guidelines for monitoring and evaluation for biodiversity...

Global Environment Division

Guidelines for Monitoringand Evaluation forBiodiversity Projects

June 1998

Papers in this series are not formal publications ofthe World Bank. They are circulated to encourage thought and discussion. The useand citation of this paper should take this into account. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed tothe World Bank. Copies are available from the World Bank’s Environment Department, Global Environment Division, Rooms-21 17x.

Administrator

27031

ContentsExecutive Summary .,..........................*........................................................*..........................*... i

Chapter 1: Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..*....................................................-........... 1

A. Background ...................................................................................................................... 1B. Key concepts and terminology ..................................................................................... 2

Biodiversity ....................................................................................................................... 2Biodiversity monitoring .................................................................................................. 2Project monitoring .......................................................................................................... 2Measuring vs. monitoring .............................................................................................. 2Evaluation ......................................................................................................................... 2Indicators .......................................................................................................................... 2Baseline studies ................................................................................................................ 2Performance vs. impact indicators .............................................................................. 3

Chapter 2: Formulating a monitoring and evaluation plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

A. The M&E plan ................................................................................................................. 58. Scoping .............................................................................................................................. 5C. Key considerations .......................................................................................................... 6

Temporal scales ............................................................................................................... 6Spatial scales .................................................................................................................... 6Socio-economics and participation .............................................................................. 7Institutional and legal factors ....................................................................................... 8

D. Data collection, storage and processing ..................................................................... 8E. Evaluation and feedback into management .............................................................. 8F . Steps in developing an M&E plan ............................................................................... 8

Chapter 3: Identifying and selecting indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

A. Key considerations ....................................................................................................... 11Biodiversity value vs. biodiversity performance indicators .................................. 12Quantitative vs. qualitative indicators ..................................................................... 12

B. Identifying specific indicators .................................................................................... 12Classes of indicators vs. specific indicators ............................................................. 13

C. Monitoring at the regional/landscape level.. .......................................................... 13

Biodiversity Series

Ecotourism and Conservation: A Review of Key Issues

D. Monitoring at the community/ecosystem level ...................................................... 13E. Monitoring at the species/population level ............................................................ 13F. Monitoring socio-economic factors ........................................................................... 14G. Monitoring community involvement and participation ....................................... 14H. Monitoring institutional and regulatory factors ..................................................... 14I. Monitoring management capacity and effectiveness ............................................ 15

Chapter 4: Institutional arrangements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

A. General guidance ......................................................................................................... 17B. Dissemination of information .................................................................................... 17C. Coordination with national M&E components ...................................................... 17D. Regional coordination of national M&E components ........................................... 18

Chapter 5: M&E and the project cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

A. Identification and preparation phase ....................................................................... 19B. Appraisal and negotiations phase ............................................................................ 20C. Implementation phase ................................................................................................. 20

Annex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..................21

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......34

Boxes1 Common data gathering methods ..................................................................................... 92 M&E plan for China Nature Reserves Management project ...................................... 1 03 Desirable characteristics of indicators ............................................................................ 114 Responsibilities of Major Players in M&E ...................................................................... 18

Tables1 Examples of indicators at the regional/landscape level .............................................. 222 Examples of indicators at the community/ecosystem level ........................................ 233 Examples of indicators at the species/population level .............................................. 244 Examples of socio-economic indicators .......................................................................... 255 Examples of community involvement and participation indicators ......................... 276 Examples of legal and regulatory indicators ................................................................. 297 Examples of management capacity and effectiveness indicators .............................. 31

Environment Department Papers

Executive Summary

Executive SummaryBiodiversity projects are designed on theassumption that project interventions will leadto conservation of key biological resources.Monitoring and evaluation are the primarymechanisms to assess whether a project ismeeting its targets and objectives. Theseguidelines are intended primarily to assistWorld Bank task teams and consultants in thedesign and implementation of monitoring andevaluation (M&E) plans for biodiversity conser-vation projects or projects with biodiversitycomponents. It is hoped that they may alsoserve as useful reference materials for govern-ment agencies, non-governmental organiza-tions and others involved in the design, imple-mentation or evaluation of biodiversity projects.

M&E plans are mandatory for all Bank projects.They must be developed as integral elements ofprojects to provide information on whetherproject interventions are successful in achievingproject objectives and on how social, economic,political and institutional factors are affectingproject performance. Monitoring and evalua-tion for biodiversity projects involves two kindsof indicators: implemen tat-ion pe@rmanceindicators (project inputs and outputs) andproject impact indicators (project impact onbiodiversity). These guidelines focus primarilyon the latter (impact indicators).

An M&E plan is a detailed program of workwhich defines what monitoring activities willtake place, when and by whom, and how thatinformation will feed back into managementdecisions. The plan should include an estimateof costs of implementation, and identify train-ing and capacity building needs among thestaff and institutions responsible for this M&E.The plan should also spell out how M&E

activities begun under the project will contrib-ute to the establishment of a long-term monitor-ing and evaluation capability in the hostcountry. In the developing country context it isespecially important to develop an M&E planthat is simple, inexpensive, and sustainable interms of the financial, institutional, and techni-cal resources available.

A biodiversity M&E plan should, therefore:

answer a clearly stated set of questions (i.e.have clear objectives);state clearly what indicators will be chosen;specify how often monitoring and evalua-tion will be done, and by whom;outline any necessary training or financialinputs that are required;state the intended audience for the evalua-tions;specify how information will feed back intomanagement decisions; andstate clearly the decision points at whichaction must be taken to address negativetrends.

Monitoring of biodiversity is not the same asmeasuring biodiversity. Measuring biodiversityprovides a snapshot of biodiversity (e.g. numberof species present) at the time of measurement.Monitoring is a continuing process whichallows managers to identify changes and trendsover time so that they can assess whetherinterventions are achieving biodiversity goalsand adapt management accordingly. Whilepreparation of a biodiversity project mayrequire a comprehensive biodiversity survey,future monitoring does not need to update thisfull set of data. In most cases managers are

Biodiversity Series i

concerned with monitoring trends rather thanmeasuring absolute values.

Scoping of the M&E plan should be doneduring project preparation. Experience hasshown that there is seldom sufficient informa-tion available at this stage to prepare a detailedM&E plan. Nevertheless it is important todevelop either the terms of reference for prepa-ration of an M&E plan, or the preliminaryoutline of the M&E plan. This provides a basisboth for the costing of M&E project componentsand for the development of the full M&E plan assoon as possible after project commencement.Further development and refinement of theM&E plan can be done as necessary duringproject implementation, based on local experi-ence and field testing.

It is particularly important to define the spatialI and temporal scales of monitoring activities.

Because biodiversity management deals withecological processes which are generallylongterm (e.g. changes in numbers of a popula-tion of a key species) changes resulting frommanagement interventions may be slow toemerge, sometimes beyond the project timeframe. This suggests the need to establish amonitoring framework that will extend beyondthe project term and, if appropriate, feed into anational monitoring system. The appropriatespatial scale for project monitoring will bedetermined by the specific goals and objectivesof the project, and depend on whether it focusesat the landscape, ecosystem or species level.

The most important aspect of any M&E projectis the choice of suitable and meaningful indica-tors. Clearly identifying the assumptions forproject interventions will help identify indica-tors for monitoring both changes in threats andthe effectiveness of project interventions inmitigating those threats. Most importantly,indicators must be practical and realistic, andshould, whenever possible, be meaningful atboth the national and site level, as well asconsistent with the main objectives of theproject. For example, monitoring changes inforest extent and integrity may provide usefulinformation on park integrity, but will notprovide information on the conservation statusof tigers or other wildlife if the main threat ispoaching.

Most threats to biodiversity result from humanactivities which, in turn, depend on social andeconomic factors. Monitoring of socioeconomicfactors, therefore, is an important part ofbiodiversity M&E. However, it is necessary torecognize that the relationships betweenbiodiversity health and the socioeconomiccharacteristics of human groups causingimpacts are far from clearly established. In factthey are likely to vary from one location toanother. This needs to be taken into account indesigning M&E plans and particularly inidentifying and interpreting socio-economicindicators. Similarly a range of institutionalfactors can impact on biodiversity health andthe effectiveness of biodiversity managementand should also be monitored.

Preparation of M&E plans and identification ofrelevant indicators should, as much as possible,involve those communities and institutionslikely to be affected by project interventions.The identification of indicators and appropriatesampling regimes should also take into accountexisting monitoring programs and data sets atthe local and national level, capacity at theselevels, and the need to establish agreed sam-pling and recording protocols at the nationallevel. Consistency of monitoring approachesacross local areas and protected area systemsshould have a high priority.

A meaningful and operationally relevantbiodiversity monitoring system will encompassa broad range of subjects to be monitored,including landscape or species dynamics,socioeconomic factors and community involve-ment and institutional and regulatory factors.No universal set of indicators will apply to allprojects but most projects will be measuring arange of indicators. The specific indicatorschosen for any individual project will dependon the particular objectives and goals of thatproject and the activities that are proposed tomeet those goals. For any project it will beimportant to choose a minimum set of a fewindicators that are feasible, useful and relevantto that project and can be sustained with localcapacity and resources after the end of theproject. Chapter 3 provides general guidanceon identifying appropriate biodiversity M&Eindicators in different thematic areas while theannexes provide examples to assist in the

Guidel ines for Monitoring and Evaluation for Biodiversity Projects

i i Environment Department Papers

development of indicator sets relevant toparticular situations.

