hilly or mountain areas a traditional practice of African origin is that of the so-called agricultura de montón (‘mound cropping’) by which roots and tubers are grown by making small mounds of soil. Farmers’ capacity to store seed is crucial for securing both the year’s harvest and the seed supply for the following year’s crop, especially if one considers that in Cuba 80% of the seed for the new growing season comes from the farmer’s own production or the informal supply systems across the island (Almekinders et al. 1994; Shagarodsky et al. 2007). Furthermore, it has been suggested that available storage systems influence the adoption of improved varieties by farmers, since these may not possess the characteristics which allow them to resist under traditional storage conditions (Latournerie et al. 2006). In the target regions, 100% of farmers store their maize seeds as full cobs without leaves, either at home (45.5%) or in an especially dedicated storage building (33.3%) and generally in yuta bags or in glass or plastic containers sealed with wax. All Cuban farmers use some control strategy against insects and pests in the storage phase for maize. The main forms of control are periodically exposing seeds to the sun (66% of farmers), various types of insecticides (12%) and other means. A relatively common practice is to use leaves of matico (or guayuyo, Piper aduncum), rubbed into the walls of the containers in which seed is stored (6.1%). Bean seeds are stored alternatively in the pod or after threshing, the latter being preferred (58.7% of farmers). Only 43% of farmers use control methods against pests in beans


A - 14

storage. Among the most common methods is the application of ash (27%) or insecticides (32%). Chili sowing material is stored as threshed seed, unless it is semi-domesticated or wild, in which case there is no seed saving. Seed of both crops is mostly conserved within the house and pest control in this phase is basically non existent. 8. Seed systems As described above, most farmers in the regions around the target MAB reserves choose to reproduce their own seed (in approximately 80% of the cases) (Castiñeiras et al. 2002). The most frequent source of initial germplasm is the close family, followed by trusted neighbours and members of the same community. Only when these sources fail to satisfy the farmers’ needs do they turn to the formal sector (Ministry of Agriculture or scientific institutions) (Fernández et al. 2004; Badstue et al. 2006). Table 5. Origin of seed in MAB conucos

Origin of seed material Maize Bean Chili

%

Saved seed 67 83 44

Locally sourced seed 24 15 41

Seed obtained from the formal system 9 2 15

An IPGRI led project on seed system dynamics (2004-2007) looked into the patterns of seed exchange in 36 traditional farms in Western (La Flora, La Tumba, Los Tumbos y Río Hondo) and Eastern communities (La Carolina, La Munición, La Vuelta, Rancho Yagua y Vega Grande) of Cuba (see Table 5). Additional literature reports that, for the major crops analysed in the project, seed exchange occurs mostly within the same community, whereas exchanges between communities do not exceed 19.3% as can be seen in Figure 1.


A - 15

Figure 1. Extent of within and between community seed exchange for bean, maize and chilli

The portion of the total cropping area where self-saved seed was observed during the project is quite relevant, especially for beans, as can be seen in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2. Proportion of the farms’cropping area planted with self-saved seed

Farmers prefer seeds produced in their own farms (Arias 2000; Ortega-Paczka et al. 2000) because they have control over its quality or because their own varieties are likely to be better adapted to unique or specific micro-niches (Dennis et al. 2005). Sometimes a certain extent of seed exchange is used to support local farming practices: in Eastern


A - 16

Cuba, farmers avoid cultivating the same maize variety for more than two years in a row and exchange seeds among neighbours to maintain the necessary rotation (Torres 2007). The speed at which varieties move through exchanges among farmers and communities can be a function of their level of adoption and the knowledge farmers possess about their existence and availability in neighbouring communities. In the East, seed from more widespread varieties such as Cuña and Criollo (maize) and Negro sin brillo and Colorao (common bean) tend to move faster, whereas rarer varieties moved with much lower frequencies or appeared to not move at all, such as in the case of Argentino and Grano grande (maize) and Maní and Blanco (common bean) (Castiñeiras et al. 2009). This suggests the opportunity for interventions promoting the exchange of rare seeds among rural communities, coupled with interventions aimed at securing ex situ collections of such seeds. Successful examples of this kind are available in Cuba, where eight bean, one chilli and two maize cultivars were reintroduced in 2007 in small farms, using seed from the INIFAT genebank and which had originally been collected in those farms but which had then disappeared from cultivation (Castiñeiras et al. 2009). [In the small farms surveyed during the project on seed systems, the figure of so-called nodal farmers who supply seeds to a number of other farmers (four or more in Cuba) emerged. In the East and West regions, 72% and 73% of farmers can be considered nodal farmers for maize. For common and Lima bean a greater portion of farmers use their own saved seed and therefore only 9% nodal farmers in the West and 11% in the East were recorded for common bean, and 10% and 7% in the two regions for Lima bean. Nodal farmers for Lima bean correspond to farmers recognized in their community as those possessing greater diversity in their farms, whereas this is not the case for common bean nodal farmers. There were no nodal farmers for chilli in the Eastern region, maybe also because most C. frutescens populations are concentrated there and there is no seed system for this species. Although C. annuum commercial varieties are grown in the region and farmers do reproduce its seed, they tend not to exchange it in order to avoid accidental cross-fertilization and loss of germination (Badstue 2007). Only one nodal farmer for chilli was recorded (in the RBSR region) who appears to be the one conserving most traditional diversity of the area. An effective instrument to support seed exchange through informal systems is the organization of seed fairs (Almekinders 2000; IIAP et al. 2004). In Cuba, seed fairs have been organized with the intention of benefiting areas where seed systems are particularly weak and agrobiodiversity is declining. MAB reserves have hosted editions of these fairs, thus contributing to raising awareness on the diversity available in other areas of the island, which was displayed and exchanged during the fairs (Castiñeiras et al. 2002). A total of 130 species were exhibited during the seven seed fairs organized in Cuban MABs during 2005-2007, four in Pinar del Río and three in Guantánamo provinces. The fairs were particularly important for exchanging valuable varieties whose seed systems are highly localized. For example, during one of these fairs farmers from a given area who lamented the lack of Lima bean varieties with determined growth, were surprised to find seed of such a kind from another area.


A - 17

A greater number of species was reported in Western seed fairs, reflecting the greater species diversity reported in home gardens of that region. Only 34 out of 130 species were common between the regions. Complementarity measures within fairs in the two regions resulted in a relatively high complementarity index (0.645), confirming the prevalence of unique over common species between the regions. Seed fairs are also an important occasion for farmers to obtain seeds of novel crops with which to experiment and which may offer new sources of income. Cinnamon (Cinnamomun aromaticum) was introduced as part a previous IPGRI led project. It was initially multiplied in the East and gradually spread to other regions through seed fairs, offering farmers elsewhere new market and income generating opportunities (Castiñeiras et al. 2002). 9. Threats and opportunities for small scale sustainable agriculture in MAB ecosystems A combination of threats affects the delicate balance of the reserves’ ecosystems, as well as the wellbeing of the rural communities living at their borders and the diversity of their agricultural systems. On the side of natural ecosystem degradation, the Rapid Biological Inventory (Fong et al. 2005) of the RBCT reported increasing deforestation rates mostly for clearing land for agricultural purposes. Subsequent soil erosion of deforested areas may cause severe damage to the reserve’s habitats and the quality of its soils for agricultural production itself. Water contamination of rivers and groundwater by residuals of mining activities and coffee processing from larger scale enterprises may further affect the park’s ecosystem, calling for a careful evaluation and promotion of agricultural systems compatible with sustainable resource use in a protected area. In Guantánamo province, agro-forestry practices are being introduced and tested at community level according to the principles of Analog Forestry, which could be tested and possibly introduced in the protected area as a more sustainable alternative to land clearance for agriculture (http://www.analogforestrynetwork.org/es/analoga.html). For what concerns agricultural genetic resources, while there are mechanisms in place aimed at monitoring the status of national collections over time (the National Information Sharing Mechanism), there is no direct mechanism for assessing the in situ and on farm risks and losses ex ante. The lack of appropriate technology and funding support for such assessments is a continuing problem, although Cuba has carried out a series of projects on in situ conservation and threats to on farm biodiversity, mostly focused on traditional small scale agriculture and at least partly on MAB reserve areas. Data produced as part of these projects revealed that many farms and gardens had lost significant portions of their traditional varieties, leading to genetic erosion in the field. Before listing any of the most important bottlenecks leading to an increased risk of genetic erosion of the diversity conserved in small farms, it has to be said that those varieties and species which are grown and exchanged at low frequencies are those under


A - 18

greatest threat and which should be prioritized in any conservation strategy. Some of the main problems reported by farmers are: • Increased climate variability and extreme events. Farming systems at all scales are

increasingly affected by climatic variations and extreme events (mostly a predominance of long dry seasons followed by long wet ones), which are becoming the main cause for crop failure and consequently loss of farmer saved seed which, as already discussed, represents a large proportion of total seed planted.

• High incidence of pests and diseases in the field and in the storage phase and poor germination rates. Climatic events and their sudden variations are triggering increased incidence of pests and diseases. In the late nineties a new pest (Thrips palmi) hit important crops such as bean and chilies and made the development of integrated management strategies necessary (Murgido et al. 2002). Integrated pest management has proven effective in managing pests and diseases in a sustainable manner in many countries and ecological contexts. The use of diverse plant species and varietal mixtures is usually included among the various elements of effective IPM strategies.

• Loss of knowledge related to use and conservation and reproduction of traditional crops and varieties (affecting Lima bean among others)

• Insufficient information on the availability of varieties in neighbouring or far farms and gardens

• Low purchasing power by families to buy seeds and improving their pests and disease control methods

• Difficult or expensive access to seed after natural disasters. Furthermore, the mechanisms Cuba has established for agricultural relief after extreme events pay no attention to the recovery and distribution of local, traditional seed.

• Low price of agricultural produce on the market • Small population size of the traditional varieties kept on farm (this is an important

factor constraining the conservation of Lima bean for instance) • Lack of genetic purity in traditional crops and varieties (especially in conucos, crops

are grown very close to one another, which increases cross fertilization especially in crops such as maize and chilli)

Ecological problems due to population increase and a general tendency towards production intensification and are also observed in Cuba, although in protected areas these have been somewhat buffered. The abandonment of some traditional agronomic practices such as granting soils a sufficiently long fallow period has consistently reduced productivity and the level of below and above ground biodiversity important for securing ecosystem functioning and productivity. This practice is most commonly observed in larger conucos and farms where improved varieties requiring more intensive cultivation systems are grown for commercial production while it is less frequent in smaller, subsistence oriented gardens. At the same time, the smaller the farm the smaller the population size of the crops conserved, which leads to increased risks of germplasm loss or loss of genetic integrity of the on-farm populations, through hybridization (as for chilli).


A - 19

10. National and international initiatives and policies relevant for protected areas and agrobiodiversity conservation MAB reserves are recognized formally by UNESCO as important for in situ conservation of plant genetic resources, including agrobiodiversity. Their role in facilitating and supporting the implementation of international agreements on biodiversity conservation and sustainable development is explicitly promoted in UNESCO’s Sevilla strategy (UNESCO 1995). Cuba has signed and ratified nine conventions, two protocols and a Treaty related to genetic resources for food and agriculture, with which the MAB could develop synergies. Furthermore, Cuba’s National Committee on Genetic Resources has formalized their intention to join efforts with the MAB programme for the promotion of biodiversity (Castiñeiras and García 2006). Cuba’s biosphere reserves are included in the World Network of Biospehere Reserves, the Regional Netowrk for Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal (IBEROMaB) and will be included in the incipient Subregional Caribbean Network. These networks provide opportunities to disseminate success stories of natural as well as agricultural biodiversity conservation in MAB reserves and to mainstream good practices and lessons learnt which can be useful in other MAB reserves in the region. UNESCO’s Madrid action plan (UNESCO 2008) provides a list of milestones and actions to be implemented in the MAB reserves in the coming years. Among the milestones for Cuba, the strategy mentions the need to update the country’s reserves’ management plans by 2011. Since proposals have been put forward in the past for the official inclusion of conuco based conservation of agrobiodiversity (Castiñeiras et al. 2002) in MAB reserves, this call would represent an opportunity to incorporate such proposals formally. The Madrid plan also calls for both general and scientific publications to raise awareness on MAB reserves, again providing opportunities to highlight and mainstream the agricultural component and its relevance for the wider ecosystem’s health and ecological functioning. Finally, the plan promotes improved communication on the role of farmers in maintaining the reserve’s integrity. Cuba’s successful experience in this sense through diversity and seed fairs could be further strengthened. Cuba’s political vision on environmental sustainability and development is strongly shaped and supported by the socialist system. The idea of sustainability is intrinsic to the socialist principles that uphold the revolutionary model. This is true especially in terms of the decisive role played by the State, whose economic planning aims at harmoniously projecting long-term use of resources. Socialism in Cuba maintains its focus on environmental protection and sustainable use of natural resources, due to its ethical and social identity, the social solidarity that it engenders and the conceptual unity inherent to socialist governments (CITMA 2007). The creation of the Ministry of Science, Technology, and Environment (CITMA) in 1994 provided an important impetus for environmental policy and management and soon after its establishment a progressive National Environment Strategy was elaborated (1997). Over the ten years of the Strategy’s implementation, many important socio-economic changes occurred at the national level, and the Strategy was revised to strengthen specific components, some of which are particularly relevant for the present project such as those


A - 20

on biological diversity, sustainable forest and watershed management, integrated mountain development, environmental education, desertification and drought and the National System of Protected Areas. In terms of genetic resources, the Environmental Strategy calls for the conservation of the genetic diversity of crops, livestock, and species of trees, fishes, and wildlife collected commercially and other socio-economically valuable species together with the associated local knowledge. It also encourages the development of a normative strategic framework that integrates conservation of biological diversity with the development of genetic resources for food and agriculture. In promoting joint regional and international programs relating to monitoring, management, research, and utilization of biological diversity, the Strategy aims at strengthening coordination and integration between national entities directly or indirectly linked to the conservation and use of biological diversity and encourages synergies between commissions and groups involved in the protection and use of natural resources. One of the most relevant institutions involved in these collaborative efforts on genetic resources is he National System for Genetic Resources, composed by a National Commission, a National Database of Plant Genetic Resources and a network of research institutes, national germplasm collection curators and educational centres. The National Commission was established by the Science Technology and Environment Ministry to oversee and coordinate actions for the conservation, access and sustainable use of the country’s genetic resources and ensures a framework for the equitable sharing of benefits deriving from their use, with the ultimate goal of promoting food security. The National compiles the National Report on the state of genetic resources and of the National Action Plan for conservation and sustainable use. It supports the Government in the design of national policies and actions around genetic resource issues, including norms and regulations which implement the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture at national level (work is underway to implement the Material Transfer Agreements with rules for access and benefit sharing). Cuba grants official protection to those plant varieties developed through conventional breeding programmes by registration in the National Official Varietal List. A positive development in the field of agrobiodiversity, and particularly with relation to underutilized, local diversity is the growing interest in registering local crops and varieties, if not in the Official Varietal List, in separate inventories (Castiñeiras et al. 2006). IPGRI led in situ conservation projects focusing on home gardens and small farms carried out on the island since 1998 have also added to such interest. Some of the inventories developed through these interventions include information on the traditional knowledge related to each species’ use and management and ensuring their continued update could allow to monitoring trends in the conservation and use of locally important resources. The recent inclusion of a few traditional varieties of Lima bean (Enano Pinto), maize and Capsicum in the List undoubtedly represents an incentive from a social-cultural standpoint. Nevertheless, there are no regulatory frameworks to ensure the development or expansion of seed systems for local crops or varieties of relevance for Cuban smallholders. In addition, the inclusion of traditional varieties in the list does not automatically enable the farmer to claim ownership over these. Famers can claim ownership only when the variety complies with the characteristics of distinctiveness,


A - 21

homogeneity and stability, requirements which automatically exclude traditional varieties. The above mentioned in situ conservation projects supported by the active participation of local authorities provided justification for strengthening informal and local seed exchange systems – for instance through the organization of successful diversity fairs and the establishment of a few community seed banks (in the Pinar del Río region and in Batabanó near La Habana), mostly for traditional varieties. Although there is still no official support for small scale seed production from traditional varieties and economic incentives for seed production from local varieties are still scarce, some steps have been taken towards the integration of this activity in the national agricultural context, ranging from involvement of private actors (for example the Grupo Empresarial de Cultivos Varios) to the creation of Urban Seed Farms, building upon the success of Cuba’s Urban Agriculture Programme. An open and dynamic system for seed exchange is often recommended (Vernooy 2007), in which local initiatives are supported, such as the creation of micro-enterprises for production of landrace seed, knowledge and material sharing initiatives (such as diversity fairs) and institutional arrangements which favour access to and use of diversity. In this last respect, improved coordination between ex situ and in situ efforts is auspicable, in order to make diversity more easily accessible to producers. In Cuba itself, examples are available of the potential of using on-farm diversity to restore ex situ collections (Castiñeiras et al. 2007). Indeed, national policies in the area of Urban Agriculture have been of great relevance not only for Cuba’s food security but also for promoting diversity through formal production channels. Specifically, the Urban Agriculture programme (PNAU)’s contribution to enhancing the use of 39 underutilized crops within sustainable cropping systems deserves attention. The main use categories being supported are those capable of delivering the highest benefits in complementing staple foods, such as fruit, vegetable and medicinal species. The Programme has promoted advanced soft and hard grain Lima bean cultivars obtained by material from traditional agricultural systems (CNRG 2007). It has also developed and disseminated integrated pest management plans as well as the use of species with medicinal properties. It has carried out participatory evaluation of crops and varieties, an approach which could be usefully extended to rural areas and home gardens in the present project’s target areas. Within the network of Urban Farms more than 1500 nurseries have been established where grafting of a number of often underutilized local fruit trees is being carried out, with the aim of reproducing enough material to be respond to the demand on local markets (annona, sapote, guava). In recent times, traditional varieties have been used also within other programmes such as the field days of the National Programme for Rice and the Agricultural Diversification Programme of the Ministry of Agriculture (CNRG 2007). The Government has somewhat incorporated the idea of using locally available diversity in its overall agricultural development strategies, by establishing for example that any increase in maize cropping area has to be based on the use of germplasm from the region (which will include traditional varieties alongside commercial ones, although to a lesser extent).


A - 22

It will be important that genetic resources become a priority issue within programmes to educate both farmers and the general public in agriculture and conservation, emphasising the relevance of agrobiodiversity both for ecosystem and human health and incorporating these issues in other areas, such as in nutrition programmes (CNRG 2007). In terms of education and awareness, MAB reserves have already played an important role: since 1986 education and communication programmes for schools and communities as well as participatory trainings on genetic resource conservation and ecotourism initiatives have been developed in the RBSR, promoting the involvement of inhabitants of the reserves in their management (Castiñeiras and García 2006).


A - 23

References Almekinders C (2000) The importance of informal seed sector and its relation with the

legislative framework. GTZ-Eschborn, July 4-5, 2000 Almekinders CJM, NP Louwaars, GH deBrujin (1994) Local seed systems and their

importance for an improved seed supply in developing countries. Euphytica 78: 207-216

Arias LM (2000) Diversidad genética y conservación in situ de los maíces locales de Yucatán, México. Ciencias en Bioquímica, Instituto Tecnológico de Mérida, Yucatán, México.

Badstue LB (2007) Adquisición de semillas: El papel que juega la confianza. LEISA 23: 14-17

Badstue LB, M. Bellon, J. Berthaud et al. (2006) Collective action for the conservation of on-farm genetic diversity in a center of crop diversity: An assessment of the role of traditional farmers’ networks. CAPRi Working Paper 38. IFPRI

Barrios O, V Fuentes, T Shagarosdky et al. (2007) Variabilidad intraespecífica de los recursos genéticos de Capsicum spp. conservados en sistemas de agricultura tradicional en Cuba. Agrotecnia de Cuba 31: 211-219

Castellanos M (1989) Estudio comparativo del germoplasma del genero Vigna. Instituto Superior de Enseñianza Tecnica y Profesional. Facultad de Agronomia. Ciudad Habana, La Habana. 41 pp.

Castiñeiras L, F.A. Guzman, M. C. Duque et al. (2007) AFLPs and morphological diversity of Phaseolus lunatus L. in Cuban home gardens: approaches to recovering the lost ex situ collection Biodiversity and Conservation 16: 2847–2865

Castiñeiras L, M García (2006) Hacia la integración de la conservación de la biodiversidad natural y la biodiversidad agrícola. In: M. García, and L Castiñeiras (eds) La Conservación de la Biodiversidad Agrícola en las Reservas de la Biosfera de Cuba: Un Reto para el Futuro. UNESCO, Paris. ISBN: 959-270-080-X

Castiñeiras L, O. Barrios, L. Fernández et al. (2006) Catalogo de cultivares tradicionales y nombres locales en fincas de las regiones occidental y oriental de Cuba (Frijoal Caballero, Frijol Comun, Ajies-Pimientos, Maiz). INIFAT, La Habana, Cuba

Castiñeiras L, R. Cristóbal, R.Pinedo et al. (2009) Redes de abastecimiento de semillas y limitaciones que enfrenta el sistema informal. In: Hermann M, K Amaya, L Latournerie, and L Castiñeiras (eds) ¿Cómo conservan los agricultores sus semillas en el trópico húmedo de Cuba, México y Perú? Experiencias de un proyecto de investigación en sistemas informales de semillas de chile, frijoles y maíz. Bioversity International, Rome:

Castiñeiras L, Z. Fundora Mayor, T. Shagarodsky et al. (2001) Contribution of home gardens to in situ conservation of plant genetic resources in farming systems—Cuban component. In: Watson JW, and P Eyzaguirre (eds) Home gardens and in situ conservation of plant genetic resources in farming systems. Bioversity International, Rome, Italy:42-56

Castiñeiras L, Z. Fundora Mayor, T. Shagarodsky et al. (2002) Contribution of home gardens to in situ conservation of plant genetic resources in farming systems—


A - 24

Cuban component. In: Watson JW, and P Eyzaguirre (eds) Home gardens and in situ conservation of plant genetic resources in farming systems. Bioversity International, Rome, Italy:42-56

Castiñieiras L, M . Esquivel, L . Lioi et al. (1991) Origin, diversity and utilization of the Cuban germplasm of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L .). Euphytica 57: 1-8

Ceccarelli S (1996) Positive interpretation of genotype by environment interactions in relation to sustainability and biodiversity. Plant adaptation and crop improvement -The International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA).

CITMA (2007) Estrategia Ambiental Nacional. Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnologia y Medio Ambiente. La Habana, Cuba

CNRG (2007) Informe Nacional sobre los RFAA. Comisión Nacional de Recursos Genéticos de Cuba. La Habana, Cuba

Covich A, N Nickerson (1966) Studies of cultivated plants around Choco dwelling clearings, Darien, Panama. Economic Botany 20: 285-301

Dennis E, J. Ilyasov, M.E. van Dusen et al. (2005) Social institutions and seed systems: the diversity of fruits and nuts in Uzbekistan. In: Smale M (ed) Valuing crop biodiversity: on-farm genetic resources and economic change. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK

Esquivel M, K Hammer (1988) The 'conuco'-an important refuge of Cuban plant genetic resources. Kulturpflanze 36: 451-463

Esquivel M, K . Krieghoff, H . Uranga et al. (1989) Collecting plant genetic resources in Cuba. Report of the third mission, March 1988. Kulturpflanze 37: 359-372

Esquivell M, K Hammer (1992) The Cuban homegarden 'conuco': a perspective environment for evolution and in situ conservation of plant genetic resources. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 39: 9-22

Eyzaguirre P (2006) Prefacio. In: M. García, and L Castiñeiras (eds) La Conservación de la Biodiversidad Agrícola en las Reservas de la Biosfera de Cuba: Un Reto para el Futuro. UNESCO, Paris 2006. ISBN: 959-270-080-X

Eyzaguirre P, O Linares (2004) Introduction. In: Eyzaguirre P, and O Linares (eds) Home gardens and Agrobiodiversity. Smithsonian Books, Washington:1-28

Eyzaguirre P, J Watson (2001) Home gardens and agrobiodiversity: an overview across regions. In: Watson JW, and PB Eyzaguirre (eds) Proceedings of the Second International Home garden Workshop. Bioversity International, Rome, Italy:10-13

Fernández L, L Castiñeiras, R Cristóbal et al. (2005) Estudio de la variabilidad in situ de maíces tradicionales cubanos en dos regiones rurales de Cuba. Revista electrónica de Agrotecnia de Cuba Volumen Especial: 97-116

Fernández L, L. Castiñeiras, Z. Fundora-Mayor et al. (2007) Manejo dinámico de maíces tradicionales en fincas de dos áreas rurales de Cuba. Agrotecnia de Cuba 31: 321-326

Fernández L, M Torres, M Sánchez et al. (2004) El cultivo del maíz en Cuba. In: Barandiarán-Gamarra M, A Chávez-Cabrera, R Sevilla-Panizo, and T Narro-León (eds) XX Reunión Latinoamericana de maíz, Lima, Peru. pp. 56-61

Fong A, DF Maceira, WS Alverson et al. (eds) 2005. Cuba: Parque Nacional “Alejandro de Humboldt”. Rapid Biological Inventories Report 14.The Field Museum, Chicago.


A - 25

García M, L. Castiñeiras, T Shagarodsky et al. (2006) Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra del Rosario. In: M. García, and L Castiñeiras (eds) La Conservación de la Biodiversidad Agrícola en las Reservas de la Biosfera de Cuba: Un Reto para el Futuro. UNESCO, Paris. ISBN: 959-270-080-X

García M, L. Castiñeiras, T. Shagarodsky et al. (2005) Conservación de la biodiversidad y uso de las plantas cultivadas en huertos caseros de algunas áreas rurales de Cuba. Mediterranea Serie de Estudios Biológicos Época II

Giraudy C, L Castiñeiras, T Shagarodsky et al. (2006) Reserva de la Biosfera Cuchillas del Toa. In: M. García, and L Castiñeiras (eds) La Conservación de la Biodiversidad Agrícola en las Reservas de la Biosfera de Cuba: Un Reto para el Futuro. UNESCO, Paris. ISBN: 959-270-080-X

Guarino L, M Hoogendijk (2004) Microenvironments. In: Eyzaguirre P, and O Linares (eds) Home gardens and Agrobiodiversity. Smithsonian Books, Washington:31-40

Hodgkin T (2001) Home gardens and the maintenance of genetic diversity. In: Watson JW, and PB Eyzaguirre (eds) Proceedings of the Second International Home garden Workshop. Bioversity International, Rome, Italy:14-18

Hoogerbrugge ID, LO Fresco (1993) Homegarden Systems: Agricultural Characteristics and Challenges. International Institute for Environment and Development. London, UK

IIAP, PNUD, ASAP (2004) Proyecto In Situ. Feria de intercambio de semillas en Tuni Grande Pucara. Available at: http://insitu.org.pe/webinsitu/Feria%20Tuni%20Grande.pdf. Instituto de Investigaciones de la Amazonia Peruana, United Nations Environment Programme, Asociación Savia Andina Pukara

Kulpa W, P Hanelt (1981) Activities regarding collection and evaluation of Polish landraces. Kulturpflanze 29: 81–90

Latournerie L, J. A. Salomón, C. Prott et al. (2006) Importancia del flujo de semilla sobre la diversidad de maíz cultivada en Yucatán. Revista de divulgación de la Fundación Produce, Yucatán. México

Latournerie L, LM Arias, O Barrios et al. (2009) Diversidad en los cultivos tradicionales conservados por los agricultores. In: Hermann M, K Amaya, L Latournerie, and L Castiñeiras (eds) ¿Cómo conservan los agricultores sus semillas en el trópico húmedo de Cuba, México y Perú? Experiencias de un proyecto de investigación en sistemas informales de semillas de chile, frijoles y maíz. Bioversity International, Rome:47-60

Leiva JM, C Azurdia, W Ovando et al. (2001) Contributions of home gardens to in situ conservation in traditional farming systems - Guatemalan component. In: Watson JW, and PB Eyzaguirre (eds) Proceedings of the Second International Home Gardens Workshop. Bioversity International, Rome, Italy:56-72

Marsh R (1998) Building on Traditional Gardening to Improve Household Food Security. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, Italy

MINAG (1998) Ley 80: Ley Forestal. La Habana, Cuba MINAG (2004) Programa para la producción de maíz tierno. pp. 4 MINAG (2007) Base de Datos del Mecanismo Nacional.


A - 26

Muñoz L, A Prats, G Brito (1991) Manual de producción de semillas hortícolas. Reporte de Investigación No. 1. INIFAT, Cuba

Murgido C, L. Vázquez, A. I. Eliozondo et al. (2002) Manejo integrado de plagas de insectos en el cultivo del frijol. Fitosanidad 6: 29-40

Ortega-Paczka R, L. Dzib-Aguilar, L. Arias-Reyes et al. (2000) Seed supply systems: data collection and analysis. Mexico. . In: Jarvis D, B. Sthapit, L. Sears (ed) Conserving agricultural biodiversity in situ: A scientific basis for sustainable agriculture. IPGRI, Rome, Italy:152-154

Pinedo R, L. Collado, L. Arias et al. (2009) Importancia del maíz, frijol, pallar y chile en agroecosistemas tradicionales del trópico húmedo de Cuba, México y Perú. In: Hermann M, K Amaya, L Latournerie, and L Castiñeiras (eds) ¿Cómo conservan los agricultores sus semillas en el trópico húmedo de Cuba, México y Perú? Experiencias de un proyecto de investigación en sistemas informales de semillas de chile, frijoles y maíz. Bioversity International, Rome:31-46

Sevilla R, M Holle (2004) Recursos genéticos vegetales. Luis León Asociados S.R.L. (Ed.), Primera edición

Shagarodsky T, L. Castiñeiras, M. García et al. (2007) Desarrollo de ferias de agrobiodiversidad y semillas como apoyo a la conservación in situ de la biodiversidad en fincas del occidente y el oriente de Cuba. Agrotecnia de Cuba 31: 261-268

Shagarodsky T, V Fuentes, O Barrios (2004) Exposición de la biodiversidad agrícola conservada en áreas rurales de la Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra del Rosario. Memorias de la Reunión Nacional de agrobiodiversidad en Reservas de la Biosfera de Cuba. Instituto de Investigaciones Fundamentales en Agricultura Tropical “Alejandro de Humbolt” (INIFAT). La Havana, Cuba:129-134

Tilman D (2000) Causes, consequences and ethics of biodiversity. Nature 405: 208-211 Torres F (2007) Las rutas de las semillas de papa: el atajo o “camino derecho”. LEISA

Revista Agroecológica 23: 37-39 Troutner M, M Holle (1979) The homestead area in the Atlantic zone of Costa Rica: An

efficient agroecosystem. Meeting of American Society for Horticultural Sciences, Tropical Region, México.

UNESCO (1995) The Seville Strategy for Biosphere Reserves. Available at: http://www.unesco.org/mab/doc/brs/Strategy.pdf. UNESCO, Paris.

UNESCO (2008) Madrid Action Plan for Biosphere Reserves (2008–2013). UNESCO, Paris


Annex B. List of plant species in Sierra del Rosario Biosphere Reserve (RBSR) and the Cuchillas del Toa Biosphere Reserve (RBCT)

Family Genera Taxa Status Common name Primary useAcanthaceae Crossandra Crossandra infundibiliformis Nees. Cultivada Crosandra OrnamentalAcanthaceae Justicia Justicia pectoralis Jacq. var. pectoralis Cultivada Tilo MedicinalAcanthaceae Odontonema Odontonema cuspidatum (Nees in DC.) Kuntze Cultivada - OrnamentalAcanthaceae Sanchezia Sanchezia nobilis Hook. f. var. glaucophylla Cultivada Sankesia OrnamentalAcanthaceae Thunbergia Thunbergia erecta (Benth.) T. Anders. Cultivada Mainereta OrnamentalAgavaceae Agave Agave angustifolia Haw. var. marginata Hort. Cultivada - OrnamentalAgavaceae Agave Agave sp. Cultivada Maguey OrnamentalAgavaceae Cordyline Cordyline fruticosa (L.) A. Chevalier Cultivada Cordiline OrnamentalAgavaceae Cordyline Cordyline magnifica Hort. Cultivada Cuba Libre OrnamentalAgavaceae Dracaena Dracaena marginata Lam. Cultivada Palmita OrnamentalAgavaceae Polianthes Polianthes tuberosa L. Cultivada Azucena OrnamentalAgavaceae Sansevieria Sansevieria hyacinthoides (L.) Druce Cultivada Lengua de vaca Alimento animalAgavaceae Sansevieria Sansevieria trifasciata Hort. ex Prain 'Helnii' Cultivada Lengua de vaca enana OrnamentalAlliaceae Allium Allium cepa L. Cultivada Cebolla CondimentosAlliaceae Allium Allium cepa L. var. aggregatum G. Don Cultivada Cebolla corojo CondimentosAlliaceae Allium Allium chinense G. Don Cultivada Ajo porro CondimentosAlliaceae Allium Allium fistulosum L. Cultivada Cebollino, Ajo de jardín CondimentosAlliaceae Allium Allium sativum L. Cultivada Ajo criollo CondimentosAloaceae Aloe Aloe vera (L.) N. L. Burm. Cultivada Sábila MedicinalAmaranthaceae Alternanthera Alternanthera paronychoides A. St. Hilaire 'Amoena' Cultivada Alternantera OrnamentalAmaranthaceae Alternanthera Alternanthera sp. Cultivada - MedicinalAmaranthaceae Celosia Celosia argentea L. Cultivada Moco de pavo OrnamentalAmaranthaceae Gomphrena Gomphrena globosa L. Cultivada San Diego OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Crinum Crinum zeylanicum (L.) L. Cultivada Lirio de cinta OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Hippeastrum Hippeastrum puniceum (Lam.) Cultivada Kuntze, Taraco OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Hymenocallis Hymenocallis arenicola Northrop Cultivada Lirio sanjuanero OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Zephyranthes Zephyranthes puerotricensis Traub. Cultivada Brujita blanca OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Zephyranthes Zephyranthes rosea Lindl. Cultivada Brujita rosada OrnamentalAnacardiaceae Mangifera Mangifera indica L. Cultivada Mango FrutalAnacardiaceae Spondias Spondias mombin L. Cultivada Jobo Otros usosAnacardiaceae Spondias Spondias purpurea L. Cultivada Ciruela FrutalAnnonaceae Annona Annona muricata L. Cultivada Guanábana FrutalAnnonaceae Annona Annona reticulata L. Cultivada Chirimoya FrutalAnnonaceae Annona Annona squamosa L. Cultivada Anón FrutalApiaceae Eryngium Eryngium foetidum L. Cultivada Culantro CondimentosApocynaceae Allamanda Allamanda cathartica L. Cultivada Flor de barbero Ornamental

Plant Species - Sierra del Rosario Biosphere Reserve

Plant Species - BRSR


B - 1

Family Genera Taxa Status Common name Primary usePlant Species - BRSR

Apocynaceae Catharanthus Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Don Cultivada Vicaria MedicinalApocynaceae Nerium Nerium oleander L. Cultivada Adelfa OrnamentalApocynaceae Plumeria Plumeria rubra L. Cultivada Súcheli OrnamentalApocynaceae Tabernaemontana Tabernaemontana citrifolia L. Cultivada Jazmín café MedicinalApocynaceae Tabernaemontana Tabernaemontana divaricata (L.) R. Br. Cultivada Jazmín de montaña OrnamentalAraceae Aglaonoema Aglaonoema sp. Cultivada - OrnamentalAraceae Anthurium Anthurium crassinervium (Jacq.) Schott Cultivada Anturio gigante OrnamentalAraceae Anthurium Anthurium sp. Cultivada Malanga OrnamentalAraceae Caladium Caladium bicolor (Ait.) Vent. Cultivada Corazón de cabrito OrnamentalAraceae Colocasia Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott et Endl. Cultivada Malanga Raices y tubérculosAraceae Dieffenbachia Dieffenbachia seguine (Jacq.) Schott in Schott et Endl. Cultivada Dicha OrnamentalAraceae Syngonium Syngonium auritum (L.) Schot in Schott et Endl. Cultivada Malanga OrnamentalAraceae Xanthosoma Xanthosoma atrovirens Koch et Bouche Cultivada Malanga amarilla Raices y tubérculosAraceae Xanthosoma Xanthosoma nigrum (Vell.) Mansf. Cultivada Malanga morada OrnamentalAraceae Xanthosoma Xanthosoma sagittifolium (L.) Schott in Schott et Endl. Cultivada Malanga Raices y tubérculosAraliaceae Polyscias Polysicias guilfoley (Bull) L.H.Bailey Cultivada Aralia OrnamentalArecaceae Cocos Cocos nucifera L. Cultivada Coco FrutalArecaceae Dypsis Dypsis lutescens (Bory) W. Wendl. Cultivada Areca OrnamentalAsclepiadaceae Hoya Hoya carnosa (L. f.) R. Br. Cultivada Flor de cera OrnamentalAsteraceae Bidens Bidens pilosa L. var. radiata Sch. - Bip. Cultivada Romerillo MedicinalAsteraceae Lactuca Lactuca sativa L. Cultivada Lechuga VegetalAsteraceae Montanoa Montanoa hibiscifolia C. Koch. Cultivada Montanoa OrnamentalAsteraceae Pluchea Pluchea carolinensis (Jacq.) G. Don Cultivada Salvia MedicinalAsteraceae Zinnia Zinnia elegans Jacq. Cultivada Clavelón OrnamentalBalsaminaceae Impatiens Impatiens balsamina L. Cultivada Madama OrnamentalBalsaminaceae Impatiens Impatiens wallerana J. D. Hook. f. in Oliver Cultivada Madama china OrnamentalBegoniaceae Begonia Begonia erytophylla Newman Cultivada Begonia OrnamentalBegoniaceae Begonia Begonia sp. Cultivada Begonia OrnamentalBignoniaceae Crescentia Crescentia cujete L. Cultivada Guira Otros usosBignoniaceae Podranea Podranea riacasolina (Tanf.) in Sprague Cultivada - OrnamentalBixaceae Bixa Bixa orellana L. Cultivada Bija, achote CondimentosBombacaceae Pachira Pachira aquatica Aubl. Cultivada Carolina OrnamentalBoraginaceae Gerascanthus Gerascanthus coloccocus (L.) Borhidi Cultivada Ateje Alimento animalBrassicaceae Brassica Brassica juncea (L.) Czern. Cultivada Mostaza CondimentosBrassicaceae Lepidium Lepidium virginicum L. Cultivada Mastuerzo MedicinalBrassicaceae Sinapis Sinapis alba L. Cultivada Mostaza CondimentosBromeliaceae Ananas Ananas comosus (L.) Merr. Cultivada Piña FrutalBromeliaceae Bromelia Bromelia pinguin L. Cultivada Piña de ratón Cerca vivaCactaceae Opuntia Opuntia cochenillifera (L.) Mill. Cultivada Tuna mansa OrnamentalCactaceae Opuntia Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Mill. Cultivada Cerca vivaCactaceae Opuntia Opuntia sp. Cultivada Tuna MedicinalCactaceae Opuntia Opuntia stricta Haw. var. dillenii (Ker-Gawler) L. Bensun Cultivada Tuna brava OrnamentalCaesalpinaceae Bauhinia Bauhinia purpurea L. Cultivada Pata de vaca OrnamentalCaesalpinaceae Caesalpinia Caesalpina pulcherrima (L.) Sw. Cultivada Guacamaya Medicinal


B - 2


Caesalpinaceae Cassia Cassia grandis L. f. Cultivada BebidaCaesalpinaceae Delonix Delonix regia (Bojer ex Hook.) Raf. Cultivada Flamboyant OrnamentalCaesalpinaceae Peltophorum Peltophorum pterocarpum (DC.) Backer ex K. Hen Cultivada Framboyán amarillo OrnamentalCaesalpinaceae Senna Senna alata (L.) Roxb. Cultivada Guacamaya francesa MedicinalCannaceae Canna Canna indica L. Cultivada Platanillo de Cuba Raices y tubérculosCannaceae Canna Canna x generalis Bailey Cultivada Platanillo de Cuba OrnamentalCapparaceae Cleome Cleome sp. Cultivada Uña de gato OrnamentalCapparaceae Sambucus Sambucus mexicana K. B. Presl. ex DC. Cultivada Saúco blanco OrnamentalCaricaceae Carica Carica papaya L. Cultivada Fruta bomba FrutalCaryophyllaceae Dianthus Dianthus caryophyllus L. Cultivada Clavel OrnamentalCasuarinaceae Casuarina Casuarina equisetifolia L. ex J.R. et J. G. Foster Cultivada Casuarina OrnamentalChenopodiaceae Teloxys Teloxys ambrosioides (L.) W. A. Weber Cultivada Apasote MedicinalChrysobalanaceae Chyrsobalanus Chyrsobalanus icaco L. Cultivada Icaco Otros usosClusiaceae Mammea Mammea americana L. Cultivada Mamey de Santo Domingo FrutalCombretaceae Quisqualis Quisqualis indica L. Cultivada Piscuala OrnamentalCommelinaceae Callisa Callisa repens L. Cultivada Calisa OrnamentalCommelinaceae Cyanetis Cyanetis somalensis C. B. Clarke Cultivada Cucaracha peluda OrnamentalCommelinaceae Tradescantia Tradescantia pallida (Rosel) D. R. Hunt Cultivada Cucaracha morada OrnamentalCommelinaceae Tradescantia Tradescantia spatahacea Sw. Cultivada Cordován OrnamentalConvolvulaceae Ipomoea Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam. Cultivada Boniato Raices y tubérculosCostaceae Costus Costus sp. Cultivada Caña mejicana MedicinalCostaceae Costus Costus speciosus (Koening) J. E. Smith Cultivada Caña americana, cañuela santa MedicinalCostaceae Costus Costus spicatus (Jacq.) Roscoe Cultivada Caña mejicana MedicinalCrassulaceae Bryophyllum Bryophyllum pinnatum (Lam.) Oken Cultivada Siempreviva OrnamentalCrassulaceae Echeveria Echeveria pallida E. Walth. Cultivada - OrnamentalCrassulaceae Kalanchoe Kalanchoe blossfeldiana V. Poell. Cultivada Santa Bárbara OrnamentalCrassulaceae Kalanchoe Kalanchoe fedtschenkoi Hamet et Perr. Cultivada Siempre viva OrnamentalCrassulaceae Kalanchoe Kalanchoe sp. Cultivada Majá OrnamentalCrassulaceae Kalanchoe Kalanchoe tubiflora (Harvey) Hamet Cultivada Majá OrnamentalCrassulaceae Sedum Sedum morganianum E. Walth. Cultivada Granito de arroz OrnamentalCucurbitaceae Benincasa Benincasa hispida (Thunb.) Cogn. in DC. Cultivada Calabaza china VegetalCucurbitaceae Citrullus Citrullus lanatus (Thunb.) Matsumura et Nakai Cultivada Melón de agua FrutalCucurbitaceae Cucumis Cucumis melo L. Cultivada Melón de castilla Otros usosCucurbitaceae Cucumis Cucumis sativus L. Cultivada Pepino VegetalCucurbitaceae Cucurbita Cucurbita moschata (Duch. ex Lam.) Duch. ex Poir Cultivada Calabaza VegetalCucurbitaceae Luffa Luffa aegyptiaca Mill. Cultivada Estropajo Otros usosCucurbitaceae Sechium Sechium edule (Jacq.) Sw. Cultivada Chayote VegetalCycadaceae Cycas Cycas revoluta L. Cultivada Alcanfor OrnamentalDioscoreaceae Dioscorea Dioscorea alata L. Cultivada Ñame Raices y tubérculosDioscoreaceae Dioscorea Dioscorea cayenensis Lam. Cultivada Ñame amarillo Raices y tubérculosEuphorbiaceae Acalypha Acalypha hispida Burm. f. Cultivada Rabo de gato OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Acalypha Acalypha wilkesiana Muell. Arg. Cultivada Acalifa OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Codiaeum Codiaeum variegatum (L.) Blume Cultivada Croto OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia leucocephala ritr Cultivada Euphorbia Ornamental