Monitoring and evaluation are integral parts ofbiodiversity management and require adequateresources, including budget and institutionalcapacity, clear institutional responsibilities andreporting mechanisms. It is important to buildincentives and capacity to collect, use andmaintain data for monitoring and evaluation.Since M&E will require additional capacity,work and budget beyond the lifetime of theproject it is important to develop M&E plansthat can be resourced sustainably. The informa-

Executive Summary

tion gathered through M&E activities is usefulboth for assessing the impacts of the individualproject and to provide input into the design andimplementation of future biodiversity projectsand ongoing biodiversity managementprogmmmes.

Biodiversity Series . . .1 1 1

Introduction

1 IntroductionMonitoring and evaluation (M&E) for biodiver-sity has been defined as the gathering of data toenable detection of changes in the status,security and utilization of biological diversityfor the purpose of improving the effectiveness ofmanagement of that biodiversity. Biodiversitycan be defined at three different levels (ecosys-tem, species and genetic) and projects may beconcerned with biodiversity at all three levels.The complexity of biodiversity as a conceptrequires some different monitoring and evalua-tion approaches to those usually used in otherenvironmental projects.

These guidelines are intended primarily toassist World Bank task teams and consultantsin the design and implementation of monitoringand evaluation (M&E) plans for biodiversityconservation projects. It is anticipated that theguidelines will also serve as a useful referencefor client government agencies, non-governmen-tal organizations and others involved orinterested in the design, implementation orevaluation of biodiversity projects. In generalthe guidance is aimed at the developing countrysituation where resources and capability arelimited.

A. BACKGROUNDIn 1992 the World Bank issued preliminaryguidelines for M&E of biodiversity conservationprojects financed by the Global EnvironmentFacility (GEF) - Guidelinesfor Monitoring andEvaluation of GEF Biodiversity Projects (WorldBank, 1992). At that time, none of the GEF pilotphase biodiversity projects were yet under way.The guidelines, therefore, were based primarilyon expert knowledge in the field, After fiveyears of implementation experience, lessons for

M&E are starting to emerge. These guidelinesupdate the previous guidance to make themmore useful for application at the field level.

The design and execution of M&E plans areguided by the Bank’s operational directive formonitoring and evaluation (OperationalDirective 10.70). GEF-financed projects mustalso respond to GEF standards for monitoringand evaluation and reflect GEF’s operationalstrategies and programs (Operational Strategy,1996).

The revised guidelines are designed to recog-nize the particular characteristics and com-plexities of assuring biodiversity conservation -whether in biodiversity conservation projects oras a necessary consideration in a wider range ofproject types which impact on biodiversity. Theguidelines provide some background to M&E ofbiodiversity, discuss some of the major issues,and provide advice on formulating abiodiversity monitoring plan and selectingappropriate indicators.

The technical aspects of formulating an M&Eplan are addressed in Chapter 2, including keyconsiderations of temporal and spatial scales aswell as data collection, storage and processing.Chapter 3 focuses on the identification andselection of appropriate indicators. The tablesin Annex 1 provide menus of biological, socio-economic and management indicators fromwhich a project-specific selection can be drawn.A key aspect of M&E is determining who isresponsible for the tasks; institutional arrange-ments are discussed in Chapter 4. FinallyChapter 5 addresses the timing of preparationand implementation of M&E plans in thecontext of the Bank project cycle.

Biodiversity Series 1

Guidelines For Monitoring and Evaluation For Biodiversity Projects

B. KEY CONCEPTS ANDTERMINOLOGY

These guidelines deal with a range of conceptsand terms which may need some clarificationfor those not familiar with biodiversity orproject monitoring and evaluation.

shot of biodiversity at the time of the measure-ment. It is useful for comparing relativebiodiversity values of different areas (i.e. is onearea more species-rich than another). Monitor-ing is measuring trends over time to determinewhether management is having the desiredresult or needs to be changed.

Biodiversity EvaluationBiodiversity is an umbrella term encompassingall species of plants, animals, and micro-organisms, and the variation in ecosystems andecological processes of which they are part. It isa multi-dimensional concept, difficult to definein an operational sense and difficult to mea-sure.

Monitoring provides the basis for evaluation,which involves answering two questions: “hasthe activity met its objectives?” and “whataccounts for its level of performance?” Evalua-tion tells managers whether they are movingtoward, or away from, project or managementgoals, and why. It provides feedback to adjustfuture management interventions.

Biodiversity Monitoring

Monitoring biodiversity is not as simple asmonitoring other environmental characteristics,such as air or water quality for which there arewell established standards or benchmarks. Thebiodiversity values of an area undergo consid-erable fluctuations as a result of natural pro-cesses. These natural variations need to beidentified and monitored so that they can betaken into account in evaluating the results ofproject interventions. Moreover it is oftendifficult to assess the impact of project activitieson biodiversity in the short term. Thereforemonitoring must rely on indicators of likelysuccess rather than absolute measurements ofbiodiversity.

Indica tom

Indicators can be quantitative or qualitativevariables which can be measured or describedand which, when observed periodically,demonstrate trends in biodiversity characteris-tics over time.

Baseline Studies

A baseline study describes the condition oftarget biodiversity prior to, or in the early stagesof, project implementation. It is a benchmarkagainst which management-induced changescan be identified and measured.

Project MonitoringProject monitoring is the collection of data priorto, and during, the project. These data, whenanalyzed, pinpoint progress or constraints asearly as possible, allowing project managers toadjust project activities as needed. Monitoringis a continuing process throughout projectimplementation and often extends beyondproject completion.

Measuring vs. MonitoringThere is an important difference betweenmeasuring biodiversity (e.g. number of speciespresent) and monitoring changes in biodiver-sity. Measuring biodiversity provides a snap-

Preparation or commencement of a biodiversity’conservation project often requires a compre-hensive survey to determine factors such as: theareas of highest biodiversity value; the typesand location of threats to those values; theecological history of the area, etc. However,future monitoring generally does not need toupdate this full data set. In most cases, manag-ers are concerned with trends rather thanabsolute values. Absolute values (total numberof species, exact densities, etc.) are generally notneeded on a day-to-day basis; changes inrelative indices of these parameters (trends) willprovide the information that managers need.This is an important consideration, because toooften there is a tendency to delay the commence-ment of biodiversity monitoring until baselinestudies have been completed.

2 Environment Department Papers

Introduction

For many indicators, baseline data will berequired to provide “calibration” of the indica-tors, and to show whether trends are movingdangerously close to unacceptable situations.However, these can be collected after monitor-ing has commenced, and will need to berepeated (usually at fairly long intervals) to “re-calibrate” the indicators. Budgets for M&Eplans should include funds for baseline andcalibration studies; these can be relativelyexpensive undertakings.

Performance vs. Impact Indicators

Project monitoring and evaluation involves twokinds of indicators: implementation performanceindicators (project inputs and outputs) andproject impact indicators (achievement of objec-tives in relation to biodiversity).

Implementation performance indicators measurethe progress in securing project inputs anddelivering project outputs against set targets.

For biodiversity projects, special attentionshould be paid to timely execution of projectin teruen tions that address environmentaldegradation directly, such as capacity buildingfor biodiversity management, and prqjectmanagement to oversee, coordinate and monitorthe implementation of all project activities.

Project impact indicators reveal trends toward, oraway from, biodiversity conservation. Suchchanges indicate whether the managementneeds to be modified so as to enhance ormitigate the effects of project interventions. Asthe main impact on biodiversity is human use,M&E plans for biodiversity should include bothenvironmental impact indica tars and socio-economic impact indica tars .

These guidelines focus primarily on impactindicators for monitoring project effects onbiodiversity values.


Formulating a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

2 Formulating a Monitoring andEvaluation Plan

Biodiversity conservation projects are preparedprimarily to conserve the biodiversity of se-lected sites, yet the long-term survival andviability of those sites, and the species popula-tions within them, largely depends on social,economic and political factors which must betaken into account in project selection, designand implementation. Projects are designed onthe assumption that project interventions willlead to conservation of key biological resources.Monitoring and evaluation are the primaryvehicles to determine if biological diversity isbeing maintained as a result of project activities.

A. THE M&E PLAN

An M&E plan is a detailed program of workwhich sets out what monitoring activities willtake place, when and by whom, and how thatinformation will feed back into managementdecisions. The plan should include an estimateof costs of implementation, and identify tram-ing and capacity building needs for local staffand institutions responsible for monitoringidentified indicators and implementing the ,M&E plan. Budgets should include the costs ofequipment (including maintenance) and fortraining in their use. The plan should alsodescribe mechanisms for feeding results backinto the management process and indicate howthe proposed activities will contribute to theestablishment of a long-term monitoring andevaluation capability in the host country.

M&E plans should be developed as integralelements of all projects to provide informationon whether project interventions are successfulin achieving biodiversity objectives and on howsocial, economic, political and institutionalfactors are affecting project performance.

A biodiversity monitoring plan should, there-fore:

answer a clearly stated set of questions (i.e.have clear objectives);state clearly what indicators will be chosen;specify how often monitoring will be doneand by whom;specify how often evaluations will be madeand by whom;outline any necessary training that isrequired;state the intended audience for the evalua-tions;specify how information will feed back intomanagement decisions;state clearly the decision points at whichaction must be taken to address negativetrends; andspecify costs and funding sources for thevarious activities.

In the developing country context it is espe-cially important to develop an M&E plan that issimple, inexpensive, and sustainable.

B. SCOPINGA first step in project design is to clarify theobjectives for biodiversity management, identifythe sources of threat and determine how projectactivities can address them and with whatconsequences. A threats analysis linksbiodiversity and ecosystem elements with socialfactors, and analyzes direct and indirect causesof biodiversity loss. Specifying the relation-ships between threats and project activitiesdesigned to reduce them is an integral elementof project design. Clearly identifying the



assumptions for project interventions will helpto identify indicators for monitoring bothchanges in threats and the effectiveness ofproject interventions in mitigating those threats.

During project identification/preparation, aninitial assessment is undertaken to compile aninventory of relevant existing information. Thisinformation should include (i) the environmen-tal and socioeconomic conditions in the projectarea, (ii) the legal, policy, and regulatoryframework governing the management ofbiodiversity, (iii) institutional responsibilities,organizational arrangements and existingresources available for biodiversity manage-ment, and (iv) inadequacies in the coverage andquality of the information base and institutionalarrangements.

Scoping of the M&E plan should be doneduring project preparation. Experience hasshown that there is seldom sufficient informa-tion available at this stage to prepare a detailedM&E plan. Nevertheless it is important todevelop either the terms of reference for prepa-ration of an M&E plan, or the preliminaryoutline of the M&E plan. This provides a basisboth for the costing of M&E project componentsand for the development of the full M&E plan assoon as possible after project commencement.

Scoping of M&E requires the initial identifica-tion of :

the extent and quality of existing knowl-edge of biodiversity values of the projectarea (including important gaps in thatknowledge);the known significant biodiversity values ofthe project area;the nature of existing impacts on biodiver-s i ty ;those aspects of biodiversity likely to beimpacted (positively or negatively) byproject activities;the nature of likely impacts of projectactivities on biodiversity (positive andnegative, derived from project objectivesand preliminary impact analysis);relevant existing M&E programs, includingthose at national and regional levels;the stakeholder groups who should beinvolved in the M&E activities and theirability to carry out monitoring tasks;

l types of training likely to be required toallow M&E to be carried out;

l the questions which will need to be an-swered by monitoring and evaluation.

l the geographical boundary of the monitor-ing activity;

l the time intervals for evaluation (for bothperformance evaluation and impactevaluation);

‘Scoping may also include preliminary identifi-cation of suitable indicators, or at least classesof indicators, for particular aspects ofbiodiversity.

C. KEY CONSIDERATIONSThe following considerations need to be takeninto account in formulating an M&E plan.

Temporal Scales

Because management of biodiversity deals withecological processes which are generally long-term (e.g. changes in numbers in a population,or changes in community structures) thechanges in biodiversity resulting from manage-ment interventions are also typically slow toemerge, commonly beyond project time frames.This suggests the need for the establishment ofmonitoring frameworks which will survive wellbeyond the project term. This is best done at thenational rather than local level, not leastbecause it will require ongoing policy andfunding support. In addition, the long-termusefulness of any system of biodiversity moni-toring and evaluation will be greatly increasedif it is part of a national system of capacitybuilding. It also enables national level evalua-tions as well as comparisons between differentlocal areas.

Spatial Scales

Monitoring should be done at appropriatespatial scales to assess how the project ismeeting ik biodiversity goals. Several factorswill affect the spatial scale at which biodiver-sity can be monitored.

l Fragmentation of habitats at the regional orlandscape level is one of the most pervasivethreats to maintaining biodiversity. Many



protected areas are not sufficiently large toincorporate whole landscapes, and theirboundaries seldom coincide with ecologicalboundaries. Monitoring biodiversityconservation often needs to extend beyondprotected area boundaries to involve aregional scale of monitoring.Some types of threats or emerging trends inbiodiversity health may be quite localizedin their occurrence. This suggests a need toinclude monitoring at smaller scales, atleast for some indicators.Biodiversity conservation is often mostconcerned with particular species orfeatures in the environment. Monitoring forthese should include some narrower,targeted measurements as well as broader-scale approaches.It is impossible to monitor all aspects ofbiodiversity at a site. In the interests ofefficient use of human and financialresources, a monitoring plan should focuson key biodiversity elements that the projectaims to conserve and the sources of threatsto these elements. Key elements andindicator species will be defined by theobjectives and focus of the project, e.g.medicinal plants, elephant populations,habitat or park integrity.

Taken together with the characteristics ofbiodiversity, these temporal and spatial factorssuggest that biodiversity monitoring should becarried out at three scales: regional/landscape,community/ecosystem, and species/popula-tion. The emphasis will depend on the specificsituation and project objectives but it will oftenbe necessary to put some effort into monitoringat each level.

Socio-economics and Participation

Most threats to biodiversity result from humanactivities which, in turn, depend on social andeconomic factors. Monitoring of socio-economicfactors, therefore, is an important part ofbiodiversity M&E. However, it is necessary torecognize that the relationships betweenbiodiversity health and the socioeconomiccharacteristics of human groups causingimpacts are far from clearly established. In fact

they are likely to vary from one location toanother. This needs to be taken into account indesigning M&E plans, and particularly inidentifying and interpreting socioeconomicindicators.

Biodiversity projects often have a wide range ofstakeholders. Stakeholder groups should beidentified by stakeholder analysis (see Incorpo-rating Social Assessment and Participation intoSiodiversify Conservation Projects, 1994). Groupswhich are likely either to impact on biodiversityhealth, or to benefit from biodiversity conserva-tion, should be the focus of socio-economicmonitoring.

There will sometimes be a connection betweencommunity participation in resource manage-ment and biodiversity health. This is notalways necessarily beneficial to biodiversityconservation. Nevertheless, where communi-ties have a good understanding of the need forbiodiversity conservation and sustainableresource use, and see some benefit to themselvesin these approaches, their involvement inresource management can make a significantcontribution to the maintenance of biodiversity .It can, therefore, be useful to monitor aspects ofcommunity participation in biodiversitymanagement.

Preparation of M&E plans and identification ofrelevant indicators should, as much as possible,involve those communities and institutionslikely to be affected by project interventions(whether positively or negatively). This will bebeneficial because:

l M&E is likely to be more sustainable if theseplayers are involved;

l local communities often possess knowledgeabout ecological relationships and relation-ships between threats and effects that willcontribute significantly to the identificationof useful indicators and the accuracy ofevaluation; and

. stakeholder involvement can contribute tothe development of a sense of ownership ofthe resource management regime andresponsibility for biodiversity health.



Institutional and Legal Factors

A range of institutional factors can have abearing on biodiversity health. These includeinstitutional capacity and coordination (capac-ity of government agencies, NGOs, localcommunities, etc. to undertake resource man-agement and biodiversity maintenance); landtenure, property rights and customary practices;national policies and political will; ratificationand implementation of international agree-ments, such as Ramsar and CITES, whichinclude obligations for the signatory countries;and the existence and implementation of otherappropriate legislation.

D. DATA COLLECTION, STORAGEA N D P R O C E S S I N G

The identification of indicators and appropriatesampling regimes shouId take into accountexisting monitoring programs and data sets atthe local and national level, capacity at theselevels, and the need to establish agreed sam-pling and recording protocols at the nationallevel. Consistency of monitoring approachesacross local areas and protected area systemsshould have a high priority.

To the greatest extent possible biodiversitymonitoring should make use of existing datasources in order to minimize costs. In addition,those responsible for the management of thearea should be involved in the collection ofbiodiversity monitoring data as much aspossible. Where it is necessary to bring inoutside expertise to assist with monitoring,management staff should be involved in datacollection, made familiar with the purpose andevaluation of the data, and trained to continuethe monitoring plans.

There are many tools and techniques forbiodiversity monitoring. h-t general methodsshould be chosen that are appropriate to thelevels of human, financial and equipmentresources available for the task. The advantagesand constraink of some common monitoringtools are described inBox 1.

E. EVALUATION AND FEEDBACKINTO MANAGEMENT

Based on the results of the monitoring, an

evaluation can be made of the effectiveness ofproject interventions in meeting biodiversityobjectives, and any necessary revisions toproject componenk can be identified andimplemented. The effectiveness of projectactivities can be assessed in three ways:

are they adequately addressing the directand indirect causes of the threats tobiodiversity?are they causing any unacceptable negativeimpacts on biodiversity values? andwere activities adequately designed andimplemented?

The results of evaluation of monitoring data canhelp to pinpoint where, and how, a projectshould be remodeled. Restructuring or redesignof project elements based on the results of M&E,will contribute to adaptive management, i.e.management which is responsive to changingconditions and project objectives.

The M&E plan should set out the time intervals(mid-term, krminal) between evaluations andshould state who (individual, organization, oragency) will carry out evaluations and who willbe the recipients of reports. For an evaluation tohave some practical effect in improving conser-vation management, there should be specificmechanisms for feeding the results of evalua-tion back into the management process, andassigned responsibilities for follow-up.

As with monitoring, evaluation should be anongoing part of biodiversity conservationmanagement, rather than a project-basedactivity. Project preparation should includeassessment of capability to undertake evalua-tion and, where necessary, capacity-building inevaluation techniques should be built intoproject design.

F. STEPS IN DEVELOPING ANM & E P L A N

Scoping of the M&E plan should be doneduring project preparation so that M&E needscan be identified and costed. At this stage,however, it is usually impossible to prepare afull M&E plan. There should be, therefore,sufficient flexibility within the project to allowfurther development and refinement of theM&E plan as necessary during project



BOX 1: Common Data Gathering Methods

Remote Sensing: Appropriate, regular and high quality remote sensing coverage, combined withGeographic Information System technology and ground surveys, can make an important contributionto biodiversity monitoring, especially of habitat integrity. However it needs to be recognized that inmany countries resource management agencies will not be able to afford periodic acquisition ofremote sensing data for monitoring purposes. It may be justifiable, however, to include acquisition ofsuch data for establishing baseline conditions but future monitoring and training should not dependon access to regularly updated information where this cannot be supported by the managementagency. Whenever possible conservation agencies should be encouraged to make use of remotesensing data sets acquired (and possibly already interpreted) for other purposes, possibly by otheragencies.