B - 3


Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia mili Ch. des Moulins Cultivada Corona de Cristo OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia trigona Haw. Cultivada Corona de la reina OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Jatropha Jatropha aethiopica Muell. Arg. Cultivada Chaya, mata diabetes OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Jatropha Jatropha curcas L. Cultivada Piñón botija OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Jatropha Jatropha multifida L. Cultivada Ceibilla MedicinalEuphorbiaceae Manihot Manihot esculenta Crantz Cultivada Yuca Raices y tubérculosEuphorbiaceae Pedilanthus Pedilanthus tithymaloides (L.) Poit. Cultivada Itamo real MedicinalFabaceae Arachis Arachis hypogaea L. Cultivada Maní Otros usosFabaceae Cajanus Cajanus cajan (L.) Huth. Cultivada Gandul Alimento animalFabaceae Canavalia Canavalia ensiformis (L.) DC. Cultivada Nescafé BebidaFabaceae Gliricidia Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Kunth ex Walp. Cultivada Jupiter Cerca vivaFabaceae Oritrina Oritrina variegata var. orientalis (L.) Merr. in Stichm. Cultivada Piñón OrnamentalFabaceae Phaseolus Phaseolus lunatus L. Cultivada Frijol caballero GranosFabaceae Phaseolus Phaseolus vulgaris L. Cultivada Frijol GranosFabaceae Vigna Vigna umbellata (Thunb.) Ohwi et Ohashi Cultivada Frijol picolina VegetalFabaceae Vigna Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp. subs. sesquipedalis (L.) Verdc. Cultivada Habichuela china VegetalFabaceae Vigna Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp., subsp. unguiculata Cultivada GranosGesneriaceae Chrysanthemis Chrysanthemis pulchella (J. Donn ex Sims) Descasine Cultivada Begonia OrnamentalGesneriaceae Episcia Episcia cupreatra (Hook.) Hanstein Cultivada Barba de Aarón OrnamentalGesneriaceae Episcia Episcia lilacina Hanstein Cultivada Barba de Aarón OrnamentalHaemodoraceae Xiphidium Xiphidium caeruleum Aubl. Cultivada Mandelamina MedicinalHeliconiaceae Heliconia Heliconia rostrata Ruiz et Pavón Cultivada Heliconia OrnamentalHeliconiaceae Heliconia Heliconia wagneriana Petersen Cultivada Heliconia OrnamentalIridaceae Gladiolus Gladiolus communis L. Cultivada Gladiolo OrnamentalLamiaceae Mentha Mentha spicata L. Cultivada Hieba buena MedicinalLamiaceae Ocimum Ocimum basilicum L. Cultivada Albahaca MedicinalLamiaceae Ocimum Ocimum gratissimum L. Cultivada Oregano cimarron MedicinalLamiaceae Ocimum Ocimum tenuiflorum L. Cultivada Albahaca morada CondimentosLamiaceae Origanum Origanum majorana L. Cultivada Mejorana MedicinalLamiaceae Plectranthus Plectranthus amboinicus (Lour.) Spreng. Cultivada Orégano francés CondimentosLamiaceae Plectranthus Plectranthus nummularius Briq. Cultivada Mata del dinero OrnamentalLamiaceae Rosmarinus Rosmarinus officinalis L. Cultivada Romero MedicinalLamiaceae Solenostemon Solenostemon scutellarioides (L.) Codd. Cultivada Manto OrnamentalLauraceae Persea Persea americana Mill. Cultivada Aguacate FrutalLiliaceae Asparagus Asparagus plumosus J. G. Baker Cultivada Espárrago OrnamentalLiliaceae Asparagus Asparagus sprengeri Regel Cultivada Espárrago OrnamentalLiliaceae Clorophyton Clorophyton stembergianum Steud. Cultivada Mala madre OrnamentalLiliaceae Eucharis Eucharis grandiflora Planch. et Lindl. Cultivada Estrella americana OrnamentalLiliaceae Hemerocallis Hemerocallis fulva (L.) L. Cultivada Lirio turco OrnamentalLytrhaceae Cuphea Cuphea hyssopifolia Kunth Cultivada Cufia OrnamentalLytrhaceae Lagerstroemia Lagerstroemia indica L. Cultivada Júpiter OrnamentalMalvaceae Abelmoschus Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench. Cultivada Quimbombó VegetalMalvaceae Gossypium Gossypium hirsutum L. Cultivada Algodón MedicinalMalvaceae Gossypium Gossypium sp. Cultivada Algodón Medicinal


B - 4


Malvaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus pernambucencis Arruda Cultivada Majagua Otros usosMalvaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L. Cultivada Marpacífico OrnamentalMalvaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus sabdariffa L. Cultivada Serení MedicinalMalvaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus schizopetalus L. Cultivada Farolito chino OrnamentalMalvaceae Malvabiscus Malvabiscus arboreus Cavanilles var. mexicanus Schlechtendahl Cultivada Lágrimas de señorita OrnamentalMarantaceae Maranta Maranta arundinacea L. Cultivada Sagú Raices y tubérculosMeliaceae Melia Melia azedarach L. Cultivada Paraiso MedicinalMoraceae Artocarpus Artocarpus communis J.R. et J. F. Foster Cultivada Arbol del pan Otros usosMusaceae Musa Musa acuminata Colla Cultivada Plátano congo FrutalMusaceae Musa Musa x paradisiaca L. Cultivada Plátano FrutalMyrtaceae Psidium Psidium guajava L. Cultivada Guayaba FrutalMyrtaceae Syzygium Syzygium malaccense (L.) Merr. et Perry Cultivada Albaricoque, pera FrutalNyctaginaceae Bougainvillaea Bougainvillaea glabra Choisy Cultivada Buganvil OrnamentalNyctaginaceae Bougainvillaea Bougainvillaea spectabilis Willd. Cultivada Bugnavil OrnamentalNyctaginaceae Mirabilis Mirabilis jalapa L. Cultivada Maravilla OrnamentalOleaceae Jasminum Jasminum sambac (L.) Ait. Cultivada Jazmín OrnamentalOrchidaceae Bletia Bletia purpurea (Lam.) DC. Cultivada Candelaria OrnamentalOrchidaceae Cattleya Cattleya sp. Cultivada Orquídea OrnamentalOrchidaceae Encyclia Encyclia phoenicea (Lindl.) Cogn. Cultivada Flor de San Pedro OrnamentalOrchidaceae Encyclia Encyclia sp. Cultivada Orquídea OrnamentalOrchidaceae Epidendrum Epidendrum difforme Jacq. Cultivada Orquídea OrnamentalOrchidaceae Oncidium Oncidium luridum (Sw.) Salisb. Cultivada Oreja de burro OrnamentalOrchidaceae Schomburgkia Schomburgkia tibicinis Baten Cultivada Buho OrnamentalOrchidaceae Spathoglottis Spathoglottis plicata Blume Cultivada Orquídea OrnamentalOxalidaceae Averrhoa Averrhoa bilimbi L. Cultivada Pepinillo CondimentosPassifloraceae Passiflora Passiflora edulis Sims Cultivada Maracuyá BebidaPedaliaceae Sesamum Sesamum orientale L. Cultivada Ajonjolí Otros usosPiperaceae Peperomia Peperomia arrepta Tril. Cultivada Charol OrnamentalPiperaceae Piper Piper sp. Cultivada - MedicinalPiperaceae Potomorphe Potomorphe umbellata (L.) Miq. Cultivada Caisimón MedicinalPlumbaginaceae Plumbago Plumbago auriculata Lam. Cultivada Embeleso OrnamentalPoaceae Bambusa Bambusa vulgaris Schrander ex Wendel. Cultivada Caña brava Otros usosPoaceae Cymbopogon Cymbopogon citratus (DC.) Stapf. Cultivada Caña santa MedicinalPoaceae Oryza Oryza sativa L. Cultivada Arroz GranosPoaceae Saccharum Saccharum officinarum L. Cultivada Caña de azucar Otros usosPoaceae Zea Zea mays L. Cultivada Maiz GranosPolemoniaceae Plox Plox drumondii Hook. in Curtis Cultivada Primavera OrnamentalPolygonaceae Antigonon Antigonon leptopus Hook. et Arn. Cultivada Coralillo OrnamentalPolypodiaceae Adiantus Adiantus capillus-veneris L. Cultivada Culantrillo de pozo OrnamentalPolypodiaceae Platycerium Platycerium alciforme Desv. Cultivada Cabeza de reno OrnamentalPontederiaceae Eichhornia Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.) Solms. Cultivada Jacinto de agua OrnamentalPortulacaceae Portulaca Portulaca grandiflora Hook. in Curt. Cultivada Diez del día OrnamentalPortulacaceae Portulaca Portulaca oleracea L. Cultivada Verdolaga de jardín OrnamentalPortulacaceae Portulaca Portulaca pilosa L. Cultivada Diez del día Ornamental


B - 5


Punicaceae Punica Punica granatum L. Cultivada Granada FrutalRosaceae Prunus Prunus persica (L.) Batsch. Cultivada Melocotón FrutalRosaceae Rosa Rosa sp. Cultivada Rosa OrnamentalRubiaceae Coffea Coffea arabica L. Cultivada Café BebidaRubiaceae Gardenia Gardenia augusta (L.) Merrill Cultivada Gardenia OrnamentalRubiaceae Ixora Ixora coccinea L. Cultivada Santa Rita OrnamentalRubiaceae Pentas Pentas lanceolata (Fors.) Deflers Cultivada Pentas OrnamentalRutaceae Citrus Citrus aurantiifolia (Christm. et Pranz) Swingle Cultivada Limón criollo CondimentosRutaceae Citrus Citrus aurantium L. Cultivada Naranja agria CondimentosRutaceae Citrus Citrus bergamia Risso et Poit. Cultivada Bergamota MedicinalRutaceae Citrus Citrus limetta Risso Cultivada Lima de ombligo FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus limon Burm Cultivada Limón agrio, limón CondimentosRutaceae Citrus Citrus limon Burm f. x Citrus medica L. Cultivada Limón francés Otros usosRutaceae Citrus Citrus madurensis Lour. Cultivada Mandarina de San José FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus medica L. Cultivada Cidra Otros usosRutaceae Citrus Citrus reticulata Blanco Cultivada Mandarina FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck Cultivada Naranja dulce FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus x paradisi Macf. in Hook. Cultivada Toronja, grifu FrutalRutaceae Murraya Murraya paniculata (L.) Jacq. Cultivada Muraya OrnamentalRutaceae Ruta Ruta chalepensis L. Cultivada Ruda MedicinalSapindaceae Melicoccus Melicoccus bijugatus Jacq. Cultivada Mamoncillo FrutalSapotaceae Chrysophyllum Chrysophyllum cainito L. Cultivada Caimito FrutalSapotaceae Chrysophyllum Chrysophyllum oliviforme L. Cultivada Caimitillo FrutalSapotaceae Manilkara Manilkara sapota (L.) van Royen Cultivada Sapote FrutalSapotaceae Pouteria Pouteria campechiana (Humb., Bonpl. et Kunt) Baehni Cultivada Canistel FrutalSapotaceae Pouteria Pouteria sapota (Jacq.) H. E. Moore et Stearn Cultivada Mamey colorado, sapote FrutalScrophulariaceae Angelonia Angelonia pilosella Kickx Cultivada No me olvides OrnamentalScrophulariaceae Ruselia Ruselia equisetiformis Schletcht.et Cham. Cultivada Lágrimas de Cupido OrnamentalSolanaceae Brugmansia Brugmansia x candida Pers. Cultivada Campana OrnamentalSolanaceae Brugmansia Brugmansia x cubensis (V. R. Fuentes) V. R. Fuentes Cultivada Campana OrnamentalSolanaceae Brunfelsia Brunfelsia jamaicensis Griseb. Cultivada Galán de noche OrnamentalSolanaceae Brunfelsia Brunfelsia nitida Benth. in DC. Cultivada Galán OrnamentalSolanaceae Capsicum Capsicum annuum L. Cultivada Ají de jardín CondimentosSolanaceae Capsicum Capsicum chinense Jacq. Cultivada Ají cachucha CondimentosSolanaceae Capsicum Capsicum frutescens L. Cultivada Ají guaguao CondimentosSolanaceae Datura Datura metel L. var. fastuosa (Bernh.) Danert Cultivada Chamico morado OrnamentalSolanaceae Lycopersicon Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. Cultivada Tomate de ensalada, placero, guirito VegetalSolanaceae Lycopersicon Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. var. cerasiforme (Dunal) Alef Cultivada Tomate cimarrón CondimentosSymphoremaceae Congea Congea tomentosa Roxb. Cultivada Lluvia de orquídeas OrnamentalTurneraceae Turnera Turnera ulmifolia L. Cultivada Marilope MedicinalUrticaceae Pilea Pilea involucrata Cultivada Frescura OrnamentalUrticaceae Pilea Pilea microphylla (L.) Liebm. Cultivada Frescura OrnamentalVerbenaceae Duranta Duranta repens L. Cultivada No me olvides OrnamentalVerbenaceae Lippia Lippia alba (Mill.) N. E. Brown Cultivada Quita dolor, flor de España, menta americana Medicinal


B - 6


Verbenaceae Lippia Lippia micromera Schau. In DC. Cultivada Oreganito CondimentosVerbenaceae Stachytarpheta Stachytarpheta jamaicensis (L.) Vahl Cultivada Verbena, verbena cimarrona MedicinalVerbenaceae Verbena Verbena sp. Cultivada Verbena OrnamentalVerbenaceae Vitex Vitex agnus-castus L. Cultivada Vencedor OrnamentalVerbenaceae Vitex Vitex trifolia L. Cultivada Yo puedo más que tú OrnamentalVitaceae Vitis Vitis vinifera L. Cultivada Uva BebidaZingiberaceae Alpinia Alpinia purpurata Vieillard ex Schumann in Engler Cultivada Alpinia roja OrnamentalZingiberaceae Alpinia Alpinia zerumbet (Peerson) Brutt et R.M. Smith Cultivada Colonia MedicinalZingiberaceae Curcuma Curcuma zedoaria (Berg.) Roscoe Cultivada - OrnamentalZingiberaceae Etlingera Etlingera elatior (Jack) R. M. Smith Cultivada Bastón del Emperador OrnamentalZingiberaceae Hedychium Hedychium coronarium Koen. in Retz. Cultivada Mariposa blanca MedicinalZingiberaceae Hedychium Hedychium gardnerianum Roscoe Cultivada Mariposa amarilla OrnamentalZingiberaceae Kaempferia Kaempferia rotunda L. Cultivada Gengibre OrnamentalZingiberaceae Zingiber Zingiber officinale (L.) Roscoe Cultivada Gengibre MedicinalAnnonaceae Oxandra Oxandra lanceolata (Sw.) Benth. Silvestre Algarrobo, yaya MedicinalArecaceae Roystonea Roystonea regia (Kunth) O. F. Cook Silvestre Palma real Madera casaArecaceae Sabal Sabal florida Becc. Silvestre Palma cana Madera casaAsteraceae Bidens Bidens pilosa L. Silvestre Romerillo MedicinalAsteraceae Parthenium Parthenium hysterophorus L. Silvestre Escoba amarga MedicinalAsteraceae Xanthium Xanthium strumarium L. Silvestre Guizazo de caballo MedicinalBoraginaceae Tournefortia Tournefortia hirsotissima L. Silvestre Nigua MedicinalBoraginaceae Varronia Varronia globosa (Jacq.) Borhidi Silvestre Yerba de la sangre MedicinalBurseraceae Bursera Bursera simaruba (L.) Sarg. Silvestre Almácigo MedicinalCaesalpinaceae Caesalpinia Caesalpinia vesicaria L. Silvestre Brasil MedicinalCaesalpinaceae Senna Senna occidentalis (L.) Link. Silvestre Yerba hedionda MedicinalClusiaceae Calophyllum Calophyllum antillanum Britt. Silvestre Ocuje Madera casaClusiaceae Garcinia Garcinia aristata (Griseb.) Borhidi Silvestre Manajú MedicinalCucurbitaceae Momordica Momordica charantia L. Silvestre Cundeamor MedicinalErythroxylaceae Erythroxylon Erythroxylon confusum Britt. Silvestre Arabo Madera casaErythroxylaceae Erythroxylon Erythroxylon havanensis Jacq. Silvestre Jibá MedicinalFabaceae Andira Andira jamaicensis (W. Wr.) Urb. Silvestre Yaba Madera casaFlacourtiaceae Casearia Casearia sylvestris Sw. Silvestre Sarnilla Madera casaMalvaceae Gossypium Gossypium arboreum L. Silvestre Algodón MedicinalMalvaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus tiliaceus L. Silvestre Majagua Madera casaMeliaceae Cedrela Cedrela odorata L. Silvestre Cedro Madera casaMeliaceae Guarea Guarea trichilioides L. Silvestre Yamao Madera casaMeliaceae Swietenia Swietenia mahagoni (L.) Jacq. Silvestre Caobilla Madera casaMeliaceae Trichilia Trichilia hirta L. Silvestre Cabo de hacha Madera casaMimosaceae Acacia Acacia farneciana (L.) Willd. Silvestre Aroma Madera casaMimosaceae Dichrostachys Dichrostachys cinerea (L.) Wight. Et Arnot. Silvestre Marabú Madera casaMimosaceae Samanea Samanea saman (Jacq.) Merrill Silvestre Algarrobo Otros usosMoraceae Cecropia Cecropia schreberiana Miq. Silvestre Yagruma MedicinalMoraceae Ficus Ficus membranacea C. Wr. Silvestre Jaguey colorado Madera casaMoraceae Pseudolmedia Pseudolmedia spuria (Sw.) Griseb. Silvestre Macagua Madera casa


B - 7


Moraceae Trophys Trophys racemosa (L.) Urb. Silvestre Ramon de caballo Madera otros usosMyrtaceae Eugenia Eugenia axillaris (Sw.) Willd. Silvestre Guairaje Madera casaMyrtaceae Syzygium Syzygium jambos (L.) Alston in Trimen Silvestre Pomarrosa Madera casaPiperaceae Piper Piper aduncum L. Silvestre Platanillo de Cuba MedicinalPoaceae Panicum Panicum maximum Jacq. Silvestre Hierba de guinea MedicinalPolypodiaceae Polypodium Polypodium polypodioides (L.) Hitchc. Silvestre Doradilla MedicinalRosaceae Prunus Prunus occidentalis Sw. Silvestre Cuajaní MedicinalRubiaceae Hamelia Hamelia patens Jacq. Silvestre Ponasí MedicinalRutaceae Zanthoxylum Zanthoxylum martinicense (Lam.) DC Silvestre Ayúa Madera casaSapindaceae Allophylus Allophylus cominia L. Silvestre Palo caja MedicinalSapindaceae Cupania Cupania macrophylla A. Rich. Silvestre Guara Madera casaSapindaceae Matayba Matayba opoositifolia (A. Rich.) Britt. Silvestre Macurije Otros usosSapotaceae Mastichodendron Mastichodendron foetidissimum Jacq. Silvestre Jocuma Madera casaSmilaceae Smilax Smilax dominguensis Willd. Silvestre Raiz de china MedicinalSolanaceae Solanum Solanum torvum Sw. Silvestre Pendejera MedicinalSterculiaceae Guazuma Guazuma ulmifolia Lam. Silvestre Guasima Madera casaUrticaceae Urera Urera baccifera (L.) Gaud. Silvestre Chichicate MedicinalVerbenaceae Lippia Lippia dulcis Trevir Silvestre Orozoz MedicinalVerbenaceae Tectonia Tectonia grandis L. Silvestre Teca Madera casaVitaceae Cissus Cissus verticillata (L.) Nicolson et Jarvis Silvestre Bejuco ubí Medicinal

Families 91Genera 235Taxa 320Cultivated 270Wild 50


B - 8

Family Genera Taxa Status Common name Primary useAcanthaceae Justicia Justicia pectoralis Jacq. var. pectoralis Cultivada Tilo MedicinalAcanthaceae Odontonema Odontonema cuspidatum (Nees in DC.) Kuntze Cultivada - OrnamentalAcanthaceae Thunbergia Thunbergia grandiflora (Roxb. ex Rutt.) Roxb. Cultivada Fauto OrnamentalAgavaceae Cordyline Cordyline fruticosa (L.) A. Chevalier Cultivada Cordiline Cerca vivaAgavaceae Cordyline Cordyline magnifica Hort. Cultivada Cuba Libre OrnamentalAgavaceae Sansevieria Sansevieria hyacinthoides (L.) Druce Cultivada Lengua de vaca OrnamentalAizoaceae Aptenia Aptenia cordifolia Schwantes Cultivada - OrnamentalAlliaceae Allium Allium cepa L. var. aggregatum G. Don Cultivada Cebolla corojo CondimentosAlliaceae Allium Allium chinense G. Don Cultivada Ajo porro CondimentosAlliaceae Allium Allium tuberosum Cultivada Cebollino, Ajo de montaña CondimentosAloaceae Aloe Aloe vera (L.) N. L. Burm. Cultivada Sábila MedicinalAmaranthaceae Gomphrena Gomphrena globosa L. Cultivada San Diego OrnamentalAmaranthaceae Iresine Iresine herbstii Hook. Cultivada Molleja OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Crinum Crinum sp. Cultivada Lirio OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Crinum Crinum zeylanicum (L.) L. Cultivada Lirio de cinta OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Hippeastrum Hippeastrum puniceum (Lam.) Cultivada Kuntze, Taraco OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Hymenocallis Hymenocallis arenicola Northrop Cultivada Lirio sanjuanero OrnamentalAnacardiaceae Mangifera Mangifera indica L. Cultivada Mango FrutalAnacardiaceae Spondias Spondias purpurea L. Cultivada Ciruela FrutalAnnonaceae Annona Annona muricata L. Cultivada Guanábana FrutalAnnonaceae Annona Annona reticulata L. Cultivada Chirimoya FrutalApiaceae Coriandrum Coriandrum sativum L. Cultivada Culantro CondimentosApiaceae Daucus Daucus carota L. Cultivada Encaje de la reina OrnamentalApiaceae Eryngium Eryngium foetidum L. Cultivada Culantro CondimentosApiaceae Foeniculum Foeniculum vulgare Mill. Cultivada Hinojo CondimentosApiaceae Petroselinum Petroselinum crispum (Mill.) Nym. Cultivada Perejil CondimentosApocynaceae Allamanda Allamanda cathartica L. Cultivada Flor de barbero OrnamentalApocynaceae Catharanthus Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Don Cultivada Vicaria MedicinalApocynaceae Nerium Nerium oleander L. Cultivada Adelfa OrnamentalAraceae Caladium Caladium bicolor (Ait.) Vent. Cultivada Corazón de cabrito OrnamentalAraceae Dieffenbachia Dieffenbachia seguine (Jacq.) Schott in Schott et Endl. Cultivada Dicha OrnamentalAraceae Xanthosoma Xanthosoma sagittifolium (L.) Schott in Schott et Endl. Cultivada Malanga Raices y tubérculosAraliaceae Polyscias Polyscias sp. Cultivada Aralia OrnamentalArecaceae Cocos Cocos nucifera L. Cultivada Coco FrutalAsteraceae Ambrosia Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. Cultivada Artemisa MedicinalAsteraceae Artemisia Artemisia absintihium L. Cultivada Ajenjo MedicinalAsteraceae Bidens Bidens leucantha Willd. Cultivada Romerillo de jardín OrnamentalAsteraceae Bidens Bidens pilosa L. var. radiata Sch. - Bip. Cultivada Romerillo MedicinalAsteraceae Coreopsis Coreopsis tinctoria Nuttall Cultivada Estrella del norte OrnamentalAsteraceae Dahlia Dahlia pinnata Cav. Cultivada Dalia OrnamentalAsteraceae Gerbera Gerbera jamesonii H. Bolus ex J. D. Hook. Cultivada Margarita japonesa OrnamentalAsteraceae Helenium Helenium amarum (Raf.) Rock Cultivada Manzanilla OrnamentalAsteraceae Helianthus Helianthus annuus L. Cultivada Giarasol Alimento animalAsteraceae Tagetes Tagetes erecta L. Cultivada Carolá Medicinal

Plant Species - Sierra del Rosario Biosphere Reserve

Plant Species - BRCT


B - 9

Family Genera Taxa Status Common name Primary usePlant Species - BRCT

Asteraceae Tithonia Tithonia diversifolia Hesml. Cultivada Margarita angolana OrnamentalAsteraceae Zinnia Zinnia elegans Jacq. Cultivada Clavelón OrnamentalBalsaminaceae Impatiens Impatiens balsamina L. Cultivada Madama OrnamentalBalsaminaceae Impatiens Impatiens wallerana J. D. Hook. f. in Oliver Cultivada Madama china OrnamentalBegoniaceae Begonia Begonia sp. Cultivada Begonia OrnamentalBixaceae Bixa Bixa orellana L. Cultivada Bija, achote CondimentosBrassicaceae Brassica Brassica juncea (L.) Czern. Cultivada Mostaza MedicinalBrassicaceae Brassica Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata Cultivada Col, repollo VegetalBrassicaceae Lepidium Lepidium virginicum L. Cultivada Mastuerzo MedicinalBromeliaceae Ananas Ananas comosus (L.) Merr. Cultivada Piña FrutalBromeliaceae Bromelia Bromelia pinguin L. Cultivada Piña de ratón Cerca vivaCactaceae Opuntia Opuntia brasiliensis (Willd.) Haw. Cultivada Tuna OrnamentalCactaceae Opuntia Opuntia cochenillifera (L.) Mill. Cultivada Tuna mansa Cerca vivaCactaceae Opuntia Opuntia stricta Haw. var. dillenii (Ker-Gawler) L. Bensun Cultivada Tuna brava OrnamentalCaesalpinaceae Cassia Cassia fistula L. Cultivada Caña fístula MedicinalCaesalpinaceae Cassia Cassia moschata Humb., Bonpl. et Kunth Cultivada Cañandonga de hueso Alimento animalCaesalpinaceae Delonix Delonix regia (Bojer ex Hook.) Raf. Cultivada Flamboyant OrnamentalCaesalpinaceae Senna Senna bicapsularis (L.) Roxb. Cultivada Sena MedicinalCannaceae Canna Canna indica L. Cultivada Platanillo de Cuba OrnamentalCannaceae Canna Canna x generalis Bailey Cultivada Platanillo de Cuba OrnamentalCapparaceae Cleome Cleome sp. Cultivada Uña de gato OrnamentalCaricaceae Carica Carica papaya L. Cultivada Fruta bomba FrutalCaryophyllaceae Dianthus Dianthus chinensis L. Cultivada Clavel OrnamentalClusiaceae Mammea Mammea americana L. Cultivada Mamey de Santo Domingo FrutalCombretaceae Quisqualis Quisqualis indica L. Cultivada Piscuala OrnamentalCommelinaceae Callisa Callisa repens L. Cultivada Calisa OrnamentalCommelinaceae Tradescantia Tradescantia pallida (Rosel) D. R. Hunt Cultivada Cucaracha morada OrnamentalCommelinaceae Tradescantia Tradescantia spatahacea Sw. Cultivada Cordován OrnamentalCommelinaceae Tradescantia Tradescantia zebrina Bosse Cultivada Cucaracha OrnamentalConvolvulaceae Ipomoea Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam. Cultivada Boniato Raices y tubérculosCostaceae Costus Costus sp. Cultivada Caña mejicana OrnamentalCrassulaceae Bryophyllum Bryophyllum pinnatum (Lam.) Oken Cultivada Siempreviva OrnamentalCrassulaceae Kalanchoe Kalanchoe blossfeldiana V. Poell. Cultivada Santa Bárbara OrnamentalCrassulaceae Kalanchoe Kalanchoe fedtschenkoi Hamet et Perr. Cultivada Siempre viva OrnamentalCrassulaceae Kalanchoe Kalanchoe tubiflora (Harvey) Hamet Cultivada Majá OrnamentalCucurbitaceae Cucurbita Cucurbita moschata (Duch. ex Lam.) Duch. ex Poir Cultivada Calabaza Otros usosCucurbitaceae Momordica Momordica charantia L. subsp. abreviata (Ser.) Grebense Cultivada Cundeamor MedicinalCucurbitaceae Sechium Sechium edule (Jacq.) Sw. Cultivada Chayote VegetalCupressaceae Platycarpus Platycarpus orientalis (L.) Franco Cultivada - OrnamentalCycadaceae Cycas Cycas revoluta L. Cultivada Alcanfor OrnamentalDioscoreaceae Dioscorea Dioscorea bulbifera L. Cultivada Ñame, ñame volador Raices y tubérculosDioscoreaceae Dioscorea Dioscorea cayenensis Lam. Cultivada Ñame amarillo Raices y tubérculosEuphorbiaceae Acalypha Acalypha hispida Burm. f. Cultivada Rabo de gato OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Acalypha Acalypha wilkesiana Muell. Arg. Cultivada Acalifa OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Codiaeum Codiaeum variegatum (L.) Blume Cultivada Croto OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia lactea Haw. Cultivada Ataja negro Cerca viva


B - 10


Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia mili Ch. des Moulins Cultivada Corona de Cristo OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia pulcherrima Willd. ex Klotzm Cultivada Flor de pascua OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia tirucalli L. Cultivada Palito chino OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Jatropha Jatropha curcas L. Cultivada Piñón botija Cerca vivaEuphorbiaceae Jatropha Jatropha urens L. Cultivada Chaya Cerca vivaEuphorbiaceae Manihot Manihot esculenta Crantz Cultivada Yuca Raices y tubérculosEuphorbiaceae Pedilanthus Pedilanthus tithymaloides (L.) Poit. Cultivada Itamo real Otros usosFabaceae Arachis Arachis hypogaea L. Cultivada Maní GranosFabaceae Cajanus Cajanus cajan (L.) Huth. Cultivada Gandul VegetalFabaceae Erythrina Eryhtrina berteroana Urb. Cultivada Piñón de conejo Cerca vivaFabaceae Glycine Glycine max (L.) Merr. Cultivada Soya GranosFabaceae Phaseolus Phaseolus lunatus L. Cultivada Frijol caballero GranosFabaceae Phaseolus Phaseolus vulgaris L. Cultivada Frijol GranosFabaceae Pisum Pisum sativun L. Cultivada Chícharo GranosFabaceae Vigna Vigna umbellata (Thunb.) Ohwi et Ohashi Cultivada Frijol picolina GranosGeraniaceae Pelargonium Pelargonium sp. Cultivada Geranio OrnamentalHydrangeaceae Hydrangea Hydrangea macrophylla (Thunberg) Seringe Cultivada Bella Hortensia OrnamentalIridaceae Gladiolus Gladiolus communis L. Cultivada Gladiolo OrnamentalIridaceae Tigridia Tigridia pavonia Ker. Cultivada Avispa OrnamentalLamiaceae Mentha Mentha spicata L. Cultivada Hieba buena MedicinalLamiaceae Mentha Mentha x piperita L. Cultivada Menta inglesa, toronjil MedicinalLamiaceae Ocimum Ocimum basilicum L. Cultivada Albahaca MedicinalLamiaceae Ocimum Ocimum tenuiflorum L. Cultivada Albahaca morada MedicinalLamiaceae Origanum Origanum majorana L. Cultivada Mejorana MedicinalLamiaceae Plectranthus Plectranthus amboinicus (Lour.) Spreng. Cultivada Orégano francés CondimentosLamiaceae Plectranthus Plectranthus nummularius Briq. Cultivada Mata del dinero OrnamentalLamiaceae Pogostemon Pogostemon cablin (Blanco) Benth. Cultivada Pachuli Otros usosLamiaceae Salvia Salvia tenella Sw. Cultivada Amargosa MedicinalLamiaceae Solenostemon Solenostemon scutellarioides (L.) Codd. Cultivada Manto OrnamentalLamiaceae Thymus Thymus vulgaris L. Cultivada Tomillo CondimentosLauraceae Persea Persea americana Mill. Cultivada Aguacate FrutalLiliaceae Asparagus Asparagus plumosus J. G. Baker Cultivada Espárrago OrnamentalLiliaceae Asparagus Asparagus sprengeri Regel Cultivada Espárrago OrnamentalLiliaceae Clorophyton Clorophyton stembergianum Steud. Cultivada Mala madre OrnamentalLiliaceae Hemerocallis Hemerocallis fulva (L.) L. Cultivada Lirio turco OrnamentalLytrhaceae Lagerstroemia Lagerstroemia indica L. Cultivada Júpiter OrnamentalMalvaceae Abelmoschus Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench. Cultivada Quimbombó Otros usosMalvaceae Abutilon Abutilon indicum (L.) Sweet Cultivada Botón de oro OrnamentalMalvaceae Althaea Althaea rosea Cav. Cultivada Varita de San José OrnamentalMalvaceae Gossypium Gossypium sp. Cultivada Algodón Otros usosMalvaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L. Cultivada Marpacífico OrnamentalMalvaceae Malvabiscus Malvabiscus arboreus Cavanilles var. mexicanus Schlechtendahl Cultivada Lágrimas de señorita OrnamentalMalvaceae Pavonia Pavonia thyphalea (L.) Cav. Cultivada Guizazo de perro MedicinalMarantaceae Maranta Maranta arundinacea L. Cultivada Sagú Raices y tubérculosMusaceae Musa Musa x paradisiaca L. Cultivada Plátano FrutalMyrtaceae Pimenta Pimenta dioica (L.) Merr. Cultivada Pimienta gorda Medicinal


B - 11


Myrtaceae Psidium Psidium guajava L. Cultivada Guayaba MedicinalMyrtaceae Syzygium Syzygium malaccense (L.) Merr. et Perry Cultivada Albaricoque, pera FrutalOleaceae Jasminum Jasminum sambac (L.) Ait. Cultivada Jazmín OrnamentalOrchidaceae Schomburgkia Schomburgkia tibicinis Baten Cultivada Buho OrnamentalPassifloraceae Passiflora Passiflora edulis Sims Cultivada Maracuyá FrutalPiperaceae Peperomia Peperomia arrepta Tril. Cultivada Charol OrnamentalPiperaceae Peperomia Peperomia pellucida (L.) Humb., Bonpl. et Kunth Cultivada Hierba de hombre OrnamentalPiperaceae Piper Piper auritum Humb.; Bonp. et Kunth Cultivada Anisón MedicinalPlantaginaceae Plantago Plantago major L. Cultivada Llantén MedicinalPoaceae Cymbopogon Cymbopogon citratus (DC.) Stapf. Cultivada Caña santa MedicinalPoaceae Oryza Oryza sativa L. Cultivada Arroz GranosPoaceae Saccharum Saccharum officinarum L. Cultivada Caña de azucar Alimento animalPoaceae Sorghum Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench. Cultivada Sorgo Alimento animalPoaceae Zea Zea mays L. Cultivada Maiz GranosPolygonaceae Antigonon Antigonon leptopus Hook. et Arn. Cultivada Coralillo OrnamentalPortulacaceae Portulaca Portulaca grandiflora Hook. in Curt. Cultivada Diez del día OrnamentalPortulacaceae Portulaca Portulaca oleracea L. Cultivada Verdolaga de jardín OrnamentalRosaceae Rosa Rosa sp. Cultivada Rosa OrnamentalRubiaceae Coffea Coffea arabica L. Cultivada Café BebidaRubiaceae Coffea Coffea canephora Pierre ex Frochener var.robusta Cultivada Café robusto BebidaRutaceae Citrus Citrus aurantiifolia (Christm. et Pranz) Swingle Cultivada Limón criollo CondimentosRutaceae Citrus Citrus aurantium L. Cultivada Naranja agria CondimentosRutaceae Citrus Citrus limetta Risso Cultivada Lima de ombligo FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus reticulata Blanco Cultivada Mandarina FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck Cultivada Naranja dulce FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus x paradisi Macf. In Hook. Cultivada Toronja, grifu FrutalRutaceae Ruta Ruta chalepensis L. Cultivada Ruda MedicinalSapotaceae Chrysophyllum Chrysophyllum oliviforme L. Cultivada Caimitillo FrutalSapotaceae Pouteria Pouteria sapota (Jacq.) H. E. Moore et Stearn Cultivada Mamey colorado, sapote FrutalScrophulariaceae Capraria Capraria biflora L. Cultivada Maguiro MedicinalScrophulariaceae Ruselia Ruselia equisetiformis Schletcht.et Cham. Cultivada Lágrimas de Cupido OrnamentalSolanaceae Brugmansia Brugmansia x candida Pers. Cultivada Campana Cerca vivaSolanaceae Brugmansia Brugmansia x cubensis (V. R. Fuentes) V. R. Fuentes Cultivada Campana OrnamentalSolanaceae Capsicum Capsicum annuum L. Cultivada ají, pimiento VegetalSolanaceae Capsicum Capsicum chinense Jacq. Cultivada Ají cachucha CondimentosSolanaceae Capsicum Capsicum frutescens L. Cultivada Ají guaguao MedicinalSolanaceae Cestrum Cestrum nocturnum L. Cultivada Galán de noche OrnamentalSolanaceae Lycopersicon Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. Cultivada Tomate de ensalada, placero, guirito VegetalSolanaceae Lycopersicon Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. var. cerasiforme (Dunal) Alef Cultivada Tomate cimarrón CondimentosSolanaceae Nicotiana Nicotiana tabacum L. Cultivada Tabaco Otros usosSolanaceae Solanum Solanum americanum Mill. Cultivada Yerba mora MedicinalSolanaceae Solanum Solanum melongena L. Cultivada Berenjena VegetalSolanaceae Solanum Solanum seaforthianum Andr. Cultivada Jazmín OrnamentalSolanaceae Solanum Solanum torvum Sw. Cultivada Pendejera MedicinalTiliaceae Corchorus Corchorus siliquosus L. Cultivada Platanillo MedicinalTropaeolaceae Tropaeolum Tropaeolum majus L. Cultivada Calabacita de jardín Ornamental


B - 12


Urticaceae Pilea Pilea involucrata Cultivada Frescura OrnamentalUrticaceae Pilea Pilea microphylla (L.) Liebm. Cultivada Frescura Otros usosVerbenaceae Aloysia Aloysia citriodora Palau Cultivada yerbaluisa MedicinalVerbenaceae Duranta Duranta repens L. Cultivada No me olvides OrnamentalVerbenaceae Lippia Lippia alba (Mill.) N. E. Brown Cultivada Quita dolor, flor de España, menta americana MedicinalVerbenaceae Lippia Lippia dulcis Trevir Cultivada Orozoz MedicinalVerbenaceae Lippia Lippia micromera Schau. in DC. Cultivada Oreganito CondimentosVerbenaceae Stachytarpheta Stachytarpheta jamaicensis (L.) Vahl Cultivada Verbena, verbena cimarrona MedicinalVerbenaceae Verbena Verbena sp. Cultivada Verbena OrnamentalVerbenaceae Vitex Vitex trifolia L. Cultivada Yo puedo más que tú OrnamentalVitaceae Cissus Cissus verticillata (L.) Nicolson et Jarvis Cultivada Bejuco ubí MedicinalZingiberaceae Alpinia Alpinia zerumbet (Peerson) Brutt et R.M. Smith Cultivada Colonia CondimentosZingiberaceae Hedychium Hedychium coronarium Koen. in Retz. Cultivada Mariposa blanca OrnamentalZingiberaceae Zingiber Zingiber officinale (L.) Roscoe Cultivada Gengibre MedicinalAnnonaceae Oxandra Oxandra laurifolia (Sw.) A.Rich. Silvestre Puria Madera casaApocynaceae Rauvolfia Rauvolfia salicifolia Griseb. Silvestre Lechero Madera otros usosArecaceae Calyptrogine Calyptrogine dulcis H. Wend. Silvestre Guano manaca Otros usosArecaceae Roystonea Roystonea regia (Kunth) O. F. Cook Silvestre Palma real Madera casaAsteraceae Bidens Bidens pilosa L. Silvestre Romerillo MedicinalAsteraceae Chrosmolaena Chrosmolaena odorata (L.) R. M. King et H. Rob. Silvestre Rompezaraguey MedicinalAsteraceae Eupatorium Eupatorium villosum Sw. Silvestre Trebolillo MedicinalAsteraceae Koanophyllum Koanophyllum villosum (Sw) R. M. King et H. Rob. Silvestre Trebolillo MedicinalAsteraceae Mikania Mikania hastata (L.) Mill. Silvestre Guaco MedicinalAsteraceae Parthenium Parthenium hysterophorus L. Silvestre Confitillo MedicinalAsteraceae Pluchea Pluchea carolinensis (Jacq.) G. Don Silvestre Salvia MedicinalBignoniaceae Crescentia Crescentia cujete L. Silvestre Guira Madera otros usosBignoniaceae Enallagma Enallagma cucurbitina (L.) Baill. Silvestre Maguiro MedicinalBignoniaceae Tabehuia Tabehuia angustata Britt. Silvestre Roble blanco Madera casaBoraginaceae Cordia Cordia sulcata DC. Silvestre Tabaco Madera otros usosBurseraceae Protium Protium cubense (Rose) Urb. Silvestre Copal MedicinalBurseraceae Protium Protium fragrans (Rose) Urb. Silvestre Incienso Madera casaChenopodiaceae Teloxys Teloxys ambrosioides (L.) W. A. Weber Silvestre Apasote MedicinalClusiaceae Calophyllum Calophyllum antillanum Britt. Silvestre Ocuje Madera casaClusiaceae Clusia Clusia rosea Jacq. Silvestre Cupey Madera otros usosClusiaceae Garcinia Garcinia aristata (Griseb.) Borhidi Silvestre Manajú Madera otros usosClusiaceae Rheedia Rheedia roscifolia Griseb. Silvestre Espuela de rey Madera casaCombretaceae Bucida Bucida buceras L. Silvestre Júcaro Madera casaCombretaceae Bucida Bucida spinosa (Nortrop.) Jenning Silvestre Jucarillo Madera casaCucurbitaceae Fevilla Fevilla cordifolia L. Silvestre Jabilla MedicinalCyperaceae Cyperus Cyperus rotundus L. Silvestre Caramaná MedicinalEuphorbiaceae Gymnanthes Gymnanthes locida Sw. Silvestre Aite Madera casaEuphorbiaceae Lasiocroton Lasiocroton cordifolius Britt.et Wils. Silvestre Cuaba amarila Madera casaEuphorbiaceae Ricinus Ricinus communis L. Silvestre Higuereta MedicinalFabaceae Canavalia Canavalia cubensis Griseb. Silvestre Cayajabo MedicinalFabaceae Erythrina Erythrina poeppigiana (Walp.) O.F.Cook Silvestre Bucaro Madera otros usosFabaceae Gliricidia Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Kunth ex Walp. Silvestre Júpiter Madera casa


B - 13


Lauraceae Nectandra Nectandra antillana Meins Silvestre Boniato Madera casaLauraceae Ocotea Ocotea cuneata (Griseb.) Urb. Silvestre Canelón Madera otros usosLauraceae Ocotea Ocotea leucoxylon (Sw.) Mez. Silvestre Curavara Madera casaMalvaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus tiliaceus L. Silvestre Majagua Madera casaMeliaceae Cedrela Cedrela odorata L. Silvestre Cedro Madera casaMeliaceae Guarea Guarea trichilioides L. Silvestre Yamagua Madera casaMeliaceae Swietenia Swietenia mahagoni (L.) Jacq. Silvestre Caoba Madera casaMoraceae Chlorophora Chlorophora tinctoria (L.) Gaud. Silvestre Futete Madera casaMoraceae Ficus Ficus membranacea C. Wr. Silvestre Jaguey Madera casaMoraceae Pseudolmedia Pseudolmedia spuria (Sw.) Griseb. Silvestre Macagua Madera casaMoraceae Trophys Trophys racemosa (L.) Urb. Silvestre Ramón de caballo Alimento animalMyrtaceae Syzygium Syzygium jambos (L.) Alston in Trimen Silvestre Pomarrosa Madera otros usosPiperaceae Piper Piper aduncum L. subsp. aduncum Silvestre Guayoyo MedicinalRhamnaceae Colubrina Colubrina arborescens (Mill.) Sarg. Silvestre Fuego Madera casaRhamnaceae Gavania Gavania polygama (Jacq.) Urb. Silvestre Jaboncillo BebidaRosaceae Prunus Prunus myrtifolius (L.) Urb. Silvestre Almendrillo Madera casaRosaceae Prunus Prunus occidentalis Sw. Silvestre Almendro Madera casaRubiaceae Acrosynanthus Acrosynanthus trachyphyllus Standley Silvestre Jaragua Madera casaRubiaceae Casasia Casasia calophylla Griseb. Silvestre Lirio Madera casaRubiaceae Erithralis Erithralis fruticosa L. Silvestre Cuabilla Madera casaRutaceae Amyris Amyris balsamifera L. Silvestre Cuaba Madera casaRutaceae Zanthoxylum Zanthoxylum martinicense (Lam.) DC Silvestre Ayúa Madera casaSapindaceae Allophylus Allophylus cominia L. Silvestre Palo caja MedicinalSapindaceae Cupania Cupania macrophylla A. Rich. Silvestre Guarano Madera casaSmilaceae Smilax Smilax dominguensis Willd. Silvestre Raiz de china BebidaSterculiaceae Guazuma Guazuma ulmifolia Lam. Silvestre Guasima Madera otros usosTurneraceae Turnera Turnera ulmifolia L. Silvestre Marilope MedicinalUlmaceae Celtis Celtis trinervia Lam. Silvestre Hueso Madera otros usosVerbenaceae Cornutia Cornutia pyramidata L. Silvestre Salvilla MedicinalVitaceae Vitis Vitis tiliaefolia Humb. Silvestre Bejuco parra Bebida

Families 82Genera 204Taxa 258Cultivated 196Wild 62


B - 14

Sample Home gardensSample Home

gardenOwner Community Location Altitude Municipality Province Region Longitude Latitude