Geographic Information Systems (GIS): Similarly, while GIS technology might appear essential forbetter data interpretation and producing more useful biodiversity monitoring results, itssustainability in the developing country context is often low, especially at the local area level. Thereare often compelling arguments for using more traditional data storage and presentation approaches(e.g. map overlay techniques) for biodiversity monitoring until adequate capacity (technical, financialand infrastructure) has been established to support GIS use. This provides an opportunity for thoseinvolved to learn and practise approaches which are not only extremely effective for many purposesbut also provide a good grounding in the underlying theory of GIS.

Local Ecological Knowledge: Local community involvement is often an important element in man-agement of protected areas and establishment of sustainable harvesting regimes for natural resources.Local villagers often have good knowledge of local biodiversity and changing conditions over time.Local ecological knowledge, therefore, can help determine appropriate indicators, refine samplingdesign, and interpret the results of monitoring. The data sets required for many biodiversity indica-tors can easily be collected by villagers, often with a minimum of training, and in a cost-effectivemanner.

Transect and Point Sampling: Transect and point sampling methods are commonly used for monitor-ing at the community/ecosystem and species/population levels. In particular, a number of popula-tion estimates and indices may be derived from a well-planned sampling program. The difficultiesinherent in undertaking accurate and useful monitoring using these techniques, however, should notbe overlooked. The key to success lies in careful planning and execution of the sampling. Transects orsampling areas should be as representative of the project area as possible, even if this seems inconve-nient. Data collectors need to be trained to collect data in a standardized manner. All data collectorsideally should be able to collect information in the same manner, at the same rate, and with the samelevel of confidence.

Data collection protocols should be developed and occasional field checks should be carried out toensure the quality of the data collection. A standardized data collection system or representativesystem of sampling transects should generate interpretable data for a long-term monitoring system.

implementation. Similarly it is generally morerealistic at the scoping stage to identify classesof indicators rather than specific indicators,with the latter being refined and field testedduring implementation. Chapter 5 illustrateshow M&E fits with the Bank project cycle. Box2 outlines the steps that a task team in Chinafollowed in order to develop an effective andoperationally relevant M&E plan.Biocliversity Series

It is important to build incentives and capacityto collect, use and maintain data for monitoringand evaluation. However it needs to be appre-ciated that M&E will require additional workand budget. During the project these costs areincluded in the project budget. After the projectit is likely that protected area, and other re-source, managers will only focus on collecting

9


data that clearly assist in identifying or reduc- indicators that are simple, relevant, easy toing threats or in raising awareness or funding. collect and can be incorporated into the normalThis is another good reason for focusing on duties of field staff.

BOX 2: M&E Plan For China Nature Reserves Management Project

The Nature Reserves Management Project in China initially proposed an M&E plan made up ofloo-125 generic variables and indicators. The team quickly realized that monitoring all of thoseindicators was unrealistic and unnecessary. A first effort to prioritize indicators reduced the listto approximately 45. An additional exercise reduced the list to approximately 30 key impactindicators, focusing on improving the effectiveness of reserve management and field level protec-tion; increased community participation and developing institutional capacity.

In doing the prioritization exercises, the project team agreed on certain principles for the M&Eplan. These were:

l data should be simple to collect. indicators should be ractical. M&E should

!ride aEp

the project Mjustment to project direction

l E plan should be integrated into a long-term national M&E program in China. it should provide lessons learned to the Government, Bank and GEF.

Based on those principles and using the following steps, the project team was able to develop anM&E plan that is based on project objectives and is dependent on the outcomes of the project. T h ebasic steps were:

. state biodiversity project objectives

. identify inputs and outputs

. state expected outcomes, results and accomplishments

. state assumptions upon which the outcomes are based

. iden ’

3

impacts expected as a result of outcomes or results. iden * how to measure results, outcomes, and impacts. iden ’ categories of indicatorsl determine methods for collecting data (what, how, who, when), updating, analyzing and

storing data

The task team, however, faced certain constraints when developing the M&E plan, and continuesto overcome these constraints. These include:

l lack of funds (field work and data collection were not seen as priority uses for scarce budgetresources)

l data collection was previously not seen as useful to nature reserve managementl staff were inadequately trained, and. a lack of incentives for personel.


Identifying and Selecting Indicators

3 Identifying and Selecting IndicatorsThis chapter provides general guidance onidentifying appropriate biodiversity M&Eindicators. It is not possible to include anexhaustive list of the indicators of biodiver-sity health in a set of guidelines. Examplesare provided in Annex 1 under a range ofheadings or menus to assist in the develop-ment of indicator sets relevant to particularsituations. For most projects it will be appro-priate to choose one or a few indicators fromseveral sections.

A. KEY CONSIDERATIONSIn formulating a biodiversity M&E plan, theselection of indicators is determined largelyb y :

l the obiectives for biodiversitv manaee-

l the nature of the proposed interventionsor activities,

l the feasibility and cost of collectingvarious types of information and data,and

l the institutional capability for incorporat-ing them into analysis and decisionmaking.

Most importantly, indicators must be practi-cal and realistic, and should, wheneverpossible, be meaningful at both the nationaland site level, as well as consistent with themain objectives of the project (see Box 3). Forexample, monitoring changes in forest extentand integrity may provide useful informationon park integrity, but will not provide infor-mation on the status of tigers or other wildlife

ment, ’ if the main threat is poaching.

Box 3: Desirable Characteristics of Indicators

To be most useful and effective, monitoring indicators should:

l be cost-effective to monitor (maximum information with minimum sampling time, effort andexpenditure),

. be measurable,l reveal meaningful trends,l point as directly as possible to the state of biodiversity in the subject area or the impact of a project

activity on that biodiversity,l be precise and unambiguous so that they can be clearly defined and understood the same way by

different stakeholders,. allow the identification of effects of “background” processes, such as weather, climate, cata-

strophic events, and natural variation,l be selected to address the specific challenges of the individual projectl be amenable to sampling by non-specialists, including user/local communities (suggesting that

the indicators should also be meaningful to local people),l be consistent, i.e. continue to measure the same thing over time,l be consistent with, if not the same as, national level indicators as well as those used in other

protected areas, and. require the involvement of the minimum possible number of individuals and agencies in their

evaluation.

Biodiversity Series 1 1


While it is desirable that the relationshipbetween the indicators and biodiversity healthis clear and well understood, this is seldom thecase in reality. Often indicators must beselected intuitively, or on the basis of incom-plete research. In all situations, one of the mainpurposes of indicators is to suggest emerging orreal problems in biodiversity conservation sothat management can be adapted to address theappropriate problems. It is realistic, therefore,to adopt an approach of using the best availableknowledge to select appropriate indicators andto rely on a combination of indicators so thatinconsistencies or inadequacies in any oneindicator are balanced by evidence from others.

Biodiversify Value vs. BiodiversityPerformance IndicatorsThere is a difference between measuring thebiodiversity values of an area and monitoringthe impact of management on biodiversity.While some of the indicators might be the same,many will be different. This distinction canhave significant implications for conservationmanagement. For example, the number (orpercent) of species threatened with extinction orthe number (or percent) of species with decreas-ing populations are sometimes cited asbiodiversity indicators. As indicators ofbiodiversity value they may be useful forcomparing different areas at the same point intime. However, using them as indicators of theimpact of management on the biodiversity of anarea could result in some unusual conclusions.For example, in an area which moves fromhaving twenty percent of its species threatenedwith extinction to ten percent of species threat-ened, there are several possible scenarios: halfthe threatened species may have recovered; or,all the originally threatened species may be lostand ten percent of the remaining species maynow be threatened.

Designers of biodiversity monitoring plansneed to be aware of these distinctions andchoose appropriate indicators.

Quantitative vs. Qualitative IndicatorsIn practice there are considerable difficulties instandardizing qualitative indicators so as toallow meaningful statements of changes over

time. because recording or evaluating qualita-tive indicators frequently involves subjectiveassessment, it is generally better to avoidqualitative indicators for all but broad nationalor international level assessment of biodiversityconservation. However, in monitoring socio-economic factors it is frequently difficult toavoid the use of qualitative indicators. It may,however, be useful to combine qualitative data(e.g. focus group interviews) with quantitativedata (from transect walks) to describe impactsand trends e.g. of levels of harvesting forspecific plants.

Sometimes apparently quantitative indicatorsalso harbor difficulties. For example, theexistence of relevant legislation is frequentlyproposed as a biodiversity indicator. Thesituation would seem to be “no legislation” or“legislation exists.” However, badly draftedlegislation may be more detrimental tobiodiversity conservation than no legislation atall . In addition, it is often difficult to determinewhy quantitative indicators have changed. Forinstance, the change in the number of arres ts forbreach of the regulations seems as though itwould be a useful indicator, but would thechange (increase or decrease) be due to:. more/less stringent policing?. an increase/decrease in enforcement staff?. an increase/ decrease in the number of

breaches of the law?. a change in the interpretation of the law?

B. IDENTIFYING SPECIFICI N D I C A T O R S

A meaningful and operationally relevantbiodiversity monitoring system will generallyencompass a broad scope of levels and subjectsto be monitored. These can be usefully catego-rized as:

. regional/ landscape level

. community/ecosystem level

. species/ population level

. socioeconomic factors. community involvement and participationl legal and regulatory factors, and. management capacity and effectiveness.


Identifying and Selecting Indicators

Most projects will be monitoring several of thesesets of indicators. Key indicators for M&Eshould be developed during preparation orearly stages of project implementation. Particu-lar attention needs to be paid to the way inwhich indicators are described. In most casesan indicator will be either a change in a param-eter, or the di@rence between a measurementand an established benchmark for that param-eter. For example, catch per unit effor (cpue) isnot an indicator of overfishing - it is the changein cpue that is the indicator.

Classes of Indicators vs. SpecificIndica tarsIn formulating M&E plans, there is a tendencyto confuse classes of indicators with specificindicators. For example, merjishing representsa class of indicators-it cannot be measureddirectly. Indicators of overfishing include:change in catch per unit effort, difirence betweenlargest size in catch and expected largest size fi thespecies/population, and change in proportion of thespecies in catch.

While it is useful to begin with classes ofindicators, final M&E plans should include thespecific indicators which will be used. It is onlywhen specific indicators are stated that theirfeasibility and cost implications can be as-sessed. Examples of different categories ofindicators are provided in Annex 1.

C. MONITORING AT THEREGIONAIjLANDSCAPE LEVEL

The important aspects of landscapes cangenerally be quantified in terms of area, diver-sity and pattern. Area measures such as“change in total area habitat” or “increase inarea encroached” are often relatively easy tocalculate providing the data are available. Inaddition, a range of indices has been developedwhich can be used to characterize the spatialarrangement of elements within landscapes.Table 1 (Annex 1) provides some examples ofclasses and specific indicators which might beused at this level.

Biodivers ity !Sries 13

D. MONITORING AT THECOMMUNITY”COSYSTEML E V E L

At the community/ecosystem level, monitoringis concerned mainly with the effectiveness ofmaintaining extent and quality of habitat, andof maintaining ecosystem processes. becausethe maintenance of ecosystem processes directlyaffects the success of biodiversity conservationit is desirable that these processes should bemonitored. However there are few simple,easily monitored indicators available for thistask. Some species of plants and animals canbe linked with ecological processes, e.g. key-stone species such as major herbivores, topcarnivores, important fruiting trees (such as figtrees), seed dispersers and pollinators forkeystone tree species, and species which favorregenerating or disturbed environments.Changes in the number and distribution of wellchosen examples of such species can sometimesbe indicators of ecosystem processes. Table 2(Annex 1) provides some examples of classesand specific indicators which might be used atthis level .

E. MONITORING AT THESPECIES/POPULATION LEVEL

SmaIl population size is ultimately the mostserious threat to species survival. Habitatdestruction, overharvesting or overhunting canlead to local species extinction. Species moni-toring is especially relevant to sustainable useprojects. Low or decreasing population size is asignificant indicator for important species, butdemographic trends (population age and sexstructure, age at reproduction) are usually moreimportant than absolute population size.Detailed demographic studies of key or har-vested species may need to be undertaken atregular intervals to confirm population viabil-ity, to calibrate population indicators, orprovide information on sustainability ofharvesting levels. The change in harvest perunit effort can be an indicator of thesustainability of the harvest, but it is difficult toquantify without the close cooperation of localpeople. The difficulty of sighting many speciesof wildlife means that secondary indicatorssuch as signs of presence (e.g. tracks, scats,rubbing posts, etc.) or signs of removal (e.g.


butchered carcasses, used traps, poachervehicle tracks, etc.) have to be used. Table 3(Annex 1) provides some examples of classesand specific indicators which might be used atthis level .

F. MONITORING SOCIO-E C O N O M I C F A C T O R S

Socioeconomic indicators should relate directlyto use or pressure on biological resources. Indeveloping areas where the population is at anearly stage of economic development, there willgenerally be connections between changes inwealth, either of whole communities or of sub-groups within the communities, and utilizationof biodiversity resources. It would be unwise,however, to make assumptions about thedirection of this relationship. Increasing wealthmight imply less need for reliance on biologicalresources, or might be a result of increasedharvesting responding to better access tomarkets.

Similarly, there are likely to be connectionsbetween changes in population and biodiver-sity health. In particular, rapid populationgrowth is often associated with biodiversityloss. However, the raw data on human popula-tion change will often be less meaningful thaninformation about changes in populationcharacteristics such as age distribution, numberin paid employment, education level, dispos-able income, time available for recreation, etc.The likely connections will need to be ascer-tained on a case-by-case basis and appropriateindicators included in the monitoring plan.

Some human activities which impact onbiodiversity resources are not easily measuredwith any degree of accuracy and can only beestimated on the basis of indirect measuressuch as human population distribution orstructure, or the presence of roads or otherinfrastructure.

In general, no reliance should be placed on asingle socioeconomic indicator in isolationbecause of the general uncertainty of therelationship between this type of indicator andthe state of biodiversity health. Table 4 (Annex1) provides some examples of classes andspecific indicators which might be used.

G. MONITORING COMMUNITYINVOLVEMENT ANDPARTICIPATION

Community involvement in resource manage-ment is often an integral element of sustainableuse. Monitoring community involvement willhelp to identify avenues for cooperation as wellas training and capacity building needs. Inaddition, participatory management which hasappropriate roles for local stakeholders can alsomake a contribution to maintainingbiodiversity.

It is important to recognise that communityinvolvement per se will not necessarily lead toenhanced biodiversity conservation. Thenature and extent of community involvementthat is appropriate will vary with site, commu-nity dependence on the resource and thebiodiversity objectives of the project. Theimpact of community involvement in decision-making for management needs to be monitoredclosely to ensure that it is promotingbiodiversity goals. Table 5 (Annex 1) providessome examples of classes and specific indica-tors which might be used to monitor communityinvolvement

H. MONITORINGINSTITUTIONAL ANDR E G U L A T O R Y F A C T O R S

Biodiversity conservation can only be achievedwithin a supportive legislative and regulatoryframework. National legislation may beinconsistent, or executive orders contravene oneanother. National policy changes necessary forproject success should be identified andindicators established to monitor progress. Arange of factors will influence capacity tomanage for biodiversity conservation. Theseinclude supportive and appropriate legislationand appropriate legal status for special areas;legal status and authority of managementinstitutions; and appropriate policies on landtenure and resource use rights. Table 6 (Annex1) provides examples of classes and specificindicators which might be used for legal andregulatory factors.


Identifying and Sekting Indicators

I. MONITORING MANAGEMENTCAPACITY ANDEFFECTJVENESS

Biodiversity conservation is achieved directlythrough management activities which reducepressure on biodiversity. The capability orcapacity of the institution through whichmanagement operates, and effectiveness of themanagement which is carried out, will clearly

affect biodiversity conservation. However, it isnecessary to note that capacity for managementis not always translated into effective manage-ment. Thus, two different sets of indicators arerequired - one set to measure capacity, and theother to measure effectiveness. Table 7 (Annex1) provides examples of classes and specificindicators of management capacity and effec-tiveness.


Institutional Arrangement

4 Institutional ArrangementsA. GENERAL GUIDANCE B. DISSEMINATION OF

INFORMATIONProject monitoring is the responsibility of thecountry management team or project imple-mentation unit (PIU). The majority of thedata for M&E is usually gathered by the localexecuting agency in the country of projectexecution. However, in certain complex orinnovative projects, several agencies/depart-ments may be involved. Thus, one overallagency must assume the overall responsibilityand coordination. When there is a separateM&E unit, it should be integrated into themanagement structure of the implementingagency to best serve the information needs ofthe agency.

Information gathered through M&E is usefulto a number of different audiences (nation-ally, regionally or globally), and for dissemi-nation of lessons learned and development ofgood practice. M&E allows the assessment ofproject achievements and impacts andprovides useful input to the target project aswell as lessons learned for influencing designof future projects.

C. COORDINATION WITHNATIONAL M&ECOMPONENTS

Institutional responsibilities for evaluations ofproject performance differ depending on thenature of the evaluation. For example:

Inter im evaluations, designed to reviewprogress and to anticipate likely effects of theproject, are carried out during the projectimplementation period by the PIU.

Mid-term and terminal evaluations are carriedout jointly at mid-term and at the end of theproject by the government and the Bank, withthe government and the PIU having particu-lar inputs.

Impact evaluations, measuring direct andindirect project impacts, are normally under-taken several years after final disbursementby national authorities independent from thePIU, and/or the Bank (Operations EvaluationDepartment) .

The performance monitoring of biodiversityprojects should be done at the national levelby the sectoral agencies responsible for suchareas as parks, protected areas and wildlife(habitat and species protection), fisheries(management of fishing effort and produc-tion), wetlands (restoration), agriculture (landuse), forestry (afforestation of watersheds),and ex-situ (gene banks) or systematic collec-tions (museum, herbarium), etc. The designand implementation capacity of manyexisting sectoral monitoring programs is weakand will frequently need strengthening. ThePIU, working with national agencies, shouldbe responsible for procuring the equipmentand support required for monitoring. Mostimportantly, it should implement the humanresource development plan (individualtraining, workshops, study tours, etc.) toenhance M&E skills throughout the agenciesinvolved.

See Box 4 for an outline of the responsibilitiesof major players in the M&E process.



Box 4: Responsibilities of Major Players in M&E

Level Responsibil i ty

Local Executing Agency(ies)/ 0 Coordination of monitoring activitiesPIU l Coordinating training in collection and analy-

sis of monitoring data for data collectorsl M&E data collection and analysisl Maintenance of information management

system, including all existing information andbaseline data

. Periodic progress reports

. Implementation of modifications as necessary

Overall Executing Agency (if differ- . Coordination of M&E if more than one localent from local executing agency) executing agency

l Preparation of semi-annual, annual, mid-termand final reports

l Collaboration with other biodiversity projectsl Supervision of M&E personnel including

recruitment and training. Statement of expenditures. Disbursement records. Procurement records. Financial and technical audits. Ensuring feedback into project managementl Dissemination of information and lessons

learned to all other interest groups, both locala n d g l o b a l

World Bank l Supervision of projectl Informal advisor to Local Executing Agency/

PlUl Verify disbursement/procurementl Confirm accuracy and adequacy of reporting

mechanisms

D. REGIONAL COORDINATION governmental or regional cooperation to- . *OF NATIONAL

C O M P O N E N T SM & E

Biodiversity conservation projects oftenaddress the transboundary aspects of protect-ing landscapes and ecosystems. Transbound-ary solutions require coordination of nationalM&E plans under the umbrella of inter-

ensure sound environmental management.This coordination reinforces the sharing ofM&E objectives and targets, so that nationalM&E plans are synchronised and complemen-tary, and ensures that methods for collecting,analysing, and reporting data in the partici-pating countries are compatible.