1 Rafael Oliva La Flora Fca. San José, Carretera Soroa 10 Candelaria Pinar del Río Occidental -82.9867 22.76112 Isidro Piloto Rio Hondo Fca. La Esperanza, Carretera Nueva Montaña 210 Candelaria Pinar del Río Occidental -83.0775 22.81833 Placido C. Martínez Rio Hondo Fca. La Colmena, Carretera Nueva Montaña 288 Candelaria Pinar del Río Occidental -83.0908 22.82474 Andrés Requejo La Tumba Fca. La Gloria, Km 51 de la 8 Vías 45 Artemisa Habana Occidental -82.9044 22.83065 Celestino Rivero La Tumba Fca. Calderin, Coblet 40 Artemisa Habana Occidental -82.9050 22.80256 Eugenio Gutiérrez Rio Hondo Fca. San Nicolás, La Comadre 237 Candelaria Pinar del Río Occidental -83.0808 22.81757 Vicente Bocourt Rio Hondo CCS Julio A. Mella 215 Candelaria Pinar del Río Occidental -83.0689 22.81368 José Bocourt Los Tumbos Fca. El Mameyal 204 San Cristóbal Pinar del Río Occidental -83.1075 22.79649 Manuel Gomez La Flora Fca. San Jose Bencomo, Carambola 125 Candelaria Pinar del Río Occidental -83.0144 22.7811

10 Dora Bocourt Los Tumbos Fca. San Nicolás, La Comadre 206 Candelaria Pinar del Río Occidental -83.0867 22.816411 Vicente Martinez La Flora Fca. San Jose Bencomo, Carambola 115 Candelaria Pinar del Río Occidental -83.0128 22.782512 Juan F. Babín La Flora Barrio Candido, La Carretera 93 Bahía Honda Pinar del Río Occidental -83.0021 22.781413 Mauricio Salabarría Los Tumbos Fca. El Porvenir, La Comadre 210 Candelaria Pinar del Río Occidental -83.0914 22.816415 José María Díaz El Cafetal El Cafetal, La Sierrita 210 Cumanayagua Cienfuegos Central -80.2478 21.993616 Victor Mena El Cafetal El Cafetal, La Sierrita 200 Cumanayagua Cienfuegos Central -80.2486 21.991917 Gregorio Calderón El Cafetal Fca. Horno de Cal, El Cafetal 190 Cumanayagua Cienfuegos Central -80.2353 21.981718 Rosa Rodríguez El Cafetal El Cafetal, La Sierrita 490 Cumanayagua Cienfuegos Central -80.2481 21.8992

19 Sebastián I. González La Tatagua Fca. La Vega, La Tatagua 30 Cumanayagua Cienfuegos Central -80.2405 21.885120 María labrada El Cacahual Cacahuall, La Sierrita 158 Cumanayagua Cienfuegos Central -80.2778 21.992821 Hector Madruga Pepito Tey Batey Central Pepito Tey 60 Cienfuegos Cienfuegos Central -80.3364 22.128622 Silvio Velásquez Guaos Guaos 54 Cienfuegos Cienfuegos Central -80.3078 22.144423 Francisco Rodríguez Guaos Guaos, El Naranjito 61 Cienfuegos Cienfuegos Central -80.3081 22.140024 Heriberto Soriano Guaos Guaos 73 Cienfuegos Cienfuegos Central -80.3189 22.141125 Octavio A. San Martin Guaos Guaos 67 Cienfuegos Cienfuegos Central -80.3211 22.141126 Zenaida Trujillo El Cafetal El Cafetal 220 Cumanayagua Cienfuegos Central -80.2506 21.995328 Diego Arcalla La Munición La Escondida, La Munición 720 Yateras Guantánamo Oriental -75.0511 20.395829 Alberto Rodríguez La Munición S/n, La Munición 752 Yateras Guantánamo Oriental -75.0472 20.400630 Rafael Rodríguez La Munición Fca. Aguas Blancas, La Munición 775 Yateras Guantánamo Oriental -75.0522 20.384731 Felix Savón La Munición Fca. La Pumarrosa 790 Yateras Guantánamo Oriental -75.0533 20.406132 Victor Savón La Munición Fca Esperanza, La Munición 800 Guantánamo Guantánamo Oriental -75.0644 20.399433 Luís Tabera La Munición Fca. Toro, La Munición 760 Yateras Guantánamo Oriental -75.0606 20.394734 Gabriel Montero Vega Grande S/n, Vega Grande 770 Guantánamo Guantánamo Oriental -75.0772 20.425335 José A. Rodríguez La Munición S/n, La Munición 600 Yateras Guantánamo Oriental -75.0461 20.398136 Fermín Fidalgo La Vuelta S/n, La Vuelta 580 Guantánamo Guantánamo Oriental -75.0792 20.438637 Rafael Pol Vega Grande S/n, Vega Grande 700 Guantánamo Guantánamo Oriental -75.0825 20.436438 Emilio Pérez La Carolina Fca. La Caridad, La Carolina 462 Yateras Guantánamo Oriental -75.0567 20.363939 Cristina Ramírez La Carolina S/n, La Carolina 437 Yateras Guantánamo Oriental -75.0264 20.3636

40 Eladio Cuza La Carolina Fca. El Paradero No. 2, El Baldor, La Carolina 541 Yateras Guantánamo Oriental -75.0331 20.3481

41 Eduardo Diez La Munición Fca. El Sapote, La Munición 738 Yateras Guantánamo Oriental -75.0519 20.399714 Centro-Occidente Sin localización 153 Candelaria Pinar del Rio Occidental -83.0040 22.800027 Centro -Centro Sin localización 151 Cumanayagua Cienfuegos Central -80.2880 22.013042 Centro-Oriente Sin localización 673 Yateras Guantánamo Oriental -75.0597 20.3939

Sample Home gardens Annex 1. Project document

B - 15

Family Genera Taxa Status Common name Primary useAcanthaceae Aphelandra Aphelandra sinclariana Nees Cultivada Afelandra OrnamentalMalvaceae Abelmoschus Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench. Cultivada Quimbombó VegetalMalvaceae Abutilon Abutilon indicum (L.) Sweet Cultivada Botón de oro OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Acalypha Acalypha hispida Burm. f. Cultivada Rabo de gato OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Acalypha Acalypha wilkesiana Muell. Arg. Cultivada Acalifa OrnamentalPolypodiaceae Adiantus Adiantus capillus-veneris L. Cultivada Culantrillo de pozo OrnamentalAgavaceae Agave Agave angustifolia Haw. var. marginata Hort. Cultivada - OrnamentalAgavaceae Agave Agave sp. Cultivada Maguey OrnamentalAraceae Aglaonoema Aglaonoema sp. Cultivada - OrnamentalApocynaceae Allamanda Allamanda cathartica L. Cultivada Flor de barbero OrnamentalAlliaceae Allium Allium cepa L. Cultivada Cebolla CondimentosAlliaceae Allium Allium cepa L. var. aggregatum G. Don Cultivada Cebolla corojo CondimentosAlliaceae Allium Allium chinense G. Don Cultivada Ajo porro CondimentosAlliaceae Allium Allium fistulosum L. Cultivada Cebollino, Ajo de jardín CondimentosAlliaceae Allium Allium porrum L. Cultivada Ajo porro CondimentosAlliaceae Allium Allium sativum L. Cultivada Ajo criollo CondimentosAlliaceae Allium Allium tuberosum Cultivada Cebollino, Ajo de montaña CondimentosAloaceae Aloe Aloe vera (L.) N. L. Burm. Cultivada Sábila MedicinalVerbenaceae Aloysia Aloysia citriodora Palau Cultivada yerbaluisa MedicinalZingiberaceae Alpinia Alpinia purpurata Vieillard ex Schumann in Engler Cultivada Alpinia roja OrnamentalZingiberaceae Alpinia Alpinia zerumbet (Peerson) Brutt et R.M. Smith Cultivada Colonia MedicinalAmaranthaceae Alternanthera Alternanthera bettzichiana (Regel) Voss Cultivada Adorno de jardín OrnamentalAmaranthaceae Alternanthera Alternanthera paronychoides A. St. Hilaire 'Amoena' Cultivada Alternantera OrnamentalAmaranthaceae Alternanthera Alternanthera peploides (Humb. et Bonpl.) Urb. Cultivada Tapón MedicinalAmaranthaceae Alternanthera Alternanthera sp. Cultivada - MedicinalMalvaceae Althaea Althaea rosea Cav. Cultivada Varita de San José OrnamentalAsteraceae Ambrosia Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. Cultivada Artemisa MedicinalAnacardiaceae Anacardium Anacardium occidentale L. Cultivada Marañón FrutalBromeliaceae Ananas Ananas comosus (L.) Merr. Cultivada Piña FrutalScrophulariaceae Angelonia Angelonia pilosella Kickx Cultivada No me olvides OrnamentalAnnonaceae Annona Annona muricata L. Cultivada Guanábana FrutalAnnonaceae Annona Annona reticulata L. Cultivada Chirimoya FrutalAnnonaceae Annona Annona squamosa L. Cultivada Anón FrutalAraceae Anthurium Anthurium crassinervium (Jacq.) Schott Cultivada Anturio gigante OrnamentalAraceae Anthurium Anthurium sp. Cultivada Malanga OrnamentalPolygonaceae Antigonon Antigonon leptopus Hook. et Arn. Cultivada Coralillo OrnamentalAizoaceae Aptenia Aptenia cordifolia Schwantes Cultivada - OrnamentalFabaceae Arachis Arachis hypogaea L. Cultivada Maní Otros usosAsteraceae Artemisia Artemisia absintihium L. Cultivada Ajenjo MedicinalMoraceae Artocarpus Artocarpus communis J.R. et J. F. Foster Cultivada Arbol del pan Otros usos

Plant species BRSR, BRCT

Plant Species - Sierra del Rosario Biosphere Reserve and Cuchillas del Toa Biosphere Reserve


B - 16

Family Genera Taxa Status Common name Primary usePlant species BRSR, BRCT

Asclepiadaceae Asclepias Asclepias curassavica L. Cultivada Yerba de la calentura OrnamentalLiliaceae Asparagus Asparagus plumosus J. G. Baker Cultivada Espárrago OrnamentalLiliaceae Asparagus Asparagus sprengeri Regel Cultivada Espárrago OrnamentalAsteraceae Aster Aster nov-belgii floribunda De May Cultivada Ramillete cubano OrnamentalOxalidaceae Averrhoa Averrhoa bilimbi L. Cultivada Pepinillo CondimentosPoaceae Bambusa Bambusa vulgaris Schrander ex Wendel. Cultivada Caña brava Otros usosCaesalpinaceae Bauhinia Bauhinia purpurea L. Cultivada Pata de vaca OrnamentalBegoniaceae Begonia Begonia erytophylla Newman Cultivada Begonia OrnamentalBegoniaceae Begonia Begonia sp. Cultivada Begonia OrnamentalCucurbitaceae Benincasa Benincasa hispida (Thunb.) Cogn. in DC. Cultivada Calabaza china VegetalChenopodiaceae Beta Beta vulgaris L. Cultivada Remolacha VegetalAsteraceae Bidens Bidens leucantha Willd. Cultivada Romerillo de jardín OrnamentalAsteraceae Bidens Bidens pilosa L. var. radiata Sch. - Bip. Cultivada Romerillo MedicinalBromeliaceae Bilbergia Bilbergia pyrmidalis (Sims) Lindl. Cultivada Bilbergia OrnamentalBixaceae Bixa Bixa orellana L. Cultivada Bija, achote CondimentosOrchidaceae Bletia Bletia purpurea (Lam.) DC. Cultivada Candelaria OrnamentalNyctaginaceae Bougainvillaea Bougainvillaea glabra Choisy Cultivada Buganvil OrnamentalNyctaginaceae Bougainvillaea Bougainvillaea spectabilis Willd. Cultivada Bugnavil OrnamentalBrassicaceae Brassica Brassica juncea (L.) Czern. Cultivada Mostaza CondimentosBrassicaceae Brassica Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata Cultivada Col, repollo MedicinalBromeliaceae Bromelia Bromelia pinguin L. Cultivada Piña de ratón Cerca vivaSolanaceae Brugmansia Brugmansia x candida Pers. Cultivada Campana OrnamentalSolanaceae Brugmansia Brugmansia x cubensis (V. R. Fuentes) V. R. Fuentes Cultivada Campana OrnamentalSolanaceae Brunfelsia Brunfelsia jamaicensis Griseb. Cultivada Galán de noche OrnamentalSolanaceae Brunfelsia Brunfelsia nitida Benth. in DC. Cultivada Galán OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Bryenia Bryenia disticha J.R.Forst et J.G. Forst Cultivada Nevada OrnamentalCrassulaceae Bryophyllum Bryophyllum pinnatum (Lam.) Oken Cultivada Siempreviva OrnamentalBurseraceae Bursera Bursera graveolens (Humb., Bonpl. et Kunth) Triana et Planch.Cultivada - MedicinalCaesalpinaceae Caesalpinia Caesalpina pulcherrima (L.) Sw. Cultivada Guacamaya MedicinalFabaceae Cajanus Cajanus cajan (L.) Huth. Cultivada Gandul Alimento animalAraceae Caladium Caladium bicolor (Ait.) Vent. Cultivada Corazón de cabrito OrnamentalCommelinaceae Callisa Callisa repens L. Cultivada Calisa OrnamentalMyrtaceae Callistemon Callistemon speciosus DC. Cultivada Calistemon OrnamentalFabaceae Canavalia Canavalia ensiformis (L.) DC. Cultivada Nescafé BebidaCannaceae Canna Canna indica L. Cultivada Platanillo de Cuba Raices y tubérculosCannaceae Canna Canna x generalis Bailey Cultivada Platanillo de Cuba OrnamentalScrophulariaceae Capraria Capraria biflora L. Cultivada Maguiro MedicinalSolanaceae Capsicum Capsicum annuum L. Cultivada Ají de jardín CondimentosSolanaceae Capsicum Capsicum chinense Jacq. Cultivada Ají cachucha CondimentosSolanaceae Capsicum Capsicum frutescens L. Cultivada Ají guaguao CondimentosCaricaceae Carica Carica papaya L. Cultivada Fruta bomba FrutalApocynaceae Cascabela Cascabela thevetia (L.) Lippold Cultivada Cabalonga Medicinal


B - 17


Caesalpinaceae Cassia Cassia fistula L. Cultivada Caña fístula MedicinalCaesalpinaceae Cassia Cassia grandis L. f. Cultivada BebidaCaesalpinaceae Cassia Cassia moschata Humb., Bonpl. et Kunth Cultivada Cañandonga de hueso Alimento animalCasuarinaceae Casuarina Casuarina equisetifolia L. ex J.R. et J. G. Foster Cultivada Casuarina OrnamentalApocynaceae Catharanthus Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Don Cultivada Vicaria MedicinalOrchidaceae Cattleya Cattleya sp. Cultivada Orquídea OrnamentalAmaranthaceae Celosia Celosia argentea L. Cultivada Moco de pavo OrnamentalCactaceae Cereus Cereus hexagonus (L.) Mill. Cultivada Miramar OrnamentalSolanaceae Cestrum Cestrum diurnum L. Cultivada Galán de día OrnamentalSolanaceae Cestrum Cestrum nocturnum L. Cultivada Galán de noche OrnamentalGesneriaceae Chrysanthemis Chrysanthemis pulchella (J. Donn ex Sims) Descasine Cultivada Begonia OrnamentalSapotaceae Chrysophyllum Chrysophyllum cainito L. Cultivada Caimito FrutalSapotaceae Chrysophyllum Chrysophyllum oliviforme L. Cultivada Caimitillo FrutalChrysobalanaceae Chyrsobalanus Chyrsobalanus icaco L. Cultivada Icaco Otros usosVerbenaceae Citharexylum Citharexylum ellipticum Sessé ex D. Don Cultivada Yo puedo más que tú OrnamentalCucurbitaceae Citrullus Citrullus lanatus (Thunb.) Matsumura et Nakai Cultivada Melón de agua FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus aurantiifolia (Christm. et Pranz) Swingle Cultivada Limón criollo CondimentosRutaceae Citrus Citrus aurantium L. Cultivada Naranja agria CondimentosRutaceae Citrus Citrus bergamia Risso et Poit. Cultivada Bergamota MedicinalRutaceae Citrus Citrus limetta Risso Cultivada Lima de ombligo FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus limon Burm Cultivada Limón agrio, limón CondimentosRutaceae Citrus Citrus limon Burm f. x Citrus medica L. Cultivada Limón francés Otros usosRutaceae Citrus Citrus limonia Osbeck Cultivada Lima ranjour, limón dulce FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus madurensis Lour. Cultivada Mandarina de San José FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus maxima (Burm.) Merr. Cultivada Toronja criolla, pomelo FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus medica L. Cultivada Cidra Otros usosRutaceae Citrus Citrus reshni (Engler) Tanaka Cultivada Mandarina Cleopatra MedicinalRutaceae Citrus Citrus reticulata Blanco Cultivada Mandarina FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck Cultivada Naranja dulce FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus sp. Cultivada - FrutalRutaceae Citrus Citrus x paradisi Macf. in Hook. Cultivada Toronja, grifu FrutalCapparaceae Cleome Cleome sp. Cultivada Uña de gato OrnamentalVerbenaceae Clerodendrum Clerodendrum sp. Cultivada - OrnamentalVerbenaceae Clerodendrum Clerodendrum speciosissimum van Gaert et Morren Cultivada Coral OrnamentalVerbenaceae Clerodendrum Clerodendrum thomsonae Balf. f. Cultivada Claralisa OrnamentalLiliaceae Clorophyton Clorophyton stembergianum Steud. Cultivada Mala madre OrnamentalBignoniaceae Clystotoma Clystotoma callistegioides Bur. Cultivada Ajo de Jardín OrnamentalPolygonaceae Coccoloba Coccoloba uvifera L. Cultivada Uva caleta, uvero Otros usosArecaceae Cocos Cocos nucifera L. Cultivada Coco FrutalEuphorbiaceae Codiaeum Codiaeum variegatum (L.) Blume Cultivada Croto OrnamentalRubiaceae Coffea Coffea arabica L. Cultivada Café BebidaRubiaceae Coffea Coffea canephora Pierre ex Frochener var.robusta Cultivada Café robusto Bebida


B - 18


Araceae Colocasia Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott et Endl. Cultivada Malanga Raices y tubérculosSymphoremaceae Congea Congea tomentosa Roxb. Cultivada Lluvia de orquídeas OrnamentalTiliaceae Corchorus Corchorus siliquosus L. Cultivada Platanillo MedicinalAgavaceae Cordyline Cordyline fruticosa (L.) A. Chevalier Cultivada Cordiline OrnamentalAgavaceae Cordyline Cordyline magnifica Hort. Cultivada Cuba Libre OrnamentalAsteraceae Coreopsis Coreopsis tinctoria Nuttall Cultivada Estrella del norte OrnamentalApiaceae Coriandrum Coriandrum sativum L. Cultivada Culantro CondimentosCostaceae Costus Costus sp. Cultivada Caña mejicana MedicinalCostaceae Costus Costus speciosus (Koening) J. E. Smith Cultivada Caña americana, cañuela santa MedicinalCostaceae Costus Costus spicatus (Jacq.) Roscoe Cultivada Caña mejicana MedicinalBignoniaceae Crescentia Crescentia cujete L. Cultivada Guira Otros usosAmaryllidaceae Crinum Crinum sp. Cultivada Lirio OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Crinum Crinum zeylanicum (L.) L. Cultivada Lirio de cinta OrnamentalAsteraceae Critonia Critonia aromatissans (DC.) R.M. King H. Rob. Cultivada Trebol Otros usosAcanthaceae Crossandra Crossandra infundibiliformis Nees. Cultivada Crosandra OrnamentalCucurbitaceae Cucumis Cucumis melo L. Cultivada Melón de castilla Otros usosCucurbitaceae Cucumis Cucumis sativus L. Cultivada Pepino VegetalCucurbitaceae Cucurbita Cucurbita moschata (Duch. ex Lam.) Duch. ex Poir Cultivada Calabaza VegetalLytrhaceae Cuphea Cuphea hyssopifolia Kunth Cultivada Cufia OrnamentalZingiberaceae Curcuma Curcuma longa L Cultivada Raiz de madrás, cúrcuma, yuquilla OrnamentalZingiberaceae Curcuma Curcuma zedoaria (Berg.) Roscoe Cultivada - OrnamentalCommelinaceae Cyanetis Cyanetis somalensis C. B. Clarke Cultivada Cucaracha peluda OrnamentalCycadaceae Cycas Cycas revoluta L. Cultivada Alcanfor OrnamentalPoaceae Cymbopogon Cymbopogon citratus (DC.) Stapf. Cultivada Caña santa MedicinalOrchidaceae Cyrtopodium Cyrtopodium punctatum (L.)Lindl. Cultivada Cañuela OrnamentalAsteraceae Dahlia Dahlia pinnata Cav. Cultivada Dalia OrnamentalSolanaceae Datura Datura metel L. var. fastuosa (Bernh.) Danert Cultivada Chamico morado OrnamentalApiaceae Daucus Daucus carota L. Cultivada Encaje de la reina OrnamentalApiaceae Daucus Daucus carota L. subsp. sativa (Hoffm.) Schuelb. et Mart. Cultivada VegetalCaesalpinaceae Delonix Delonix regia (Bojer ex Hook.) Raf. Cultivada Flamboyant OrnamentalCaryophyllaceae Dianthus Dianthus caryophyllus L. Cultivada Clavel OrnamentalCaryophyllaceae Dianthus Dianthus chinensis L. Cultivada Clavel OrnamentalAraceae Dieffenbachia Dieffenbachia seguine (Jacq.) Schott in Schott et Endl. Cultivada Dicha OrnamentalDioscoreaceae Dioscorea Dioscorea alata L. Cultivada Ñame Raices y tubérculosDioscoreaceae Dioscorea Dioscorea bulbifera L. Cultivada Ñame, ñame volador Raices y tubérculosDioscoreaceae Dioscorea Dioscorea cayenensis Lam. Cultivada Ñame amarillo Raices y tubérculosAgavaceae Dracaena Dracaena marginata Lam. Cultivada Palmita OrnamentalAgavaceae Dracaena Dracaena sanderiana Hort. Sanders ex M. T. Masters Cultivada Dracaena OrnamentalVerbenaceae Duranta Duranta repens L. Cultivada No me olvides OrnamentalArecaceae Dypsis Dypsis lutescens (Bory) W. Wendl. Cultivada Areca OrnamentalCrassulaceae Echeveria Echeveria pallida E. Walth. Cultivada - OrnamentalAsteraceae Egletes Egletes viscosa (L.) Less Cultivada Manzanilla Medicinal


B - 19


Pontederiaceae Eichhornia Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.) Solms. Cultivada Jacinto de agua OrnamentalOrchidaceae Encyclia Encyclia phoenicea (Lindl.) Cogn. Cultivada Flor de San Pedro OrnamentalOrchidaceae Encyclia Encyclia sp. Cultivada Orquídea OrnamentalOrchidaceae Epidendrum Epidendrum difforme Jacq. Cultivada Orquídea OrnamentalOrchidaceae Epidendrum Epidendrum nocturnum Jacq. Cultivada Flor de San Pedro OrnamentalOrchidaceae Epidendrum Epidendrum secundum Jacq. Cultivada Orquídea OrnamentalGesneriaceae Episcia Episcia cupreatra (Hook.) Hanstein Cultivada Barba de Aarón OrnamentalGesneriaceae Episcia Episcia lilacina Hanstein Cultivada Barba de Aarón OrnamentalFabaceae Erythrina Eryhtrina berteroana Urb. Cultivada Piñón de conejo Cerca vivaApiaceae Eryngium Eryngium foetidum L. Cultivada Culantro CondimentosZingiberaceae Etlingera Etlingera elatior (Jack) R. M. Smith Cultivada Bastón del Emperador OrnamentalLiliaceae Eucharis Eucharis grandiflora Planch. et Lindl. Cultivada Estrella americana OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia lactea Haw. Cultivada Ataja negro Cerca vivaEuphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia leucocephala ritr Cultivada Euphorbia OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia mili Ch. des Moulins Cultivada Corona de Cristo OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia pulcherrima Willd. ex Klotzm Cultivada Flor de pascua OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia tirucalli L. Cultivada Palito chino OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Euphorbia Euphorbia trigona Haw. Cultivada Corona de la reina OrnamentalMoraceae Ficus Ficus sp. Cultivada - Otros usosApiaceae Foeniculum Foeniculum vulgare Mill. Cultivada Hinojo MedicinalMalpighiaceae Galphimia Galphimia gracilis Bartl. Cultivada Granito de oro OrnamentalRubiaceae Gardenia Gardenia augusta (L.) Merrill Cultivada Gardenia OrnamentalBoraginaceae Gerascanthus Gerascanthus coloccocus (L.) Borhidi Cultivada Ateje Alimento animalAsteraceae Gerbera Gerbera jamesonii H. Bolus ex J. D. Hook. Cultivada Margarita japonesa OrnamentalIridaceae Gladiolus Gladiolus communis L. Cultivada Gladiolo OrnamentalFabaceae Gliricidia Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Kunth ex Walp. Cultivada Jupiter Cerca vivaFabaceae Glycine Glycine max (L.) Merr. Cultivada Soya GranosAmaranthaceae Gomphrena Gomphrena globosa L. Cultivada San Diego OrnamentalMalvaceae Gossypium Gossypium hirsutum L. Cultivada Algodón MedicinalMalvaceae Gossypium Gossypium sp. Cultivada Algodón MedicinalAcanthaceae Graptophyllum Graptophyllum pictum (L.) Griffith Cultivada Guacamayo OrnamentalAsteraceae Gynura Gynura aurantica (Blume) DC. Cultivada - OrnamentalZingiberaceae Hedychium Hedychium coronarium Koen. in Retz. Cultivada Mariposa blanca MedicinalZingiberaceae Hedychium Hedychium gardnerianum Roscoe Cultivada Mariposa amarilla OrnamentalAsteraceae Helenium Helenium amarum (Raf.) Rock Cultivada Manzanilla MedicinalAsteraceae Helenium Helenium amarum (Raf.) Rock Cultivada Manzanilla OrnamentalAsteraceae Helianthus Helianthus annuus L. Cultivada Giarasol Alimento animalHeliconiaceae Heliconia Heliconia rostrata Ruiz et Pavón Cultivada Heliconia OrnamentalHeliconiaceae Heliconia Heliconia wagneriana Petersen Cultivada Heliconia OrnamentalLiliaceae Hemerocallis Hemerocallis fulva (L.) L. Cultivada Lirio turco OrnamentalMalvaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus pernambucencis Arruda Cultivada Majagua Otros usosMalvaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L. Cultivada Marpacífico Ornamental


B - 20


Malvaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus sabdariffa L. Cultivada Serení MedicinalMalvaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus schizopetalus L. Cultivada Farolito chino OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Hippeastrum Hippeastrum puniceum (Lam.) Cultivada Kuntze, Taraco OrnamentalVerbenaceae Holmskioldia Holmskioldia sanguinea Retz. Cultivada Paragüita chino OrnamentalAsclepiadaceae Hoya Hoya carnosa (L. f.) R. Br. Cultivada Flor de cera OrnamentalHydrangeaceae Hydrangea Hydrangea macrophylla (Thunberg) Seringe Cultivada Bella Hortensia OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Hymenocallis Hymenocallis arenicola Northrop Cultivada Lirio sanjuanero OrnamentalBalsaminaceae Impatiens Impatiens balsamina L. Cultivada Madama OrnamentalBalsaminaceae Impatiens Impatiens wallerana J. D. Hook. f. in Oliver Cultivada Madama china OrnamentalConvolvulaceae Ipomoea Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam. Cultivada Boniato Raices y tubérculosAmaranthaceae Iresine Iresine herbstii Hook. Cultivada Molleja OrnamentalRubiaceae Ixora Ixora coccinea L. Cultivada Santa Rita OrnamentalRubiaceae Ixora Ixora twaithesii Hook. f. Cultivada Ixora blanca OrnamentalOleaceae Jasminum Jasminum sambac (L.) Ait. Cultivada Jazmín OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Jatropha Jatropha aethiopica Muell. Arg. Cultivada Chaya, mata diabetes OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Jatropha Jatropha curcas L. Cultivada Piñón botija OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Jatropha Jatropha gossypifolia L. Cultivada Frailecillo, tuatua Otros usosEuphorbiaceae Jatropha Jatropha multifida L. Cultivada Ceibilla MedicinalEuphorbiaceae Jatropha Jatropha ritrinama Jacq. Cultivada Peregrina OrnamentalEuphorbiaceae Jatropha Jatropha urens L. Cultivada Chaya Cerca vivaAcanthaceae Justicia Justicia pectoralis Jacq. var. pectoralis Cultivada Tilo MedicinalAcanthaceae Justicia Justicia pectoralis Jacq. var. stenopylla Leonard Cultivada Tilo o tila MedicinalZingiberaceae Kaempferia Kaempferia rotunda L. Cultivada Gengibre OrnamentalCrassulaceae Kalanchoe Kalanchoe blossfeldiana V. Poell. Cultivada Santa Bárbara OrnamentalCrassulaceae Kalanchoe Kalanchoe fedtschenkoi Hamet et Perr. Cultivada Siempre viva OrnamentalCrassulaceae Kalanchoe Kalanchoe sp. Cultivada Majá OrnamentalCrassulaceae Kalanchoe Kalanchoe tubiflora (Harvey) Hamet Cultivada Majá OrnamentalAsteraceae Lactuca Lactuca sativa L. Cultivada Lechuga VegetalLytrhaceae Lagerstroemia Lagerstroemia indica L. Cultivada Júpiter OrnamentalLamiaceae Lantana Lantana sp. Cultivada Filigrana OrnamentalBrassicaceae Lepidium Lepidium virginicum L. Cultivada Mastuerzo MedicinalMimosaceae Leucaena Leucaena leucocephala (Lam.) De Wit Cultivada Pinito Alimento animalVerbenaceae Lippia Lippia alba (Mill.) N. E. Brown Cultivada Quita dolor, flor de España, menta americanaMedicinalVerbenaceae Lippia Lippia micromera Schau. In DC. Cultivada Oreganito CondimentosCucurbitaceae Luffa Luffa aegyptiaca Mill. Cultivada Estropajo Otros usosSolanaceae Lycopersicon Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. Cultivada Tomate de ensalada, placero, guiritoVegetalSolanaceae Lycopersicon Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. var. cerasiforme (Dunal) Alef Cultivada Tomate cimarrón CondimentosMalvaceae Malvabiscus Malvabiscus arboreus Cavanilles var. mexicanus SchlechtendahlCultivada Lágrimas de señorita OrnamentalCactaceae Mamillaria Mamillaria prolifera (Mill.) Haw. Cultivada Mamilaria OrnamentalClusiaceae Mammea Mammea americana L. Cultivada Mamey de Santo Domingo FrutalAnacardiaceae Mangifera Mangifera indica L. Cultivada Mango FrutalEuphorbiaceae Manihot Manihot esculenta Crantz Cultivada Yuca Raices y tubérculos


B - 21


Sapotaceae Manilkara Manilkara sapota (L.) van Royen Cultivada Sapote FrutalMarantaceae Maranta Maranta arundinacea L. Cultivada Sagú Raices y tubérculosMeliaceae Melia Melia azedarach L. Cultivada Paraiso MedicinalSapindaceae Melicoccus Melicoccus bijugatus Jacq. Cultivada Mamoncillo FrutalLamiaceae Mentha Mentha spicata L. Cultivada Hieba buena MedicinalLamiaceae Mentha Mentha suaveolens Ehrh. Cultivada Menta MedicinalLamiaceae Mentha Mentha x piperita L. Cultivada Menta inglesa, toronjil MedicinalConvolvulaceae Merremia Merremia tuberosa (L.) Rendle in Dyer Cultivada Flor de madera OrnamentalNyctaginaceae Mirabilis Mirabilis jalapa L. Cultivada Maravilla OrnamentalCucurbitaceae Momordica Momordica charantia L. subsp. abreviata (Ser.) Grebense Cultivada Cundeamor MedicinalAsteraceae Montanoa Montanoa hibiscifolia C. Koch. Cultivada Montanoa OrnamentalMoringaceae Moringa Moringa oleifera Lam. Cultivada Falso hilo, acacia, palo jeringa MedicinalRutaceae Murraya Murraya paniculata (L.) Jacq. Cultivada Muraya OrnamentalMusaceae Musa Musa acuminata Colla Cultivada Plátano congo FrutalMusaceae Musa Musa x paradisiaca L. Cultivada Plátano FrutalPolypodiaceae Nephrolepis Nephrolepis exaltata Schott Cultivada Helecho OrnamentalApocynaceae Nerium Nerium oleander L. Cultivada Adelfa OrnamentalSolanaceae Nicotiana Nicotiana tabacum L. Cultivada Tabaco Otros usosLamiaceae Ocimum Ocimum basilicum L. Cultivada Albahaca MedicinalLamiaceae Ocimum Ocimum gratissimum L. Cultivada Oregano cimarron MedicinalLamiaceae Ocimum Ocimum tenuiflorum L. Cultivada Albahaca morada CondimentosAcanthaceae Odontonema Odontonema cuspidatum (Nees in DC.) Kuntze Cultivada - OrnamentalOrchidaceae Oncidium Oncidium luridum (Sw.) Salisb. Cultivada Oreja de burro OrnamentalCactaceae Opuntia Opuntia brasiliensis (Willd.) Haw. Cultivada Tuna OrnamentalCactaceae Opuntia Opuntia cochenillifera (L.) Mill. Cultivada Tuna mansa OrnamentalCactaceae Opuntia Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Mill. Cultivada Cerca vivaCactaceae Opuntia Opuntia sp. Cultivada Tuna MedicinalCactaceae Opuntia Opuntia stricta Haw. var. dillenii (Ker-Gawler) L. Bensun Cultivada Tuna brava OrnamentalLamiaceae Origanum Origanum majorana L. Cultivada Mejorana MedicinalFabaceae Oritrina Oritrina variegata var. orientalis (L.) Merr. in Stichm. Cultivada Piñón OrnamentalPoaceae Oryza Oryza sativa L. Cultivada Arroz GranosBombacaceae Pachira Pachira aquatica Aubl. Cultivada Carolina OrnamentalPassifloraceae Passiflora Passiflora edulis Sims Cultivada Maracuyá BebidaPassifloraceae Passiflora Passiflora quadrangularis L. Cultivada Ceibey, maracuyá BebidaMalvaceae Pavonia Pavonia fruticosa (Mill.) Fawc. et Rendle Cultivada Tábano MedicinalMalvaceae Pavonia Pavonia thyphalea (L.) Cav. Cultivada Guizazo de perro MedicinalEuphorbiaceae Pedilanthus Pedilanthus tithymaloides (L.) Poit. Cultivada Itamo real MedicinalGeraniaceae Pelargonium Pelargonium sp. Cultivada Geranio OrnamentalCaesalpinaceae Peltophorum Peltophorum pterocarpum (DC.) Backer ex K. Hen Cultivada Framboyán amarillo OrnamentalPoaceae Pennisetum Pennisetum purpureum Schum. Cultivada Hierba elefante Alimento animalRubiaceae Pentas Pentas lanceolata (Fors.) Deflers Cultivada Pentas OrnamentalPiperaceae Peperomia Peperomia arrepta Tril. Cultivada Charol Ornamental


B - 22


Piperaceae Peperomia Peperomia pellucida (L.) Humb., Bonpl. et Kunth Cultivada Hierba de hombre MedicinalLauraceae Persea Persea americana Mill. Cultivada Aguacate FrutalApiaceae Petroselinum Petroselinum crispum (Mill.) Nym. Cultivada Perejil CondimentosOrchidaceae Phaius Phaius thankervillae (Banks) Blume Cultivada Orquídea OrnamentalFabaceae Phaseolus Phaseolus lunatus L. Cultivada Frijol caballero GranosFabaceae Phaseolus Phaseolus vulgaris L. Cultivada Frijol GranosAraceae Philodendron Philodendron sp. Cultivada Malanga OrnamentalVerbenaceae Phylla Phylla scaberrima (Juss. ex Pers.) Moldenke Cultivada Orozoz MedicinalUrticaceae Pilea Pilea involucrata Cultivada Frescura OrnamentalUrticaceae Pilea Pilea microphylla (L.) Liebm. Cultivada Frescura OrnamentalMyrtaceae Pimenta Pimenta dioica (L.) Merr. Cultivada Pimienta gorda MedicinalPiperaceae Piper Piper aduncum L. subsp. ossanum (C.DC.) Trel. Cultivada Platanillo de Cuba MedicinalPiperaceae Piper Piper auritum Humb.; Bonp. et Kunth Cultivada Anisón MedicinalPiperaceae Piper Piper sp. Cultivada - MedicinalFabaceae Pisum Pisum sativun L. Cultivada Chícharo GranosPlantaginaceae Plantago Plantago major L. Cultivada Llantén MedicinalCupressaceae Platycarpus Platycarpus orientalis (L.) Franco Cultivada - OrnamentalPolypodiaceae Platycerium Platycerium alciforme Desv. Cultivada Cabeza de reno OrnamentalLamiaceae Plectranthus Plectranthus amboinicus (Lour.) Spreng. Cultivada Orégano francés CondimentosLamiaceae Plectranthus Plectranthus nummularius Briq. Cultivada Mata del dinero OrnamentalPolemoniaceae Plox Plox drumondii Hook. in Curtis Cultivada Primavera OrnamentalAsteraceae Pluchea Pluchea carolinensis (Jacq.) G. Don Cultivada Salvia MedicinalPlumbaginaceae Plumbago Plumbago auriculata Lam. Cultivada Embeleso OrnamentalApocynaceae Plumeria Plumeria rubra L. Cultivada Súcheli OrnamentalBignoniaceae Podranea Podranea riacasolina (Tanf.) in Sprague Cultivada - OrnamentalLamiaceae Pogostemon Pogostemon cablin (Blanco) Benth. Cultivada Pachuli Otros usosAgavaceae Polianthes Polianthes tuberosa L. Cultivada Azucena OrnamentalAraliaceae Polyscias Polyscias sp. Cultivada Aralia Cerca vivaAraliaceae Polyscias Polysicias guilfoley (Bull) L.H.Bailey Cultivada Aralia OrnamentalPortulacaceae Portulaca Portulaca grandiflora Hook. in Curt. Cultivada Diez del día OrnamentalPortulacaceae Portulaca Portulaca oleracea L. Cultivada Verdolaga de jardín OrnamentalPortulacaceae Portulaca Portulaca pilosa L. Cultivada Diez del día OrnamentalPiperaceae Potomorphe Potomorphe sp. Cultivada Caisimón MedicinalPiperaceae Potomorphe Potomorphe umbellata (L.) Miq. Cultivada Caisimón MedicinalSapotaceae Pouteria Pouteria campechiana (Humb., Bonpl. et Kunt) Baehni Cultivada Canistel FrutalSapotaceae Pouteria Pouteria sapota (Jacq.) H. E. Moore et Stearn Cultivada Mamey colorado, sapote FrutalRosaceae Prunus Prunus persica (L.) Batsch. Cultivada Melocotón FrutalMyrtaceae Psidium Psidium guajava L. Cultivada Guayaba FrutalPunicaceae Punica Punica granatum L. Cultivada Granada FrutalCombretaceae Quisqualis Quisqualis indica L. Cultivada Piscuala OrnamentalBrassicaceae Raphanus Raphanus sativus L. Cultivada Rábanp VegetalEuphorbiaceae Ricinus Ricinus communis L. Cultivada Higuereta Medicinal


B - 23


Rosaceae Rosa Rosa sp. Cultivada Rosa OrnamentalLamiaceae Rosmarinus Rosmarinus officinalis L. Cultivada Romero MedicinalScrophulariaceae Ruselia Ruselia equisetiformis Schletcht.et Cham. Cultivada Lágrimas de Cupido OrnamentalRutaceae Ruta Ruta chalepensis L. Cultivada Ruda MedicinalPoaceae Saccharum Saccharum officinarum L. Cultivada Caña de azucar Otros usosLamiaceae Salvia Salvia tenella Sw. Cultivada Amargosa MedicinalCapparaceae Sambucus Sambucus mexicana K. B. Presl. ex DC. Cultivada Saúco blanco OrnamentalAcanthaceae Sanchezia Sanchezia nobilis Hook. f. var. glaucophylla Cultivada Sankesia OrnamentalAgavaceae Sansevieria Sansevieria hyacinthoides (L.) Druce Cultivada Lengua de vaca Alimento animalAgavaceae Sansevieria Sansevieria trifasciata Hort. ex Prain 'Helnii' Cultivada Lengua de vaca enana OrnamentalLamiaceae Satureja Satureja brownei (Sw.) Briq. Cultivada Menta MedicinalOrchidaceae Schomburgkia Schomburgkia tibicinis Baten Cultivada Buho OrnamentalAraceae Scindapsis Scindapsis aureus Engl. Cultivada Malanguita de jardín OrnamentalCucurbitaceae Sechium Sechium edule (Jacq.) Sw. Cultivada Chayote VegetalCrassulaceae Sedum Sedum morganianum E. Walth. Cultivada Granito de arroz OrnamentalCaesalpinaceae Senna Senna alata (L.) Roxb. Cultivada Guacamaya francesa MedicinalCaesalpinaceae Senna Senna bicapsularis (L.) Roxb. Cultivada Sena MedicinalPedaliaceae Sesamum Sesamum orientale L. Cultivada Ajonjolí Otros usosBrassicaceae Sinapis Sinapis alba L. Cultivada Mostaza CondimentosSolanaceae Solanum Solanum americanum Mill. Cultivada Yerba mora MedicinalSolanaceae Solanum Solanum melongena L. Cultivada Berenjena VegetalSolanaceae Solanum Solanum seaforthianum Andr. Cultivada Jazmín OrnamentalLamiaceae Solenostemon Solenostemon scutellarioides (L.) Codd. Cultivada Manto OrnamentalPoaceae Sorghum Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench. Cultivada Sorgo Alimento animalOrchidaceae Spathoglottis Spathoglottis plicata Blume Cultivada Orquídea OrnamentalAnacardiaceae Spondias Spondias mombin L. Cultivada Jobo Otros usosAnacardiaceae Spondias Spondias purpurea L. Cultivada Ciruela FrutalVerbenaceae Stachytarpheta Stachytarpheta jamaicensis (L.) Vahl Cultivada Verbena, verbena cimarrona MedicinalAraceae Syngonium Syngonium auritum (L.) Schot in Schott et Endl. Cultivada Malanga OrnamentalMyrtaceae Syzygium Syzygium malaccense (L.) Merr. et Perry Cultivada Albaricoque, pera FrutalApocynaceae Tabernaemontana Tabernaemontana citrifolia L. Cultivada Jazmín café MedicinalApocynaceae Tabernaemontana Tabernaemontana divaricata (L.) R. Br. Cultivada Jazmín de montaña OrnamentalAsteraceae Tagetes Tagetes erecta L. Cultivada Carolá MedicinalCaesalpinaceae Tamarindus Tamarindus indica L. Cultivada Tamarindo FrutalChenopodiaceae Teloxys Teloxys ambrosioides (L.) W. A. Weber Cultivada Apasote MedicinalCombretaceae Terminalia Terminalia catappa L. Cultivada Almendro de la india FrutalSterculiaceae Theobroma Theobroma cacao L. Cultivada Cacao Otros usosAcanthaceae Thunbergia Thunbergia erecta (Benth.) T. Anders. Cultivada Mainereta OrnamentalAcanthaceae Thunbergia Thunbergia grandiflora (Roxb. ex Rutt.) Roxb. Cultivada Fauto OrnamentalLamiaceae Thymus Thymus vulgaris L. Cultivada Tomillo CondimentosIridaceae Tigridia Tigridia pavonia Ker. Cultivada Avispa OrnamentalAsteraceae Tithonia Tithonia diversifolia Hesml. Cultivada Margarita angolana Ornamental