1 8 Environment Department Papers

M&E and the Bank Project Cycle

5 M&E and the Bank Project CycleMonitoring and evaluation needs to be aninherent part of every component of a project.Moreover, M&E needs to commence as early inthe project implementation phase as possible.Experience has shown that this has often beendifficult to achieve, generally because littleattention has been paid to the details of M&Eduring pre-implementation phases. M&E needsto be addressed at each stage of the projectcycle: identification/preparation; appraisal/negotiation; and implementation/supervision.

A. IDENTIFICATION ANDPREPARATION PHASE

During both the identification and preparationof the project, the task team and the countryproject preparation team should ensure that thefollowing M&E related tasks are completed.

1. Include the identification of indicators formonitoring and evaluation in the terms ofreference of all key members of the preparationteam (e.g. biodiversity specialist, sociologist,legal/ institutional specialist).

2. Early in preparation, compile an inventory ofall existing information. This inventory shouldfocus on obtaining information on:

l biodiversity of the project area, and threatsto biodiversity

. socio-economic conditions of populationsliving in and around the project area,especially those dependent on, or impact-ing on, biodiversity

. community management of natural re-sources and opportunities for participation

. institutional responsibilities and capacityfor biodiversity management and conserva-tion

l legal, policy and regulatory frameworkgoverning management of biodiversity

3. CIarify the questions to be answered by theM&E plan on the basis of a clear understandingof the biodiversity in the project areas and theproject goals, taking into consideration:

. availability of human and financial re-sources

. availability and knowledge oftech.noIogies

l degree of understanding of the issues to beconsidered

4. Propose specific indicators or classes ofindicators to provide a continuous and long-term assessment of changes or trends that showor suggest alteration of biodiversity in theproject area.

5. Propose process indicators to monitorwhether the project has met its performanceobjectives (inputs and outputs).

6. Identify a management information system tosupport monitoring and evaluation, accordingto proposed indicators to cover:

l data collection, including methods. analytical methods for data evaluationl information dissemination/ sharing. equipment and technology


Guidelines For Monitoring and EvaIuation For Biodiversity Projects

7. Propose institutional responsibilities andorganizational arrangements for monitoringand evaluation to cover:

. management of data. technical slcills, training and labor require-

ments. coordination between national agencies

8. Estimate the costs of implementing the M&Eplan. Note that monitoring and evaluationshould not be an additional cost to the regularactivities carried out in the project. Rather M&Eactivities should be built into project activities.There may be additional costs, however, forreporting and dissemination of informationand, in certain cases, training. Costs andfunding sources should be identified.

9. Prepare a time-bound implementationschedule with assigned responsibilities for theimplementation of activities.

B. APPRAISAL ANDNEGOTIATIONS PHASE

During appraisal and negotiations, task teamsand executing government agencies shouldaddress the following priorities in respect tomonitoring and evaluation.

1. Assess the adequacy of the proposed M&Eplan (or terms of reference for M&E plan,depending on the outcome of the scopingactivity) in relation to:

. responsiveness to project objectivesl technical feasibility. institutional capacity and human resources

needs. stakeholder and NGO involvement in

design and implementation. adequacy of proposed mechanisms for

regional coordination. mechanisms for feedback and dissemina-

tion of lessons learned. cost effectivenessl budgetary commitments by participating

country governmenkl sustainability

2. Negotiate Grant Agreement assuring that thelegal agreement includes target variables andindicators, target dates, standards for monitor-

ing and evaluation, and reporting responsibili-t ies .

C. IMPLEMENTATION PHASEMonitoring and evaluation of biodiversity needto commence as soon as possible during theimplementation stage. In many situations therewill be a need to fill gaps in knowledge identi-fied during scoping and to further identifyindicators which are appropriate to localconditions. Training and equipment may needto be delivered before the M&E plan can be fullyimplemented.

Apart from supporting the further developmentand implementation of the M&E plan, countryagencies/ departments responsible for M&Eand task teams responsible for project supervi-sion will need to address the following priori-t ies .

1. As monitoring data become available (targetdates agreed upon tit negotiations), undertakeperiodic evaluation of project performancerelative to stated objectives. These evaluationsshould attempt to:

l determine if the objectives for addressingthreats to biodiversity are being achieved byt h e p r o j e c t ,

. evaluate any ancillary benefits achieved bythe project, and

. assess the technical and/or institutionalreasons why anticipated targets were eithermet, missed or exceeded.

2. Assess and improve the relevance andeffectiveness of the M&E plan by:. validating the relationship between indica-

tors and objectives for biodiversity protec-tion,

. verifying the rapidity, quality and quantityof information transfer within the informa-tion system,

. reviewing the extent to which implementa-tion of the M&E plan has facilitated projectmanagement, and

l providing feedback to project executank sothat management can be adapted to betterserve conservation objectives.


Annex 1 Sample Indicators


Class’Habitat area

hdscape patternmalysis

:onservation status

.and use type

IndicatoFChange in total area ofa particular habitat type

Change in area oflargest block of aparticular habitat type

Change in average sizeof a particular habitattype.Change in mean nearestdistance betweenblocks of a particularhabitat type

Change in averagewidth of break in anidentified habitatzorridor

Change in number or:otal area of PAs

Change in total area ofand uses compatiblewith biodiversityxmservation in thenonitoring area

I able 1: Examples of Indicators at the Regional/LandsData Set Method

Remote sensing data(vegetation maps mayalready exist for baseline)

Remote sensing data orneasured in the field

spatial plans

irea of identifiednmpatible land uses

’ These are examples of appropriate classes. Others can be developed.

* These are examples of appropriate indicators. others can be developed.

Manual methods usingoverlay maps, or GIS wherefeasible.

Aerial surveys

31s or overlay maps

demote sensing data or fieldeports. Land use maps areikely to be available fromnher agencies.

pe LevelComments

Shows whether habitat is being gained or lost over themonitoring area.

Ideally the monitoring area should extend outside theimmediate project area. Comparison between the project/no-project areas may be useful.

Long-term population viability is endangered if area is small!especially for species which occur at low density.

Suggests whether losses are spread over the wholemonitoring area.

Suggests likelihood of migration between habitat blocks.Can be modified to mean distance between a particular blockand neighbors where the particular block is in a protectedarea (PA). More complex approaches to landscape patternanalysis may be appropriate in some circumstances.

Shows changes in effectiveness of the corridor. Changes inthe gap width should be a trigger for management attention.However significance depends on the species of concern andthe type of land use in the gap.

Shows change in conservation status (and thereforelikelihood of protection) of land/habitat.

Shows change in area likely to support biodiversityconservation - significance may depend on the focus ofbiodiversity value in the area.

22

Annex 1

ClassVegetation structure

IndicatorChange in crowncover percent

Table 2: Examples of Indicators at the Community/Ecosystem LevelData Set Method Comments

Canopy cover in % at Standard canopy cover Significant habitat disturbance is generally indicated byupper canopy level methods, possibly done changes in canopy cover and dominant species. However,(whether tree, shrub, seasonally, or at least records need to be long term to take into account short-termgrass, etc.) annually in the same season fluctuations due to factors such as tire and weather patterns.

Not likely to provide early warning of changes which are notrevealed by other, possibly easier, methods.

Habitat distribution Change in location Location of boundary in Long-term (possibly every Can show expansion or retreat of crucial habitats. Changesof habitat boundaries defined quadrats or two to five years) survey of may take many years to establish and generally background

transects3 sites, and/or fixed point effects need to be removed.photography

Change in vegetation Area of riparian Remote sensing or transect, Changes in riparian vegetation can have significant effects onalong watercourses vegetation type. quadrat survey aquatic biodiversity through direct (change in water

Boundary of riparian temperature and light availability) and indirect (increasedvegetation, etc. run-off, siltation, etc.) impacts.

Keystone or indicator Change in number Transect or wide area Survey of transects or sites, Can suggest changes in ecological processes, particularly torpecies and/or distribution of survey results frequency depends on the provide early warning of possible changes. Examples include

keystone or indicator species involved species important in seed distribution (certain birds, rats,species etc.), bat species favoring different vegetation structure.

Change in limiting Numbers, or presence or Transects, quadrats, general Can provide early warning of impacts on species beforefactors for key absence - depends on the observations. changes in numbers become obvious.species, e.g. nest factor involvedholes for parrots,t?uit bat roostingtrees

nvasive species Change in presence, Survey, transect or quadrat Transects, quadrats or The significance of the invasive species for the biodiversitylocation, area, results, patrol reports, interviews values which are of concern needs to be known. In manynumbers of invasive reports from community cases plant invasions are an indicator of disturbance.plant or animal members Dieback (Phythophthoru fimgus) may also be an indicator ofspecies disturbance.

ndicator events Changes in Patrol reports, aerial Incorporate into patrol Events should be of a type which is related to biodiversityfrequency of events surveys, remote sensing reporting. Carry out specific health at the community/ecosystem level.such as landslips surveys for identified events.

3 Transects may be more reliable than quadrats (plots) because of the possibility that marked quadrats will receive special management attention. The sametransects mieht be useful for fauna1 surveys.