B - 24


Commelinaceae Tradescantia Tradescantia pallida (Rosel) D. R. Hunt Cultivada Cucaracha morada OrnamentalCommelinaceae Tradescantia Tradescantia spatahacea Sw. Cultivada Cordován OrnamentalCommelinaceae Tradescantia Tradescantia zebrina Bosse Cultivada Cucaracha OrnamentalMeliaceae Trichilia Trichilia glabra L. Cultivada Siguaraya MedicinalTropaeolaceae Tropaeolum Tropaeolum majus L. Cultivada Calabacita de jardín OrnamentalTurneraceae Turnera Turnera ulmifolia L. Cultivada Marilope MedicinalArecaceae Veitchia Veitchia merillii (Becc.) H. E. Moore Cultivada Palma Miami OrnamentalVerbenaceae Verbena Verbena sp. Cultivada Verbena OrnamentalPoaceae Vetiveria Vetiveria zizanoides (L.) Nash in Small Cultivada Vetiver Otros usosFabaceae Vigna Vigna umbellata (Thunb.) Ohwi et Ohashi Cultivada Frijol picolina VegetalFabaceae Vigna Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp. subs. sesquipedalis (L.) Verdc.Cultivada Habichuela china VegetalFabaceae Vigna Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp., subsp. unguiculata Cultivada GranosViolaceae Viola Viola odorata L. Cultivada Violeta MedicinalVerbenaceae Vitex Vitex agnus-castus L. Cultivada Vencedor OrnamentalVerbenaceae Vitex Vitex sp. Cultivada - MedicinalVerbenaceae Vitex Vitex trifolia L. Cultivada Yo puedo más que tú OrnamentalVitaceae Vitis Vitis vinifera L. Cultivada Uva BebidaAraceae Xanthosoma Xanthosoma atrovirens Koch et Bouche Cultivada Malanga amarilla Raices y tubérculosAraceae Xanthosoma Xanthosoma nigrum (Vell.) Mansf. Cultivada Malanga morada OrnamentalAraceae Xanthosoma Xanthosoma sagittifolium (L.) Schott in Schott et Endl. Cultivada Malanga Raices y tubérculosHaemodoraceae Xiphidium Xiphidium caeruleum Aubl. Cultivada Mandelamina MedicinalPoaceae Zea Zea mays L. Cultivada Maiz GranosAmaryllidaceae Zephyranthes Zephyranthes puerotricensis Traub. Cultivada Brujita blanca OrnamentalAmaryllidaceae Zephyranthes Zephyranthes rosea Lindl. Cultivada Brujita rosada OrnamentalZingiberaceae Zingiber Zingiber officinale (L.) Roscoe Cultivada Gengibre MedicinalAsteraceae Zinnia Zinnia elegans Jacq. Cultivada Clavelón OrnamentalMimosaceae Acacia Acacia farneciana (L.) Willd. Silvestre Aroma Madera casaRubiaceae Acrosynanthus Acrosynanthus trachyphyllus Standley Silvestre Jaragua Madera casaSapindaceae Allophylus Allophylus cominia L. Silvestre Palo caja MedicinalRutaceae Amyris Amyris balsamifera L. Silvestre Cuaba Madera casaFabaceae Andira Andira jamaicensis (W. Wr.) Urb. Silvestre Yaba Madera casaAsteraceae Bidens Bidens pilosa L. Silvestre Romerillo MedicinalCombretaceae Bucida Bucida buceras L. Silvestre Júcaro Madera casaCombretaceae Bucida Bucida sp. Silvestre Júcaro Madera casaCombretaceae Bucida Bucida spinosa (Nortrop.) Jenning Silvestre Jucarillo Madera casaBurseraceae Bursera Bursera simaruba (L.) Sarg. Silvestre Almácigo MedicinalCaesalpinaceae Caesalpinia Caesalpinia bahamensis Lam. Silvestre Brasilete Madera otros usosCaesalpinaceae Caesalpinia Caesalpinia vesicaria L. Silvestre Brasil MedicinalClusiaceae Calophyllum Calophyllum antillanum Britt. Silvestre Ocuje Madera casaRubiaceae Calycophyllum Calycophyllum candidissimum DC Silvestre Dagame MeliferaArecaceae Calyptrogine Calyptrogine dulcis H. Wend. Silvestre Guano manaca Otros usosFabaceae Canavalia Canavalia cubensis Griseb. Silvestre Cayajabo Medicinal


B - 25


Canellaceae Canella Canella winterana (L.) Gaertn. Silvestre Palo malambo MedicinalRubiaceae Casasia Casasia calophylla Griseb. Silvestre Lirio Madera casaFlacourtiaceae Casearia Casearia sylvestris Sw. Silvestre Sarnilla Madera casaMoraceae Cecropia Cecropia schreberiana Miq. Silvestre Yagruma MedicinalMeliaceae Cedrela Cedrela odorata L. Silvestre Cedro Madera casaUlmaceae Celtis Celtis trinervia Lam. Silvestre Hueso Madera otros usosMoraceae Chlorophora Chlorophora tinctoria (L.) Gaud. Silvestre Futete Madera casaAsteraceae Chrosmolaena Chrosmolaena odorata (L.) R. M. King et H. Rob. Silvestre Rompezaraguey MedicinalVitaceae Cissus Cissus verticillata (L.) Nicolson et Jarvis Silvestre Bejuco ubí MedicinalClusiaceae Clusia Clusia rosea Jacq. Silvestre Cupey Madera otros usosRhamnaceae Colubrina Colubrina arborescens (Mill.) Sarg. Silvestre Fuego Madera casaBoraginaceae Cordia Cordia sulcata DC. Silvestre Tabaco Madera otros usosVerbenaceae Cornutia Cornutia pyramidata L. Silvestre Salvilla MedicinalSapindaceae Cupania Cupania macrophylla A. Rich. Silvestre Guara Madera casaCyperaceae Cyperus Cyperus rotundus L. Silvestre Caramaná MedicinalMimosaceae Dichrostachys Dichrostachys cinerea (L.) Wight. Et Arnot. Silvestre Marabú Madera casaBignoniaceae Enallagma Enallagma cucurbitina (L.) Baill. Silvestre Maguiro MedicinalRubiaceae Erithralis Erithralis fruticosa L. Silvestre Yajabico Madera cercasFabaceae Erythrina Erythrina poeppigiana (Walp.) O.F.Cook Silvestre Bucaro Madera otros usosErythroxylaceae Erythroxylon Erythroxilom sp. Silvestre Arabo Madera casaErythroxylaceae Erythroxylon Erythroxylon confusum Britt. Silvestre Arabo Madera casaErythroxylaceae Erythroxylon Erythroxylon havanensis Jacq. Silvestre Jibá MedicinalMyrtaceae Eucalyptus Eucalyptus sp. Silvestre Eucalipto Madera casaMyrtaceae Eugenia Eugenia axillaris (Sw.) Willd. Silvestre Guairaje Madera casaAsteraceae Eupatorium Eupatorium villosum Sw. Silvestre Trebolillo MedicinalCucurbitaceae Fevilla Fevilla cordifolia L. Silvestre Jabilla MedicinalMoraceae Ficus Ficus membranacea C. Wr. Silvestre Jaguey colorado Madera casaClusiaceae Garcinia Garcinia aristata (Griseb.) Borhidi Silvestre Manajú MedicinalRhamnaceae Gavania Gavania polygama (Jacq.) Urb. Silvestre Jaboncillo BebidaBoraginaceae Gerascanthus Gerascanthus gerascanthoides (L.) Borhidi Silvestre Varia Madera otros usosMalvaceae Gossypium Gossypium arboreum L. Silvestre Algodón MedicinalZygophyllaceae Guajacum Guajacum officinale L. Silvestre Guayacán Madera casaZygophyllaceae Guajacum Guajacum sanctum L. Silvestre Guacayancillo Madera casaMeliaceae Guarea Guarea trichilioides L. Silvestre Yamao Madera casaSterculiaceae Guazuma Guazuma ulmifolia Lam. Silvestre Guasima Madera casaEuphorbiaceae Gymnanthes Gymnanthes locida Sw. Silvestre Aite Madera casaRubiaceae Hamelia Hamelia patens Jacq. Silvestre Ponasí MedicinalMeliaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus elatus Sw. Silvestre Majagua Madera casaMalvaceae Hibiscus Hibiscus tiliaceus L. Silvestre Majagua Madera casaAsteraceae Koanophyllum Koanophyllum villosum (Sw) R. M. King et H. Rob. Silvestre Trebolillo MedicinalEuphorbiaceae Lasiocroton Lasiocroton cordifolius Britt.et Wils. Silvestre Cuaba amarila Madera casaVerbenaceae Lippia Lippia dulcis Trevir Silvestre Orozoz Medicinal


B - 26


Sapotaceae Mastichodendron Mastichodendron foetidissimum Jacq. Silvestre Jocuma Madera casaSapindaceae Matayba Matayba opoositifolia (A. Rich.) Britt. Silvestre Macurije Otros usosAsteraceae Mikania Mikania hastata (L.) Mill. Silvestre Guaco MedicinalCucurbitaceae Momordica Momordica charantia L. Silvestre Cundeamor MedicinalLauraceae Nectandra Nectandra antillana Meins Silvestre Boniato Madera casaLauraceae Ocotea Ocotea cuneata (Griseb.) Urb. Silvestre Caneón MedicinalLauraceae Ocotea Ocotea leucoxylon (Sw.) Mez. Silvestre Curavara Madera casaAnnonaceae Oxandra Oxandra lanceolata (Sw.) Benth. Silvestre Algarrobo, yaya MedicinalAnnonaceae Oxandra Oxandra laurifolia (Sw.) A.Rich. Silvestre Puria Madera casaPoaceae Panicum Panicum maximum Jacq. Silvestre Hierba de guinea MedicinalAsteraceae Parthenium Parthenium hysterophorus L. Silvestre Escoba amarga MedicinalEuphorbiaceae Pera Pera bumeliifolia Griseb. Silvestre Jiquí Madera casaPiperaceae Piper Piper aduncum L. Silvestre Platanillo de Cuba MedicinalPiperaceae Piper Piper aduncum L. subsp. aduncum Silvestre Guayoyo MedicinalFabaceae Piscidia Piscidia piscipula L. Silvestre Candelón Madera casaCaesalpinaceae Poeppigia Poeppigia procesa Presl. Silvestre Tengue Madera casaPolypodiaceae Polypodium Polypodium polypodioides (L.) Hitchc. Silvestre Doradilla MedicinalBurseraceae Protium Protium cubense (Rose) Urb. Silvestre Copal MedicinalBurseraceae Protium Protium fragrans (Rose) Urb. Silvestre Incienso Madera casaRosaceae Prunus Prunus myrtifolius (L.) Urb. Silvestre Almendrillo Madera casaRosaceae Prunus Prunus occidentalis Sw. Silvestre Cuajaní MedicinalMoraceae Pseudolmedia Pseudolmedia spuria (Sw.) Griseb. Silvestre Macagua Madera casaApocynaceae Rauvolfia Rauvolfia salicifolia Griseb. Silvestre Lechero Madera otros usosClusiaceae Rheedia Rheedia roscifolia Griseb. Silvestre Espuela de rey Madera casaRhizophoraceae Rhizophora Rhizophora mangle L. Silvestre Mangle MedicinalArecaceae Roystonea Roystonea regia (Kunth) O. F. Cook Silvestre Palma real Madera casaArecaceae Sabal Sabal florida Becc. Silvestre Palma cana Madera casaMimosaceae Samanea Samanea saman (Jacq.) Merrill Silvestre Algarrobo Otros usosCaesalpinaceae Senna Senna occidentalis (L.) Link. Silvestre Yerba hedionda MedicinalSmilaceae Smilax Smilax dominguensis Willd. Silvestre Raiz de china MedicinalSmilaceae Smilax Smilax sp. Silvestre Zarzaparrilla MedicinalSolanaceae Solanum Solanum torvum Sw. Silvestre Pendejera MedicinalMeliaceae Swietenia Swietenia macrophylla King Silvestre Caoba hondureña Madera casaMeliaceae Swietenia Swietenia mahagoni (L.) Jacq. Silvestre Caobilla Madera casaMyrtaceae Syzygium Syzygium jambos (L.) Alston in Trimen Silvestre Pomarrosa Madera casaBignoniaceae Tabehuia Tabehuia angustata Britt. Silvestre Roble blanco Madera casaBignoniaceae Tabehuia Tabehuia sp. Silvestre Roble Madera casaVerbenaceae Tectonia Tectonia grandis L. Silvestre Teca Madera casaBoraginaceae Tournefortia Tournefortia hirsotissima L. Silvestre Nigua MedicinalMeliaceae Trichilia Trichilia hirta L. Silvestre Cabo de hacha Madera casaMoraceae Trophys Trophys racemosa (L.) Urb. Silvestre Ramon de caballo Madera otros usosConvolvulaceae Turbina Turbina corymbosa (L.) Raf. Silvestre Campanilla Melifera


B - 27


Urticaceae Urera Urera baccifera (L.) Gaud. Silvestre Chichicate MedicinalBoraginaceae Varronia Varronia globosa (Jacq.) Borhidi Silvestre Yerba de la sangre MedicinalVitaceae Vitis Vitis tiliaefolia Humb. Silvestre Bejuco parra BebidaAsteraceae Xanthium Xanthium strumarium L. Silvestre Guizazo de caballo MedicinalRutaceae Zanthoxylum Zanthoxylum martinicense (Lam.) DC Silvestre Ayúa Madera casaFlacourtiaceae Zuelania Zuelania guidonia (Sw.) Britt. Et Mills. Silvestre Guajaní Madera casa

familias 107generos 352taxa 508cultivadas 402silvestres 106


B - 28

No % No % No % No %Families 91 85.05 90 84.11 82 76.64 107 100.00Genera 235 66.76 238 67.61 204 57.95 352 100.00

taxa 320 62.99 315 62.01 258 50.79 508 100.00cultivated 270 84.38 281 89.21 196 75.97 402 79.13

wild 50 15.63 34 10.79 62 24.03 106 20.87

TotalWestern Cuba Central Cuba Eastern Cuba

Summary table of Plant Species


B - 29

ANNEX C. Cuba’s National System of Protected Areas. SISTEMA NACIONAL DE AREAS PROTEGIDAS DE CUBA: Desarrollo del Sistema y Plan Estratégico ABSTRACT: Cuba’s National System of Protected Areas: its development and strategic plan The paper reviews the historical evolution and status of Cuba’s national system of protected areas. Key tables and maps present the total area under protection and the conservation and management regimes that pertain to the different areas. The paper provides a brief description of the edaphic and geographic conditions in Cuba 109,886 km2 distributed over 1600 islands and cays in the Greater Antilles. The diverse ecosystems are highlighted- tropical mountains, hillsides and plains with three major mountain chains cutting across the main island. Cuba’ National Protected Area Systems (SNAP) traces its origin to 1930 with the establishment of a protected habitat for flamingoes. With the Revolution in 1959, a decree established the legal basis for protected area conservation, focusing primarily on forests and habitats for endangered species. The Agrarian Reform Law of 1963 recognized the importance of ecosystem conservation and set aside additional areas for protection. Cuba established the National Systems of Natural and Cultural Areas in 1974 with support from FAO and UNDP. In 1981, Law #33 established a national policy on Environmental Protection and Rational Use of Natural Resources that provided the legal basis for a consolidated national protected area system with articles 78 and 79 creating the legal structure of SNAP. In 1985 UNESCO accords Biosphere Reserve status to the first two protected areas in Cuba leading to the eventual total of 6 MaB Reserves achieved in 2004. In 1994 the Ministry of Science, Technology, and Environment (CITMA) was created and the SNAP was placed under the CITMA with the national centre for Protected Areas (CNAP) providing the policy, organization and management for the national system. There are presently 53 protected areas in Cuba distributed among categories 1-6 of IUCN’s protected area management typology. The bulk of the area under protection falls within the designated MaB Reserves. The two ministries directly charged with protected area management are CITMA and the Ministry of Agriculture with involvement from the Ministry of Tourism and FARC territorial defense. A much smaller proportion of the systems is managed by local authorities and civil society organizations. The first SNAP Strategic Plan covered the period 2003-2008. The current SNAP strategic Plan covers 2009-2013 and has 14 programmes to implement 10 strategic objectives that the paper presents in detail. The bulk of the area under protection is also designated for sustainable use of biodiversity and is closely linked to national development goals and enhancing the value of Cuba’s natural and cultural patrimony. INTRODUCCION El archipiélago cubano está formado por más de 1 600 islas, islotes y cayos, ubicados entre los 23º17´09´´- 19º49´36´´ de latitud norte y los 74º07´55´´- 84º57´54´´ de longitud oeste, con una extensión total de 109 886 km2, rodeado por cuatro grupos insulares: Los Colorados y Sabana-Camagüey (al norte) y Jardines de la Reina y Los Canarreos (al sur). Este último archipiélago posee, la isla más extensa después de la Isla de Cuba, nombrada Isla de la Juventud, con 2 419 km2 (Comisión Nacional de Nombres Geográficos, 2000). El relieve se destaca por su complejidad y diversidad, constituido por montañas, alturas y llanuras, ocupando estas últimas la mayor parte del territorio nacional. Los grupos orográficos más importantes son la cordillera de Guaniguanico en la región occidental, el macizo de Guamuahaya en


C - 1

la región central y los macizos de Nipe-Sagua-Baracoa y la Sierra Maestra en la región oriental. En la Sierra Maestra se encuentra la mayor elevación de Cuba, el Pico Real del Turquino con 1 974 msnm (ONE, 2007). En la Isla de la Juventud, la elevación más alta se encuentra en la Sierra de la Cañada con 303 msnm y en Cayo Romano, tercera isla de Cuba en extensión, la mayor altura es la Silla de Romano con 62 msnm. La mayor parte de los suelos de Cuba son calizos, dado el predominio de las rocas carbonatadas en todo el país (65 %), los menos desarrollados se encuentran en las zonas montañosas, mientras en las llanuras se destacan los arcillosos. La isla de Cuba, por su forma larga y estrecha, presenta una peculiar hidrología que se divide en dos grandes vertientes, norte y sur, separada por un parteaguas central que atraviesa todo el territorio. Los ríos más largos son el Cauto, Zaza, Sagua la Grande, Caonao y Toa. La mayor parte de los ríos se encuentran embalsados, siendo los mayores embalses el del Zaza y el del Alacranes. En la Isla de la Juventud la red hidrográfica es radial por su forma de domo (Comisión Nacional de Nombres Geográficos, 2000). En Cuba los paisajes, a diferencia del resto de las Antillas Mayores, se caracterizan por un amplio predominio de las llanuras y de los paisajes desarrollados en rocas carbonatadas y la preponderancia de las montañas bajas húmedas, mientras que las montañas medias solo ocupan el 1 % del territorio (Mateo, 1989). ORIGEN Y EVOLUCIÓN DEL SISTEMA NACIONAL DE ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS El primer territorio legalmente establecido en Cuba como área protegida fue el Parque Nacional Sierra del Cristal, situado en los términos municipales de Mayarí y Sagua de Tánamo, de la entonces provincia de Oriente, el 12 de abril de 1930 por el Decreto Presidencial 487/1930. El fundamento de su creación (actualmente conocido como Parque Nacional Pico Cristal) fue su valor como reserva forestal, por el valor de las maderas y el grado de conservación de los bosques de pinares presentes en ella. Con posterioridad el Decreto 803/1933, declaró una Reserva Nacional para flamencos en la costa norte de la provincia de Camagüey, incluyendo los cayos, con la prohibición de matar o apresar a estas aves. El Decreto 1370/1936, declaró como Refugio Nacional de Caza y Pesca a toda la Ciénaga de Zapata. En el año 1959 el gobierno revolucionario aprueba la Ley 239/59, que a través del Departamento de Repoblación Forestal tenía como finalidad conservar, proteger y fomentar la riqueza forestal de la nación y que en su Artículo 20 crea nueve Parques Nacionales (Cuchillas del Toa, Gran Piedra, Sierra Maestra, Escambray, Laguna del Tesoro, Los Órganos, Guanahacabibes, Ciénaga de Lanier y Sierra de Cubitas) a lo largo del país, prohibiéndose en ellos la destrucción de la vegetación y de la fauna. En los años 60 con el objetivo de proteger y profundizar en el conocimiento de nuestros recursos naturales, mediante la Resolución No. 412/1963, del Instituto Nacional de Reforma Agraria, se declaran como Reservaciones Naturales conocidas como El Veral y Cabo Corrientes en Pinar del Río, Jaguaní y Cupeyal del Norte en las provincias orientales, y en 1966 a Cayo Caguanes, al norte de Sancti Spiritus. En 1973, a través de un proyecto internacional del INDAF, en colaboración con el Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo (PNUD) y la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la


C - 2

Agricultura y la Alimentación (FAO) con el fin de fortalecer diferentes aspectos del sector forestal del país, se solicitó una consultoría a esta última entidad, para desarrollar la actividad de Parques Nacionales y Vida Silvestre. En el marco de este proyecto, en mayo de 1973, visita a Cuba el consultor Kenton Miller (actualmente asesor de la Comisión Mundial de Áreas Protegidas), quien contribuyó a crear un marco conceptual para la planificación de forma general y particular en relación a las áreas protegidas, introduciéndose nuevos conceptos, términos, nomenclatura y principios. Se recomendó por primera vez una estrategia para la creación, manejo y desarrollo de un “sistema nacional de áreas naturales y culturales en Cuba” (FAO, 1974). Se apoyó además el concepto de una Comisión Nacional ínter organismos, que se encargara del tema. Estos y muchos otros aspectos, incluyendo la propuesta de un grupo importante de áreas de elevados valores naturales y culturales y de significación nacional, aparecen reflejados en el Informe preparado para el Gobierno de Cuba por la FAO, basado en la labor del consultor K. R. Miller (FAO, 1974). En el año 1976 se crea de la Comisión Nacional para la Protección del Medio Ambiente y los Recursos Naturales (COMARNA), con las funciones de recomendar las medidas legislativas y la tecnología apropiada para la protección y el mejoramiento del medio ambiente y el aprovechamiento racional de los recursos naturales. En 1981 se aprueba la Ley 33 de Protección del Medio Ambiente y del Uso Racional de los Recursos Naturales que unificó políticas y acciones en cuanto a estos temas, y en sus artículos 78 y 79 brindó la base legal para la creación de la red nacional de áreas protegidas. En esta década de los años ochenta, se continúan realizando estudios relacionados con la conservación y protección de nuestros recursos, teniéndose en cuenta la representatividad de ecosistemas y de otros valores como los florísticos, faunísticos, geológicos, geomorfológicos e histórico-culturales, en los que intervinieron especialistas de diferentes entidades estatales como el Departamento de Parques Nacionales, Fauna Silvestre y Caza del Ministerio de la Agricultura (MINAG), la COMARNA, el Instituto de Planificación Física (IPF), el Instituto de Ecología y Sistemática (IES) y el Instituto de Geografía, el Instituto Nacional de Turismo (INTUR), entre otras instituciones. También la UNESCO concede en 1985 el título de Reserva de la Biosfera a la Sierra del Rosario en la provincia de Pinar del Río y en 1987 a la Península de Guanahacabibes en Pinar del Río, a las Cuchillas del Toa en Guantánamo y a Baconao en Santiago de Cuba (Herrera, 2001). En la década del noventa se produce una reorganización de los Organismos de la Administración Central del Estado, creándose en 1994 el Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología y Medio Ambiente (CITMA) y la Agencia de Medio Ambiente (AMA), y en 1995, entre otros centros de carácter ambiental, el Centro Nacional de Áreas Protegidas (CNAP) que en cumplimiento de sus funciones estatales, tiene como misión, ser el centro rector del planeamiento y la gestión integral del Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas (SNAP), garantizando su dirección, control y funcionamiento. Este proceso impulsó la consolidación institucional del SNAP (CNAP, 2002). En este período el Instituto de Oceanología (IDO) elaboró el documento Propuesta de áreas vedadas de pesca para el manejo sostenible de los recursos de la plataforma cubana, definiendo principios, generalidades y beneficios de las reservas de pesca, proponiendo 15 áreas que respondían a objetivos de protección y conservación de especies o ecosistemas, para su incorporación en el Sistema (Estrada et al., 2004).


C - 3

En 1995, se realizó el II Taller Nacional de Áreas Protegidas, donde se analizaron 535 sitios propuestos como áreas protegidas y se inició un proceso de perfeccionamiento con vistas a lograr una mayor representatividad de los ecosistemas marinos. En esta etapa se crea la Dirección Nacional Forestal y el Servicio Estatal Forestal (SEF) adjuntas al MINAG, encargadas de dirigir y controlar la política forestal del país; se establece el Cuerpo de Guardabosques (CGB) en el Ministerio del Interior (MININT); se crea la Oficina Nacional de Inspecciones Pesqueras (ONIP) y la Dirección de Ciencia y Regulaciones Pesqueras (DCRP) en el Ministerio de la Industria Pesquera (MIP). Estas entidades tienen una fuerte incidencia en la gestión de las áreas protegidas. La Dirección de Ciencia y Regulaciones Pesqueras (DCRP) comenzó un proceso de declaración de Zonas Bajo Régimen Especial de Uso y Protección (ZBREUP), que han sido el punto de partida de propuestas de áreas protegidas marinas como el Parque Nacional Jardines de la Reina, el Parque Nacional Punta Francés, así como del reconocimiento del Parque Nacional Ciénaga de Zapata y la Reserva Ecológica Cayo Largo, entre otras (Estrada et al., 2004). En 1999 se emite el Decreto Ley 201/99 del Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas que establece el régimen legal relativo a su rectoría, control, administración, categorías de manejo, propuesta y declaración de áreas protegidas, régimen de protección, entre otros aspectos. En este propio año se reconoce por la UNESCO como Sitio del Patrimonio Mundial Natural, al Parque Nacional Desembarco del Granma. Dos nuevas Reservas de la Biosfera reconoce la UNESCO en el 1999: Buenavista al norte de las provincias de Villa Clara, Sancti Spiritus y Ciego de Ávila y Ciénaga de Zapata en Matanzas. Por primera vez, se reconoce legalmente un grupo de 35 áreas protegidas mediante el Acuerdo 4262/2001, del Comité Ejecutivo del Consejo de Ministros (CECM). Cuba designa seis sitios Ramsar que fueron reconocidos por dicha convención, uno en el año 2001 (Ciénaga de Zapata) y los 5 restantes en el 2002: Buenavista al Norte de Villa Clara y Sancti Spiritus; Ciénaga de Lanier y Sur de la Isla de la Juventud; Gran Humedal del Norte de Ciego de Ávila; Humedal Delta del Cauto en Granma y Las Tunas y Río Máximo-Cagüey al Norte de Camaguey. También la UNESCO distingue un nuevo Sitio del Patrimonio Mundial Natural, al Parque Nacional Alejandro de Humboldt en el 2001. (Tabla-1)


C - 4

Tabla – 1. Áreas Protegidas con Reconocimiento Internacional

ÁREAS Provincia

Superficie Zona Zona de Zona de Total núcleo amortiguamiento transición

(km2) (km2)

(%) (km2) (%) (km2) (%) Reservas de la Biosfera Guanahacabibes Pinar del Río 1191,89 348,56

29,2 736,35 61,8 106,98 9,0

Sierra del Rosario Pinar del Río - La Habana 250,70 24,66 9,8 80,20 32,0 145,84

58,2

Cuchillas del Toa Guantánamo – Holguín 2083,05 897,41

43,1 492,84 23,7 692,80

33,3

Ciénaga de Zapata Matanzas 10499,00 7478,00

71,2 1968,00 18,7 1053,00

10,0

Buenavista Villa Clara, Sancti Spiritus y Ciego de Ávila 3154,66 765,10

24,3 195,56 6,2 2194,00

69,5

Baconao Santiago de Cuba - Guantánamo 848,53 141,53

16,7 446,50 52,6 260,50

30,7 Patrimonio Natural de la Humanidad Parque Nacional Desembarco del Granma Granma 325,76 .. .. .. .. .. .. Parque Nacional Alejandro de Humboldt Guantánamo 706,80 .. .. .. .. .. .. Paisaje Cultural de la Humanidad Parque Nacional Viñales Pinar del Río 111,20 .. .. .. .. .. .. Sitios Ramsar (Humedales de Importancia Internacional) Ciénaga de zapata Matanzas 6657,85 .. .. .. .. .. .. Ciénaga de Lanier y Sur de la Isla de la Juventud Isla de la Juventud 1540,29 .. .. .. .. .. .. Humedal Río Máximo-Camagüey Camagüey 225,80 .. .. .. .. .. .. Gran Humedal del Norte de Ciego de Ávila Ciego de Ávila 2589,27 .. .. .. .. .. ..

Buenavista Villa Clara, Sancti Spiritus y Ciego de Ávila 3154,66 .. .. .. .. .. ..

Humedal Delta del Cauto Tunas, Granma 663,70 .. .. .. .. .. ..


C - 5

A partir del año 2003 se realiza un diagnóstico, se actualiza y redefine el SNAP y se elabora el primer Plan del Sistema 2003-2008, documento rector de carácter normativo y metodológico que constituyó la primera herramienta estratégica, para encaminar las acciones a través de objetivos y programas durante cinco años. A inicios del 2008, el CECM reconoce por medio del Acuerdo 6291 a diez áreas protegidas identificadas en el Sistema, con lo que suman 45 las áreas protegidas legalmente aprobadas por el gobierno cubano, de un total de 105 áreas administradas. Con posterioridad en el 2010 se hace un nuevo análisis por el CECM y se aprueba por el Acuerdo 6803 ocho nuevas áreas protegidas, lo que ahora suman 53 las áreas legalmente aprobadas por el gobierno cubano, de un total de 105 áreas administradas. PLAN DE SISTEMA NACIONAL DE ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS 2003 – 2008 El año 2003 constituyó un momento importante en el SNAP de Cuba, pues mediante un proceso participativo, se elaboró el primer Plan de Sistema, que constituyó una herramienta programática a través de la cual se establecieron los objetivos y las acciones a realizar en el período 2003-2008, diseñado a través de 14 programas dirigidos a desarrollar las 10 líneas estratégicas identificadas que se relacionan a continuación: 10 Objetivos Estrategicos para las Areas Protegidas

1. Perfeccionar la organización del Sistema creando la Junta Coordinadora Nacional (JCN) del SNAP y otros mecanismos.

2. Fortalecer el proceso de instrumentación de las áreas protegidas identificadas en el Sistema Nacional, y la elaboración de sus planes de manejo, priorizando Parques Nacionales, Reservas Ecológica y Áreas Protegidas de Recursos Manejados, proponiendo al CECM al menos el 80 % de las áreas protegidas de significación nacional.

3. Fortalecer los mecanismos de trabajo de los organismos administrativos y de control sobre las actividades que se realizan en las áreas protegidas.

4. Perfeccionar la integración e interacción con otros sistemas, planes y programas e incorporar en el planeamiento del SNAP estrategias de manejos bio-regionales.

5. Priorizar la declaración y atención de áreas bajo reconocimientos internacional es y lograr una adecuada proyección nacional e internacional del sistema que permita la búsqueda y obtención de financiamiento y recursos.

6. Desarrollar la capacitación en todos los niveles y componentes del SNAP. 7. Desarrollar la investigación, validación e introducción de tecnologías de avanzada,

implementando un sistema de información para la gestión del SNAP. 8. Desarrollar el trabajo y la participación comunitaria en las áreas protegidas. 9. Fortalecer la capacidad para la divulgación y la educación ambiental. 10. Incrementar el uso público en las áreas protegidas.

Los principales resultados de este proceso de implementación del Plan del SNAP 2003- 2008 fueron: Sistema de planificación

El propio desarrollo del primer Plan del Sistema, como estrategia general que estableció el diseño y las acciones a realizar a mediano plazo, que constituyó el marco de referencia para el desarrollo de las áreas protegidas.


C - 6

Elaboración de instrumentos metodológicos para la planificación y la gestión de las áreas protegidas como la:

o Metodología para la elaboración de los Planes de Manejo y Planes Operativos, o Metodología para Evaluar la Efectividad del Manejo (EEM), o Metodología para Capacidad de Carga de Visitantes en las áreas protegidas

marinas, o Manual de Señalética, o Manual de Identidad Visual Institucional del SNAP, o Metodología para evaluar daños causados por huracanes en áreas protegidas, o Manual y Metodología para la Planificación Financiera en las Áreas Protegidas,

entre otros. Mecanismos de coordinación

Creación y consolidación del trabajo de gestión de la Junta Coordinadora Nacional del SNAP, de las 15 Juntas Coordinadoras Provinciales (JCP) de áreas protegidas, de las Juntas de Administración de las Reservas de la Biosfera (RB) y los sitios Ramsar que necesitan de mecanismos de coordinación para su gestión.

Establecimiento de un mecanismo participativo de elaboración, revisión, entrega y aprobación de los planes de manejo y los planes operativos a nivel provincial y nacional, y de aplicación de los resultados de la Evaluación de la Efectividad del Manejo en la gestión de las áreas.

Sistema de control

Inclusión del control de la gestión del SNAP en el Sistema Ambiental del CITMA, que incluye a la Dirección de Medio Ambiente (DMA), a la Agencia de Medio Ambiente (AMA), al Centro de Información, Gestión y Educación Ambiental (CIGEA) y al Centro de Control e Inspección Ambiental (CICA).

Implementación de un sistema de control de la gestión del SNAP en el que participan activamente instancias nacionales y territoriales de control como el SEF, el CGB, Tropas Guardafronteras (TGF), la ONIP, las OPIP, así como la ENPFF y las Unidades de Medio Ambiente (UMAs).

Este sistema de control permite evaluar anualmente de forma sistemática el funcionamiento del Sistema de forma integral y a nivel de los territorios, mediante acciones entre las que se destacan las visitas integrales que realiza el Sistema Ambiental del CITMA y la Junta Coordinadora Nacional a cada una de las provincias del país y las Juntas Coordinadoras Provinciales que en cumplimiento de sus cronogramas de trabajo, realizan visitas dirigidas a las áreas protegidas. PLAN DE SISTEMA NACIONAL DE ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS 2009 – 2013 El SNAP lo integran un conjunto de entidades e instituciones que de manera colegiada, contribuyen a la conservación in situ del patrimonio natural cubano, a través de tres niveles de coordinación de la gestión, con roles y responsabilidades diferenciadas: Nivel Nacional: Comprendido por las entidades que integran la Junta Coordinadora Nacional: el Centro Nacional de Áreas Protegidas, la Dirección Nacional del Cuerpo de Guardabosque, la Dirección Nacional Forestal, la Dirección de Ciencia y Regulaciones Pesqueras, la Oficina Nacional de Inspección Pesquera, la Empresa Nacional para la Protección de la Flora y la Fauna, la Dirección de Medio Ambiente del CITMA y la Oficina de Regulación Ambiental y de Seguridad Nuclear. Nivel Provincial: Comprendido por las entidades que integran las Juntas Coordinadoras Provinciales: las Unidades de Medio Ambiente de las Delegaciones Territoriales del CITMA, los


C - 7

establecimientos territoriales de la ENPFF y sus grupos técnicos, el SEF tanto provincial como municipal, Cuerpo de Guardabosque, las Oficinas Provinciales de Inspección Pesquera, los Órganos Locales del Poder Popular, entre otros. Nivel Base: Constituido por las áreas protegidas que cuentan con administración tanto individual (cuando es ejercida por una única persona natural o jurídica) como coordinada (cuando las son administradas a través de una Junta de Administración compuestas por todas las personas naturales o jurídicas con intereses en el área protegida) (Decreto-Ley 201/99). Se consideran en el nivel básico los guardabosques situados en las áreas protegidas y los circuitos que los mismos apoyan. Nivel Nacional: La coordinación a nivel de nacional se realiza a través de la Junta Coordinadora Nacional, que permite a las entidades que la integran, un mejor desempeño en sus funciones estatales de rectoría, gestión y control relacionadas con las áreas protegidas. Esta Junta es presidida por el Centro Nacional de Áreas Protegidas, y está integrada por los máximos representantes de las entidades miembros, que se reúnen periódicamente para tomar decisiones de manera colegiada. El Plan de Sistema como documento rector para un período de 5 años, se elabora de manera participativa entre todos los miembros del Sistema. Para materializar el Plan se lleva a cabo cada año a una expresión anual, de manera que sea más fácil la consecución de los logros propuestos y se puede ir midiendo los resultados alcanzados. La coordinación a nivel provincial se ejecuta a través de las Juntas Coordinadoras Provinciales. Cada provincia y el municipio especial Isla de la Juventud, en el transcurso de estos 5 años ha consolidado su Junta Coordinadora Provincial. Las 15 Juntas Coordinadoras Provinciales, son presididas por la Delegación Provincial del CITMA en las que participan especialistas de las instituciones vinculadas a la gestión y el control de las áreas protegidas a este nivel. Estas Juntas planifican sus reuniones periódicas y visitas de control a las áreas protegidas en sus respectivos territorios. A nivel base se puso en evidencia la necesidad de conceptualizar los diferentes estadios de gestión de las áreas protegidas en Cuba. Se constata que algunas poseen administraciones más activas y consolidadas que otras en cuanto a disponibilidad de personal, infraestructura, equipamiento, etc., para asumir las necesidades de protección y gestión del área. Se cuenta por el SNAP a través de las administraciones de las áreas y de las Juntas Coordinadoras Provinciales, un total de 105 áreas protegidas con administración, de las cuales 11 son administradas de manera coordinada: tres áreas entre dos instituciones y ocho áreas a través de una Junta de Administración, compuesta por las personas naturales o jurídicas con intereses en el área protegida y 94 son administradas de manera individual (administración ejercida por una única persona natural o jurídica). Los principales organismos administradores de áreas protegidas son el MINAG y el CITMA, que administran de manera individual aproximadamente el 83,8 % del total de las áreas protegidas administradas del Sistema. La Empresa Nacional para la Protección de la Flora y la Fauna del Ministerio de la Agricultura, administra individualmente 69 áreas protegidas, y las Empresas Forestales Integrales tienen 4 administraciones en su haber. Diferentes entidades del CITMA administran de manera individual 15 áreas protegidas que representan alrededor del 14,3 % del total de áreas administradas. El resto de las áreas están administradas por una diversidad de organismos y entidades, entre las que se encuentran la ONG Fundación Antonio Núñez Jiménez para la Naturaleza y el Hombre, las Sociedades Anónimas Gaviota y Cubanacán, Órgano Local del Poder Popular de la Ciudad de la Habana y Juntas de Administración.


C - 8

Estructura Espacial del SNAP En el período anterior (2003-2008), el SNAP tenía identificadas 263 áreas protegidas. Luego de un reanálisis de los valores existentes en las áreas de cada provincia y el municipio especial Isla de la Juventud, quedan identificadas 253 áreas protegidas con valores para ser manejadas con fines de conservación bajo alguna de las categorías de manejo establecidas para Cuba, de las cuales 91 son de significación nacional (APSN) y 162 de significación local (APSL) (Anexos 1 y 2). Este análisis se realizó a nivel de los sistemas provinciales de áreas protegidas (SPAP), y consistió en la propuesta de 24 nuevas áreas y la reevaluación de otras 34, por diferentes causas, como redelimitación, unificación con áreas adyacentes u otras (Fig. 1). Figura 1. Número de áreas protegidas por categorías de manejo en el Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas de Cuba.

La superficie que abarcan las 253 áreas protegidas identificadas representa el 19.93 % del territorio nacional, incluyendo la plataforma insular marina hasta la profundidad de 200 m, quedando bajo cobertura del Sistema el 16,85 % de la parte terrestre y el 24,81 % de la plataforma marina (Tabla - 2). Tabla - 2 Por ciento de cobertura del Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas con relación a la superficie total del archipiélago cubano.

Superficie (ha)

SNAP

Áreas Protegidas de Significación

Áreas Protegidas de Significación

Cuba


C - 9

Nacional Local Terrestre 1 850 006,90

(16,84 %) 1 523 116,36 326 890,54 10 988 600,00

Marina 1 733 595,18

(24,81 %) 1 652 383,00

81 212,18

6 988 058,00

Total

3 583 602,08

(19,93 %)

3 175 499,36 (88,61 %)

408 102,72 (11,39 %)

17 976 658,00

Aunque el número de APSN es menor que el de las APSL, las primeras abarcan una mayor extensión territorial (3 175 499,36 ha) que estas últimas (408 102,72 ha), debido a que son generalmente áreas más extensas y comprenden ecosistemas más completos. Las APSN cubren el 88,61 % del SNAP, mientras que las APSL lo hacen solo sobre el 11,39 %, concentrándose los mayores valores naturales del país en las de significación nacional. Según su categoría de manejo las 253 áreas protegidas identificadas para formar parte del SNAP en Cuba se dividen de la siguiente forma según su importancia. (Tabla 2). Tabla 2. Áreas Protegidas Identificadas por Categoría de Manejo Significación

Nacional Significación

Local Total

Reserva Natural (UICN Categoría. I)

5 0 5

Parque Nacional (UICN Categoría. II)

14 0 14

Reserva Ecológica (UICN Categoría. II)

25 12 37

Elemento Natural Destacado (UICN Categoría. III

11 32 43

Reserva Florística Manejada. (UICN Categoría. IV

11 50 61

Refugio de Fauna (UICN Categoría. IV)

13 34 47

Paisaje Natural Protegido (UICN Categoría. V)

2 24 26

Áreas Protegida de Recursos Manejados (UICN Categoría. VI)

10 10 20

TOTAL 91 162 253 Haciendo un análisis del número de áreas protegidas y su nivel de significación por Categoría de manejo, se observa que las categorías con mayor número de áreas son la Reserva Florística Manejada, el Refugio de Fauna y el Elemento Natural Destacado Las áreas protegidas por los valores contenidos en ellos se dividen en categorías de manejo, lo que hace más viable la gestión administrativa y de conservación. Las áreas protegidas identificadas para Cuba son ocho, que equivalen a las 6 categorías de manejo propuestas por la UICN.


C - 10

PROYECCIONES ESTRATÉGICAS DEL SISTEMA NACIONAL DE ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS DE CUBA. 1. Lograr la integración institucional y funcional del SNAP. 2. Fortalecer la colaboración internacional. 3. Fortalecer las áreas protegidas como unidades básicas del SNAP. 4. Diseñar y promover nuevos mecanismos financieros y económicos para el SNAP. 5. Identificar y desarrollar las prioridades sobre capacitación, gestión participativa de las comunidades, de investigación, monitoreo y manejo para el SNAP. 6. Elevar la eficacia del proceso de planificación para la conservación en armonía con el desarrollo sostenible. 7. Determinar las amenazas y vulnerabilidades del SNAP para prevenir, mitigar y adaptación al cambio climático. BIBLIOGRAFÍA. Comisión Nacional de Nombres Geográficos. 2000. Diccionario Geográfico de Cuba. Oficina Nacional de Hidrografía y Geodesia, Ediciones GEO. GEOCUBA. 386 pp. CNAP. 2002. Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas. Cuba. Plan 2003-2008. Escandón Impresores, España. 222 pp. Estrada, R., A. Hernández, J. L. Gerhartz, A. Martínez, M. Melero, M. Blienmsrieder y K. C. Lindeman. 2004. El Sistema de áreas Marinas Protegidas de Cuba. Centro Nacional de Áreas Protegidas. CNAP. 11 pp. FAO. 1974. Manejo y desarrollo integral de las áreas naturales y culturales. Proyecto PNUD/CUB/69/503, Informe Técnico 11. 101 pp. Herrera, M. 2001. Las Reservas de la Biosfera de Cuba. GRAFIP. La Habana. Cuba. 53 pp. Mateo, J. 1989. Paisajes. Sección XII 1.2-3. En Nuevo Atlas Nacional de Cuba. Instituto de Geografía. Academia de Ciencias de Cuba. Ediciones Alber, España.


C - 11

1/17/2012

1

SISTEMA NACIONAL DE AREAS PROTEGIDAS DE LA SISTEMA NACIONAL DE AREAS PROTEGIDAS DE LA REPUBLICA DE CUBAREPUBLICA DE CUBA

SISTEMA NACIONAL DE AREAS PROTEGIDAS DE LA SISTEMA NACIONAL DE AREAS PROTEGIDAS DE LA REPUBLICA DE CUBAREPUBLICA DE CUBA

Julio 2011Julio 2011

Sistema Nacional de Áreas ProtegidasSistema Nacional de Áreas ProtegidasSistema Nacional de Áreas ProtegidasSistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas

Misión:• Contrib uir a disminuir la pérdida de la Diversidad

Biológica, a la protección de los valores Patrimoniales, Naturales y al Desarrollo Sostenible.

Visión:• Somos un Sistema integrado con múltiples actores,

diseñado con una adecuada representatividad de los valores naturales terrestres y marinos, que de manera efectiva contribuye a la disminución de la pérdida de la Diversidad Biológica y al Desarrollo Sostenible

Misión:• Contrib uir a disminuir la pérdida de la Diversidad

Biológica, a la protección de los valores Patrimoniales, Naturales y al Desarrollo Sostenible.

Visión:• Somos un Sistema integrado con múltiples actores,

diseñado con una adecuada representatividad de los valores naturales terrestres y marinos, que de manera efectiva contribuye a la disminución de la pérdida de la Diversidad Biológica y al Desarrollo Sostenible


C - 12

1/17/2012

2

Clasificación de las AP en Cuba

• Áreas Protegi das de Significación Nacional.

• Áreas Protegidas de SignificaciónLocal.

• Regiones Especiales de Desarrollo Sostenible.

El Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas presenta la siguiente El Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas presenta la siguiente situaci ón para comenzar el Plan del 2009 situación para comenzar el Plan del 2009 –– 2013.2013.

ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS IDENTIFICADAS:ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS IDENTIFICADAS:

ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS DE SIGNIFICACIÓN NACIONAL ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS DE SIGNIFICACIÓN NACIONAL –– 9191

ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS DE SIGNIFICACIÓN LOCAL ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS DE SIGNIFICACIÓN LOCAL –– 162162

Total Total –– 253 ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS IDENTIFICADAS253 ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS IDENTIFICADAS

ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS IDENTIFICADAS:ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS IDENTIFICADAS:

ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS DE SIGNIFICACIÓN NACIONAL ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS DE SIGNIFICACIÓN NACIONAL –– 9191

ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS DE SIGNIFICACIÓN LOCAL ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS DE SIGNIFICACIÓN LOCAL –– 162162

Total Total –– 253 ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS IDENTIFICADAS253 ÁREAS PROTEGIDAS IDENTIFICADAS


C - 13

1/17/2012

3

SignificaciónNaciona l

SignificaciónLocal Total

RN 5 0 5

PN 14 0 14

RE 25 12 37

END 11 32 43

RFM 11 50 61

RF 13 34 47

PNP 2 24 26

APRM 10 10 20

91 162 253

Representa el 19.95% del territorio nacional incluyendo la plataforma insular marina

De ello el: 24,81 % del territorio de la plataforma insular marina

16,85 % del territorio terrestre

AP 19.95%

Territorio Nacional en Areas Protegidas Identificadas

Territorio Nacional que no constituye áreas protegidas


C - 14

1/17/2012

4

Superficie de áreas protegidas identificadas por cada tipo de significación

Areas Protegidas de Significación Nacional (91 áreas protegidas)

Areas Pr otegidas de Significación Local (162 áreas protegidas)

409966.32 11.43%

3175526.36 88.57%

1 505 191 ha.

2 078 381 ha.

Cat 1 - 6 Cat 7 - 8

Nivel de conservación según categorías de manejo

Categorías de la 1 a la 6 más estrictasCategorí as de la 7 a la 8 menos estrictas

53%47%


C - 15

1/17/2012

5

Cuba tiene establecidas 8 categ orías de manejo , que se corresponden (al igual que en otros países), con las propuestas por la UICN. Este sistema de categorías se encuentra definido en los capítulos II y IV del Decreto - Ley 201 del SNAP .

Categorías de manejo

11-- Reserva Natural Reserva Natural I UICNI UICN

22-- Parque NacionalParque Nacional II UICNII UICN

33-- Reserva Reserva EcológicaEcológica II UICNII UICN

44-- Elemento Natural DestacadoElemento Natural Destacado III UICNIII UICN

55-- Refugio de Fauna Refugio de Fauna IV UICNIV UICN

66-- Reserva Reserva FlorísticaFlorística ManejadaManejada IV UICNIV UICN

77-- Paisaje Natural ProtegidoPaisaje Natural Protegido V UICNV UICN

88-- Área de Recursos ManejadosÁrea de Recursos Manejados VI UICNVI UICN

6 Reservas de la Biosfera:

• RB Guan ahacabibes• RB Sierra del Rosario• RB Ciénaga de Zapata• RB Buenavista• RB Baconao• RB Cuchillas del Toa

6 Sitios Ramsar:•Ciénaga de Zapata•Buenavista•Ciénaga de Lanier y Sur Isla de la Juventud•Gran Humedal del Norte de Ciego de Ávila•Delta del Cauto Río Máximo-Camaguey

2 Sitios de Patrimonio Mundial Natural :•PN Desembarco del Granma•PN Alejandro de Humboldt

En Cuba están reconocidas:


C - 16

1/17/2012

6

Areas Protegidas con Reconocimiento Internacional


C - 17

1/17/2012

7

Áreas Protegidas Administradas por categorías de manejo

Reserva s Naturales 3Parques Nacionales 14Reservas Ecológica 19Elementos Naturales Destacados 10Refugios de Fauna 27Reserva Florística Manejadas 14Paisaje Natural Protegido 12Áreas Protegidas de Recursos Manejados 14

Se cuenta en SNAP con 113 Áreas Protegidas Administradas67 de Significación Nacional46 de Significación Local

AREAS ADMINISTRADASDEL TOTAL DE AREAS IDENTIFICADAS

44,66 %55,34%

Areas Protegidas Administradas - 113

Areas Pr otegidas Identificadas sin Administración - 140

55,34% 44,66%1

2


C - 18

1/17/2012

8

De las 113 áreas protegidas administradas

80 están aprobadas por el CECM (76,19%)26 están presentadas al CD del CITMA (23,81%)

Las áreas administradas están distribuidas de la siguiente forma:

68 de la Empresa Nacional de Flora y Fauna14 del CITMA3 EFI Ministerio de la Agricultura2 OLPP (Museo de Guanabo)1 Parque Metropolitano4 Turismo (Gaviota)1 Fundación Antonio Núñez Jiménez de la Naturaleza y el Hombre1 Flora y Fauna – CITMA3 CITMA – MINAGRI (EFI)8 Juntas de Administración


C - 19

1/17/2012

9

Programas del Sistema

• Coordinación y Control• Legisl ación• Planificación• Cambio Climático• Vigilancia y Protección• Administración• Capacitación • Manejo de recursos• Especies Invasoras.• Educación ambiental y

participación• Visitación• Investigación y monitoreo• Sostenibilidad Financiera

Líneas Estratégicas del SNAP 2009-2013

11.Lograr la integración institucional y .Lograr la integración institucional y funcio nal del SNAP en todas funcional del SNAP en todas direccionesdirecciones

2.2.Fortalecer la Colaboración Internacional.Fortalecer la Colaboración Internacional.

33.For talecer .Fortalecer la base d el la base del SNAP. SNAP.

55. Diseñar y promover . Diseñar y promover mecanismo s financieros y mecanismos financieros y económicos en el SNAP.económicos en el SNAP.

4.4. Identificar y Identificar y desar roll ar las desarrollar las prioridades de prioridades de investigación y investigación y monitoreo para el monitoreo para el SNAP. SNAP.

66. Elevar la eficacia del . Elevar la eficacia del proce so de planificación proceso de planificación de la conservación.de la conservación.

..7.7. Determinar las amenazas Determinar las amenazas y vulnera bilidades del y vulnerabilidades del SNAP para prevenir y SNAP para prevenir y mitigar desastres.mitigar desastres.


C - 20

1/17/2012

10

Las Áreas Protegidas Marino Costeras por la importancia de los servici os ambientales que brindan y por su alta representatividad, el Plan del SNAP está encaminado a fortalecer la gestión de ellas.

La representatividad del carso cubano abarca el 76,9% de la

superficie total del SNAP

Por los valores existentes en el Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidastambién nos encontramos trabajando las áreas cársicas de nuestro país


C - 21

1/17/2012

11

El Programa de Protección y Vigilancia adquiere en esta nueva etapa una dimensión más integral (en muchas áreas protegidas solo con el cumplimiento de este programa se garantizan todas las actividades de los Planes de Manejo y Operativos)

A través del programa Educación Ambiental y Participación se fortalece la visi ón social del SNAP


C - 22

Appendix 1. Project document

D - 1

ANNEX D. Project Public Involvement Plan

INSTITUTUION RELEVANT MISSION AND SCOPE ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE PROJECT

INIFAT MINAG

Contribute to the management of genetic resources and sustainable development Cuban agriculture. Special emphasis in urban peri‐urban agriculture and the commitment to long term support for food security and food sovereignty

» Provide national coordinator » Coordinate activities of the three

component with external partners » Lead implementer of components 1 and

3 » Identify and evaluate agriculture

landscapes, their biodiversity and its uses

» Organize and direct capacity building workshops and exchanges with other partners in project sites

» Collect documents and process socio‐cultural information and agricultural biodiversity

» Use GIS to identify agrobiodiversity within natural landscapes in collaboration with external partners

» Organize and establish community seed banks, seed fairs, biodiversity fairs and cultural events with partners

»

CNAP National center for protected areas CITMA

Manage and protect the biodiversity and natural resources of Cuba, including agricultural biodiversity found in natural ecosystems and protected areas

» Vice coordinator of the project and lead partner in component 2

» Oversee all activities implemented within the project biosphere reserves (Sierra del Rosario and Cuchilla del Toa Biosphere reserves)

» Disseminate and communicate results and lessons learnt to the networked of the protected areas of Cuba

»

Small farm household s and communities that manage agricultural spaces in biosphere reserves (homegardens, conucos)

Livelihoods security, food sovereignty based on sustainable use of biodiversity

» Contribute their traditional knowledge in agricultural biodiversity and best practices for sustainable management

» Community seed banks » Timely farm families in local workshops,

seed fairs and other cultural and technical events

» Sharing of knowledge and best practices


D - 2


Sierra del Rosario and cuchilla del Toa Biosphere reserves

Conservation and management of natural resources in the reserves

» Select and participate in project sites » Contribute inventories of species and

natural vegetation and distribution of endemism

» Organize and direct capacity building workshops and knowledge exchange

» Maintain nurseries of endemic forest species in the reserves (in collaboration with MINAG)

» Determine the role of agrobiodiversity and its function as biological corridors for wild and migratory species

» Monitor impacts of agriculture in natural landscapes including resilence invasive species and restoration

» Evaluate the possible involvement of farm families in ecotourist routes of bio‐cultural corridors

»

ANAP National association of small farmers: national and provincial cooperatives (CCS and CPA) NGO

Promote social and economic interest of small farmers in Cuba who account for 35% of Cuban agriculture production

» Contribute through its capacity building system and outreach programmes, certification schemes and multipurpose agriculture community centres

» Support commercialization and income generation activities using products from traditional agricultural biodiversity

» Participate and co‐organize workshops and fairs

Cuban Institute of Anthropology CITMA

Scientific Research on ethnological, socio‐cultural, and archeological topics

» Develop survey instruments and tools for interviews, participatory appraisals with farm households,

» Record cultural and non‐market values for landscape management practices and biodiversity uses

» Assess differences in institutions, family household structure and gender across communities, regions & ecosystems in MaB reserves

Museum of Natural History “Felipe Poey” CITMA

Teaching, training, environmental education (theory & practice), speciation and adaptation based on the museum’s scientific collections of plants and animals.

» Assist in identifying and characterising crop wild relatives and their uses by communities in the respective sites.

Inst. Ecología y Sistemática (IES)/ CITMA

Conduct ecological, taxonomic and systematics studies on biodiversity for conservations and sustainable use in both natural ecosystems and ecosystem restoration.

» Support taxonomic inventories of cultivated species and the identification and classification of useful wild species.


D - 3


National Program for Urban and SubUrban Agriculture (PNAU/ASU)/ MINAG

Achieve food security and food sovereignty, practice ecoagriculture, increase land productivity, reduce fuel consumption, sustainable agriculture in urban/suburban spaces. Increase access to food markets. Build linkages among producers, scientific, technical agencies; promote knowledge exchange; build capacities along the food value chain for local farmer‐led innovations.

» Technical support to establish fruit tree nurseries in Project sites and communities.

» Develop and extend frameworks for commercialization of natural products and local processing of agrobiodiversity products.

School of Adcvanced Studies in Hotel and Tourism Management MINTUR

Provide technical and post‐graduate training for personnel in tourism sector

» Support and evaluate the inclusión of farm families in ecotourism/ agrotourism routes in collaboration with CITMA & ANAP

» Train tourism operators on the value of agricultural/biocultural landscapes, and biodiversity in MaB reserves

Museum of Anthropology “Montané”/ Biology Faculty, U. of Havana MES

Research and teaching and archeological exhibitions based on materials and pre‐hispanic historical collections, including ecological history of land use and adaptation.

» Support development of questionnaires and data collection for farm household interviews.

» Support collection information on socio‐cultural, economic and gender aspects.

Cuban Assoc. of agricultural and forestry technicians (ACTAF) NGO

Conduct actions and cannel resources to contribute to sustainable agricultural development, capacity building of technicians and farmers, and supporting farming systems for local community development.

» Support extension and dissemination of Project results.

» Support training and capacity building for local producers.

Cuban Assoc. of Livestock Producers (ACPA) NGO

Contribute to raising productivity and integrated development of the livestock sector.

» Provide technical support and expertise to small farmers on small livestock raising in Project sites

Institute of Tropical Geography Tropical (IGT) CITMA

Conduct research and provide scientific and technical services on Geography and GIS for land use planning and sustainable economic development

» Provide technical support on GIS to define and map natural and agricultural landscapes in Project sites.

Man and Biosphere Reserves: Ciénaga de Zapata (RBCZ), Baconao (RBB),Guanahacabibes (RBG), Buenavista (RBBU) CITMA

Conservation and management of of natural resources in RBCZ, RBB, RBG y RBBU.

» Participation in technical workshops; » Evaluate social‐ecological production

landscapes in the four Biosphere reserves.

UNESCO‐Havana Cluster Office ;

Promote science for sustainable development;

» Contribute to training of Biosphere staff and farming community leaders in


D - 4


UNESCO MAB national committee, hosted by CITMA UNESCO Paris Division of Ecological Sciences and Crosscutting Initiatives

Culture and bio‐cultural development Afro‐Cuban culture and the landscape, promotion of certified quality crafts using bio‐cultural knowledge Support Conventions; Capacity building for biological and cultural patrimony, environmental education, Use biosphere reserves as sites for integration with work of environmental conventions. Establish close links between aspects on cultural and biological diversity. Reinforce World Network of Biosphere Reserves. Reinforce Regional MAB Networks, and thematic inter‐regional networks. Caribbean Biodiversity Corridor Mainstream methods and best practices to achieve UNESCO‐MaB Madrid Action Plan, livelihood s & food security MDG

» Management of Cultural Landscapes » Management of Natural Patrimony » Provide networking support and

expertise linking in environmental sciences and culture (bio‐cultural landscapes)

» Provide facilitation between national MaB agrobiodiversity project and regional; UNESCO MaB Networtk and offices

» Support mainstreaming of agricultural biodiversity knowledge and awareness into schools and public educational programmes,

United Nations University – Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU – IAS) International Organization

Seeks to advance knowledge and promote learning for policy making to meet the challenges of environmentally sustainable development. The research programmes in the Institute analyse local, regional and global environmental issues from inter‐ and multi‐disciplinary perspectives, bringing together the natural, social and life sciences

» Promotes socio‐ecological production landscapes that contribute to the maintenance and conservation of biodiversity

» Provides support for the development and application of indicators of resilience to agriculture, conservation and community livelihoods in protected areas.

FAO – Land Water Division

Aims at enhancing the agricultural productivity and advancing the sustainable use of land and water resources through their improved tenure, management, development and conservation in order to meet present and future demands for agricultural products, while ensuring the long‐term sustainability of the land and water quantity and quality. It provides assistance to member nations in developing policies, programmes, best practices and tools.

» Support development of policies, programmes, best practices and tools in the fields of irrigation and drainage, soil conservation, drought mitigation, water rights, access to natural resources, and improvement of land markets

» Identify and mainstream sustainable practices from conservation areas into the larger agricultural production sector

» Support dynamic conservation management approaches in agricultural systems and landscapes for improved productivity and better management of land and water.

» Mainstream sustainable practices from


D - 5


conservation areas into the larger agricultural production sector and to other networks of similar agricultural landscapes and systems worldwide.

University of Michigan Teaching and research ecology, natural and wild landscape interface

» Provide inputs on conservation functions of Protected Areas

» Impact of agriculture on biological corridors

» Assess natural and wild landscape interface

ISTOM (Ecole d’ingénieur Agro‐développement International) International University

Research on development in emerging and developing economies with focus on the agro‐ecological transformations and changes in agricultural sectors using multidisciplinary approaches

» Provide support in analyses of economic services

» Analysis of income opportunities from sustainable agriculture

» Contribute to development of methodological framework for agrobiodiversity promotion and sustainable use

BOKU, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Austria

Teaching and research on ecologically sustainable use of natural resources, agricultural Sciences and their contribution to the responsible utilization of ecological, economic and social resources in agricultural production, a principal means of subsistence for society.

» Mainstream agriculture to eco‐agriculture and homegardens

» Management of agrobiodiversity in homegardens

» Management and in situ conservation of traditional species and local varieties in farmers plots

» Diversity of plant species harvested and their use in the MaB Biosphere Reserve

Diversity and Development, NGO

Defines and promotes territorial development strategies relying on biocultural diversity conservation and its sustainable use. They sustain biocultural diversity through research, policy development, knowledge management, capacity building, development of models and tools to strengthen adaptive management of biocultural diversity

» Contribute to the development of participatory certification schemes

» Capacity building to staff and local communities on certification

» Test and evaluate effectiveness of participatory certification schemes

» Provide support improving livelihoods of local communities

Annex E. List of documents and existing datasets consulted for Cuba-MAB baseline study (PPG)1 Data files and compilations of agro)biodiversity taxa and features

• Base de datos proyecto conucos (.xls).

• Base de datos proyecto flujo de semillas (.xls).

• lista biodiversidad de fauna_RBSR (.xls)

• .lista biodiversidad de flora_RBSR (.doc).

• lista de flora comestible_RBSR (.doc).

• lista de flora maderable_RBSR (.doc).

• lista de flora medicinal_RBSR (.doc).

• lista de flora melifera_RBSR (.doc).

Ansel Fong, G. et al. eds., 2005. Cuba: Parque Nacional "Alejandro de Humboldt Rapid Biological Inventories Report", Chicago: The Field Museum. Available at: http://fm2.fmnh.org/rbi/results_cub14.asp.

Castineiras, L. et al., 2009. Diversidad AFLP y morfológica de Phaseolus lunatus L. en huertos caseros de Cuba (.ppt).

Centro Nacional de Biodiversidad Cuba, Diversidad Biota Cubana. Available at: http://www.ecosis.cu/cenbio/diversidadbiotacubana.htm [Accessed August 9, 2010].

Centro Nacional de Biodiversidad, Cuba, Diversidad Biológica Cubana Reino Plantae: Angiospermas.

Centro Nacional de Biodiversidad, Cuba, Diversidad Biológica Cubana Reino Plantae: Gimnospermas.

Centro Nacional de Biodiversidad, Cuba, Diversidad Biológica Cubana Reino Plantae: Pterodofitos.

Luer, C., 2004. The orchids of Cuba/Las orquideas de Cuba, Sevilla, Spain: Greta Editores.

Mesa Izquierdo, M., Alvarez Pinto, M. & Sanchez Rodriguez, N., 1999. Los productos forestales no madereros en Cuba, Santiago, Chile: FAO. Available at: http://www.infoagro.net/shared/docs/a6/serie13.pdf.

Muñoz de Con, L., 2009, Identificación de las variedades de mango más destacadas de Cuba. (.ppt)

Reserva de la Biosfera Cuchillas del Toa: background information. (.ppt)

Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra del Rosario: background information I. (.ppt)

Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra del Rosario: background information II. (.ppt) 1 This list is saved as a reference file with Zotero software, which can be shared online

E - 1


Project reports and publications (from previous homegarden studies) Castineiras, L. et al., 2002. Contribution of home gardens to in situ conservation of plant genetic resources in farming systems: Cuban component. In J. Watson & P. Eyzaguirre, eds. Proceedings of the Second International Home Gardens Workshop: Contribution of home gardens to in situ conservation of plant genetic resources in farming systems, 17–19 July 2001, Witzenhausen, Federal Republic of Germany. Rome, Italy: IPGRI, pp. 42-56.

Castineiras, L. et al., 2002. Contribution of home gardens to in situ conservation of plant genetic resources in farming systems: Cuban component. In Proceedings of the Second International Home Gardens Workshop: Contribution of home gardens to in situ conservation of plant genetic resources in farming systems, 17–19 July 2001, Witzenhausen, Federal Republic of Germany. Rome, Italy: IPGRI, pp. 42-56.

Garcia, M. & Castineiras, L., 2006. Biodiversidad agricola en las Reservas de la Biosfera de Cuba, La Habana, Cuba: Editorial Adademia.

Garcia, M. et al., 2007. Conservación de la biodiversidad agrícola en las reservas de la biosfera de Cuba: un reto para el futuro, La Habana, Cuba: INIFAT. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10625/44367.

Hermann, M. et al. eds., 2009. ¿Cómo conservan los agricultores sus semillas en el trópico húmedo de Cuba, México y Perú? Experiencias de un proyecto de investigación en sistemas informales de semillas de chile, frijoles y maíz, Rome, Italy: Bioversity International.

Shagarodsky, T., Fuentes, V. & Barrios, O., 2004. Exposición de la biodiversidad agrícola conservada en áreas rurales de la Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra del Rosario. In Memorias de la Reunión Nacional de agrobiodiversidad en Reservas de la Biosfera de Cuba. La Habana, Cuba: INIFAT, pp. 129-134.

Shagarodsky, T. et al., 2003. Diversidad de especies alimenticias en tres mercados agricolas de La Habana, Cuba. Agronomia Mesoamericana, 14(1), 27-39.

Castineiras, L. & et al, 1999. The Contribution of Home Gardens to In Situ Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources in Farming Systems. Annual Report 1999.

Castineiras, L. & et al, 2000a. The Contribution of Home Gardens to In Situ Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources in Farming Systems. Annual Report 2000.

Castineiras, L. & et al, 2000b. The Contribution of Home Gardens to In Situ Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources in Farming Systems. Six Months Report 2000. Comment: these project reports contain a large amount of data, including drawings and profiles of the gardens studied. Some of the findings of these reports are summarized in Castineiras, L. et al., 2002 (above)

Castineiras, L. et al., 2000. The use of home gardens as a component of the national strategy for the in situ conservation of plant genetic resources in Cuba. Plant Genetic Resources Newsletter, (123), 9-18.

Fundora Mayor, Z. et al., 2007. Percepción local de la diversidad infraespecífica de las especies presentes en los huertos caseros de tres zonas de Cuba. Plant Genetic Resources Newsletter, (152), 23-32.

E - 2


Fundora Mayor, Z. et al., 1999. Sistemas Informales de Producción de Semilla, Recursos Fitogenéticos Tradicionales y Variedades Mejoradas, en Cuba. In Simposio Internacional y Talleres sobre Fitomejoramiento Participativo (FMP) en América Latina y el Caribe: Un Intercambio de Experiencias. Quito.

Fundora Mayor, Z. et al., 2004. Seed systems and genetic diversity in home gardens: a Cuban approach. In D. Jarvis et al., eds. Seed systems and crop genetic diversity on-farm. Proceedings of a workshop, 16-20 September 2003, Pucalpa, Peru. Rome, Italy: IPGRI, pp. 68-77.

National and International reports, policy and management.

CITMA, 2005. Cuba: Tercer informe nacional CBD. Comment: contains all information necessary related to status of conservation, national policies, etc.

Fundora Mayor, Z. & et al, 2007. Cuba: Informe nacional sobre los recursos fitogenéticos para la alimentación y la agricultura, La Habana, Cuba. Comment: idem (see above)

Rodriguez Nodals, A. & Sanchez Perez, P., 2009. Especies de frutales cultivadas en cuba en la agricultura urbana y suburbana 4th ed., La Habana: INIFAT.

World Food Programme (WFP), 2001. Analisis y cartografia de la vulnerabilidad a la inseguridad alimentaria en Cuba, La Habana, Cuba.

CITMA, 2010. Plan de Manejo: Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra del Rosario (2011-2015). Comment: Missing is the Cuchillas del Toa mgt plan.

Garcia, M., 2010. Registro de acciones y metas a ejecutar por los países en el marco del Plan de Acción de Madrid.

UNESCO, 2008. Madrid Action Plan for Biosphere Reserves (2008-2013).

Information booklets and didactic materials

Castineiras, L., 1998. El campesino cubano y sus huertos caseros.

Castineiras, L. & et al, 2006. Catalogo de cultivares tradicionales y nombres locales en fincas de las regiones occidental y oriental de Cuba (Frijoal Caballero, Frijol Comun, Ajies-Pimientos, Maiz), La Habana, Cuba: INIFAT.

Fundora Mayor, Z., Castineiras, L. & Shagarodsky, T., 2009. La conservacion de la Diversidad Agricola (material didactico), La Habana, Cuba: ProNaturaleza.

Telleria Llamazares, T. et al., 2009. La conservacion de la diversidad agricola: Ajies y pimientos (Capsicum spp.) (material didactico), La Habana, Cuba: ProNaturaleza.

Telleria Llamazares, T. & et al, 2009. La conservacion de la diversidad agricola: Frijol caballero (Phaseolus lunatus) (material didactico), La Habana, Cuba: ProNaturaleza.

Telleria Llamazares, T. & Fernandez Granda, L., 2009. La conservacion de la diversidad agricola: Maiz (Zea mays) (material didactico), La Habana, Cuba: ProNaturaleza.

E - 3


INIFAT, 2007. Practicas del manejo de semillas para la conservacion de la biodiversidad agricola tradicional, La Habana, Cuba: INIFAT.

Other publications of interest

DeClerck, F.A. et al., 2010. Biodiversity conservation in human-modified landscapes of Mesoamerica: Past, present and future. Biological Conservation.

Garcia, M. et al., 2005. Conservación de la biodiversidad y uso de las plantas cultivadas en huertos caseros de algunas áreas rurales de Cuba. Mediterranea: Serie de estudios biologicos, 2(18).

José-María, L. et al., 2010. Effects of agricultural intensification on plant diversity in Mediterranean dryland cereal fields. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(4), 832-840. [methodology]

Volpato, G. & Godínez, D., 2004. Ethnobotany of pru, a traditional Cuban refreshment. Economic Botany, 58(3), 381-395. [example of underutilized wild specie that could be focus of project]

Esquivel, M. & Hammer, K., 1992. The Cuban homegarden ‘conuco’: a perspective environment for evolution and in situ conservation of plant genetic resources. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, 39(1), 9-22.

Finegan, B. & Nasi, R., 2004. The biodiversity and conservation potential of shifting cultivation landscapes. In G. Schroth et al., eds. Agroforestry and biodiversity conservation in tropical landscapes. Island Press, pp. 153-197. [details important connections between cultivated and wild landscape components]

Hoehn, P., Steffan-Dewenter, I. & Tscharntke, T., 2010. Relative contribution of agroforestry, rainforest and openland to local and regional bee diversity. Biodiversity and Conservation, 19(8), 2189-2200. [methodology]

E - 4


Eyzaguirre, P. B and Linares O.F. 2004. Introduction In: Home Gardens and Agrobiodiversity, Eyzaguirre, P. B and Linares O.F.(eds.), pp. 1-28 Fundora Mayor, Z., Shagarodsky T., Castiñeiras, L. 2004. Sampling methods for the study of Genetic diversity in home gardens in cuba. In: Home Gardens and Agrobiodiversity, Euzaguirre, P. B and Linares O.F.(eds.), pp. 56-77

E - 5


Annex F_ Methodological Framework and Key Issues and Questions

Draft Methodological Framework for the UNEP/GEF –Bioversity International -

UNESCO MAB project: Agricultural biodiversity conservation and Man and Biosphere

Reserves in Cuba: Bridging managed and natural landscapes

In traditional systems, farmers actively manage agricultural biodiversity on-farm in order to

improve productivity and maintain sustainability; and adapt to changing needs and

circumstances.

Agricultural biodiversity supports livelihoods and contributes to resilient agro-ecosystems

worldwide. Enhancing farmer utility for a certain variety or species with a high public value

increases the incentive for farmers to maintain agrobiodiversity on farm. This can be

accomplished by enhancing the income generated from these resources.

Although they have the potential to increase the demand for diverse products from different

varieties, markets can also result in homogenisation and specialisation.

Agricultural commercialization can have adverse effects on in situ conservation when native

crops are replaced by commercial crops. It is therefore of critical importance to identify

whether a market-based strategy aimed at both income generation and agrobiodiversity

conservation could be successful and sustainable (Rietbergen et al., 2002).

The sustainable use of ABD could be achieved following an integrated strategy that covers all

the potential “values” associated with ABD. This implies not only to combine measures aimed

at improving quality of products, differentiating them and diversifying their value chain, but

also to take into account aspects such as the relation between quality and origin, the

traditional ecological knowledge associated with ABD, the consumption habits and food

culture, and their contribution to the resilience of socio-ecological production landscapes.

Nevertheless, it is crucial to create the economical conditions and break down the incentives,

institutional and policy barriers that currently exist so as to focus interventions on some ABD

products with high market potential that will generate a virtuous cycle and positively impact

the other components of ABD. This won’t be achieved through independent actions and single

sectorial interventions around a traditional market based strategy for ABD but transforming

valorisation towards a more integrated strategy that covers different scales and relies on other

activities and services such as agro-ecotourism, traditional craft and their interrelations.

Basket of Goods is an integrated tool which promotes the joint valorisation of local quality

products, and environmental services strongly linked with the territory and its culture.

This tool results from a social and institutional construction around AGD interactions that allow

a fair and equitable flow of benefits

The proposed general methodological framework will be tested and adapted in the context of

the : UNEP/GEF –Bioversity International -UNESCO MAB project : Agricultural biodiversity

conservation and Man and Biosphere Reserves in Cuba. The project goal is to conserve the

diversity within and around protected areas in ways that both improve the livelihoods of rural

F - 1


communities and sustain ecosystem functions in MAB Reserve buffer and transition zones.

Therefore this integrated methodology will focus on two of the six Cuban biosphere reserves,

the Sierra del Rosario (RBSR) and the Cuchillos del Toa (RBCT) which have already taken a first

and major step: Recognizing that agricultural biodiversity and the associated management

practices are important, and beginning to identify and gather data on these practices.

Consequently with a ABD identification and valorisation stage detailed as follows, the objective

will be to adopt a more holistic and integrated approach around the joint valorisation of ABD

products and services, such as agro-ecotourism, and their interrelations under an innovative

conceptual framework: the Basket of Goods and Services (BGS)

This tool results from a social and institutional construction around ABD interactions which

allows a fair and equitable flow of benefits distributed along the value chains while positively

impacting the whole local community. The proposed methodological framework will lead to

the identification and development of income generating activities with potential of positively

impacting the livelihoods of local communities while generating high levels of ABD from

“conucos to landscape”.

Figure 1 : Different stages of the methodological framework

STAGE 1: PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION

The first question that arise when initiating an integrated approach of agricultural biodiversity

(ABD) valorisation, is how to identified the ABD components in which the strategy will focus to

ABD PRODUCTS

IDENTIFICATION

VALUE ENHACEMENT

FOR ABD IDENTIFIED PROUCTS

BASKET OF GOODS AND

SERVICES

INTEGRATED BENEFIT FLOW

TO COMMUNITIE

S

HIGH LEVEL OF AGRICULTURAL BIO DIVERSITY

FROM PRODUCT TO LANDSCAPE

F - 2


generate at different scales-from products to landscape- a virtuous circle around ABD

conservation

How products have to be identified to be part of an ABD valorisation strategy that ensures an

equitable and integrated flow of benefits to communities? Do they have to be identified taking

into account only economic/market based parameters? Do they have to incorporate new

criteria to ensure that the valorisation strategy leads to more sustainable and equitable benefit

sharing mechanisms? How to integrate agroecosystem and landscape resilience components in

a product valorisation strategy?

Precise participatory identification of ABD products that are going to be valorised as a

component of the biocultural territorial diversity is the first and a critical step of the

agricultural biodiversity valorisation strategy presented in this document. In this way, this

methodology do not rely exclusively on the market potential for ABD products but integrate a

range of features such as the existing governance around a product value chain, the link

between this products and the local biocultural diversity and the contribution of these

products to the resilience of socio-ecological production landscapes.

Since the participatory approach is going to be present in the different stages that make this

strategy up, the multi-stakeholders identification related to the ABD valorisation and the

relationship of power among them -by using “who does what mapping exercise”- is going to be

a starting point. Following this step, different studies could be used to identify the products

with potential of positively impacting the livelihoods of local communities while generating

high levels of ABD from products to landscape.

1. Market studies:

a. Market analysis:

A market analysis allows identifying who products´ buyers are, their characteristics,

and why they are likely to buy that product. In other words, it is a definition and a

description of prospective customers, including target markets, size and structure of

the customer base, and growth prospects. Although, when studying products that are

related to the landscape and ABD, the market analysis also has to acknowledge that

the forces driving changes, especially within agri-food chains, are mainly linked to the

increasing retail consolidation and the influence of food retailers on value chain

governance, as well as to the tighter links between farmers, processors, retailers and

other stakeholders needed to address the rapidly changing economic, production and

marketing environment. Some study cases have been accomplished in relation to

improve marketing underutilized ABD products that could be reference to analyse the

market value of products within the landscape and territories with a high level of ABD.

b. Value chain analysis:

Value chains analysis describes the work processes and actors involved in the

production, processing, trade, and consumption of a product. In terms of development

cooperation they offer various opportunities to improve the living and production

conditions of the people involved, as well as to conserve biological diversity for food

F - 3


and agriculture. Their suitability varies in terms of measures for reducing poverty, and

conserving biodiversity. There are, for example, differences in the type of social groups

involved, access to the value chain and the distribution of power within the chains.

To accomplish this analysis, production and production´s cost estimations are needed,

and to obtain this data, a value chain structure analysis has to be made, determining

the value chain´s technic stages, the value chain´s actors and its own functions, the

repartition of the production throughout the different commercialization channels, to

end up with the value chain´s functionality analysis.

This analysis is an important tool to inform decision making and allows identifying the

potential malfunctions and disparities existing around a specific product’s value chain

while looking for options and corrective actions to secure a fair and sustainable flow of

benefit to local communities. To have a global picture of the value chain around a

specific product the existing market channels (direct and indirect selling) have to be

identified and examine how the value is created and distributed along these

commercialization channels.

An example of this type of analysis´ result is seen in the following graphics around ABD

products in Morocco. In the first one, the retailer obtains the higher price and better

profit margin of mint’s value chain, being the producer the actor that obtains the lower

price and profit margin. In this way, as it is seen in the second picture, the retailer

obtains the highest percentage of the added value of all the actors that make up the

Moroccan mint chain value, concentrating three and a half times more the mint´s total

added value than the producer.

Figure 1: Example of the Value Chain`s Analysis

2 1.56

53

7

2

12.5

5.5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Selling Price (DH/kg) Proffit margin (DH)

Distribution of the added value for the

moroccan mint along the informal national

commercialization channel (DH/kg)

Retailer

Local/national grocery

stores

Local intermediary

Producer

F - 4


Figure 2: Example of the Value Chain`s Analysis

2. Territorial products identification analysis:

Analysing the existing relation between a product and its territory is a difficult endeavour,

because this relation could be related to its geographical origin, the biocultural diversity

associated to this product at the production or consumption level, its historical

anchorage, or a mix combination of this entire factor. Although, what is widely recognized

is that territorial products integrate three dimensions: ecological historical and socio-

cultural aspects. These biocultural dimensions differentiate territorial products by

associating them to a singular know-how a particular identity and ultimately conferring

them specificity identity.

ABD products, due to their special bond with a specific territory and culture, frequently

rely on an intrexincable link between biological and cultural elements which in turn leads

to particular qualitative characteristics that differentiate it from other products. Thus,

after the market analysis the following step of the Product Identification strategy is the

selection, with a participatory approach, of the territorial products found at the local

level.

Due to the difficulty to correctly identified territorial products, institutions such as Food

And Agriculture of the United Nations (FAO) have been working in a methodology to

identify products with territorial identity in a participatory manner. This type of

methodology could be integrated into the “tool box” ABD valorisation strategy to identify

those products that have a strong territorial identity and are already recognized as such

by producers and consumers.

13%

25%

17%

46%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

%

Distribution of the added value for the

moroccan mint along the informal national

commercialization channel (DH/kg)

Retailer

Local/national grocery

stores

Local intermediary

Producer

F - 5


3. Socio-ecological resilience contribution analysis:

One of the main risks of ABD value enhancement strategies is to ultimately fall in

specialization processes and consequently negatively impact the level of agricultural

biodiversity. According to FAO (2011), there is a negative reinforcing feedback between

poverty and ecosystem conditions, resulting from the interaction between human

activities and ecosystem. That is to say, that when a homogenization of ABD occurs, as the

result of any specialised productive practices or governance aspects occurred, poverty will

increase as a result of the loss of biodiversity.

Consequently, all ecosystems and landscapes must be seen as social-ecological systems

whose capacity to respond to stresses and change is a result of ecological and social

characteristics and their interrelation (Van Oudenhoven & al. 154). Hence the importance

to develop with a participatory approaches a value enhancement strategy that integrates

aspects that could prevent and/or avoid the ABD homogenization. This will be done

analysing the ABD products socio-ecological resilience contribution.

To determine how high the contribution of a product´s species to resilience is, the biologic

diversity, understood as the diversity of ways of life of an organism and its adaptation to

the environment, is going to be quantified. To do so, once a product that has a strong

market value and a strong territorial identity is identified, is also going to be studied, with

a participatory approach, to determine its socio-ecological resilience contribution trough

the number of varieties related to its species.

Measuring social-ecological resilience contribution is challenging, particularly because

institutional and organizational processes must be understood as carefully as ecological

ones. Therefore, a framework, like the one developed by Van Oudenhoven and Eyzaguirre

could be use, mainly because it helps the understanding of interactions between human

and environment taking in place in traditionally managed ecosystems and landscapes. It

also monitors the role that these interactions play in the maintenance of such systems.

Figure 3: Stage 1 of the Agricultural Biodiversity Valorisation Strategy

F - 6


STAGE 2: ABD IDENTIFIED PRODUCTS VALORISATION STRATEGY. VALUE CHAINS –

COMMERCIALIZATION OF PRODUCTS: QUALITY, DIVERSIFICATION AND DIFFERENTIATION

The best way to preserve naturally occurring plant and animal species and those sub-species,

types and races arising out of environmental conditions and human intervention, used, or

potentially usable by humans, is to create and maintain a market value for them. In this way,

according to the experience accumulated, there are three relevant aspects to be considered to

improve the market and socio-ecological value of a product, which are main components of

this ABD valorisation strategy:

Quality:

Quality is commonly understood as the property or a group of inherent properties of

something that allows judging its value. In addition, the International Standardization

Organization defines it as the group of properties and characteristics of a product that

confer the aptitude to satisfy consumers´ declare and implicit needs. In other words,

these product´s group of properties allow its own distinction among other products,

being its quality determined by its functionality or aptitude.

Consequently, the quality of a product is strongly linked with its consumer and its

needs. In this way, the “good quality” is relative, subjective and dynamic, especially

when the product´s value is influenced by social customs and traditions (Pons and

Sivardière, 2002). Recently the definition of quality has evolved under a more holistic

approach. A good example of this integrated vision of quality could be found in

definitions such as the one developed by Slow Food, where a quality product is defined

as being a “Good, Clean and Fair” one.

Differentiation:

Differentiation is strongly linked with quality concept, because a product

differentiation can be done by modifying its inherent characteristics in the production

process, or modifying the product´s image that consumers perceive.

The product differentiation is a method that allows the producer to achieve a

competitive advantage that it is not reachable by a strategic option or structural

impossibility, due to the higher cost that it means in comparison to standardize

products (Grant, 1991).

Hence, the absence of homogeneity among one type of products ends the perfect

competition and places the market in the proximities of monopolistic competition, in

which each segment of the demand is willing to pay more for some product´s specific

characteristics that satisfy it.

Since the producer has higher possibilities to set the price of his product and reach

new markets, the possibility to obtain a higher rent increases. In the consumer’s hand,

the products differentiation allows them to obtain a higher satisfaction through its

consumption, due to the possibility to find in the market the product that fits to their

pleasure, needs and resources (Caldentey and Gómez, 2001).

To accomplish a correct differentiation by the modification of the product´s image that

consumers perceive, some signals are necessary to communicate those new

characteristics. Therefore, these signals, more known as “quality brands”, are

F - 7


constituted by all those distinctive signals that recognise product´s particular

qualitative characteristics (Caldentey y Gómez, 1998).

Among the quality brands, Denomination of Origin, Geographic Denominations,

Quality Denominations, Regional Distinctive, Collective Brands, Participatory Guaranty

System, Organic Certification, Fair Trade, among others, can be found. Furthermore, in

the literature it is also found a discussion about landscape labelling approach and the

way it contributes to the promotion of ecosystem services delivery, together with the

cultural and symbolic attributes of the landscape. It has the potential to improve

market recognition, and secure premium payments while gaining access to niche

markets.

To obtain any of these or other quality brands a certification is needed. This is

understood as a formal document in which a certification organization declares that

the product or service that the consumer is paying for is produced or done under a

specific norm that goes beyond the law. In this way certification establish a

relationship of trust among the producer and the consumer, in which the producer

response to the different consumer´s desires related to cultural, social, ethics, and

environmental aspects.

It cannot be forgotten that the State has a role in the certification process, which is to

ensure the seriousness of the certification and the accredited agencies that are active

in each country, doing a State control on the certification bodies. The State can also

take on the role of giving a general framework and recognition of certain voluntary

standards, as in the case for organic food, Protected Designation of Origin, and

Protected Geographical Indications, among others.

ABD can benefit from marketing development and differenciation strategies as a

means of supporting their sustained use and help foster the conservation of

agrobiodiversity, while generating sustainable income for the local producers and

value chain stakeholders.

Diversification:

Cáceres (1994) understands diversification as the group of strategies that have, both,

in or out the productive systems, which objective is to minimize the homogeneity

among productions. As seen before, the modification of the inherent characteristics

contributes to eradicate this situation, and can be made, in relation with the

productive processes, by incorporating added value to the product, modifying the

producing processes, valorising new varieties of incomes, and the use of productive

processes´ externalities to create new products, among many others.

Territorial characteristics get relevance to diversify and develop a product and/or its

process, mainly for its contribution the conservation and sustainable use of ABD. The

know how accumulated through years in traditional and environmental friendly

transformation practices, allows to innovate and diversify a product and its productive

process, also within other productive sectors and services. As a result, this innovation

processes allow to improve conservation of some types of ABD valorisation products,

F - 8


such as agro-food ones, permitting also to increase rent and the period of time

through year that it is obtained.

According to what has been said until now, the ABD valorisation strategy will define, once the

participatory product identification is done, a participatory action plan will combine measures

aimed at improving the quality of products, differentiating them, and diversifying their value

chain, while ensuring that the biocultural diversity embedded in this production is preserved

and enhanced.

Figure 4: Stage 2 Enhanced and equitable value for ABD products

STAGE 3: FLOW OF BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY

To avoid process of specialization and in turn homogenization through an enhanced and

equitable value for ABD products, there is a strong need to transform this sectorial valorisation

strategy to a more integrated one which covers different scales (from product to landscapes)

and relies on other activities and services such as tourism, traditional craft and their

interrelations.

Once the identified products´ market value has been improved, it is necessary to canalised the

benefit flow to the local community avoiding specialization process so as to positively impact

on biocultural diversity from the product to the landscape. Thus, Basket of Goods and Services

(BGS) gets prominence, this concept is an integrated tool which promotes the joint valorisation

of local quality products and environmental services strongly linked with the territory. This

bond makes these resources exclusive, interdependent and complementary, resulting from a

social and institutional construction around ABD interactions that connect products, services

F - 9


and landscapes in a sustainable and holistic manner. It also has the potential of building a

model of sustainable territorial development, because it relies on positive synergies between

the supply and demand of specific local high quality products and services and goes beyond

conventional development strategies around single value chains by promoting joint and

complementary market access strategies for territorial resources.

In contrast to the singular valorisation of each product identified, which would result in a

Vertical Benefit Flow (VBF), the BGS will promote an Integrated Benefit Flow (IBF). In the first

case, , as a result of the action plan developed at the stage 2 the benefits are going to flow

only among the value chains` actors involved on the production, transformation and

commercialization of a specific product. In the case of the BGS the whole community is going

to be benefited, through the joint valorisation of local quality products and environmental

services that result from a social-institutional construction which cross different sectors.

In this context, governance gets significance, thus, the previously correct identification of the

multi-stakeholders related to the joint valorisation of local quality products and environmental

services is of paramount importance.

The recognition for those environmental services obtains importance to strengthen the flow of

benefits to the community. For this reason, the design and implementation of instruments and

the application of mechanisms that monitor income increase are necessary to value the

improvement that these activities generate for the local livelihoods.

As a consequence of the vertical and integrated benefits flows to the community, an

increment of the agricultural biodiversity at the landscape level will be achieved, due to the

influence that the strategy has in raising the community´s awareness of the importance ofABD

and its valorisation in socio-cultural, economic and environmental aspects. Thus, these flows of

benefits will positively affect the community´s initiative in improving the quality of their

products, diversifying and differentiating their productive activities with a territorial and

sustainable approach.

F - 10


Figure 5: Stage 5 of the Agricultural Biodiversity Valorisation Strategy

F - 11


INDICATORS TO EVALUATE THE FLOW OF BENEFITS OF THE ABD

VALORISATION STRATEGY

ABD contributes to livelihoods in a number of ways, both directly and indirectly. The direct

effects include improved nutrition and promotion of traditional knowledge among other

things, while indirect benefits include improved resilience of the Socio Ecological Production of

Landscape (SEPL) in the face of climate change and extreme climate events such as high winds.