Annex 1

ClassAbundance

Table 3: Examples of Indicators at the Species/Population LevelIndicator Data Set Method Comments

Change in abundance of Encounter rate (e.g. sight, Management staff monitor Indicates possible changes in population size and/or shiftkey animal species sound, sign) along trar~sats (e.g. sections of in range (interpretation should be subject to knowledge ol

tl7UlSeCtS. track) on regular patrols. demography and comparison with other indicators).Number of individuals at Regular counts at Needs to be standardized (e.g. by time/distance/habitat).concentration points such concentration points. More rigorous methods must be used occasionally toas colonies or roosts. calibrate encounter rate against total population.Management patrol reports.

Change in proportion of Records kept by Management staff collect Can show changes due to environmental factors,particular species in fish communi ty information from overharvesting, and/or introduction of exotics.catches at specified communi tyseasons

Stock managementmatneters

Difference between Average sizes/lengths oflargest/longest of a fish of given species ingiven species in fish catches.catch and Maximum sizes fromlargest/ longest recorded li terature.size for the species.

Some community members This is one example of a fsheries management approach.paid to collect data, or fish Others may be appropriate in particular situations.marketing staff collect data.

Gmge occupied

hrntinflarvest:hanges

Changes in range of Combination of sighting National level stafTdesignated species

Indicates expansion or reduction of species range. Coulddata and transect sign data combine indicator data for

(either total range orbe associated with population changes, loss of habitat or

all relevant areas. disruption of migratory pathways.range within monitoring=dChange in total amount Amount of resource Record keeping byof plant or animal harvested in a defined area

Trends in amount harvested should give early warning ofcommunity or a sub-group over-harvesting, especially when combined with the

species harvested in a as recorded by the local following indicator.defined site eg. PA communi ty

Changes in amount of Amouut of resource Community, sub-group ofdesignated resource harvested per unit effort’ community, or nominated

Changes in harvest per unit effort can indicate developingover-harvesting situations.

harvested per unit effort individuals keen records.

Changes in number of Combination of: field Information collected byconfirmed instances of evidence and village and

An increase may indicate a developing managementmanagement patrols, from

hunting and/or market surveys.problem. A decrease should be interpreted only in

villagers or from market conjunction with other information.harvesting of traders.designated species in agiven time period

4 A “unit effort” might be person-days, or hours spent collecting, or total number of overnight stays in the area.monitoring community.

The unit effort needs to be meaningful to the

24

Annex 1

ClassHuman populationdynamics

Socio-economicsituation

iesource utilization

Table 4: Examples of Socio-Economic IndicatorsIndicator Data Set Method Comments

Change in total National or local Formal census data Rapid growth likely to indicate negative impacts onhuman population statistical data or survey obtained from relevant biodiversity. In addition, any increase inside PAinside and around returns agency. might suggest illegal incursion. Interpret in(e.g. within 20 km) combination with next indicator.conservation areas Data from baseline and Surveys, possibly

repeated socio-economic involving sampling.surveys

Monitor every 2-5 years.Change in Indicates possible changes in level and nature ofdemographic pressure on biodiversity values. Relationships arefactors (age neither constant nor well understood. For example,structure, settlement increasing level of education may correlate withpatterns, education reduced interest in a subsistence lifestyle; orlevels, etc.) of increasing time available for recreation may lead torelevant human recreational hunting. May be more useful forpopulation in or assisting in the interpretation of other indicators thanaround as an indicator of biodiversity health itself. Carefulconservation areas analysis is required.Change in Survey returns Participatory techniques While reliable income data is notoriously difficult toproportion of (RRA, PRA, etc.) and gather, data on proportional importance of differentincome derived other socio-economic sources, without requiring specific figures, is easierfrom biodiversity survey techniques, to collect.resources possibly every two or

three yearsChange in Requires training of survey personnel, and theproportion of relatively low frequency of survey may mean that itincome derived is more effective to use outside, specialist teams.from alternativelivelihood activitiesChange in resource Survey returns, Participatory techniques Relatively standard survey techniques exist for this.consumption for management records, (RRA, PRA, etc.) andhousehold use vs. market surveys other socio-economicmarketing survey techniques,

possibly every two orthree years

25

Annex 1

Table 4: Examples of Socio-Economic IndicatorsClass Indicator Data Set Method Comments

Resource utilization Change in rate of Survey returns, Participatory techniques May show which groups are increasing or reducingconsumption of management records, (RRA, PRA, etc.) and their resource use, suggesting whether projectbiodiversity market surveys other socio-economic initiatives have been successful (or are appropriatelyresources by survey techniques, targeted).different groups possibly every two or(e.g. local three years Provides a check that reduction in resource use by thecommunities vs. target group is not part of an overall reductionoutside interests) unrelated to project initiatives.Change in number May have a direct bearing on biodiversity health.or percent of people Lower numbers, combined with other socio-harvesting economic data, may give a clear indication of likelybiodiversity future trends in involvement in biodiversity-resources impacting activities.

Change in levels ofexploitation towardor away fromsustainable use

41temative livelihood Change in number Survey returns, Participatory techniquesuptake

Participation data may be relatively easy to gatheror percent of people management records, (RR& PRA, etc.) and because of the need to register for assistance, loans,engaging in market surveys other socio-economic supplies, etc.alternative survey techniques,livelihood activities possibly every two or May have a direct bearing on biodiversity health if

three years this group has also given up biodiversity-impactinglivelihood activities, though this should not be takenfor granted.

26

Annex 1

Table 5: Examples of Community Involvement and Participation IndicatorsClass Indicator Data Set Method Comments

Attitudes and Change in Results of structured Structured interviews, Participation indicators rely on the assumption thatunderstanding understanding/ interviews and questionnaires participatory management will make a positive

acknowledgment of questionnaires contribution to biodiversity conservation.co-managementprinciples bygovernment agencyStaff

Extent to which Without these factors, participation will not becommunity feels sustainable iu the long term.involved inmanagement atdifferent levels (e.g.decision-making,consultation, etc.)Extent to which Lack of agreement with management approachescommunity suggests low likelihood of cooperation and/or lowunderstands and understanding of basis for management. Both willagrees with detract from effectiveness of biodiversitymanagement conservation.approaches

histing resource use Existence of Structured interviews Structured interviews If a system exists then a better indicator would be thesystems community-based effectiveness of that system (see next table).

natural resourcemanagementsystems

3iodiversity conservation Increase in cash or Project records, Review relevant Assumes that these benefits will lead to a reductionbenefits in-kind benefits alternative income records, carry out in biodiversity impacts.

returned to scheme accounts, interviewsc&munity as a survey resultsresult of biodiversityconservation

27

Annex 1

Table 5: Examples of Community Involvement and Participation IndicatorsClass Indicator Data Set Method Comments

Biodiversity conservation Change in number Project reports, Examine reports and Employment of local people on project activitiesbenefits (cont’d) and/or nature (full project employment records every one or has a range of potential benefits which may act to

time, seasonal, etc.) of records. two years. reduce biodiversity impacts. For example:community members immediate improvement in income and/or standardemployed in project of living; training which improves long-termand related activities employment options; training in organizational

skills which are relevant to communitydevelopment; increased awareness of projectobjectives and background.

Conservation awareness Number of awareness Project reports Annual surveys Indicates community interest in and commitment toand education programs undertaken sustainable resource use/conservation activities.

Participation inmanagement.

Number of schoolsvisitedChange in community Results of interviews Interviews and PRA Cooperation suggests commitment to meetingcooperation with and PRA with , . management objectives, including biodiversityconservation staff communities and conservation.(such as anti-poaching government agencyactivities, monitoring) staff.Self-monitoring of May depend on “traditional” natural resourceresource by users management system in place.Establishment of Project records, local Review records, rules These are criteria for establishment of a successfulclearly defmed rules, regulations and regulations participatory resource management system.boundaries and (annually or less Indicators might be framed as changes in themembership of frequently) effectiveness of these factors.resource using groupExistence of Management records Annual surveys of This could have positive or negative effects onrepresentative communities and biodiversity. Should be analyzed as a long-termcoordinating or conservation staff, trend.management body local records, Monitored at specific intervals rather than on an on-

interviews going basis.

2 8

Annex 1

Table 6: Examples of Legal and Regulatory IndicatorsClass Indicators Data Set Method Comments

Status of appropriate Change in the legal Official gazette, Review of status of Changes can indicate positive or negative effects onlegislation and policies and regulatory national law registry existing and pending biodiversity health. The enactment of a poorly

framework at the legislation and policies, drafted law or lack of enforcement of an appropriatenational level including legislation on law can have significant negative impact on

protected areas and biodiversity. Monitoring of this indicator needs toendangered species include some assessment of the quality,

appropriateness and enforcement of the changes tothe laws.

Legal status of Change in the legal Review status of Changes can be positive or negative. For example,protected area status of an area boundary demarcation. an area with high and sensitive wildlife values may

(e.g. legal suffer reduction in biodiversity value as a result ofgazettement), declaration as a national park rather than a strictincluding defmition wildlife reserve.of boundaries

Status and Change in Structural organization Evaluate incorporation of Management structures may exist at the national,sustainability of permanent of management project management regional, l&al and site levels. Monitoring may bemanagement bodies institutional units into permanent separate or combined, depending on the project

arrangements structures, co- objectives.and/or management managementstructure arrangements,

decentralization ofmanagement

Policy on use rights Change in use Government policies and Track the development Are use rights not only recognized but alsorights at a project laws on use rights and implementation of appropriately allocated in a way which supports anysite policies and laws which traditional management system and which will

define user rights in an encourage sustainable management?area.