The SEPL indicators will provide a framework for analysing how projects conserve ABD, both

ecosystem resilience (mainly ecological indicators) and well-being (mainly sociological

indicators) at the landscape level.

Van Oudenhoven et al. (2011) outline how classic ecological indicators of ecosystem health,

such as species richness, nutrient and water cycling, soil productivity, can be couple with socio-

cultural indicators. These socio-cultural indicators can be used to complete ecological

indicators by taking into account the social and historical dimensions of the SEPL. These

indicators would include information related to retention and acquisition of traditional

ecological knowledge (TEK), such as geographical diffusion of knowledge; cultural values

related to agriculture, such as the existence of folklore, ceremonies, dances etc.; customary

laws and social institutions; and food sovereignty, in particular availability of sufficient quantity

and quality of traditional foods, among other related indicators. The interaction between these

two types of indicators will give a better picture of the interactions important to the resilience

and functioning of SEPLs.

The combination of impacts to resilience and well-being will undoubtedly also have an impact

on livelihood strategies and choices. The changes in strategies can be measured using a

sustainable livelihood framework that takes into account the five types of capital assets

(natural, social, human, financial and physical).

Figure 6 illustrates how the indicator framework can be used by both scientists and the

population to monitor and improve the SEPL. The conservation of ABD provides a stream of

benefits to the population (whether concrete, in the form of monetary and ecological benefits,

or perceived, in the form of cultural or spiritual benefits). The population uses the indicator

framework to measure various aspects of the SEPL which helps to translate the direct

(increased well-being, nutrition, etc.) or indirect benefits (potential resilience of system in the

face of climate change, etc.) of conservation of ABD and, therefore, the increased perceived

value of conserving biodiversity. Researchers and project developers use the indicators to

develop and improve programs which increase the potential benefits of conservation of ABD

(payment for ecosystem services, etc.).

F - 12


Figure 6: Dual Purpose of the Indicator Framework for Conservation and Promotion of SEPL Values

Various indicators have been used to measure ecological and sociological impacts on

sustainable livelihood. Some relevant aspects that these should centre, after bringing them

closer to the local community´s reality, are creation of working days; poverty reduction; well-

being and capabilities; livelihood adaptation, vulnerability, resilience; the degree of

dependency of farmers’ on their ABD; flow of information and materials related to the ABD

valorisation, biotic components´ situation, water supply: quality-quantity, soil fertility-

productivity, weather stability; condition of the vegetation cover; average income levels; and

migration, among many others.

F - 13


BIBLIOGRAPHY

• Bell S., Morse S., 2003. Measuring sustainability: learning by doing. Earthscan, 208 p.

• Cáceres, D. 1994. Agricultura orgánica versus agricultura industrial. Su relación con la

diversificación productiva y la seguridad alimentario. Agroalimentaria. Nº 16. Enero-

Junio, 29-39.

• Caldentey, P. & Gómez, A.C. 2001. Productos locales y desarrollo local. Actualidad

Leader. Nº 15, 8-9.

• Caldentey, P. & Gómez A. 1998. Estudio sobre implantación de Signos de Calidad para

Productos Agroalimentarios de la Sierra Norte de Sevilla. Córdoba, Universidad de

Córdoba.

• Carney D., Drinkwater M., Rusinow T., Neefjes K., Wanmali S., Singh N., 1999.

Livelihood approaches compared: a brief comparison of the livelihoods approaches of

the UK Department for International Development (DFID), CARE, Oxfam and the UNDP.

• Carney D., Drinkwater M., Rusinow T., Neefjes K., Wanmali S., Singh N., 1999.

Livelihoods Approaches Compared: A brief comparison of the livelihood approaches of

the UK Department for International Development (DFID), CARE, Oxfam and the

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). DFID, London,.

• Chambers R., 1997. Editorial: Responsible well-being–a personal agenda for

development. World Development,. 25 (11),. pp 1743–1754.

• Chambers R., 1995. Poverty and livelihoods: whose reality counts? Environment and

Urbanization,. 7 (1),. p 173.

• Chambers R., Conway G., 1992. Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the

21st century.

• Elasha B.O., Elhassan N.G., Ahmed H., Zakieldin S., 2005. Sustainable Livelihood

approach for assessing community resilience to climate change: case studies from

Sudan. AIACC Working Paper.

• FAO. 2011. Payment for Ecosystems Services and Food Security. Main report. 281.

Rome, FAO.

• Grant, R. 1991. The resourse-based theory of competitive advantage: implication for a

strategy formulation. California Management review, 33(3), 114-135

• Howlett D., Woodhouse P., Bahiigwa G., Shinyekwa I., Pinney A., Rigby D., Formulating

Indicators for Rural Livelihoods: Lessons from Uganda and South Africa.

• Jatiket M., Simsamay S., 2007. Agrobiodiversity and Local Knowledge Issues In Luang

Prabang and Xieng Khouang Provinces: Assessment of the current knowledge,

F - 14


perceptions and roles of adults and children/adolescents in ABD resources, with a view

of their future role as the centers of local knowledge and management of ABD.

• Jodha N.S., 1988. Poverty debate in India: a minority view. Economic and Political

Weekly,. pp 2421–2428.

• Kuncoro S.A., van Noordwijk M., Martini E., Saipothong P., Areskoug V., Putra A.E.,

O’Connor T., 2006. Rapid Agrobiodiversity Appraisal (RABA) in the Context of

Environmental Service Rewards. World Agroforestry Centre—ICRAF, SEA Regional

Office, Bogor,. 106 ,.

• Nautiyal S., Bisht V., Rao K.S., Maikhuri R.K., 2008. The role of cultural values in

agrobiodiversity conservation: a case study from Uttarakhand, Himalaya. J. Hum. Ecol,.

23 (1),. pp 1–6.

• Oudenhoven, et al. 2011. Social-ecological indicators of resilience in agrarian and

natural landscapes. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal.

22(2), 154-173.

• Pons, J. & Sivardière, P. 2002. Manual de capacitación: certificación de Calidad de los

Alimentos Orientada a Sellos de Atributos de Valor en Países de América Latina.

Depósitos de documentos de la FAO. 73. Rome, FAO

• Sayer J., Campbell B., Petheram L., Aldrich M., Perez M.R., Endamana D., Dongmo

Z.L.N., Defo L., Mariki S., Doggart N., others, 2007. Assessing environment and

development outcomes in conservation landscapes. Biodiversity and Conservation,. 16

(9),. pp 2677–2694.

• Scoones I., 1998. Sustainable rural livelihoods: a framework for analysis. Institute of

Development Studies Sussex.

• Singh A.K., Varaprasad K.S., 2008. Criteria for identification and assessment of agro-

biodiversity heritage sites: Evolving sustainable agriculture. Current Science,. 94 (9),. pp

1131–1138.

• Speelman E.N., López-Ridaura S., Colomer N.A., Astier M., Masera O.R., 2007. Ten

years of sustainability evaluation using the MESMIS framework: Lessons learned from

its application in 28 Latin American case studies. The International Journal of

Sustainable Development and World Ecology,. 14 (4),. pp 345–361.

• Stocking M., Helleman H., White R., 2005. Renewable natural resources management

for mountain communities. In : Symposium and Research Workshop on Renewable

Natural Resources Management for Mountain Communities, Nepal, February-March

2003.

• Thrupp L.A., 1998. Cultivating diversity: Agrobiodiversity and food security. World

Resources Institute Washington, DC.

F - 15


Nr. Key questions and themes Comments

1 Can species/ecosystem elements be integrated/introduced into existing systems to complement them and make them more sustainable?

Recommend focus on tropical fruit trees which are arguably the part that conucos take most of their stability from (consult Instituto de Investigaciones de Fruticultura Tropical)

2 Which activities contribute in what ways to the wellbeing and economic status of people living in the reserve areas. What are the impacts of these practices on the ecosystems in the protected area, and implications for linking wild and cultivated landscapes?

Sierra del Rosario, Cuba's first Biosphere reserve, includes a 'model village', Las Terrazas. It was conceived with the idea that the people living in the countryside could improve their living conditions (which were very poor) by moving to this model village and engaging in ecotourism activities. This is an interesting example of a strategy that goes counter to the idea of the project and it will be interesting to compare the experiences of people that stayed on their farms, and the people that moved to Las Terrazas: ecotourism is an indirect way of bringing benefits to people and creates a distance between people and their ecosystem. Whereas agriculture brings a very direct benefit, where people manage and "serve" biodiversity, instead of tourism. There might be a need to defend a broader definition of 'wellbeing' with UNEP-GEF (one more in line with the social-ecological indicators, in which income is not the most important proxy) - list of species that depend to a certain degree on conuco, or on the the interactions between wild ecosystems and conucos (the species composition of conucos is very specific, with a much higher density of fruit species compared to natural forests. A study in RBCT (Begue!) found more birds in semi-natural forests than in natural ones. They have feeding nests in managed forests to cut the distance to food ('home nests' are in often in natural forests). The same is likely for pollinators (see study by Hoehn et al. [2010] in Biodiversity and Conservation)

F - 16



3 Which farming practices are most suitable for soil conservation on sloping services, and can existing farming techniques (especially slash and burn) be improved in such a way to prevent soil erosion? How can farmers contribute to the restoration of degraded lands ?

Cuchilla' means a very steep hill. These hills in the RBCT are extremely prone to erosion. Slash and burn is a common and traditional practice among farmers to cultivate larger quantitaties of root and tuber crops, or viandas (quantities grown in conucos are usually quite small, conucos are traditionally more focused on the production of fruits, decorational plants, and animals), and are often important to food security and provide additional income. The practice is not allowed in the core areas of the reserve because of its negative impact on soil runoff, although it can be observed in some areas. An important question this project has to address (through collaboration with the Earth institute and, potentially, with a recently approved GEF pilot project on soils) is whether s&b techniques can be improved in such a way as to conserve soils and not cause any runoff (which then gets into the rivers and may have impacts further downstream). Corridors : Both reserves have fairly large areas of degraded/deforested lands, landslide areas, etc. Forestry is planning to replant such areas (in RBCT), but farmers could probably take care of much of it if given the proper incentives. Can farms be considered as corridors and if yes, what are the corridor functions they contain. This would also contribute to the country's commitments under the Caribbean Corridor Convention. It directly addresses the project's aim to expand 'agricultural biodiversity corridors' Research design : the choice of approach to tests these questions is important. Probably a combination of two approaches will be necessary: 1) experimental (ask farmers to replant degraded areas and test the impact of different species/arrangements/techniques on soil regeneration, water quality, runoff, etc.; 2 comparing existing systems/farming practices (the impact of systems on ecological variables can be compared along different gradients (ecological - core, buffer, transition zone of the reserves; or knowledge intensiveness)

4 Is there a role of payment for ecosystem services in enhancing the sustainability of (communities) living in MAB reserves?

We might not want to get into this, since it is such a big field and not necessarily in line with our ways of thinking/small-scale agriculture, but if ways exist to reward farmers for the ecosystem services they are helping to maintain through their day-to-day farming activities, then a construction might be conceivable by which a reserve is paid by the ecosystem service bankers and distributes that wealth to its communities in the form of services, etc.

F - 17



5 What is the role of traditional Cuban foods in maintaining agrobiodiversity. Can these foods be repopularized?

Many culinary traditions were lost, especially in the cities, as a result of the 'periodo especial' (the years after the collapse of the USSR when agricultural inputs, fuel, etc. were all of a sudden unavailable). Of course, many of these foods were prepared with local species, including wild ones. Sagú is an example. It is a drink made from arrowroot pulp (Marantha arundinacea). Preparing it requires a lot of work (to obtain the starch) but Fidel and many elder Cubans swear by it and credit their old age with its healthful properties. One pound of arrowroot starch costs 30 pesos (a lot), but it's use is disappearing, and so is arrowroot, which is taken from uncultivated/wild plants. Regenerating wild populations , in combination with a public awareness campaign, could be an interesting activity to support in the project. Possibly involve Slow Food for production of traditional recipe book/health campaign.

6 Is there a connection between the social/cultural wellbeing of a community and the health of the surrounding ecosystem?

Develop and apply a set of indicators for both landscape and community resilience and well being. Review existing set if resilience indicators and socioeconomic wellbeing indicators (if any). Test, vet, and apply a specific set of indicators that are useful to the project focus and sites. Train project teams and communities in their uses and in the analyses of information they generate.

F - 18



7 How robust are local seed systems and how can they be strengthened?

Previous activities have focuses on this to some degree. It will be easy to do a survey among farmers we have worked with in the past and compare the current situation with that of 5-10 years ago. This would give a good idea of the factors influencing seed system security and can inform project activities that aim to strengthen these systems. Farmers in La Municion, for example, save some of their seeds and appear to have a very strong informal network of exchange with neighbours/cooperative to obtain other seeds. They know which varieties are grown by whom and go to them for seeds when in need. Nonetheless, they say that many varieties are being lost. They mention a number of factors: hurricanes, unpredictable weather (with loss of entire harvests as a result), death/emigration (of farmers) and market forces (i.e. when the government raises the price of certain crops, farmers start growing them, often at the cost of other crops. This happened with cucumber, for example: many people started to produce it, which led to overproduction, a drop in price, and now the cucumber is gone from La Municion). - establishment of Community Biodiversity Registers (which include best practices on maintaining diversity on-farm [specific techniques to maintain maize diversity]) - given the varying climatic conditions (especially humidity) and taking into account the level of dispersion of communities, which are the best and most appropriate methods to conserve seeds. Both in terms of tools (drying, preserving) and in terms of mechanisms and level of exchange (community, ecosystem, MAB, or regional level?). This must be developed together with communities. - this theme overlaps with a Trust project led by INIFAT (Nelson) on bean/maize conservation (co-funding).

F - 19



8 What is the most efficient and beneficial way to link agriculture in the MAB reserves to the formal systems of urban and peri-urban agriculture?

The value of conuco agriculture to the more institutionalized forms of urban and peri-urban agriculture is neither recognized nor exploited. I.e. the value of food production of the latter systems is clear, but conuco agriculture is characterized more by diversity and quality than by quantity, and so far this hasn't generated many benefits for conuco farmers.The project must explore ways in which these values can be appreciated and exploited (by the government), ideally by establishing linkages between the formal systems and the Biosphere reserves. One way could be to diversify urban agriculture on the basis of varieties and species that exist in the reserves, serving both conservation purposes (expanding populations) and nutritional ones. It must be kept in mind that a complicated trajectory exists for landraces to be taken up in and distributed through the formal system (varieties must be stable, distinct, homogenous), and that pursuing less formal ways may yield more results. More formal would be seed distribution through urban/peri-urban agriculture. Less formal would bee between communities that are not connected to this system (e.g. in the biosphere reserves) and if distribution is done as plants (and not as seeds) through nurseries.Fruit trees would be particularly important from this perspective (see also question 1)

9 What is the intensity of use/interaction with 'wild' ecosystems and how does this affect the health of ecosystems and human communities (social-ecological system)

Little knowledge of the use of wild species exists, previous research having focused mainly on (cultivated) species on farm. The main species used are aji, chili, ñame, a number of species used to prepare a traditional drink pru (Gouania polygama; Smilax spp.; Pimenta dioica), and medicinal plants. Some valuation work has been done on pru. There are many species that can be used, but aren't, and several species that are left in abandoned conuco's are becoming wild and adapting to changing conditions (e.g. shade becaus of forest cover). Some of the species above are over-exploited and disappearing and the project should look into opportunities for increasing their population (see also question 6) A final project output related to this theme could be a register of useful plants, their qualities, where to find them, and who knows about them.

F - 20



10 Can the idea of geographic denominations (terroirs) etc. be extended to the Cuban (socialist) context?

It already exists for the most well-known Cuban export products: coffee, rum, cigars. For the national market prices are determined by the state, however, and differentiation based on quality and origin is not allowed. All surplus production from farms, including those in the biosphere reserves, is bought by the state through cooperatives and is sold centrally. Direct sale from farmer to others is essentially prohibited, although it does happen in some places, informally. The restaurant owner in Las Terrazas (RBSR) told us he needs to go to Havana to buy yucca and soya, while the farmers next doors have plenty. Some government initiatives in Oriente, around Guantanamo and Santiago, allow for farmers to sell their produce in stands along the road. Importantly, the Diversity Fairs organized within the previous agrobiodiversity project were the first instances where farmers were allowed to display AND sell their produce, artisanry, etc. to 'consumers'. This took a tremendous amount of lobbying with officials, but proved successful.The central problem here is that the terroirs-idea depends on the existence of market niches, which in Cuba do not exist (except for the very rich, who get their food from outside anyway). Internationally, of course, they do exist, but the farmers that produce, for example, the coffee that is exported (some farmers from RBCT), do not see any additional benefits from doing so, since their wages are determined by the state.

11 How can the role of farmers in research and protected area management be strengthened?

Anything to do with institutions and hierarchies is difficult to change, especially in Cuba. Are there innovative ways of involving farming communities in the decision-making of the biosphere reserves that can be piloted during the project? One way is the establishment of farmer research committees that have a real say in the design and implementation of the research activities. Given the powerful role of the ANAP (Associacion nacional de agricoltores pequenas) in Cuba, this would also be very desirable in order to ensure their support of project findings and policy implications etc.

12 What channels are most suitable to facilitate the training/dissemination of best practices?

These channels are already in place, both through government, cooperatives, Reserve facilities and previous project activities

F - 21


Annex G. Indicators for resilience in socio-ecological production landscapes for adaptation and use in agrobiodiversity landscapes in Cuban MAB reserves1

“Socio-ecological production landscapes” or SEPLs are dynamic mosaics of habitats and land uses including various landscape components such as villages, farmland and adjacent woods, grasslands and coastal areas. These landscapes have been shaped over the years by the interactions between people and nature in ways that maintain biodiversity and provide humans with goods and services needed for their well-being. They have proven sustainable over centuries and can be considered living examples of cultural heritage. A number of studies indicate that the management of these landscapes is compatible with the Ecosystem Approach and the Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines on the Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity. The Satoyama Initiative, which aims to maintain and, where necessary, revitalize or rebuild SEPLs was recognized as a potentially useful tool to better understand and support these landscapes for the benefit of biodiversity and human well-being by the 10th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity.2

Why a resilience approach? In order to maintain, revitalize and rebuild SEPLs in times of global change, a resilience perspective on landscapes is essential. In SEPLs, communities create resilience with practices that further their well-being, but also support the landscape and its biodiversity. With the aim to provide a tool for communities to understand their resilience and encourage the practices that strengthen it, a set of indicators3 is being developed. These indicators help measure a community’s capacity to build resilience and harness ecosystem services through innovation, adaptation, and through institutions that regulate and ensure the sustainable use of biodiversity. Bioversity International with support from the International Partnership for the Satoyama Initiative (IPSI) developed the indicators to be tested and adapted to measure resilience of agricultural landscapes in proximity of natural ecosystems and important biodiversity. The first test and refinement of the indicators will take place in Cuban social ecological landscapes and protected areas and will be made available globally through IPSI and other relevant international organisations, frameworks and networks. These indicators where shared and vetted at the CBD/ SBSTTA 15, November 7-11, 2011, Montreal, Canada.

Who will use the indicators and for what? The indicators are not conceived as a defined set of measurements but rather as a guide to understanding and strengthening resilience. They are based on case studies that describe communities’ strategies to cope with and adapt to change through local innovation and the sustainable use of biodiversity. Further development of the indicators is planned through discussion among IPSI members, other interested parties and local communities, and through their practical application in community development projects in SEPLs. The indicators cover key features of SEPLs that confer resilience. While adapted for agricultural settings the indicators can be made specific to landscapes in which agriculture is not

1 Derived from Bioversity IPSI indicators – CBD-SBSTTA, Montreal Nov 2011 2 CBD COP10 Decision X/32 Sustainable use of biodiversity 3 Based on work by Van Oudenhoven, F., Mijatovic, D. and Eyzaguirre, P. (2010) Social-ecological indicators of resilience in agrarian and natural landscapes, Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal 22(2), pp.154-173.

G - 1


the main livelihood activity. They complement other existing indicator frameworks focused on community well-being, traditional knowledge and landscape productivity4,5,6.

The main purpose of the indicators is to assist communities in developing resilience-strengthening strategies that encourage local innovation, ecosystem protection and beneficial interactions between different landscape components. Unlike many assessment tools, they are defined and measured in terms easily perceived and used by local communities. The main areas in which the indicators can prove useful to the collaborative initiatives between communities, scientists, conservation and development actors are:

• Understanding the resilience of SEPLs. The indicators provide an analytical framework with a common set of parameters for the exchange of experience and information across landscapes and communities.

• Supporting communities in strengthening SEPLs, biodiversity and ecosystem functions. The indicators can help to identify social processes, institutions, and land use, conservation and innovation practices that need to be encouraged to strengthen resilience.

• Monitoring and evaluation of project interventions that aim to strengthen resilience and support biodiversity conservation.

What do indicators measure? The indicators measure elements of SEPL resilience that are, almost by definition, strongly interrelated. The practices and institutions that they describe can be grouped into four areas:

• Ecosystems protection and the maintenance of biodiversity; • Agricultural biodiversity; • Knowledge, learning and innovation; • Social equity

Ecosystems protection and the maintenance of biodiversity. The health of a landscape and the ecosystems it supports, reflected in part in the diversity of (interactions between) species, forms the physical (and, often, spiritual) basis of a community’s wellbeing. Biodiversity contributes to community and landscape resilience by providing ecosystem services, which are sustained (or degraded) by the practices and institutions that regulate the use of natural resources. In the context of climate change, for example, the protection and restoration of watersheds and forest and coastal ecosystems in SEPLs helps regulate hydrology and microclimate, thereby providing a buffer against extreme weather events, sea level rise, floods and droughts. Agricultural biodiversity forms the nexus between the health of an ecosystem and that of a community. It includes species used for food, fodder, fibre, fuel, and the large number of non-harvested species in the wider landscape directly used by or benefiting communities through the services they provide (pollinators, soil biota, regulators of pests and diseases). Agricultural

4 UNEP (2009) Learning from the Practitioners: Benefit Sharing Perspectives from Enterprising Communities. United Nations Environment Programme. 5 TEBTEBBA (2008) Indicators relevant for Indigenous Peoples: a Resource Book. Indigenous Peoples International Centre for Policy Research and Education. 6 Buck, L., Shames, S. and Scherr. S. (2007) Understanding Ecoagriculture: A Framework for Measuring Landscape Performance. Ecoagriculture Partners.

G - 2


biodiversity provides material for experimentation, innovation and adaptation. The genetic diversity found in local crop varieties and animal breeds, expressed in important traits such as drought and saline tolerance, and resistance to pests and diseases, helps them adapt to different soil and climate conditions. The loss in diversity of these traits decreases options for risk management and adaptation to changing land use and climate conditions. Revival of local food systems and landscape diversification, on the other hand, encourages the maintenance of agricultural biodiversity, and contributes to food security and self-sufficiency. Knowledge, learning and innovation are the means of building resilience. Communities strengthen resilience by experimenting, innovating, and learning within and between different knowledge systems, cultures, and age groups. Adaptation strategies may be novel or old, but generally build on traditional knowledge. This knowledge is specific to the locations and cultures of given social-ecological interactions and embodied in (resource use and agricultural) customs and traditions, local languages, cultural values, and social institutions. As many communities are losing their knowledge of local resources, biodiversity and historical events that have contributed to the shaping of the landscape, the maintenance of this knowledge increasingly depends on the ability of elders, parents and the younger generations in a community to document and share it. The role of young community members in the assimilation of traditional knowledge and in valuing and combining it with the new knowledge to which they are exposed in urban centres and learning institutions is important, but often underestimated.

Social equity is a key feature of SEPL resilience. Gender inequality, social exclusion and marginalization can hinder the ability of women, indigenous and other groups to strengthen resilience. Women hold specific knowledge and skills related to biodiversity, and thus their role in adaptation is essential. For indigenous communities, resilience is intrinsically linked with their efforts to protect traditional ways of subsistence and cultural heritage. The ability to access ancestral lands, engage in traditional land use and agricultural practices are some of the conditions for communities to maintain biodiversity and associated traditional knowledge. How to use the indicators? The indicators, presented in the table, are developed to guide the assessment of resilience in a community. The assessment entails assigning a score and a trend to each indicator by answering the questions listed in the table’s first column. A qualitative or quantitative score can be assigned to all indicators using a 5-point scale given in the table’s second column. To collect information about changes in trends, the following categories can be used for each indicator separately: ↑ steep upward trend

↗ slow/some increase

→ No change

� slow/some decrease

↓steep downward The way the indicators are used will differ depending on the user. Communities may seek to monitor the impact of external development, agricultural or conservation interventions on traditional livelihoods; for practitioners and scientists they can help elucidate whether and how

G - 3


the day-to-day interactions between people and landscape contribute to landscape resilience. Most importantly, however, they are intended as a common language between ‘traditional’ and ‘scientific’ communities that values, rather than obscures the complexity of human-environment interactions.

G - 4


Indicators for resilience in socio-ecological production landscapes

What to assess?

Scores

Ecosystems protection and the maintenance of biodiversity

Heterogeneity and multi-functionality in the landscape

• Do biodiversity management and land-use practices maintain a landscape mosaic of cultivated, semi-managed and wild areas, e.g. forest patches, riparian forests, fishing grounds, pasturelands, water-harvesting areas, home gardens, cultivated fields and orchards?

(5) Heterogeneous landscape consists of managed, cultivated areas and several types of ecosystems or wild areas well-connected with ecological corridors.

(4) Landscape mosaic consists of several land-use types and some wild areas.

(3) Landscape consists of several land-use types and fragmented wild areas.

(2) Landscape consists of two or three land-use types and very few wild areas.

(1) No heterogeneity, i.e. one type of land-use predominates in the landscape.

Areas protected for their cultural and ecological importance

• How many landscape components are protected for ensuring a continuous flow of ecosystem services? Protection may be formal or informal and include traditional forms of protection such as sacred groves.

(5) Protected and low-use areas cover key resources in the landscape and they are connected to ensure a continuous flow of ecosystem services.

(4) Protected and low-use areas cover key resources in the landscape.

(3) Protected and low-use areas small.

(2) Protected and low-use areas very small.

(1) Landscape intensively used, leading to resource depletion and accelerating loss of biodiversity.

Sustainable use of resources

• Are the resources (water, soil, forest, fisheries and others) sustainably used?

(5) Resources used in a sustainable manner.

(4) Most resources used in a sustainable manner.

(3) Not all resources used in a sustainable manner.

(2) Unsustainable use of resources.

(1) Unsustainable use of resources, accompanied by severe or irreversible resource degradation.

Environmental security and safety

• Is there a risk of environmental pollution and disasters, e.g. soil, air and water pollution, climate change related threats?

(5) Very low risk.

(4) Low risk.

(3) Medium risk.

(2) High risks.

(1) Very high risks.

Agricultural biodiversity

Maintenance, documentation and conservation of agricultural biodiversity in a community

• Are local crops, varieties and animal breeds used in a community? • Is agricultural biodiversity

(5) Local crops, varieties and breeds (#) widely used, documented and conserved.

(4) Local crops, varieties and breeds are used by some community members; documentation and conservation practices are weak.

(3) Local crops, varieties and breeds are used by few community

G - 5


documented and conserved in community classification systems and community seed banks?

members, documentation and conservation practices do not exist.

(2) Local crops, varieties and breeds are rare and used only by very few community members, documentation and conservation practices do not exist.

(1) Local crops, varieties and breeds no longer found.

Diversity of local food system

• Do communities use a diversity of traditional and locally-produced foods, e.g. cereals, vegetables, fruits, nuts, wild plants, mushrooms, berries, fish and animals?

(5) Locally-sourced foods abundant and widely used.

(4) Locally-sourced foods available and used by some community members.

(3) Locally-sourced foods available and occasionally used.

(2) Variable availability and use of locally-sourced foods.

(1) Scarcity of locally-sourced foods.

Knowledge, learning and innovation

Innovation in agricultural biodiversity management for improved resilience and sustainability

• Do community members improve, develop and adopt agricultural and biodiversity management techniques to adapt to changing conditions and contexts, e.g. climate change, population pressure, resource degradation?

(5) Community members are receptive to change and adjust their practices through local innovation.

(4) Community members are receptive to change, local innovation takes place but can be strengthened.

(3) Community members are receptive to change but the rate of innovation is low.

(2) Community members are moderately receptive to change, no innovation.

(1) Community members are not receptive to change, no innovation.

Access and exchange of agricultural biodiversity

• Are individuals within and between communities connected through institutions and networks for the exchange of agricultural biodiversity (e.g. seed exchange networks, local markets and animal and seed fairs)?

(5) Multiple systems of exchange regularly operating within and between communities across different cultures and landscapes.

(4) Exchange within and across communities takes places but can be strengthened.

(3) Exchange takes place occasionally.

(2) Exchange takes place rarely.

(1) Systems of exchange do not exist.

Transmission of traditional knowledge from elders, parents and peers to the young people in a community

• Is the knowledge of key concepts and practices about land, water, biological resources and cosmology transmitted between different age groups?

(5) Key concepts and practices known to all community members, including children.

(4) Key concepts and practices known to community members, but not to those considered children.

(3) Key concepts and practices known only to adults and elders.

(2) Key concepts and practices known only to elders.

(1) Traditional knowledge lost.

Cultural traditions related to biodiversity

• Are cultural traditions related to biodiversity maintenance and use continued by young people, e.g. festivals, rituals, songs, etc?

(5) Cultural traditions practiced by all community members including children.

(4) Cultural traditions practiced by community members, but not by those considered children.

(3) Cultural traditions practiced only by adults and elders.

(2) Cultural traditions practiced only by elders.

(1) Not practiced.

Number of generations interacting (5) Three or more generations interact with the landscape.

G - 6


with the landscape

• How many generations interact with the landscape for subsistence and income?

(4) Two or three generations interact with the landscape.

(3) Two generations interact with the landscape.

(2) One or two generations interact with the landscape.

(1) One generation interacts with the landscape.

Practices of documentation and exchange of local knowledge

• Are community-based institutions and systems for documentation, exchange and acquisition of externally-sourced knowledge in place? E.g. existence of traditional knowledge registers, resource classification systems, community biodiversity registers, farmer field schools.

(5) Institutions and systems for knowledge documentation and exchange are present and involve all community members.

(4) Institutions and systems for knowledge documentation and exchange present but can be strengthened.

(3) Some knowledge documentations and exchange taking place but need to be strengthened.

(2) Only a small fraction of knowledge documented.

(1) Documentation of knowledge does not take place.

Use of local terminology or indigenous languages

• Do community members use local terminology related to land and (the use of) biodiversity, and, if applicable, do they speak the local dialect or language?

(5) Local terminology (and local dialect or language) widely used in the community.

(4) Local terminology used by the majority of community members.

(3) Local terminology used by a part of the community.

(2) Local terminology used by a small part of the community.

(1) Local terminology not used.

Women’s knowledge about biodiversity and its use

• Are women’s knowledge, experiences and skills recognized as central to practices that strengthen resilience?

(5) Women’s knowledge, experiences and skills recognized, respected and used.

(4) Women’s knowledge, experiences and skills mostly recognized and respected and used.

(3) Women’s knowledge, experiences and skills partially recognized, respected and used.

(2) Women’s knowledge, experiences and skills receive little recognition.

(1) Women’s knowledge, experiences and skills not recognized.

Social equity

Local resource governance

• Are land, water and other resources effectively managed by community-based institutions? I.e. existence of traditional institutions (village councils, customary laws and other property sharing regimes) and non-traditional local initiatives for the sustainable use of resources.

(5) Institutions in place and resources effectively managed.

(4) Institutions in place and some resources effectively managed.

(3) Institutions in place but need to be strengthened.

(2) Institutions not effective.

(1) Institutions not present.

Autonomy in relation to land and resource management

• Does the community have autonomous access to indigenous lands, territories, natural resources, and sacred and ceremonial sites? • Is that autonomy recognized by

(5) Community has access to its traditional lands and resources and autonomy in their management.

(4) Community has access to its traditional lands and resources and partial autonomy in their management, but its autonomy needs to be strengthened and recognized by outside groups.

(3) Community has limited access to its traditional lands and

G - 7


outside groups and institutions, e.g. governments and development agencies?

resources and limited decision power over their management.

(2) Community has limited access to its traditional lands and resources and no decision power over their management.

(1) Community has neither access to nor decision power over traditional lands and resources.

Gender

• Are women involved in decision-making and communication with outsiders? • Do women have access to resources, education, information and opportunities for innovation?

(5) Women are involved in decision-making and communication with outsiders, and have the same access to resources and opportunities as men.

(4) Women are involved in decision-making and communication with outsiders, and have access to resources and opportunities, but less so than men.

(3) Women are partially or occasionally involved in decision-making and have limited access to resources and opportunities.

(2) Women are rarely involved in decision-making and have limited access to resources and opportunities.

(1) Women are not involved in decision-making, and have no access to resources and opportunities.

Social infrastructure

• Is social infrastructure, including roads, schools, telecommunications, energy, and electricity in place?

(5) Social infrastructure exists and meets all community needs.

(4) Basic social infrastructure exists.

(3) Not all necessary infrastructure exists or functions satisfactory.

(2) Some major social infrastructure is missing and opportunities for its improvement are limited.

(1) No infrastructure in place.

Health care

• Do community members have access to health care? • Are traditional healing methods and modern medicine present?

(5) Health care accessible for all community members and functions to the satisfaction of the community.

(4) Basic health care accessible.

(3) Health care facilities exist but do not function satisfactory or not easily accessible.

(2) Health care facilities not satisfactory and not easily accessible.

(1) Health care not accessible.

Health risk

• Is there a health risk from epidemics, water contamination, air pollution or other threats?

(5) Low risk.

(4) Average risk.

(3) Moderate risk.

(2) High risk.

(1) Very high risk.

G - 8


G - 9


PLAN DE ACCIÓN NACIONAL 2006/2010 SOBRE LA DIVERSIDAD BIOLÓGICA

REPÚBLICA DE CUBA

PLAN DE ACCIÓN NACIONAL 2006/2010 SOBRE LA DIVERSIDAD BIOLÓGICA REPÚBLICA DE CUBA

1

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo I.- Conservación y uso sostenible de la Diversidad Biológica

1. Poner en funcionamiento la Red Nacional de Información de Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA (CENBIO) Nodos de la Red 2006

2. Conservación in situ de la Diversidad Biológica. CITMA (CNAP) Actores del SNAP

Coordinación

− Contar con mecanismos de coordinación a nivel nacional y provincial de los principales actores del SNAP.

2006

− Contar con asesoría científico - técnica para la toma de decisiones en el SNAP.

2008

− Lograr la integración de los planes, programas y proyectos del SNAP y las AP con los planes económicos y físicos y otros programas nacionales.

2010

− Disponer de un Sistema Nacional de Información para la Gestión de las Áreas Protegidas que pueda ser utilizado como herramienta de trabajo por los tomadores de decisión y las administraciones de las AP.

2008

Legislación

− Revisar la correspondencia entre el marco legal vigente y las necesidades de implementación del SNAP.

2006

− Completar y armonizar el marco legal que garantice el funcionamiento del SNAP.

2008

− Elaborar las normas complementarias que permitan la implementación de todo el instrumento legal.

2010

Planificación

H - 1


lmaria

Typewritten Text

Annex H. Policy and Institutional Framework

lmaria

Typewritten Text


2

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo

− Completar los análisis de vacíos correspondientes, que permitan la identificación de especies y/o ecosistemas no representados o mal representados en el SNAP, y otras necesidades identificadas en el Plan del SNAP y el Programa de Trabajo de CBD, con vistas a la declaración de AP que sean ecológicamente representativas de los vacíos identificados en 2010 en la parte terrestre y 2012 para la parte marina.

2006

− Identificar y establecer metas e indicadores de áreas protegidas, que se correspondan con las metas y objetivos del programa de trabajo de CBD para AP.

2006

− Identificar y ejecutar pasos prácticos, que permitan integrar en el 2015, las AP en paisajes marinos y terrestres más amplios mediante la creación de corredores biológicos o la restauración de ecosistemas degradados, que garanticen la continuidad ecológica del SNAP (declaración de Sitios Ramsar, Reservas de la Biosfera, APRM, etc).

2008

− Adoptar medidas que permitan establecer o ampliar AP dentro de toda área natural grande, íntegra o relativamente poco fragmentada o altamente irreemplazable o áreas bajo gran amenaza o que alberguen a las especies gravemente amenazadas en el contexto de la prioridades nacionales y tomando en consideración las necesidades de conservación de las especies migratorias.

2006


3


− Gestionar el SNAP a través de Planes Estratégicos Quinquenales, elaborados mediante procesos altamente participativos, que se implementan mediante planes de acción anuales, ambos aprobados por el CITMA.

Permanente

− Aprobar según el procedimiento establecido por la legislación vigente, el 80 % de las AP de significación Nacional y el 60 % de las AP de significación Local, garantizando una cobertura del 85 % de los paisajes y especies del país con énfasis en paisajes singulares, especies endémicas o amenazadas y áreas que garanticen la conectividad del sistema.

2008

− El 80 % de las áreas protegidas aprobadas se gestionan mediante Planes de Manejo que se implementan a través de Planes Operativos Anuales, ambos aprobados por CITMA.

Permanente

− Gestionar el 100% de las AP que cuentan con estructura administrativa, mediante planes operativos anuales aprobados por el CITMA.

Permanente

− Identificar metas de conservación mensurables para sitios, tales como, genomas, especies, comunidades naturales, ecosistemas y procesos ecológicos, utilizando los criterios establecidos en el Anexo I del Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica y otros criterios pertinentes.

2006

− Integrar los sistemas regionales, nacionales y subnacionales de áreas protegidas en los paisajes terrestres y marinos más amplios, estableciendo, entre otras cosas, y administrando redes ecológicas, corredores ecológicos y/o zonas intermedias, cuando proceda, para mantener los procesos ecológicos y teniendo además en cuenta las necesidades de las especies migratorias.

2008

H - 2



4


− Perfeccionar la integración e interacción del SNAP con otros sistemas, planes y programas e incorporar en su planeamiento estrategias de manejos biorregionales.

2008

Fortalecimiento Institucional y Control

− Tener en funcionamiento un sistema de control y revisión a los Planes, programas y proyectos que se ejecuten en las Áreas Protegidas, que garantice 2 visitas anuales de control a cada AP aprobada por el CECM o con administración establecida, así como una visita a las áreas propuestas.

2006

− Las decisiones para la implementación de los programas del Plan del SNAP, son tomadas por una Junta Coordinadora Nacional, que se replica en cada una de las provincias.

2006

Capacitación

− Identificar las necesidades nacionales de capacidad para el SNAP, y diseñar Plan de Capacitación del SNAP en base a las necesidades identificadas, incluida la creación de programas de estudio, recursos y programas para la entrega sostenible de capacitación en materia de gestión de AP.

2006

− Implementar el plan de capacitación del SNAP. 2008

− Realización de Cursos, Seminarios y Talleres. Permanente

Administración de Áreas Protegidas

− Contar con infraestructura básica para la administración en cada una de las áreas protegidas con administración actual o prevista a iniciar en el período del Plan.

2008


5


− Desarrollar capacidades que permitan que las AP cuenten con personal suficientemente calificado, para garantizar la gestión eficaz del área.

2008

− Señalizar los límites de las áreas. 2008

− Diseñar e implementar un Sistema de comunicaciones por voz y datos que garantice las comunicaciones en 60 AP vinculadas en una red Nacional/Provincial.

2006

− Identificar y establecer mecanismos que permitan utilizar los beneficios sociales y económicos generados por las áreas protegidas para el mejoramiento de las condiciones de vida de las comunidades locales vinculadas a las áreas, en concordancia con los objetivos de la administración de áreas protegidas.

2010

Manejo de Recursos

− Definir áreas priorizadas para la conservación, con vistas al enfoque biorregional y conectividad de las AP (Áreas Protegidas con títulos internacionales, áreas del Plan Turquino Manatí y REDS).

2008

− Adoptar e implementar medidas para la restauración de los ecosistemas degradados y seminaturales en las AP como medio de hacer viable el sistema de corredores ecológicos.

2008

− Desarrollar, para 2010 enfoques nacionales sobre responsabilidad jurídica y medidas de reparación, incorporando el principio de quién contamina paga u otros mecanismos apropiados en relación con los daños a las áreas protegidas.

2010

H - 3



6


− Perfeccionar el Sistema de Inspección Estatal Ambiental, E.I.A y evaluación de riesgos a los Esquemas y Planes de Ordenamiento, para garantizar la conservación y uso sostenible de la diversidad biológica en las AP.

2008

− Aplicar, según proceda, evaluaciones oportunas de impacto ambiental a todo plan o proyecto con el potencial de producir efectos sobre las áreas protegidas y garantizar un flujo de información oportuno entre todas las partes interesadas con esa finalidad, teniendo en cuenta la Decisión VI/7 A de la Conferencia de las Partes sobre directrices para incorporar las cuestiones relacionadas con la diversidad biológica en la legislación y/o procesos de E.I.A y de evaluación ambiental estratégica.

2006

Especies Invasoras

− Adoptar medidas para controlar los riesgos asociados a las especies exóticas invasoras en las áreas protegidas.

2008

− Identificar principales especies invasoras que afectan a las AP.

2006

− Preparar estrategias detalladas y planes operativos para el control de especies invasoras seleccionadas, siguiendo técnicas evaluativas y consultas a los actores implicados.

2006

− Establecer un sistema de investigación, monitoreo y manejo adaptativo.

2008

Divulgación y Educación Ambiental

− Elaborar la imagen Corporativa del SNAP. 2006

− Diseñar e implementar estrategia de educación ambiental para las AP.

2006


7


− Incorporar el tema de las áreas protegidas como un componente integral del programa regular de estudios escolares, así como en la educación no oficial.

2008

Investigación y Monitoreo

− Identificar y definir prioridades y necesidades de investigación en las Áreas Protegidas, para ser tomados en cuenta al momento de proponer y/o aprobar proyectos de investigación en AP (creación del comité asesor, definir marco metodológico).

2006

− Creación de un Programa Ramal en la temática de áreas protegidas para garantizar investigaciones nacionales integradas, que contribuyan a la creación y al manejo eficaz de las áreas protegidas.

2008

− Garantizar capacidad nacional y local para desarrollar temas de investigación para el manejo de las AP.

2008

− Establecer mecanismos que garanticen la divulgación de los resultados de los proyectos y el intercambio fluido entre los actores implicados.

2010

− Establecer mecanismos que faciliten el acceso a la información científico técnica sobre áreas protegidas, en particular sobre los resultados de los proyectos ejecutados en AP.

2010

Sostenibilidad Financiera

H - 4



8


− Realizar un estudio a nivel nacional de la eficacia de los recursos financieros existentes y de las necesidades financieras relacionadas con el SNAP e identificar opciones para satisfacer esas necesidades mediante una combinación de recursos nacionales e internacionales y teniendo en cuenta toda la gama de posibles instrumentos de financiamiento, tales como, financiamiento público, conversión de la deuda en programas de protección de la naturaleza, eliminación de incentivos y subvenciones nocivos, financiación privada, impuestos y derechos por el uso de servicios ecológicos.

2006

− Perfeccionar el uso de fondos del SEF y otros fondos para la gestión de Actividad de las AP.

2006

− Identificar e Implementar fuentes y mecanismos alternativos de financiamiento para las acciones de los Programas del Plan del SNAP.

2010

− Crear cartera de proyectos de financiamiento. 2006

− Crear fondo especial para las AP. 2010

− Para 2010, establecer y comenzar a aplicar planes de financiación sostenible a nivel de país que presten apoyo al SNAP, incluidas las medidas reglamentarias, legislativas, de política, institucionales y otras necesarias.

2010

− Desarrollar los mecanismos financieros que permitan la utilización de los ingresos obtenidos por concepto de uso público en la gestión de las AP.

2010

− Desarrollar técnicas para la valoración económica de los recursos naturales y servicios ambientales de las AP.

2008


9

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo 3. Garantizar la conservación, manejo y protección

de los arrecifes coralinos.CITMA y MIP CITMA (CIEC, MNHN,

IDO, CIGEA, CNAP); MIP (ORP, ONIP, CIP); MES (CIM)

Permanente

4. Controlar la aplicación del programa para el estudio de la biodiversidad en las cuencas hidrográficas de interés nacional y validar la metodología propuesta.

Consejo de Cuencas Hidrográficas y Grupo Nacional de Trabajo de Biodiversidad

Entidades participantes en los Consejos de Cuencas Territoriales

2006

5. Garantizar la conservación de germoplasma natural de especies de interés económico y científico.

CNRG Entidades con bancos de germoplasma

2006

6. Organizar y regular la actividad de la pesca recreativa y deportiva mediante el control de su explotación y comercialización.

MIP (ONIP y ORP) MIP, INDER, MINTUR y CGB

2008

7. Perfeccionar y controlar los planes de reducción de desastres ante la pérdida de la Diversidad Biológica para zonas de prospección y explotación de recursos minerales.

CITMA (coordina), MINBAS, MICONS y EMNDC

CITMA (CIGEA, IES, IDO UMAs y Delegaciones territoriales), y otros organismos e instituciones

2008

8. Instrumentar mecanismos que permitan la validación, uso y divulgación del material genético que conforman las colecciones “ex situ” de plantas económicas.

CNRG Entidades nacionales y territoriales de MINAGRI, CITMA, ANAP, MINAZ, Jardines Botánicos, Parques Zoológicos

2008

9. Fortalecer el control de la contaminación del aire, las aguas, incluidas marinas y costeras y el suelo para favorecer la conservación de la Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA (CICA) CITMA (UMAs, CIGEA, ORASEN); CGB, MINAGRI, MINAZ, INRH, MINSAP, MITRANS, OLPP

2008

10. Identificación de instituciones o centros que pueden funcionar como centros de rescate y rehabilitación de flora y fauna silvestre. - Organizar estas instituciones en una red.

CITMA (AMA) Jardines Botánicos, Parques Zoológicos, Acuarios, BIOECO, IES, CNAP, MINAGRI (ENPFF)

2008

11. Establecer un programa nacional de documentación, recategorización y recuperación de especies amenazadas.

CITMA (IES) Jardines Botánicos, Parques Zoológicos, Acuarios, BIOECO, IES, CNAP, MINAGRI (ENPFF)

2008

H - 5



10

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo 12. Organizar la actividad cinegética mediante el

ordenamiento de sus recursos para el control, explotación y comercialización de la caza, a partir de su fundamentación científica, asegurando la internalización de sus costos ambientales.

MINAGRI CITMA (IES, MNHN, CIGEA, CNAP), Comisión Nacional de Caza, MINTUR, MIP, MES (UH), MINAGRI (ENPFF), IPF y CGB

2008

13. Elaborar y ejecutar programas para la restauración de ecosistemas priorizados (teniendo en cuenta enfoque biorregional y conectividad).

CITMA, MINBAS (Oficina Nacional de Recursos Minerales) y MINAGRI

CITMA (CIGEA, CNAP, IES, IDO, IGT, Delegaciones territoriales), Red de Jardines Botánicos, OLPP, MINAZ, CGB, MINBAS, MIP, MES (UH, CIM), MICONS, MINTUR, Instituto de Suelos, IPF

2008

14. Implementar medidas de mitigación de los impactos negativos producto de la introducción de especies y su diseminación.

- Realizar un inventario de especies exóticas.- Identificar y seleccionar un grupo de

especies para trabajar, de acuerdo a prioridad y posibilidad de acción sobre ellas

- Implementar medidas para la mitigación de los impactos de las especies identificadas

CITMA CNAP, MINAGRI (ENPFF), MIP, CGB e instituciones y/o centros de investigación

2008

15. Coordinar un programa único de conservación de sitios de patrimonio natural y tradiciones culturales que promuevan prácticas de uso sostenible y conservación de la Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA y MINCULT CNAP, Consejo Nacional de Patrimonio, Comisión Nacional y provinciales de Patrimonio, IES, MNHN y Museos Municipales, Centro Nacional de Cultura Comunitaria y MES

2008

16. Establecer un plan de acción para diversificar los recursos genéticos de uso comercial.

CNRG Entidades participantes en la Comisión, MINAGRI y MIP

2006


11

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo 17. Establecer el monitoreo de la variabilidad de

especies, razas y variedades domesticadas en huertos familiares

CNRG y MINAGRI INIFAT, IES, BIOECO y otras entidades nacionales y territoriales de CITMA, MINAZ y otros Organismos

2008

18. Promover, de manera ordenada, el incremento de los viveros especializados con el objetivo de diversificar e intensificar el uso de especies nativas en el diseño paisajístico

Poder Popular y CITMA Entidades nacionales y territoriales de CITMA, OLPP, ANAP, Red de Jardines Botánicos, MINAGRI, MINTUR

2008

19. Poner en funcionamiento las redes de colecciones conservadas zoológicas y botánicas

- Establecer mecanismos de capacitación de recursos humanos especializados para atender la conservación, catalogación e investigación de las colecciones existentes

- Establecer mecanismos de intercambio de información entre los integrantes de la red.

- Elaborar un catálogo nacional de las colecciones biológicas existentes en el país.

CITMA (AMA) Museos con colecciones permanentes de Historia Natural, Jardines Botánicos, Acuarios, Centros de Visitantes en AP con colecciones permanentes de Historia Natural

2010

20. Elaborar un Programa de Trabajo específico para los microorganismos.

− Crear por parte de cada institución, las condiciones materiales para el mantenimiento e incremento de las colecciones microbianas.

CITMA (DMA y AMA) Entidades con colecciones microbianas

2010

21. Garantizar la elaboración y ejecución de los manejos recomendados en los Proyectos de Ordenación Forestal por los propietarios o tenentes del patrimonio forestal.

MINAGRI (SEF), CGB y CNAP

Delegaciones Territoriales del CITMA, CGB, tenentes y/o administradores del patrimonio forestal

Permanente

II.- Desarrollo económico, social y ordenamiento territorial22. Incluir en el Instrumental Metodológico de la

Planificación Física los aspectos relacionados con la economía y el uso sostenible de la diversidad biológica.

MEP (IPF) CITMA, MEP (DPPF) 2006

H - 6



12

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo 23. Realizar ordenación sostenible de los bosques,

como parte del esfuerzo para hacer avanzar el enfoque por ecosistemas hacia un planteamiento cada vez más orientado al cumplimiento de los objetivos de la Estrategia Nacional de Diversidad Biológica.

- Desarrollar criterios, indicadores y programas de certificación de la Ordenación Forestal, con vistas a garantizar la interacción de los bosques y otros tipos de biomas y hábitats dentro del paisaje.

MINAGRI (SEF) MINAGRI (SEF, Entidades Territoriales), CITMA, CGB, tenentes de las áreas

2006

24. Evaluar la diversificación del uso de los recursos genéticos que generen el desarrollo de producciones alternativas y elaborar los instructivos técnicos correspondientes.

MINAGRI y MINSAP Entidades nacionales y territoriales de MINAGRI, MINSAP, CITMA, ANAP y CENSA

2006

25. Promover y perfeccionar el desarrollo del ecoturismo como vía para incentivar económica y socialmente la conservación y uso sostenible de la Diversidad Biológica.

MINTUR y CITMA IPF, CITMA (AMA, CNAP), MINAGRI, MINFAR y otros

2008

26. Elaborar las bases sobre las que se desarrollará la actividad de ecoturismo para incentivar la conservación y el uso sostenible de los recursos de la diversidad biológica.

CITMA MINTUR, MINAGRI, CITMA (AMA, CNAP), MINFAR y otros

2006

27. Identificar y promover el rescate, la divulgación de los valores de la diversidad biológica y las prácticas tradicionales asociadas a estos en los programas económicos y sociales.

MEP MINAGRI, MIP, MINAZ, ANAP, MEP, MES, MINED, OCPI, CENDA, otros OACEs y ONGs

2008

28. Promover y perfeccionar la introducción de sistemas agrosilvopastoriles, como una forma de manejo agroproductivo de probada eficacia ecológica.

MINAGRI Entidades nacionales y territoriales de CITMA, MINAGRI y ANAP

2008

29. Promover la introducción y aplicación de técnicas específicas de introducción y explotación que permitan el uso sostenible y garanticen un mejor aprovechamiento de la Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA (coordinador), MINAG, MINAZ, MIP

Entidades Nacionales y territoriales de CITMA, ANAP, MES, otros órganos, organismos y entidades

2008


13

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo 30. Implementar la Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental

de Esquemas y Planes de Ordenamiento Territorial.

CITMA (ORASEN) IPF y DPPF 2008

31. Perfeccionar los sistemas de manejo y conservación de los recursos pesqueros y su compatibilización o integración con el desarrollo del turismo marítimo, para garantizar el uso y conservación más eficiente de la Diversidad Biológica de la plataforma cubana.

MIP y CITMA (DMA, CNAP) CIGEA, CIM, CIP, MINTUR, IDO

2008

32. Promover las diferentes manifestaciones artísticas en defensa de la Diversidad Biológica.

MINCULT CITMA, MINED y MES 2010

III.- Ordenamiento Jurídico33. Concluir la elaboración de un instrumento jurídico

para regular sobre el Acceso a los recursos Genéticos y la Distribución de los Beneficios derivados de éste.

CITMA (DMA) CNRG, MINAG (INIFAT) y MINJUS

2006

34. Adoptar por los Órganos, Organismos e instituciones que directamente usan la diversidad biológica los instrumentos jurídicos para la conservación de ésta.

OACEs CITMA 2006

35. Garantizar que los instrumentos jurídicos en materia de propiedad intelectual contemplen, si así precisa su objeto , la protección expresa de los recursos genéticos de manera que garantice que su explotación proporcione beneficios a las comunidades y la sociedad

CITMA (DMA, OCPI) y MINJUS

MINAGRI, organismos e instituciones nacionales

2006

36. Llevar a cabo la revisión de la legislación de: - suelos, - aguas,- pesca

MINAGRI INRHMIP

CITMA 2006

37. Reglamentar el uso y manejo de información sobre Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA Organismos e instituciones nacionales

2006

38. Dictar las disposiciones pertinentes en materia de caza.

MINAGRI CITMA (DMA, CIGEA, CNAP), CGB, INDER

2006

H - 7



14

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo 39. Revisión e implementación sistemática de los

acuerdos emanados de los instrumentos internacionales legalmente vinculantes o no, sobre los aspectos de diversidad biológica y seguridad de la biotecnología.

CITMA CITMA (DMA, AMA, CIGEA, CNAP, ORASEN)

Permanente

40. Perfeccionar el Sistema de Inspección Ambiental Estatal, E.I.A y evaluación de riesgos, para garantizar la conservación y uso sostenible de la diversidad biológica.

CITMA (ORASEN) CITMA 2006

41. Armonizar los regímenes de responsabilidad civil, administrativo y penal en materia ambiental con las disposiciones pertinentes referidas a la conservación y uso sostenible de la Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA (DMA) Organismos e instituciones nacionales

2008

IV- Integración y Coordinación de Estrategias42. Incorporar en los planes de desarrollo y en las

estrategias y planes sectoriales y territoriales los lineamientos contenidos en el Estrategia Nacional de Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA, MEP UMAs, IPF y los OACEs 2008

43. Perfeccionar la estructura y funciones del Grupo Nacional de Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA Miembros del Grupo Nacional de Diversidad Biológica

2006

44. Incorporar los lineamientos de conservación y uso sostenible de la Diversidad Biológica en los planes nacionales contra desastres y situaciones excepcionales.

EMNDC, CITMA AMA, OACEs e instituciones nacionales y territoriales

2006

45. Dar cumplimiento al proceso de compatibilización del entorno geográfico, donde se desarrollen planes o proyectos sobre la Diversidad Biológica, con los intereses de la Defensa.

CITMA, MINFAR, IPF Organismos y entidades implicadas

Permanente

46. Elaborar proyectos, convenios de trabajo y planes de acción que propicien lograr la integración y colaboración de todas las instituciones con funciones de rectoría y/o control de los recursos de la biodiversidad.

CITMA DMA, CNAP, SEF, CGB, ORP, instancias territoriales, UMAs, ONIA

2006

V- Instrumentos económicos e incentivos sociales


15

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo 47. Los OACEs que administran áreas protegidas

incluirán en su presupuesto los gastos correspondientes al manejo de dichas áreas y a la elaboración de los planes de manejo.

CITMA, MINAGRI, MINFAR y MIP

Organismos e instituciones nacionales

Permanente

48. En el proceso de elaboración y aprobación del presupuesto de los OACEs que administran áreas protegidas, el MFP tomará en cuenta las necesidades para la elaboración y ejecución de los planes de manejos de las áreas protegidas.

MFP y CITMA CNAP, OACEs que administran AP

Permanente

49. Presentar propuestas de proyectos para su financiamiento, al Fondo Nacional de Medio Ambiente, partiendo de las acciones específicas recogidas en esta Estrategia.

Delegaciones Territoriales del CITMA

Organismos o entidades territoriales

Permanente

50. Promover el diseño de mecanismos que propicien el autofinanciamiento para las actividades de conservación de la diversidad biológica, con particular énfasis en las áreas protegidas.

MEP, CITMA (DMA, CNAP) Organismos e instituciones nacionales

2006

51. Establecer las bases para intensificar el uso de los incentivos económicos y sociales que motiven y fortalezcan la conservación y uso sostenible de la Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA, MEP y MFP Organismos e instituciones nacionales

2008

VI.- Educación ambiental, concientización y participación ciudadana52. Continuar divulgando los elementos de la

Estrategia Nacional sobre Diversidad Biológica, a todos los sectores de la sociedad a través de los medios masivos de comunicación y otras vías.

CITMA ICRT, Red de Instituciones Científico – Educativas, UMAs, Medios de difusión masiva, organizaciones de masas (CDR, CTC, FMC, etc.)

Permanente

53. Elaboración de materiales didáctico - divulgativos y científicos - técnicos relacionados con el uso sostenible y la conservación de la diversidad biológica hacia prioridades identificadas en la Estrategia Nacional y por el Grupo Nacional, propiciando el tratamiento del tema en el Portal de Medio Ambiente Cubano, los Portales Provinciales e Institucionales y publicaciones electrónicas.

CITMA (AMA, CNAP) MINAG, ICRT, MES, MINED, OACEs implicados, ONGs

2006

H - 8



16

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo - Especies amenazadas y en peligro de

extinción. - Grupos carismáticos. - Especies de interés económico y su

manejo. - Ecosistemas frágiles (Arrecifes,

humedales, bosques). 54. Garantizar que los proyectos y programas dirigidos

al estudio de los recursos biológicos incluyan entre sus salidas la preparación y elaboración de materiales educativos, tanto para el sistema educacional como para la población en general.

CITMA OACEs, Instituciones y ONGs que desarrollen proyectos

Permanente

55. Promover la inclusión del tema de la conservación y uso sostenible de la diversidad biológica en los planes de capacitación de los OACEs, así como colaborar en la instrumentación de programas elaborados en relación con el uso de los recursos biológicos, protección de especies, comercio ilegal y otros.

CITMA OACEs y OLPP Permanente

56. Promover la participación, coordinada o a través de proyectos o planes, de las organizaciones de base, sociedades científicas, aficionados y ONGs tanto en el estudio como en la protección y uso sostenible de la Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA AMA, ACC, Organizaciones de base, Sociedades científicas y ONGs

Permanente

57. Continuar la capacitación a decisores, funcionarios del gobierno, educadores y comunicadores sobre el tema de la diversidad biológica.

AMA AMA, UMAs, OACEs 2006

58. Elaborar e instrumentar programas de capacitación en relación a la seguridad biológica según grupos meta de la sociedad cubana.

CITMA MINSAP, MINAGRI, MES, OACEs implicados.

2006

59. Instruir a la población en materia de legislación sobre uso y conservación de la Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA CITMA (DMA, AMA, CIGEA), MINJUS, ONGs, OACEs rectores de recursos naturales, ICRT

2006


17

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo 60. Destacar en los programas de educación el papel

de la familia, y en particular el de la mujer, en la conservación y uso sostenible de la diversidad biológica

FMC CITMA (CIGEA, AMA, UMAs), FMC

Permanente

61. Continuar incrementando el apoyo a los programas educativos de instituciones científico educativas como museos, zoológicos, acuarios, jardines botánicos y centros relacionados con la divulgación del patrimonio natural y cultural, así como promover y estimular su extensión a todo el país a través de los ya existentes programas comunitarios de esas instalaciones.

CITMA Redes Institucionales, MINCULT, OLPP

Permanente

62. Fortalecer los aspectos relativos a la conservación y uso sostenible de la diversidad biológica en los planes y programas de estudios de las diferentes especialidades de los centros de enseñanza general.

MINED, MES CITMA, MINFAR, INDER, MINSAP, MINCULT

2006

63. Coordinar con los organismos jurídicos, de control, de gobiernos locales y de responsabilidades regulatorias, la capacitación de sus funcionarios en temas relacionados con el uso de los recursos biológicos, protección de especies, comercio ilegal y otros temas afines.

CITMA CITMA (CICA, IES, IDO, CIGEA), MINAG, MININT (CGB), ADUANA, MIP (ONIP), Unión de Juristas de Cuba, MINJUS, MINFAR

2006

64. Continuar la promoción de proyectos comunitarios de desarrollo sostenible y programas de divulgación y educación ambiental en áreas de interés para la conservación.

CITMA (AMA, CIGEA, CNAP)

CITMA (UMAs, Órganos de Montaña, CIGEA, CENBIO, BIOECO), MINCULT, MINAGRI, MIP, MINAZ

Permanente

65. Divulgar a las entidades involucradas sobre decisiones de las COPs y la marcha de la implementación de los planes de acción y de trabajo.

CIGEA, DMA Entidades involucradas en el manejo, conservación y/o aprovechamiento de recursos de la diversidad biológica

Permanente

VII- Uso y desarrollo ambientalmente seguro de la biotecnología66. Velar por el cumplimiento del Reglamento de Ética

para el uso de la biotecnología ACC Entidades Permanente

H - 9



18

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo 67. Establecer, implementar y desarrollar el Sistema

Nacional de Seguridad Biológica para fortalecer la actividad reguladora de la seguridad biológica en todo el territorio nacional.

Marco legislativo y de política

− Elaborar y revisar los documentos jurídicos que completan las disposiciones vigentes.

CSB CITMA (Dirección Jurídica), actores identificados

2010

− Identificar y elaborar normas técnicas cubanas. CTN-94 Miembros del Comité 2010

− Tipificar dentro del Decreto Ley de Contravenciones aquellos referidos a la seguridad biológica e incorporarlos al marco legal establecido.

ORASEN CITMA (CSB, Dirección Jurídica, DMA)

2006

− Incorporar la actividad de seguridad biológica dentro del reconocimiento ambiental nacional.

CITMA (CSB, DMA, CIGEA) 2006

− Elaborar guías metodológicas que complementan las regulaciones vigentes.

CSB EMNDC, CTN94, Dirección Jurídica y designados

2008

− Desarrollar acciones para incluir la seguridad biológica en los planes contra desastres de la defensa Civil.

CSB, EMNDC Actores involucrados 2010

− Implementar el Sistema Nacional de Contabilidad y Control de Agentes Biológicos, Equipos y Tecnologías Asociadas.

CSB, OACEs, Consejo Estado CSB, OACEs, Instalaciones 2010

− Aprobar el procedimiento administrativo del acuerdo fundamentado previo a los OVMs destinados a la liberación intencional.

CITMA (CSB) MINCEX, Importadores, Exportadores

2010

− Incorporar la dimensión de la seguridad biológica en el ordenamiento territorial.

CSB ORASEN (CICA), IPF, Territorios, CAPs, OACEs

2010

− Establecer las coordinaciones necesarias para implementar los requerimientos del Protocolo de Cartagena en relación con el transito de OVMs.

CSB IACC, MITRANS, AGR, EMNDC

2008


19


− Definir, adoptar e implementar los requerimientos para el transporte, envasado e identificación de los OVMs destinados al uso como alimento humano o animal. (Articulo 18 2a).

CSB y CTN91 MINSAP, MINCIN, ONN, EMNDC, Consejo de Estado, Importadores

2008

− Incorporar, en los Programas de Desarrollo y Estrategias Ramales y Territoriales, el tema de la seguridad biológica y adecuar el Plan de Acción Nacional de Seguridad Biológica a un Plan de Acción Sectorial y Territorial.

OACEs, Consejo Estado OACEs, Consejo de Estado, ANAP, Instalaciones, Territorios

2008

Marco administrativo e infraestructura

− Concluir la definición e implementar el Sistema Nacional de Seguridad Biológica.

CITMA (CSB, DMA) Actores involucrados 2008

− Determinar las acciones a desarrollar en el país con relación a los procesos internacionales en curso sobre las especies exóticas.

CITMA (CSB, CICA, AMA) OACEs, Territorios, SNAP, áreas de liberación e instalaciones designadas

2010

− Desarrollar las capacidades para la detección e identificación de OVMs.

CITMA Actores involucrados 2010

Control de la Seguridad Biológica

− Desarrollar e implementar un sistema para las autorizaciones de seguridad biológica.

CSB CSB 2008

− Implementar el sistema de inspecciones. CSB OACEs, Consejo de Estado, Instalaciones, Territorios

2008

− Desarrollar e implementar el sistema de verificación de las barreras de contención.

CSB ORASEN, DSA, Territorios 2010

− Diseñar, desarrollar e implementar el monitoreo para la evaluación y seguimiento de los impactos por liberaciones intencionales o escapes al medio ambiente.

CSB, CICA, AMA OACEs, Consejo de Estado, Instalaciones, Territorios, CAPs

2010

Financiamiento

H - 10



20


− Incluir la seguridad biológica como actividad financiada por el Fondo Nacional de Medio Ambiente existente.

CITMA CSB, Miembros de la Junta Multisectorial del FNMA

2008

− Crear en los Ministerios e Instituciones un acápite en el presupuesto destinado a la seguridad biológica.

MEP OACEs, Consejo Estado 2006

68. Desarrollar la capacitación especializada, la investigación científica e innovación tecnológica y elevar el nivel científico de los recursos humanos del sistema.

− Incluir la seguridad biológica en los planes de estudio de los niveles medio y superior.

MES, MINED, CSB Actores involucrados 2010

− Desarrollar programas de educación al público sobre seguridad biológica.

CSB Territorios, OLPPs, Medios de Difusión Masiva, Organizaciones de Masas

Permanente

− Incluir la dimensión de la seguridad biológica en los proyectos de investigación.

CITMA (Dirección de Ciencias, AMA)

OACEs, Consejo de Estado, Territorios, Instalaciones

Permanente

− Desarrollar procesos para la obtención de grados científicos y académicos en materia de seguridad biológica.

InSTEC ORASEN, CSB, OACEs, Consejo de Estado, Territorios, Instalaciones

2010

− Elaborar y publicar un Boletín sobre seguridad biológica.

CSB Actores involucrados Permanente

− Desarrollar programas específicos de capacitación sobre seguridad biológica.

ORASEN, CSB CSB, OACEs, Consejo de Estado, Territorios, Instalaciones

Permanente

− Organizar talleres, seminarios y otros eventos científicos que viabilicen el intercambio de experiencias.

CSB, MES OACEs, Consejo de Estado, Territorios, Instalaciones, DCI, ORASEN

Permanente

69. Desarrollar y fomentar la cooperación nacional, regional, subregional e internacional.

− Identificar debilidades y fortalezas para establecer proyectos de colaboración.

CSB, INSTEC, DCI, ORASEN

ORASEN, CSB, DCI, OACEs, Consejo de Estado, Territorios, Instalaciones

2010


21


− Incluir la seguridad biológica en los temas de colaboración con otros países.

DCI, MINREX, MINVEC ORASEN, CSB, DCI, OACEs, Consejo de Estado, Territorios, Instalaciones, MINREX, MINVEC

2010

70. Desarrollar y fomentar el intercambio de información en el campo de la seguridad biológica.

− Diseñar e implementar un Sistema de Gestión de la Información. (Bases de Datos, desarrollo del Sistema de Información Geográfica, entre otros).

CSB ORASEN, IDICT, CITMATEL, OACEs, Consejo de Estado, Territorios, Instalaciones

2010

− Desarrollar y fortalecer el centro de documentación.

CSB, ORASEN Actores involucrados 2008

− Desarrollar y fortalecer el Centro de Intercambio de Información de Seguridad Biológica (BCH).

CSB, ORASEN CSB, ORASEN, CITMATEL

2008

VIII- Investigación Científica e Innovación Tecnológica71. Elaborar una base de datos sobre resultados

obtenidos en los PNCT, PRCT (de la AMA, otros OACEs - MINAG, MINAZ, MIP, MINSAP, MINED, MES – y ONGs) y PTCT sobre la Diversidad Biológica y también de los proyectos en ejecución. − Crear un mecanismo para su actualización y

uso.− Elaborar reportes anuales que tributen al CHM

del CDB y a la situación ambiental nacional.

AMA (CENBIO) Entidades 2006

72. Crear un Grupo de Expertos que revise los Programas Temáticos y Multisectoriales de la CDB e identifique posibles vacíos de investigación antes evaluados para nutrir los mismos.

CITMA (DMA) Actores identificados 2006

H - 11



22


− Conservación e incremento de los especimenes de carácter patrimonial presente en las colecciones biológicas y los bancos de recursos genéticos, realizar estudios taxonómicos y sistemáticos.

− Conservación y manejo de las poblaciones silvestres y domesticadas.

− Ordenamiento ecológico de ecosistemas frágiles y zonas ecológicamente sensibles.

− Estudios de funcionamiento y manejo de ecosistemas, paisajes y distribución espacio-temporal de la Diversidad Biológica.

− Rehabilitación de la Diversidad Biológica autóctona en áreas degradadas de las regiones serpentiníticas.

− Evaluación del impacto de la actividad socioecómica sobre la Diversidad Biológica.

− Evaluación del impacto de los fenómenos naturales y/o eventos extremos.

− Desarrollar estudios de economía ambiental para la conservación y uso sostenible de la Diversidad Biológica.

− Realizar inventarios y evaluación ecológica rápida de la Diversidad Biológica.

− Investigaciones relativas a seguridad biológica.

− Estudios de la Diversidad Biológica para fundamentar e implementar los planes de manejo de las Areas Protegidas.

− Identificación de componentes de la DB para su uso como indicador ecológico.


23


− Estudios acerca de la Biología de la Conservación para las especies endémicas y/o en peligro.

− Inventario, evaluación ecológica, impacto ambiental y medidas para su control de las especies introducidas y/o invasoras sobre la Diversidad Biológica.

− Estudios etnobiológicos y sociales sobre el conocimiento comunitario de la Diversidad Biológica.

− Estudios de la percepción ambiental de la población con relación a la conservación y uso sostenible de la Diversidad Biológica.

73. Inclusión en los programas de investigación los componentes de la Diversidad Biológica que permitan reforzar el cumplimiento de los compromisos internacionales de Cuba como parte de las Convenciones Internacionales.

AMA Institutos de Investigaciones del CITMA, MINAGRI, MIP, MES y Universidades

2006

74. Efectuar la Evaluación del riego y de los efectos adversos de la liberación al medio ambiente de los OVM.

CSB Delegaciones Territoriales de CITMA y Centros de Biotecnología

Permanente

IX- Monitoreo y evaluación de la Diversidad Biológica75. Elaborar y ejecutar programas de monitoreo que

permitan evaluar el estado de la diversidad biológica e identificar los factores que inciden en la misma y en su conservación y uso sostenible, particularmente ecosistemas costeros y marinos, bosques, humedales y ecosistemas de montaña.

CITMA Actores involucrados 2006

− Establecer las áreas priorizadas a monitorear, teniendo en cuenta las zonas críticas identificadas por el Estudio Nacional sobre la Diversidad Biológica y otras que por su connotación lo requieran definiendo la red de estaciones de monitoreo.

DMA

H - 12



24


− Establecer las metodologías por las que se rijan las instituciones implicadas en el monitoreo.

AMA

− Definir y crear un sistema de indicadores de sostenibilidad para evaluar la diversidad biológica a nivel de poblaciones, comunidad y ecosistemas.

DMA

− Diseñar y construir bases de datos y redes para el acceso, distribución e intercambio de la información.

AMA

− Definir las necesidades de equipamiento, tecnología e insumos en general para la obtención, análisis, procesamiento e intercambio de la información.

AMA

− Propiciar la capacitación del personal en las áreas establecidas para la obtención, análisis y procesamiento de los datos, así como de los responsables de coordinar esta actividad dentro de cada zona y elaborar un programa de adiestramiento dirigido a cubrir dichas necesidades de formación.

AMA

76. Elaborar proyectos y convenios de trabajo que propicien lograr la integración y colaboración de todas las instituciones nacionales vinculadas al trabajo de monitoreo de la biodiversidad tanto ex situ como in situ y el apoyo financiero de organismos y organizaciones internacionales.

CITMA (AMA, CNAP) Actores identificados Permanente

77. Establecer sistemas de alerta temprana, para la elaboración de diagnósticos, pronósticos sobre el estado de la biodiversidad y recomendaciones para planes de conservación, de contingencia y de manejo a corto, mediano y largo plazo.

AMA CICA, CENBIO, IDO, CNAP, INSMET, BIOECO, CIEC, MINAG, MIP, MES, MINED, estaciones y centros territoriales de CITMA

2008

78. Potenciar el uso de sensores remotos y SIG, así como otras técnicas de avanzada en la evaluación y monitoreo de la Diversidad Biológica.

AMA Actores involucrados 2006

X- Fortalecimiento Institucional


25

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo 79. Desarrollar las capacidades materiales y humanas,

para la implementación y seguimiento de esta estrategia.

CITMA Organismos Nacionales, Gobiernos Locales y Delegaciones Territoriales de CITMA

Permanente

80. Fortalecer la infraestructura para la coordinación e integración requerida entre las organizaciones e institucionales nacionales e internacionales en el uso de tecnologías ambientalmente seguras y su transferencia, para lograr la conservación y el uso sostenible de la Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA (ORASEN) CSB, AMA, OACEs e instituciones nacionales

2008

81. Apoyar a las autoridades aduaneras y otras que realizan trabajo de fronteras, en la identificación del material biológico, trabajo de asesoramiento, facilitación de material informativo y otras vías.

CITMA (ORASEN) CICA, CSB, AMA e institutos, Organismos e instituciones

Permanente

82. Fortalecer la capacidad institucional para la administración y conservación de la diversidad biológica en áreas protegidas.

CITMA (CNAP) Miembros de la Junta Coordinadora del SNAP

2008

83. Fortalecer la capacidad de los bancos de germoplasma, Jardines Botánicos, Zoológicos y Acuarios para continuar desarrollando la conservación ex – situ.

CITMA, MINAGRI, MINAZ, MES y OLPP

Jardines Botánicos, Parques Zoológicos, Acuarios, CENSA, CNRG, Organismos e instituciones nacionales

Permanente

84. Garantizar el funcionamiento eficaz de los mecanismos de cuarentena.

− Garantizar que las instalaciones existentes cumplan con los requisitos de bioseguridad.

MINAGRI, CITMA, MIP y MINAZ

IMV, INISAV, CSB, IIFT, INICA

2006

85. Fortalecer la actividad de certificación, control de la producción y conservación de semillas en cultivos de interés económico.

MINAGRI y MINAZ ANAP e institutos nacionales.

2006

86. Fortalecer las capacidades institucionales y técnicas requeridas para la investigación y monitoreo de la Diversidad Biológica, conforme a las prioridades que se establezcan.

CITMA Organismos e instituciones nacionales

2008

87. Fortalecer la coordinación e integración en los cuerpos de vigilancia, protección y control de la Diversidad Biológica.

CITMA (ORASEN, DMA) CGB, Cuerpo de Guardafronteras, ONIP, ONIA y otros

2008

H - 13



26

No. Acción Responsable Participantes Tiempo XI- Cooperación Internacional88. Potenciar la presentación de proyectos de

colaboración internacional en la esfera de la diversidad biológica ante fuentes financieras bi, multilaterales y otras identificadas. Lograr la inclusión de Cuba en los proyectos regionales y globales en esta esfera, financiados por organismos internacionales.

CITMA (DCI) MINVEC e instituciones nacionales

2006

89. Identificación de los compromisos, oportunidades y otras opciones en relación con los Acuerdos y Metas Internacionales, en materia de Biodiversidad.

CITMA, MINREX Organismos nacionales. Permanente

90. Lograr la integración del país a las redes regionales y globales existentes, en materia de diversidad biológica.

CITMA (DCI) AMA, CIGEA, IES, IDO, CNAP, ONGs

2008

91. Promover la incorporación de Cuba a la Convención sobre la conservación de las especies migratorias de animales silvestres (Convención de Bonn).

CITMA, MINREX MIP y MINAGRI 2006

PL

AN

DE

AC

CIÓ

N N

AC

ION

AL

2006/2010 SO

BR

E L

A D

IVE

RS

IDA

D B

IOL

ÓG

ICA

R

EP

ÚB

LIC

A D

E C

UB

A

27

Acrón

imos

AC

C-

A

cademia de C

iencias de Cuba

AG

R-

Ad uana G

eneral de la República

AM

A-

Agencia de M

edio Am

biente A

NA

P-

Asociación N

acional de Agricultores Pequeños

AP

-

Áreas Protegidas

APR

M-

Área P

rotegida de Recursos M

anejados B

IOE

CO

- C

entro Oriental de B

iodiversidad y Ecosistem

as C

AP

-

Consejo de la A

dministración Provincial

CB

D-

C

onvenio sobre la Diversidad B

iológica C

DR

-

Com

ités de Defensa de la R

evolución C

EC

M-

Com

ité Ejecutivo del C

onsejo de Ministros

CE

NB

IO-

Centro N

acional de Biodiversidad

CE

ND

A-

Centro N

acional de Derecho de A

utor C

EN

SA-

Centro N

acional de Sanidad Agropecuaria

CG

B-

C

uerpo de Guardabosques

CIC

A-

Centro de Inspección y C

ontrol Am

biental C

IEC

- C

entro de Investigación de Ecosistem

as Costeros

CIG

EA

- C

entro de Información, G

estión y Educación A

mbiental

CIM

-

Centro de Investigaciones M

arinas C

IP-

C

entro de Investigaciones Pesqueras

CIT

MA

- M

inisterio de Ciencia, T

ecnología y Medio A

mbiente

CIT

MA

TE

L-

Centro de T

ecnologías de la Información y S

ervicios Telem

áticos C

NA

P-

Centro N

acional de Áreas Protegidas

CN

RG

- C

omisión N

acional de Recursos G

enéticos C

SB

-

Centro N

acional de Seguridad Biológica

CT

C-

C

entral de Trabajadores de C

uba C

TN

-

Com

ité Técnico de N

ormas

DC

I-

Dirección de C

olaboración Internacional D

MA

- D

irección de Medio A

mbiente

DPPF

- D

irección Provincial de Planificación Física D

SA

-

Dirección de S

upervisión y Auditoría

E.I.A

- E

valuación de Impacto A

mbiental

EM

ND

C-

Estado M

ayor de la Defensa C

ivil E

NP

FF

- E

mpresa N

acional para la Protección de la Flora y la Fauna

FMC

- F

ederación de Mujeres de C

uba FN

MA

- Fondo N

acional de Medio A

mbiente

IAC

C-

Instituto Nacional de A

eronáutica Civil

ICR

T-

Instituto Cubano de R

adio y Televisión

IDIC

T-

Instituto de Información C

ientífica y Tecnológica

IDO

-

Instituto de Oceanología

IES

-

Instituto de Ecología y S

istemática

IGT

-

Instituto de Geografía T

ropical IIF

-

Instituto de Investigaciones Forestales IIFT

-

Instituto de Investigaciones en Fruticultura T

ropical IM

V-

Instituto de M

edicina Veterinaria

IND

ER

- Instituto N

acional de Deportes, E

ducación Física y R

ecreación IN

ICA

- Instituto N

acional de Investigaciones de la Caña de A

zúcar IN

IFAT

- Instituto de Investigaciones F

undamentales en la A

gricultura Tropical

INISA

V-

Instituto de Investigaciones de Sanidad V

egetal

H - 14


PL

AN

DE

AC

CIÓ

N N

AC

ION

AL

2006/2010 SO

BR

E L

A D

IVE

RS

IDA

D B

IOL

ÓG

ICA

R

EP

ÚB

LIC

A D

E C

UB

A

28

INR

H-

I nstituto Nacional de R

ecursos Hidráulicos

INS

ME

T-

Instituto de Meteorología

INS

TE

C-

Instituto Superior de T

ecnología y Ciencias A

plicadas IPF

-

Instituto de Planificación Física M

EP

-

Ministerio de E

conomía y P

lanificación M

ES

-

Ministerio de E

ducación Superior

MFP-

M

inisterio de Finanzas y Precios M

ICO

NS

- M

inisterio de la Construcción

MIN

AG

RI-

Ministerio de la A

gricultura M

INA

Z-

Ministerio del A

zúcar M

INB

AS

- M

inisterio de Industria Básica

MIN

CE

X-

Ministerio de C

omercio E

xterior M

INC

IN-

Ministerio de C

omercio Interior

MIN

CU

LT

- M

inisterio de Cultura

MIN

ED

- M

inisterio de Educación

MIN

FAR

- M

inisterio de las Fuerzas A

rmadas

MIN

INT

- M

inisterio del Interior M

INJU

S-

Ministerio de Justicia

MIN

RE

X-

Ministerio de R

elaciones Exteriores

MIN

SAP

- M

inisterio de Salud Pública M

INT

UR

- M

inisterio de Turism

o M

INV

EC

- M

inisterio de la Inversión Extranjera y la C

olaboración M

IP-

M

inisterio de la Pesca

MIT

RA

NS

- M

inisterio del Transporte

MN

HN

- M

useo Nacional de H

istoria Natural

OA

CE

s- O

rganismos de la A

dministración C

entral del Estado

OC

PI-

O

ficina Nacional de la P

ropiedad Industrial O

LPP

- Ó

rganos Locales del Poder Popular

ON

Gs-

Organizaciones no G

ubernamentales

ON

IA-

Oficina N

acional de Inspección Agropecuaria

ON

IP-

Oficina N

acional de Inspección Pesquera O

NN

- O

ficina Nacional de N

ormalización

OR

ASE

N-

Oficina de R

egulación Am

biental y Seguridad Nuclear

OR

P-

O

ficina Nacional de R

egulaciones Pesqueras

OV

M-

Organism

os Vivos M

odificados P

NC

T-

Program

a Nacional de C

iencia y Técnica

PR

CT

- P

rograma R

amal de C

iencia y Técnica

PT

CT

- P

rograma T

erritorial de Ciencia y T

écnica R

ED

S-

Regiones E

speciales de Desarrollo Sostenible

SEF-

Servicio E

statal Forestal S

IG-

Sistem

a de Información G

eográfico S

NA

P-

Sistem

a Nacional de Á

reas Protegidas

UH

-

Universidad de la H

abana U

MA

s- U

nidades de Medio A

mbiente

H - 15



I-1

ANNEX I. Draft Project Communication Strategy and Action Plan

1. Project Background and Objective Draft

The nature of the proposed project raises several challenges when it comes to addressing the neglect and attitudes to biodiversity for food and nutrition. As the proposed project makes clear there are many reasons for this and which the proposed project must address if it is to be successful. This will include adding to the limited evidence base and employing this knowledge to influence policy and decision makers. The role of communications and a solid Communications Strategy will be central this to effort and must be formulated early in the project’s implementation. Such a Communications Strategy should employ effective tools and approaches to ensure that the Project takes advantages of all opportunities at the national, regional and global levels to highlight, promote and mainstream Project results and outputs. Taking advantage of the Project’s international partners and implementing agencies global networks is critical to the latter and it is vital that the Project establish links to inform these networks such as relevant programmes of work but especially UNEP and FAO’s role in helping facilitate UNDAF mechanisms. Part of the reason for the neglect of biodiversity as a tool for food and nutrition has been that efforts to promote the conservation and use of relevant biodiversity fall between different sectors with a poor history of working together. It has been difficult got biodiversity interventions to challenge traditional and conventional approaches to tackling malnutrition. This proposed project requires a cross-sectoral and multidisciplinary approach which will require the identification and selection of strategic partners (see end of this document for a partnership checklist) to reverse this situation. Effective communication between these partners will be essential and must be embedded in the proposed project’s Communications Strategy. Further, the proposed project will undertake significant work aimed at enhancing the evidence and knowledge base for the dietary and nutritional benefits of biodiversity. This will require that the project targets quality peer-reviewed journals and publications which demonstrate the effectiveness (technical and cost) of mobilizing such biodiversity and that it can be a sustainable and viable compliment to the current interventions which address malnutrition. To do this effectively the proposed project must include a formal Publications Plan as a prominent component of the Communications Strategy. Finally, the proposed project places considerable emphasis on activities and outputs to increase Awareness and Scaling-up of the promotion and mainstreaming of biodiversity for food and nutrition. This too must be an important element of the Communications Strategy demonstrating effective links to the new process for revising NBSAPs and the above mentioned UNDAF mechanism. 2. Objectives of the communications strategy The proposed project during the early stages of implementation should finalise a Communications Strategy which seeks to:

1. Raise awareness among scientists, educators, policy makers and practitioners of the role and potential of biodiversity for food and nutrition in national policies and programmes for agricultural research and development, poverty alleviation, and health and nutrition.

2. Facilitate communication within and between project staff, partners and key stakeholders.

I-2

3. Influence decision making on biodiversity for food and nutrition research at national, regional and global level.

4. Build linkages with relevant organizations and websites to share and exchange information, so contributing to a broader biodiversity for food and nutrition knowledge base. Section 2.7 of the Project document elaborates in detail the types of national and global linkages which the Project should be seeking to inform.

5. Regularly inform and influence those individuals and organizations tasked with revising NBSAPs and other relevant food security and agriculture strategies and other relevant processes such as the UNDAF mechanism both nationally and globally (see Box 1).

6. Strengthen biodiversity for food and nutrition research and publishing capacity by producing quality peer-reviewed scientific publications, developing websites and portals as a knowledge base which links best practices, tools, guidelines and other relevant resources.

Box 1. Communicating beyond the Project

Communicating beyond the Project boundaries cannot be emphasized enough. Sections 2.4 and 2.7 of the Project Document describe in detail the complex institutional and policy environment and associated initiatives in which this Project will operate. While challenging this environment also offers great opportunities for any Project willing to give attention to developing an effective communications strategy. For example, at the national level, each of the four participating countries has an active United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) in place. A UNDAF elaborates an agreed programme between the country and a United Nations country team and describes the collective actions and strategies of the United Nations towards the achievement of national development priorities. By mainstreaming the Project into national UNDAF mechanisms the opportunity to increase impacts and promote out scaling are greatly enhanced. Further, the UNDAF mechanism provides greater opportunities for improved cross-sector uptake of Project outcomes and results as well as contributing to enhanced Project sustainability. At the global level, the Project has considerable potential to influence global stakeholders through the CBD’s Cross-cutting initiative on biodiversity for food and nutrition, the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA), the relevant Millennium Development Goals 1, 4, 5 and 7 (MDGs), the global Agriculture and Health Research Platform (AHRP), the United Nations Standing Committee on Nutrition (UNSCN) and many others

3. Principles of a communications strategy The Communications Strategy and interventions are founded on four ‘i’ principles. Communications should:

Inform – information provided and exchanged should be relevant and able to be used or applied. For biodiversity for food and nutrition information to be informative, it must be available, accessible and applicable. Inspire – sharing information should be inspirational. By exchanging ideas, we generate new knowledge and drive innovation. Include – effective communications should facilitate a sense of community and engagement, particularly amongst active project partners.

I-3

Interact – communication should never be one-way. We will work towards building in feedback mechanisms and tools for multi-way exchanges so that knowledge remains relevant and demand-driven.

4. The importance of communication Taking action to change the abovementioned attitudes is probably the most reliable way to influence a change in behaviour over the long term. If the goal is the promotion of biodiversity for food and nutrition, the behaviour we wish to change is anything that prevents that goal from being met. It might be that policies are in place that prevent—or at least do not support—this goal in a given country or locality. Assuming that attitude change does in fact influence behavioural change, at least two things need to happen before these constraints can be removed: Policymakers and the people and institutions that influence policy (the so-called ‘agents of

change’) must be convinced of the need to put into place policies, strategies and incentives to support the conservation and utilization of biodiversity for food and nutrition;

Scientific institutions need to be convinced of the value of putting measures into place to conserve and utilize biodiversity for food and nutrition.

Changing attitudes is not a quick or easy business. It is not likely to be accomplished with a single conversation, let alone a fact sheet, poster or media mention. Changing attitudes on the scale necessary to achieve the impact necessary to ensure the promotion and mainstreaming of biodiversity for food and nutrition will require capacity, resources and a long-term institutional commitment. It will also require a comprehensive profile of the people who hold the key to ensuring that we can meet our strategic goals, the best way to approach them, and the means and messages that are most likely to compel them to change their attitudes. It may make sense to focus efforts on reaching this small audience rather than undertaking a broad-based campaign targeting the general public, whose support would be hard won, expensive and, in the end, probably not all that helpful. At the global level, communicating about benefits of biodiversity for food and nutrition could help get them the recognition they merit in the global policy arena and also the financial support required from donors and relevant agencies. Organizations such as Bioversity International and FAO routinely work in global fora and with international agreements such as the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD): international policy instruments that address biodiversity for food and nutrition. A visible presence in global fora where relevant issues are addressed will help to ensure that biodiversity for food and nutrition gets due attention in their deliberations, but interventions must be strategic and innovative if they are to successfully compete for attention with a long list of other conservation needs and priorities. The Global linkages part of Section 2.7 articulates some other initiatives the Project should think strategically about trying to influence. 5. Developing a communications strategy In a world where more and more people are experiencing information overload, it is especially important to understand how to communicate effectively. Policymakers and other influential people receive a constant stream of information on many different subjects and from many different sources. Spending a lot of money on a flashy brochure makes no sense if the brochure goes immediately into the bin or sits unread on a shelf. More information products do not necessarily translate into more action, outcomes or results. A better strategy might be to engineer a face-to-face encounter with a key individual. The key word is strategy. No communications intervention should ever be undertaken without serious consideration of objectives, targets and audiences. It is good

I-4

practice to seek professional advice from a communications professional when planning your intervention. An effective Communications Strategy should be based on two major assumptions: public awareness can be used to change behaviour by influencing changes in attitude influencing profound changes in attitudes will require sustained, long-term effort.