29

Annex 1

Table 6: Examples of Legal and Regulatory IndicatorsClass

Understanding and/orawareness oflegislative controls

Effectiveness ofregulatory system

IndicatorsChange in locallevel or resourceuser/regulatorawareness of theimportantcomponents ofrelevant resourcemanagement laws

T Data SetSurvey and interviewdata

and regulationsChange in level of Evidence ofinfringements infringements (physical

evidence in field,community reports,official records)

Change inpercentage ofarrests leading toconviction

Field and offtcial/ courtreports

Change in percentof repeat offendersappearing in court

MethodSurveys and interviews

Establish agreedacceptable level andcalculate the differenceannually, or at aninterval agreed withstakeholders.Calculate from field andofficial/court reports

CommentsUnless key groups are aware of the importantcomponents of the laws, the law will have no effect.Voluntary adherence is preferable to reliance onenforcement alone.

Zero intiingements is generally not a realistic ornecessary target. In most situations some level ofinfringements is tolerable. The difference betweenthis and the actual level of infringements provides anindication of the effectiveness of the regulatorysystem.“Number of arrests” is not a useful indicator as thereare too many factors which may affect it. If arrestsare well founded and properly carried out (legalrequirements followed, evidence properly gathered,etc.) then convictions are likely to result.If the regulatory system is efficient and well designed(e.g. penalties match offenses and socio-economicconditions) then the percentage of repeat offendersshould decrease.

30

ClassBudget/fundmg

Facilities and:quipment.

Staffing

itaff performance

Table 7: Examples of Management Capacity and Effectiveness Indicators5Indicators Data Set Method Comments

Change in Budget documents Identity highest priorities Project implementation (or design) should haveproportion of budget and review budget identified the highest priorities. This indicator may notallocated to highest allocation annually. be effective during project implementation because ofpriority conservation substitution of project funds for normal budgetmanagement allocations.areas/functionsChange in Information on (proposed Review information This indicator may not be effective during projectsustainability of or actual) management annually or less often. implementation because of substitution of project fundsfunding for funding sources. for normal budget allocations.managementChange in Annual budget. Calculate from official This can be a hidden factor paralyzing an otherwiseavailability and Local financial records. records and interview apparently well established and potentially effectivetimeliness of release Results of interviews with results. biodiversity conservation system.of funds local management staff.Change in extent to Results of interviews with Interviews with local Unless local management staff have a meaningful rolewhich field and local local management staff. management staff in the preparation and allocation of budgets, funds maymanagement staff not be directed to the most important issues.are involved in, andunderstand, thebudgetary processChange in quality Management records, Identify the equipment Include vehicles, boats, aircraft, field equipment, surveyand/or quantity of inventory. and facilities needed, and equipment, data recording and storage equipment.facilities and available.equipmentChange in the Staffing levels Calculate necessary Needs to be combined with other indicators such asnumber of trained staffing levels and check performance ratings, time in the field, etc.staff in relevant actual staffing levelsagencies or areas annually.(needed vs. actual)Change in the rate of Staff records Calculate from official Rapid turnover is clearly likely to reduce theturnover of staff at a records effectiveness of biodiversity protection.site

Annex 1

’ Capacity and effectiveness of management are not the same. An organization may have a high level of capacity to manage but its effectiveness may behindered due to a range of factors.

31

Annex 1

ClassStafT performance(cont’d)

Management structuresmd arrangements.

\wareness levels

hgoing monitoring:apability

Table 7: Examples of Management Capacity and Effectiveness IndicatorsIndicators Data Set Method Comments

Change in average Results of individual Develop and use a Training is not an indicator of effective performance. It isperformance rating of performance evaluations performance rating system, the way skills and knowledge gained through training arestaff at a particular (duty statements; training and update ratings every l- translated into improved performance and changed behaviorlocation history; work programs; 2 years. that shows effectiveness. Performance rating systems take

field patrol records), time to design, require a basis of duty statements andinterview results capability criteria for designated positions, and should be

developed and implemented in a participatory manner.Change in the Time sheets and field Calculate field time. It may be more indicative to use an average of field days per(average) amount of repo* management staff member, so that efforts by one or twotime (person-days) staff, or special projects, do not skew the results.spent in the fieldExistence of Project/government records, Examine records or conduct In addition to being effectively representative, such arepresentative community interviews. interviews. structure should make/improve links between field level andcoordinating or development decision-making levels. An additionalmanagement body indicator is the change in the effectiveness of suchwhich involves key StructureS.stakeholdersExistence of formal An additional indicator is the change in the effectiveness ofconservation such agreements.agreementsChange in level of Results of structured Structured interviews Specific target groups should be monitored separately, e.g.understanding of interviews/ questionnaires and/or questionnaires field management staff, resource user groups, localbiodiversity concepts government officials.and conservationobjectivesChange in budget Results of review of budget, Review budget, staffing and If there is no ongoing monitoring capability then theallocated to sta&rg, management management systems sustainability of biodiversity conservation is at risk. Themonitoring, or sys tems annually or less frequently.number of staff

capacity to monitor must exist before effective monitoringcan occur.

trained in monitoringStatus of monitoring Management systems Review of existing systemsinformationmanagement system

32

Annex 1

ClassOngoing monitoringcapability (cont’d)

Effectiveness ofmanagement bodies

Threat levels.

Encroachment

Zonflict resolution

Table 7: Examples of Management Capacity and Effectiveness IndicatorsIndicators Data Set Method Comments

Change in integration Annual work programs and Review annual work Acceptance of biodiversity monitoring as a normal part ofof biodiversity patrol reports programs and patrol reports. management activities suggests that it will be sustainable.monitoring into theroutine duties of field.5taEChange in extent and Management records Calculate whether Failure to implement planned biodiversity conservationtimeliness of management bodies are activities on time or as planned could lead to biodiversityimplementation of meeting agreed targets loss in the long term.scheduled/plannedactivitiesChange in number Recorded evidence of Calculate from official This applies to resource conflict, hunting, tire damage,and nature of threats unlawful activity, field reports. Carry out threat forest clearing, poaching, etc. Requires a ranking of theto site reports and aerial surveys, review. threats to determine whether a change in nature of threat is a

results of threat review, positive or negative trend. Effectiveness will be minimalnew development plans. unless there are clear guidelines as to what constitutes a

threat and how much effort needs to be expended inidentifying threats. A fairly gross indicator at best.

Change in rate of Remote sensing data, field Remote sensing, aerial Shows direct impacts on biodiversity health. Easy toencroachment into reports, land use data. surveys, map overlays, GIS analyze, though data gathering may be difficult, dependingPAS should be repeated every on resources and capabilty.

two to five years.Existence of an Project or government Review records and If a conflict resolution mechanism already exists, then aagreed procedure for records, documentation of documents, interviews better indicator would be the effectiveness of thatconflict resolution on traditional resource mechanismnatural resource management regime.management issuesChange in proportion Project and government Review records, carry out Successful resolution may depend on the point of view ofof conflicts which are agency records, interview interviews and PRA. the party involved. As a minimum all parties should agreesuccessfully resolved results, PRA results. that the solution is accordiig to the established rules.Reduced conflictsover access or userightsChange in tolerance Community andof wildlife on

Can indicate acceptance of conservation objectives; usuallymanagement records linked to benefits accruing to communities.

community land

3 3

Guidelines for Monitoring and Evaluation For Biodiversity Projects

BibliographyChisholm, A. H. and Dumsday,R. G. (1995). Environmental Indicators and Land Resources Policy: AnAustralian Perspective, In Developing Indicatorsfor Environmental Sustainability: the Nuts and Bolts, edited bySandra S. Batie. . Proceedings of the Resource Policy ConsortiumSymposium, Washington, D.C.

Dixon, J., Kunte, A., and Pagiola, S., (1996). Environmenfal Per@rmance Indicators. World Bank EnvironmentDepartment Note. Washington, D.C.

Global Environment Facility. (1996). Operational Strategy. Washington, D.C..

Hammond, A., Adriaanse, A., Rodenburg, E., Bryant, D. and Woodward, R. (1995). Environmental Indicators:A Systematic Approach to Measuring and Reporting on Environmental Policy PetJomzance in the Context of Sustain-able Development. World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

MacKinnon, J.,MacKinnon, K., Child, G. and Thorsell, J. (1986). Managing Protected Areas in fhe Tropics.IUCN. Cambridge.

McNeely, J.A., Miller, K.R.,Reid, W.V., Mittermeier, R.A. and Wemer,T.B. (1990). Conserving the World’sBiological Diversity. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland; WRI, CI, WWF-US, World Bank, Washington, D.C.

Margoulis, R. and Salafsky, N. (1998). Measures ofsuccess: Designing, Managing and Monitoring Conservationand DevelopmentProjects. Island Press, Washington, DC.

Operations Evaluation Department (OED) (1996). Lessons and Practices. Designing Projecf Monitoring andEvaluation. World Bank.

Ostrom, E. (1991). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutionsfor Collective Action. CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge.

Peters, C. (1994). Sustainable Harvest of Non-Timber PZant Resources in Tropical Moist Forest: An EcoZogicaZPrimer. Biodiversity Support Program, Washington.

Reid, W., McNeely, J., Tunstall, D., Bryant, D. and Winograd, M. V. (1993). Biodiversity Indicatorsfir PolicyMakers, World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

Saunders, D., Margules, C. and Hill, B. (1998). Environmental Indicators: Biodiversify. Australia: State of theEnvironment Indicator Report. Environment Australia, Canberra

United Nations Environment Programme. (1995). Global Biodiuersity Assessment. Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge.


Bibliography

World Bank. (1992). Guidelines for Monitoring and Evaluafion ofGEF Biodiversify Projects. Washington, D.C.

World Bank. (1994). Incwporating Social Assessment and Participation into Biodiversify Conservation Projects.Washington, D.C.

World Bank. (1996). Guidelines for Using Social Assessment fo Support Public Involvement in World Bank-GEFProjects. Washington. D.C.

World Bank. (1996). Performance moniton’ng indicators: A handbookfor task managers. Washington, D.C.


guidelines for monitoring and evaluation for biodiversity...

Documents