The objective of a Communications Strategy is to provide a roadmap for convincing individuals and institutions whose actions—or inactions—are impeding the promotion and mainstreaming of biodiversity conservation and use for food and nutrition that they should remove any constraints to such activities. A well developed Communications Strategy must start by describing the communications objective, the target audience, the audience’s current attitude towards the issue, the messages that need to be communicated to change that attitude, and the best ways to reach the target audience. The more you engage and consult with your target audiences about their information and communication needs, the communications tools that they prefer to receive, and the messages and arguments they find convincing (and those they do not), the more likely it is that your communication activities will have a positive impact. Therefore, a Communications Strategy should be developed at the beginning of the project and refined based on feedback during its lifetime. To re-emphasize a previous point: it is strongly recommended to include a communications specialist in the development of the strategy. Box. 1 provides a checklist of things to consider when developing a Communications Strategy. Box 1: Developing a communications strategy There is plenty of information and help available on developing a communications strategy, most for free over the Internet. There may be a communications specialist in your organization or at a partner agency. Ensure you make use of such expertise when developing a strategy. As a general rule a communications strategy should determine the following and in the following order: Objectives The very first step is to determine the objective of the communications intervention. What do you hope to accomplish? Is the objective to bring about policy change? To raise funds? To inspire a change in priorities among research institutions? The strategy must be driven by the overall objectives of the project or organisation. Target audience Identify the audience that you must influence in order to meet your objectives. Define all relevant audiences and target groups clearly. Some of your target audience will be broad and will need to be addressed using far-reaching tools (e.g. the Internet) whereas some will be highly defined and may be best addressed through face-to-face contact. Key messages These should be strategic, targeted and consistent. Different audiences will respond to different messages. Whichever audience you are addressing, the case should be summarized in no more than three key points that can be constantly repeated in different ways. Communication tools and activities Different audiences will warrant different tools. Be aware of what they find useful and what they do not. For example, using the Internet to reach a target audience in a county with low bandwidth will not get you very far. The examples in this chapter illustrate the variety of available tools.

I-5

Budgets and resources The budget will have to be sufficient to support plans and activities or else the strategy should include a well articulated case for more resources. Timeline This will include a phasing of activities and actions that might start with a needs assessment of target audiences, capacity building and so forth Evaluation and refinement of the strategy Making adjustments where necessary. This will be important for monitoring and evaluating success. Such an evaluation can gather information from both internal and external audiences. Adapted from: Media Trust A communication strategy must also consider that not all communications are a one-way affair that consists of bombarding others with messages aimed at changing their attitudes and prompting them to action. Communications as dialogue and communications for building and maintaining good relations with partners must be part of your strategy. While many communication interventions are clearly aimed at fairly broad audiences (whose influence may be limited) in many instances your most effective communications approach or strategy will consist largely of targeted face –to-face contacts with a few key individuals in strategic organizations, agencies and communities. Partnerships have to be cultivated and this can take a very long time. All of the partners need to understand exactly what is expected of them and what they will gain from the relationship. But they are worth the effort because they give greater weight to your message (IF they are reputable partners) and may be able to open doors for you and get you into places that you cannot get into on your own, i.e. the offices of those few key individuals in strategic organizations, agencies and communities. 6. Communication and public awareness tools There are many communication and public awareness tools to select from. The list that follows (see Box 2) is extensive but by no means exhaustive, and will serve to guide you in the selection of tools. Box 2: Communication and public awareness tools

External Communications Tools

Print/Radio Media press release Radio programmes Feature articles

TV

News Biodiversity, health, agriculture, science programmes Videos/CDs/DVDs of interesting activities and outcomes

Advertising and feature stories

Print Radio

I-6

Television Publishing

Brochures Posters Bill boards Letters Leaflets/flyers Technical reports Websites Blogging, listserves, wikis

Public Relations

Biodiversity, Health, Science and Agriculture Shows T-shirts, bags, stickers Telephone calls Side events Conferences Networking

Other Tools

Policy papers Lobbying Role plays and drama Developing educational materials for schools and universities Making use of special occasions such as International Day for Biological Diversity (22

May) Special exhibits in botanic gardens School painting, poetry, essay and quiz contests to target young generations

Internal Communications Tools

Phone calls Country visits Face-to-face meetings with partners/stakeholders Email Progress reports Project newsletters Training workshops International and national meetings Short-term attachments for information officers and research staff Study tours for project staff and other stakeholders Intranets Traveling seminar to bring together multidisciplinary group and policy makers The project’s Communications Strategy will be effective only if the target audience is clearly defined. For each audience there are appropriate communication channels, time scales and content types. This list of key audiences and communication channels may include something like the following: Target audience Appropriate communication channels

I-7

Universities and Faculties Face-to-face (F2F) meetings and personal outreach One to one email communication University alumni University exhibitions

NARS Email updates/subscriptions/newsletters One to one email Website Policy briefings

Ministries of Health, Departments of Nutrition

Newsletters sent by post or email National and regional and international meetings (brochures, information sheetsF2F contact Symposia Policy briefings

Ministries of Education Newsletters sent by post or email National and regional and international meetings (brochures, information sheetsF2F contact Symposia Policy briefings

NGOs and relevant NUS/nutrition working groups

Newsletters sent by post or email National and regional and international meetings (brochures, information sheets (possibly in local languages), F2F contact Symposia Policy briefings Field fairs (F2F and brochures, fact sheets) University Exhibitions

Private Sector Website F2F though personal networks Meetings and Symposia

Internal project partners and actors

Email (email group) F2F Meetings and workshops Global for a side events Website (tools and resources in particular) Partner websites and blogs

General Public Website (browsing, blogs and RSS updates) Email subscriptions

7. Evaluating success This aspect of communication is often neglected. Communication is often looked upon as a one-way process of teaching or telling others. But communication is also a process whereby the ‘communicator’ can learn a lot from the needs and interests of the target groups. Such an evaluation can only help to increase the impact of your Communications Strategy. Communication is a long-term undertaking, so we need to continually reflect and ask questions such as: Have we achieved our objectives? Did we reach the right audience? Did they understand what the message was - did they do what had to be done? Did we reach the right people within the organization? Did we use the right tools?

I-8

Were decisions taken as a result? Did this result in concrete actions? Did we meet our budget? If we didn't, why not? In this regard it is worth considering focus group discussions with your target audience to clarify: What do they read/see/hear? What works/doesn’t work? What do they want to see more of? What information do they need that you do not currently have? How often do they want us to communicate with them? Measuring impact is relatively easy if your audience is small and your objectives are measurable. If your objective is to influence policy and your target is influential parliamentarians, if you target them consistently with the sorts of information they need and policies do change, you can be sure you’ve had some impact. With a larger audience such as the general public, it’s less easy to judge even with an unlimited budget. But baseline attitude surveys are always a good way to start. 8. Communications sustainability

Active communication interventions will only be made during the life-cycle of the proposed project. By establishing linkages with relevant organizations and biodiversity knowledge providers (for example the international partners involved in the proposed project such as Crops for the Future) project knowledge and outputs can be widely shared, repackaged and re-disseminated, resulting in an enduring project memory. Further, ensuring that the Project outputs are embedded and mainstreamed through UNEP and FAO programmes of work and also the UNDAF mechanism will ensure sustainability.

9. Communication responsibilities and management

During the project inception meetings it should be emphasized that all project partners and stakeholders are communicators and play a role in sharing news, results and other project information. However, it is also clear that there needs to be one individual (or unit) charged with core communication activities for the project, including website development. These roles and responsibilities must be identified and defined early. 10. Sources of further information The Communication Initiative Network is an excellent general website on communication with extensive resources, tools, examples, funding sources etc. In many cases searchable by country/region, issue and communication tool. It also has a site maintained in Spanish. http://www.comminit.com/ Hovland, I (2005) Successful Communication: A Toolkit for Researchers and Civil Society Organisations. Overseas Development Institute. http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/download/155.pdf The Media Trust has a wealth of communications and publicity related information on how to improve outreach including training resources and online guides for public relations, communications and dealing with the media. http://www.mediatrust.org/about-us

I-9

Hesselink et al (2007) Communication, Education and Public Awareness: A Toolkit for NSBAP Coordinators. CBD/IUCN http://www.cepatoolkit.org/

I-10

Partnership planning checklist

1. Focus of the partnership Define the objective(s) of the partnership (project, activity, products); Define the time period and place involved; If necessary, make clear what is NOT the objective of the partnership; define the limits of the partnership (a partnership does not mean complete involvement in each other’s activities). 2. Organisation of the partnership Many of the challenges involved in partnerships can be managed through planning, but to complement this, formal or informal collaborative agreements can be established to avoid misunderstandings and conflicts. These may include: Informal agreements, verbal agreement, guiding principles Formal agreements (e.g. Memorandum of Understanding) Contracts (formal and legal) 3. Rights and obligations of each partner Administrative, financial and legal issues involved will have to be openly discussed and agreement reached on such issues as: Financial inputs, material inputs; Access to resources, Sharing of information and benefits; Sharing of unexpected costs; Publicity and communication strategy; Financial accounting and liability aspects Workplans, milestones, roles and responsibilities; and Monitoring and reporting requirements

GLOBAL E VIRO MENT FACILITY INVEST ! GIN OUR PLANET

Ms. Maryam Niamjr-Fuller GEF Executive Coordinator United Nations Environment Programme Nairobi 00100, Kenya

Dear Ms. Niamjr-Fuller:

August 22, 2012

Naoko Ishii, PhD Chief Executive Officer and Chairperson

1818 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20433 USA Tel: 202.473.3202 Fax: 202.522.3240/3245

E-mail: [email protected]

www. TheGEF .org

I am pleased to inform you that the following submission is endorsed and will be funded by the GEF Trust Fund:

Approval Stage: CEO Endorsement

GEFSEC ID: 4158

Agency: UNEP

Project Type: Full Size Project

Country: Cuba

Name of Project: Agricultural Biodiversity Conservation and Man and Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: Bridging Managed and Natural Landscapes

GEF Grant: $1,368,182

Agency Fee: $136,818

I am endorsing this project on the understating that this endorsement is subject to the comments made by the GEF Secretariat in the attached document. It is also based on the understanding that the project is in conformity with GEF focal areas strategies and in line with GEF policies and procedures.

Sincerely,

Attachment: GEFSEC Project Review Document cc: Country Operational Focal Point, GEF Agencies, ST AP, Trustee

Definition of terms (ICA) Annex 3

1

Term

Meaning

Funding Division/GEF Implementing Agency

Division making the funding available and providing oversight during the entire project cycle and being held accountable to the GEF Council for delivering global environmental benefits. Responsibilities include ensuring fiduciary standards are applied, and supervising the development and implementation of projects, including monitoring and evaluation, on behalf of the GEF.

Executing Division Division directly managing the project, executing project activities, monitoring project progress, sub-contracting, managing project staff and funds, and carrying out other project management functions.

Project completion date

Date when substantive/technical activities carried out under the project are completed i.e. when all activities listed in the project document are satisfactorily completed, the envisaged outputs are produced and enough data is available to allow the Task Manager to prepare the final report.

Project effectiveness Date of first approval of sub-allotment to the executing division by DGEF.

Project oversight At project level, services include project supervision (fiduciary issues, substantive quality assurance, results achieved), technical advice and quality assurance of GEF projects (in cooperation with the Executing Division) and project accountability to the GEF Trustee and Council. A detailed description of the responsibilities for oversight and due diligence is provided in Annex 1 of the paper titled “Enhancing Internal Execution of GEF projects”.

Co-financing These are project resources that are committed by the UNEP Division itself or by other non-GEF sources at the inception of the project, and which are essential for meeting the GEF project objectives. Meeting co-financing obligations and reporting on them is part of this legal agreement. Resources which are not committed as part of the essential financing package at the outset, but which are mobilized subsequently, are not considered “co-finance” but “leveraged” resources. Such leveraged resources will also be tracked.

Task Manager DGEF staff assigned to oversee the project execution. He/she reports to the Director of DGEF.

Project Manager Staff from Executing Division assigned with the responsibility to manage the project. This staff reports to his/her Division Director, not to DGEF.

Project inception meeting

Meeting to be organized when the project execution team is in place, the Steering Committee has been established and project partners sub-contracted. Key outputs of the inception meeting are: refined definition of roles and responsibilities among partners, agreed monitoring plan including key outcome indicators, means of verification, and plan for gathering any additional baseline data.

Project implementation period

The period during which the project shall be implemented, starting from the project commencing date and ending on the project completion date.

Sub-project(s) Project activities sub-contracted to a project partner. The Executing Division is responsible for managing the sub-project(s).

Project management costs

In accordance with GEF rules, project management costs should not exceed 10%. These refer to staff costs needed for project

Definition of terms (ICA) Annex 3

2

management and administration, and related office infrastructure. Any management costs in excess of the 10% would need to be borne by the Executing Division (in-kind co-financing) or from third party co-financing.

Project closure date Date when DGEF is able to financially close the project in UNEP’s accounting system, which shall be no later than 12 months after the project completion date. Any sub-project(s) entered into under this agreement by the Executing Division will have to be closed to enable DGEF to financially close the main project.

GEF fiscal year The fiscal year for GEF is from 1 July to 30 June. Suspension Refers to the temporary halt of project activities and financial

disbursements. Written notification between The Parties should take place. Re-initiation of activities should also be communicated in writing.

Termination Refers to the termination of project activities before the expected completion date and before all activities take place. Written notification between The Parties is essential and should be done at least 3 months in advance on intended termination date to allow for the orderly conclusion of activities and withdrawal of personnel.

Poor implementation performance

Project implementation that is not in compliance with the terms and schedules according to the project document.

Annex 4

Contact Details (PCA)

Correspondence on substantive and technical matters shall be addressed to:

At Bioversity At UNEP/DEPi

Ms. Nadia Bergamini Research Assistant Bioversity International Via dei Tre Denari, 472/a 00057 Maccarese Rome Tel: +39 06 6118 283 Fax: +39 06 6197 661 Email: [email protected]

Mr. Ibrahim Thiaw Director Division of Enviornmental Policy Implementation P. O. Box 30552 Nairobi 00100, Kenya Tel: +(254-20) 762-4782 Email: [email protected]

Dr. Pablo Eyzaguirre Senior Scientist Bioversity International Via dei Tre Denari, 472/a 00057 Maccarese Rome Tel: +39 06 6118 267 Fax: +39 06 6197 661 Email: [email protected]

Ms. Marieta Sakalian Senior Programme Management/Liaison Officer (CGIAR/FAO), UNEP/DEP c/o FAO Headquarters TCID Unit, D668 00153 Rome, Italy Tel: +39 06 5705 5969 Fax: +39 06 5705 4351 Email: [email protected]

Correspondence on administrative and financial matters shall be addressed to:

At Bioversity At UNEP

Chief, Corporate Services Section (CSS) P. O. Box 30552 Nairobi 00100, Kenya Tel: +254 20 762 5454 Fax : +254 20 762 3718/3568 Email : [email protected]

Ms. Allison Smith Grants Office Manager Resource Mobilization Unit Bioversity International Via dei Tre Denarai, 472/a 00057 Maccarese (Fumicino) Rome, Italy Tel: (+39) 340 743 8544 Email: [email protected]

Mr. Rodney Vorley Fund Management Officer Division of GEF Coordination P.O. Box 30552 Nairobi 00100, Kenya Tel: +(254-20) 762-3595 Fax:+(254-20) 762-4041 Email: [email protected]

cc: Marieta Sakalian (details as above)

Annex 5_Project Supervision Plan_MAB

Note: Plan covers an additional 6 months after the project

is completed to cover requirements for final reporting and Month J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

terminal evaluation Mth no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71

Executing Agency

UNEP/DEPI

1 Inception meeting/workshop + report of meeting

2 Procure equipment 3 Hire consultants and project staff4 Prepare sub-contracts (if required)5 Establish M&E system6 Expenditure report - Mar, Jun, Sep and Dec 31+ 30 days7 Progress report - Dec 31+ 30 days8 Annual co-financing report - Dec 31+ 30 days9 Annual audit report - Dec 31+ 180 days

10 Annual non-expendable equipment report Dec 31+ 30 days11 Year end review of project accounts Dec 31+ 60 days12 Project Implementation Review (PIR) - Jun 30 + 30 days 13 Project revisions14 Mid-term review/evaluation15 Project brochure/newsletter/banner16 GEFSEC communications (Inception, midterm & completion)17 Training workshops/seminars18 Project website design & development + updates/revamps19 Project steering committee meeting + minutes of meeting 20 Site visits + mission reports 21 Technical/substantive completion22 Final report + outputs23 Completion revision24 Final audit report for project25 Terminal evaluation26 Return unspent funds (if applicable)27 Closing revision

Outcome 1:

Specify activity/task/output/technical meetingsTraining developing and testing indicators for monitoring impacof agriculture in protected areasEvaluation of baseline compilation on existing agrobiodiversityand its role

Data surveys on use of traditional varieties in protected areas

Evaluation reports on implementation of policy actions that favour conservation and sustainable use of agrobiodiveristyEvaluation reports on status seed/planting material exchangesystem

Outcome 2:

Specify activity/task/output/technical meetings

Revision Management Plans of MaB reserve system monitored

Survey reports on policy recommendation and guidelinespromoting mainstreaming of agricultural biodiversityCapacity building related to the use and sustainablemanagement of local genetic resources in protected areas monitoredRegional and National information and awareness campaignreports and evaluations

Outcome 3:

Specify activity/task/output/technical meetingsSurvey reports on identifying, documenting and promotingincome generation from agrobiodiversityInitiatives for marketing agrobiodiveristy projects monitored andevaluatedSurvey reports on develpoment of participatory certification models

“Agrobiodiversity Conservation and Man and the Biosphere Reserves in Cuba: Bridging Managed and Natural Landscapes”

January 2013- May 2018


Project Title:

Project number:

Project executing partner:

Project implementation period (add additional years as required):

Activity/Task/Output

GFL-5060-2715-4c72

Year 2 Year 3 Year 6Year 4 Year 5Year 1

Annex 6_Non-expendable equipment

From To

Description Serial No. Date of Purchase

Original Price (US$)

Purchased/ Imported from

(Name of Country)

Present Condition

Location Remarks/Recommendation for

disposal

-

The physical verificaiton of the items was done by:

Name: Signature:(duly authorized official of Executing Division)

Title: Date:

Total (as per Budget Line 4299)

INVENTORY OF NON-EXPENDABLE EQUIPMENT PURCHASEDUNIT VALUE US$ 1,000 AND ABOVE

Project title:

Project number:

Project executing partner:

Project implementation period:

Report as at (ddmmyyyy):

GFL-2329-pppp-nnnn

gef funding only Annex 7_Cash advance

Project title:Project number:Project executing partner:Project implementation period: From: To:Cash requirements for the period: From: To:

GEF APPROVED BUDGET US$ For use by project executing partner A For use by UNEP - budget lines (insert numbers) Total approved GEF Trust Fund budget -

STATEMENT OF CASH RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURESCash advances for project received from UNEP to date

Advance number Date received US$123456

Total cash advances received to date B - Cumulative expenditures reported to date CCash balance held by executing partner D = B-C -

CASH ADVANCE REQUIREMENTEstimated disbursements for the next period E(as analysed on the appended schedule)New cash advance requested F = E-D -

BALANCE OF GEF APPROVED BUDGET NOT YET REQUESTEDTotal GEF budget approved for executing partner ATotal cash advances received to date BNew cash advance requested FGEF approved budget not yet requested H = A-B-F -

Request approved by

Name of duly authorized official of the Executing Division Signature Date

For UNEP official use onlyName Signature Date

UNEP DGEF certifying officer

I authorize a cash advance of US$

UNEP project Task Manager

CASH ADVANCE STATEMENT(for projects where only the GEF project grant is channelled through UNEP)

GFL-2328-pppp-nnnn

I certify the figures reported in A, B, C & D and totals aboveare correct and are properly recorded in IMIS

gef funding only Annex 7_Cash advance

DETAILS OF THE ESTMATED DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE NEXT PERIOD

From:

To:

BL* Budget Line descriptionExpenditure

Estimate

1101 Project Personnel

1201 Consultant

1301 Admin personnel

1601 Travel on official business

2101 Sub-contract (UN agency)

2201 Sub-contract (supporting organization)

2301 Sub-contract (business entity)

3201 Group training

3301 Meeting/Conference

4101 Expendable equipment

4201 Non-expendable equipment

4301 Premises

5101 Operations and Maintenance

5201 Reporting

5301 Sundry

99 Total (as per E in Cash Statement) -

Explanation

*Budget Lines (BL) in this report shall be exactly as specified in the approved budget of the project.

Annex 8_Half yearly progress report

1

United Nations Environment Programme Half Yearly Progress Report

Reporting Period: From: To:

1. PROJECT GENERAL INFORMATION

Project Title: Executing Agency:

Project partners: Geographical Scope: Participating Countries:

Project actual start date

Project intended completion date

Project expected completion date

2. PROJECT PROGRESS AND RISK MANAGEMENT 2.1 Narrative of project progress during the past semester1

1 Briefly describe progress made during the previous six months highlighting major outcomes/benchmarks achieved during the period.


2

2.2 Project implementation progress2 Outputs 3 Expected

completion date 4

Implementation status as of end of reporting period expressed in %

Comments if variance5. Describe any problems in delivering outputs

Output 1: (describe6) Activity 1: (describe) Activity 2: Activity 3:

Output 2: Activity 4: Activity 5: Activity 6:



Output 5: Activity 13: Activity 14: Activity 15: Activity 16:

2 Information provided in “Quarterly Expenditure Statement and Explanation of Expenditures Reported” should be in line with output/activity progress reported in this table. 3 Outputs and activities as described in the project logframe or in any updated project revision. 4 As per latest workplan (latest project revision) 5 Variance refers to the difference between the expected and actual progress at the time of reporting. 6 Information on expected date of output completion and progress made is a requirement.


3

2.3 Action plan to address any project shortcomings. This section should be completed if project progress was rated MS, MU, U or HU during the previous Project Implementation Review (PIR) or by the Mid-term Review/Evaluation. Problem(s) identified in previous PIR

Action(s) taken By whom When

2.4 Risk management If internal or external risks were rated as Substantial or High during the previous Project Implementation Review (PIR) or during the Mid-term Review, please indicate what risk mitigation measures were implemented during the period and with what results:

Risk Statement Action taken By who Date Result 3. MONITORING AND EVALUATION

3.1. Please describe activities for monitoring and evaluation carried out during the reporting period7 4. INVENTORY OF STAFF, CONTRACTS, MEETINGS AND OUTPUTS 4.1 Staffing details of Executing Partner (Applies to personnel, experts, consultants paid by the project budget

7 Do not include routine project reporting. Examples of M&E activities include baseline data collection, stakeholder surveys, field surveys, steering committee meetings to assess project progress, peer review of documentation to ensure quality, mid-term review, etc.


4

Functional Title Nationality Budget Line (1101, 1102, 1201,1301, etc) 4.2 Sub-contracts8 Name of contractee Address Budget Line (2101, 2201, 2301, etc) 4.3 Meetings9 Meeting type10

Title Venue Dates Convened by

Organized by

Number of participants

Report issued Yes/No

Language Dated

4.4 List(s) of meeting participants11 No. Name of participant Nationality

8 Expand table if necessary 9 Expand table if necessary 10 Meeting types: Inter-governmental meeting, expert group meeting, project inception workshop, training workshop/seminar, partners consultation workshop, project Steering Committee meeting, other. 11 Expand table if necessary


5

4.5 Documents, other printed materials, videos, and soft products (such as CDs or websites) No Type12 Title Author(s)

Editor(s) Publisher ISBN Publication

date Name of Project Manager: Name of Project Manager Supervisor:

Signature: Date: Signature: Date:

12 Documents and printed material types are: Report to inter-governmental meeting, technical publication, meeting report, technical/substantive report, brochures, media releases, etc.

Annex 9_ PIR template

1

UNEP GEF PIR Fiscal Year .. (1 July 20.. to 30 June 20..)

1. PROJECT GENERAL INFORMATION

Project Title: Executing Agency: Project partners: Geographical Scope: Participating Countries:

GEF project ID: IMIS number*1: Focal Area(s): GEF OP #: GEF Strategic Priority/Objective:

GEF approval date*:

UNEP approval date: First Disbursement*: Actual start date2: Planned duration: months Intended completion date*:

Actual or Expected completion date:

Project Type: GEF Allocation*: PDF GEF cost*: PDF co-financing*: Expected MSP/FSP Co-financing*:

Total Cost*:

Mid-term review/eval. (planned date):

Terminal Evaluation (actual date):

Mid-term review/eval. (actual date):

No. of revisions*:

Date of last Steering Committee meeting:

Date of last Revision*:

Disbursement as of 30 June yyyy*:

Date of financial closure*:

Date of Completion3*: Actual expenditures

reported as of 30 June yyyy4:

Total co-financing realized as of 30 June yyyy5:

Actual expenditures entered in IMIS as of 30 June yyyy*:

Leveraged financing:6

1 Fields with an * sign (in yellow) should be filled by the Fund Management Officer 2 Only if different from first disbursement date, e.g., in cases were a long time elapsed between first disbursement and recruitment of project manager. 3 If there was a “Completion Revision” please use the date of the revision. 4 Information to be provided by Executing Agency/Project Manager 5 Projects which completed mid-term reviews/evaluations or terminal evaluations should attach the completed co-financing table as per GEF format. 6 See above note on co-financing and Glossary (Annex 1)


2

Project summary7 Project status FY8 Project status FY9 Planned contribution to strategic priorities/targets10

2. PROJECT OBJECTIVE State the global environmental objective(s) of the project11 Please provide a narrative of progress made towards meeting the project objective(s). Describe any significant environmental or other changes attributable to project implementation. Also, please discuss any major challenges to meet the objectives or specific project outcomes (not more than 300 words) Please provide a narrative of progress towards the stated GEF Strategic Priorities and Targets if identified in project document 12(not more than 200 words)

7 As in project document 8 Please include additional lines to keep prior year implementation status (if any) 9 Progress made during current reporting period (one paragraph stating key changes since previous reporting period) 10 For Full Size Projects this information is found in the front page of the project Executive Summary; for Medium-Sized Projects the information appears in the MSP brief cover page. 11 Or immediate project objective 12 Projects that did not include these in original design are encouraged to the extent possible to retrofit specific targets.


3

3. RATING PROJECT PERFORMANCE AND RISK Based on inputs by the Project Manager, the UNEP Task Manager13 will make an overall assessment and provide ratings of: (i) Progress towards achieving the project objective(s)- see section 3.1 (ii) Implementation progress – see section 3.2 Section 3.3 on Risk should be first completed by the Project Manager. The UNEP Task Manager will subsequently enter his/her own ratings in the appropriate column.

3.1 Progress towards achieving the project objective (s)

Project objective and Outcomes

Description of indicator14

Baseline level15 Mid-term target16 End-of-project target

Level at 30 June 20..

Progress rating 17

1. 2.

Objective18

3.

Outcome 1: (describe)



Outcome 4:

13 For joint projects and where applicable ratings should also be discussed with the Task Manager of co-implementing agency. 14 Add rows if your project has more that 3 key indicators per objective or outcome. 15 Depending on selected indicator, quantitative or qualitative baseline levels and targets could be used (see Glossary included as Annex 1). 16 Many projects did not identify Mid-term targets at the design stage therefore this column should only be filled if relevant. 17 Use GEF Secretariat required six-point scale system: Highly Satisfactory (HS), Satisfactory (S), Marginally Satisfactory (MS), Marginally Unsatisfactory (MU), Unsatisfactory (U), and Highly Unsatisfactory (HU). See Annex 2 which contains GEF definitions. 18 Add rows if your project has more than 4 objective-level indicators. Same applies for the number of outcome-level indicators.


4

Project objective and Outcomes

Description of indicator14

Baseline level15 Mid-term target16 End-of-project target

Level at 30 June 20..

Progress rating 17

(describe)

Outcome 5:19 (describe)

Overall rating of project progress towards meeting project objective(s) (To be provided by UNEP GEF Task Manager. Please include columns to reflect all prior year ratings) FY20.. rating FY20.. rating Comments/narrative justifying the current FY rating and explaining reasons for change (positive or

negative) since previous reporting periods

Action plan to address MS, MU, U and HU rating (To be completed by UNEP GEF Task Manager in consultation with Project Manager) Action(s) to be taken By whom? By when? This section should be completed if project progress towards meeting objectives was rated MS, MU, U or HU during the previous Project Implementation Review (PIR) or by the Mid-term Review/Evaluation (To be completed by Project Manager). Problem(s) identified in previous PIR


19 Add rows if your project has more than 5 Outcomes.


5

3.2 Project implementation progress Outputs 20 Expected

completion date 21

Implementation status as of 30 June 20.. (%)

Comments if variance22. Describe any problems in delivering outputs

Progress rating23

Output 1: (describe) Activity 1: (describe) Activity 2: Activity 3:




Output 5: Activity 13: Activity 14: Activity 15: Activity 16:

20 Outputs and activities as described in the project logframe or in any updated project revision. 21 As per latest workplan (latest project revision) 22 Variance refers to the difference between the expected and actual progress at the time of reporting. 23 To be provided by the UNEP Task Manager


6

Overall project implementation progress 24 (To be completed by UNEP GEF Task Manager. Please include columns to reflect prior years’ ratings): FY.. rating FY.. rating Comments/narrative justifying the rating for this FY and any changes (positive or negative) in the rating

since the previous reporting period

Action plan to address MS, MU, U and HU rating. (To be completed by UNEP Task Manager in consultation with Project Manager25) Action(s) to be taken By whom? By when? This section should be completed if project progress was rated MS, MU, U or HU during the previous Project Implementation Review (PIR) or by the Mid-term Review/Evaluation (To be completed by Project Manager). Problem(s) identified in previous PIR


24 Use GEF Secretariat required six-point scale system: Highly Satisfactory (HS), Satisfactory (S), Marginally Satisfactory (MS), Marginally Unsatisfactory (MU), Unsatisfactory (U), and Highly Unsatisfactory (HU) 25 UNEP Fund Management Officer should also be consulted as appropriate.


7

3.3. Risk There are two tables to assess and address risk: the first “risk factor table” to describe and rate risk factors; the second “top risk mitigation plan” should indicate what measures/action will be taken with respect to risks rated Substantial or High and who is responsible to for it.

RISK FACTOR TABLE Project Managers will use this table to summarize risks identified in the Project Document and reflect also any new risks identified in the course of project implementation. The Notes column should be used to provide additional details concerning manifestation of the risk in your specific project, as relevant. The “Notes” column has one section for the Project Manager (PM) and one for the UNEP Task Manager (TM). If the generic risk factors and indicators in the table are not relevant to the project rows should be added. The UNEP Task Manager should provide ratings in the right hand column reflecting his/her own assessment of project risks. Project Manager

Rating Notes Task Manager

Rating Risk Factor Indicator of

Low Risk Indicator of

Medium Risk Indicator of High Risk

Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

INTERNAL RISK

Project management PM Management

structure Stable with roles and responsibilities clearly defined and understood

Individuals understand their own role but are unsure of responsibilities of others

Unclear responsibilities or overlapping functions which lead to management problems

TM

PM Governance structure

Steering Committee and/or other project bodies meet periodically and provide effective direction/inputs

Body(ies) meets periodically but guidance/input provided to project is inadequate. TOR unclear

Members lack commitment Committee/body does not fulfil its TOR

TM


8

Project Manager Rating

Notes Task Manager Rating

Risk Factor Indicator of Low Risk

Indicator of Medium Risk

Indicator of High Risk

Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

INTERNAL RISK

Project management Internal com-

munications Fluid and cordial Communication

process deficient although relationships between team members are good

Lack of adequate communication between team members leading to deterioration of relationships and resentment

Work flow Project progressing according to work plan

Some changes in project work plan but without major effect on overall timetable

Major delays or changes in work plan or method of implementation

Co-financing Co-financing is secured and payments are received on time

Is secured but payments are slow and bureaucratic

A substantial part of pledged co-financing may not materialize

Budget Activities are progressing within planned budget

Minor budget reallocation needed

Reallocation between budget lines exceeding 30% of original budget

Financial management

Funds are correctly managed and

Financial reporting slow or deficient

Serious financial reporting problems or


9






Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

INTERNAL RISK

Project management transparently accounted for

indication of mismanagement of funds

Reporting Substantive reports are presented in a timely manner and are complete and accurate with a good analysis of project progress and implementation issues

Reports are complete and accurate but often delayed or lack critical analysis of progress and implementation issues

Serious concerns about quality and timeliness of project reporting

Stakeholder involvement

Stakeholder analysis done and positive feedback from critical stakeholders and partners

Consultation and participation process seems strong but misses some groups or relevant partners

Symptoms of conflict with critical stakeholders or evidence of apathy and lack of interest from partners or other stakeholders

External com-munications

Evidence that stakeholders, practitioners and/or the general public

Communications efforts are taking place but not yet evidence that message is

Project existence is not known beyond implementation partners or


10






Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

INTERNAL RISK

Project management understand project and are regularly updated on progress

successfully transmitted

misunderstand-ings concerning objectives and activities evident

Short term/long term balance

Project is addressing short term needs and achieving results with a long term perspective, particularly sustainability and replicability

Project is interested in the short term with little understanding of or interest in the long term

Longer term issues are deliberately ignored or neglected

Science and technological issues

Project based on sound science and well established technologies

Project testing approaches, methods or technologies but based on sound analysis of options and risks

Many scientific and /or technological uncertainties

Political influences

Project decisions and choices are not particularly politically driven

Signs that some project decisions are politically motivated

Project is subject to a variety of political influences that may jeopardize project objectives


11






Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

INTERNAL RISK

Project management Other, please

specify. Add rows as necessary


12

Project Manager

Rating Notes Task Manager

Rating Risk Factor Indicator of

Low Risk Indicator of

Medium Risk Indicator of High Risk

Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

EXTERNAL RISK

Project context Political

stability Political context is stable and safe

Political context is unstable but predictable and not a threat to project implementation

Very disruptive and volatile

Environmental conditions

Project area is not affected by severe weather events or major environmental stress factors

Project area is subject to more or less predictable disasters or changes

Project area has very harsh environmental conditions

Social, cultural and economic factors

There are no evident social, cultural and/or economic issues that may affect project performance and results

Social or economic issues or changes pose challenges to project implementation but mitigation strategies have been developed

Project is highly sensitive to economic fluctuations, to social issues or cultural barriers

Capacity issues

Sound technical and managerial capacity of

Weaknesses exist but have been identified

Capacity is very low at all levels and partners


13






Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

Low

Med

ium

Sub

stan

tial

Hig

h

Not

App

licab

le

To b

e de

term

ined

EXTERNAL RISK

Project context institutions and other project partners

and actions is taken to build the necessary capacity

require constant support and technical assistance

Others, please specify

If there is a significant (over 50% of risk factors) discrepancy between Project Manager and Task Manager rating, an explanation by the Task Manager should be provided below


14

TOP RISK MITIGATION PLAN Rank – importance of risk Risk Statement – potential problem (condition and consequence) Action to take – action planned/taken to handle the risk Who – person(s) responsible for the action Date – date by which action needs to be or was completed Rank Risk Statement26 Action to Take Who Date Condition Consequence Project overall risk rating (Low, Medium, Substantial or High) (Please include PIR risk ratings for all prior periods, add columns as necessary): FY.. rating FY.. rating Comments/narrative justifying the current FY rating and any changes (positive or negative) in the rating

since the previous reporting period

If a risk mitigation plan had been presented for a previous period or as a result of the Mid-Term Review/Evaluation please report on progress or results of its implementation

26 Only for Substantial to High risk.


15

RATING MONITORING AND EVALUATION Based on the answers provided to the questions in 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 below, the UNEP Task Manager will provide ratings for the following aspects of project monitoring and evaluation:

(i) Overall quality of the Monitoring &Evaluation plan (ii) Performance in the implementation of the M&E plan

4.1. Does the project M&E plan contain the following:

• Baseline information for each outcome-level indicator Yes □ No □ • SMART indicators to track project outcomes Yes □ No □ • A clear distribution of responsibilities for monitoring project progress. Yes □ No □

4.2. Has the project budgeted for the following M&E activities:

• Mid-term review/evaluation Yes □ No □ • Terminal evaluation Yes □ No □ • Any costs associated with collecting and analysing indicators’

related information Yes □ No □ Please rate the quality of the project M&E plan (use HS, S, MS, MU, U, HU):

4.3 Has the project:

• Utilized the indicators identified in the M&E plan to track progress in meeting the project objectives; Yes □ No □

• Fulfilled the specified reporting requirements (financial, including on co-financing and auditing, and substantive reports) Yes □ No □

• Completed any scheduled MTR or MTE before or at project implementation mid-point; Yes □ No □

• Applied adaptive management in response to M&E activities Yes □ No □ • Implemented any existing risk mitigation plan (see previous section) Yes □ No □

Please rate the performance in implementing the M&E plan (use HS, S, MS, MU, U, HU):

4.4. Please describe activities for monitoring and evaluation carried out during the reporting period27

27 Do not include routine project reporting. Examples of M&E activities include stakeholder surveys, field surveys, steering committee meetings to assess project progress, peer review of documentation to ensure quality, etc.


16

4.5. Provide information on the quality of baseline information and any effects (positive or negative) on the selection of indicators and the design of other project monitoring activities 4.6. Provide comments on the usefulness and relevance of selected indicators and experiences in the application of the same. 4.7. Describe any challenges in obtaining data relevant to the selected indicators; has the project experienced problems to cover costs associated with the tracking of indicators? 4.8. Describe any changes in the indicators or in the project intervention logic, including an explanation of whether key assumptions28 are still valid 4.9. Describe how potential social or environmental negative effects are monitored 4.10. Please provide any other experiences or lessons relevant to the design and implementation of project monitoring and evaluation plans.

4. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION EXPERIENCES AND LESSONS 5.1. Please summarize any experiences and/or lessons related to project design and implementation. Please select relevant areas from the list below:

• Conditions necessary to achieve global environmental benefits such as (i) institutional, social and financial sustainability; (ii) country ownership; and (iii) stakeholder involvement, including gender issues.

• Institutional arrangements, including project governance; • Engagement of the private sector; • Capacity building;

28 Assumptions refer to elements of the “theory of change” or “intervention logic” (i.e, the problem is a result of A, therefore, if we change B, this will lead to C) and not to pre-conditions for project implementation. It is a common mistake to include statements such as “political will” as an assumption. This is rather a necessary condition to implement the project.


17

• Scientific and technological issues; • Interpretation and application of GEF guidelines; • Factors that improve likelihood of outcome sustainability; • Factors that encourage replication, including outreach and communications strategies; • Financial management and co-financing.

Annex 10_Final report

1

FINAL REPORT 1. Background Information 1.1 Project title:

1.2 Project number:

1.3 Responsible Divisions/Units in UNEP:

1.4 Project starting date:

1.5. Project completion date:

1.6 Reporting period:

1.7 Reference to UNEP Sub-Programme/GEF Strategic Priority and expected accomplishments:

1.8 Overall objectives of the project: (maximum quarter of a page):

1.9 Total Budget (US$): (specify contributions by donor/s)

Partners and leveraged resources:

Describe collaboration with partners and state their role.

1.10

List the additional resources leveraged (beyond those committed to the project itself at time of approval) as a result of the project (financial and in-kind)

2. Project Status

2.1 Information on the delivery of the project

Activities/Outputs (as listed in the project document)

Status (complete/ongoing)

Results/Outcomes (measured against the performance indicators

stated in the project document)

2.2 List lessons learned and best practices

2.3 State how the project has nurtured sustainability. Is the project or project methodology replicable in other countries or regions? If yes, are there any concrete examples or requests?

3. List of attached documents

(For example: publications, reports of meetings/training seminars/workshops, lists of participants, etc.)

Name of Division Director: Name of Project Manager:

Signature: Date: Signature: Date:

Annex 11_Quarterly expenditures & unliquidated obligations

Project title:Project number:Project implementing agency/organization:Project implementation period: From: To:Reporting period: From: To:

A B C D E F=D+E G=C+F H I=G+H J=A-I1100 Project personnel - - - - 1200 Consultants - - - - 1300 Administrative support - - - - 1600 Travel on official business - - - - 2100 Sub-contracts (UN entities) - - - - 2200 Sub-contracts (supporting organizations) - - - - 2300 Sub-contracts (for commercial purposes) - - - - 3200 Group training - - - - 3300 Meetings/Conferences - - - - 4100 Expendable equipment - - - - 4200 Non-expendable equipment - - - - 4300 Premises - - - - 5100 Operation and maintenance of equipment - - - - 5200 Reporting costs - - - - 5300 Sundry - - - - 5400 Hospitality and entertainment - - - - 5500 Evaluation - - - - 99 GRAND TOTAL - - - - - - - - - -

*The actual expenditures should be reported in accordance with the specific budget lines of the approved budget (Appendix 1) of the project document in Annex 1 The appended schedule "Explanation for expenditures reported in quarterly expenditure statement" should also be completed

Cummulative expenditures

for current YEAR

Disbursements for current QUARTER

Unliquidated obligations for current QUARTER

Cummulativeunspent balance to-date

Actual expenditures incurred*UNEP approved budgetTotal

cummulative expenditures

to date

Total expenditures

for current QUARTER

Total project budget

CurrentYEARbudget

QUARTERLY EXPENDITURE STATEMENT and UNLIQUIDATED OBLIGATIONS REPORT (US$)

UNEP Budget Line

Total expenditures

for current YEAR

Cummulative expenditures for previous YEARS

Annex 11_Quarterly expenditures & unliquidated obligations

From:To:

BL** Budget Line description1100 Project personnel -

1200 Consultants -

1300 Administrative support -

1600 Travel on official business -

2100 Sub-contracts (UN entities) -

2200 Sub-contracts (supporting organizations) -

2300 Sub-contracts (for commercial purposes) -

3200 Group training -

3300 Meeting/Conference -

4100 Expendable equipment -

4200 Non-expendable equipment -

4300 Premises -

5100 Operations and maintenance -

5200 Reporting -

5300 Sundry -

5400 Hospitality and entertainment -

5500 Evaluation -

99 Total as per Expenditure Statement -

Name: Title:

Duly authorized official of Executing Division Date: Date:

Signature:

equals total of column F

**Budget Lines (BL) in this report shall be exactly as specified in the approved budget (Appendix 1) of the project.

Signature:

EXPLANATION FOR EXPENDITURES REPORTED IN QUARTERLY EXPENDITURE STATEMENT

EXPLANATION

Name of Project Manager:

Totalexpenditure for

QUARTER

Co-financier 1 Annex 12_Cofinance report

Project title:Project number:Project executing partner:Project reporting period: US$ US$ US$ US$ US$ US$ US$ US$

From: Prior Year Cummulative To: Actual Total Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Actual TotalUNEP BUDGET LINE* A B C D E F=B+D G=C+E H=A+G1100 Project personnel - - - 1200 Consultants - - - 1300 Administrative support - - - 1600 Travel on official business (above staff) - - - 2100 Sub-contracts (UN entities) - - - 2200 Sub-contracts (supporting organizations) - - - 2300 Sub-contracts (commercial purposes) - - - 3200 Group training (study tours, field trips, workshops, seminars, etc.) - - - 3300 Meetings/conferences - - - 4100 Expendable equipment - - - 4200 Non-expendable equipment - - - 4300 Premises (office rent, maintenance of premises, etc.) - - - 5100 Operation and maintenance of equipment - - - 5200 Reporting costs (publications, maps, newsletters, printing, etc.) - - - 5300 Sundry (communications, postage,freight, clearance charges, etc.) - - - 5400 Hospitality and entertainment - - - 5500 Evaluation (consultants fees/travel/DSA, admin support,etc.) - - - TOTAL COSTS - - - - - - - -

Name: Title:

Duly authorized official of Executing Division Date:

Signature: Date:

* The actual expenditures should be reported in accordance with the specific budget lines of the approved budget (Appendix 2) of the project document in Annex 1

Name of Project Manager:

Signature:

Name:(Please prepare one worksheet per source of co-finance)

REPORT OF PLANNED AND ACTUAL CO-FINANCE BY BUDGET LINE

Cash Cofinance In-kind Cofinance Total for year

GFL-2328-pppp-nnnn