supporting food security and livelihood security through ...food security and livelihood security...

SupportingFood Security and Livelihood Security

through Improved Livestock and Tourismin Pastoralist Communities of Northern Tanzania

PROGRAMME PROPOSALFor Belgian Survival Fund

2009 – 2014

January 2009TRIAS TANZANIA

TRIAS - Programme proposal Phase II BSF Pastoralist Tanzania version of Febr. 09 2


Table of ContentOverview of tables ......................................................................................................................................... 3

ABBREVIATIONS .....................................................................................................5

1. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................7

1.1 History of the program ............................................................................................................................ 7

1.2 Relevance of the second phase ................................................................................................................. 9

2. CONTEXT OF THE PROGRAM...........................................................................12

2.1 Socio-economic characteristics of the intervention region .................................................................... 122.1.1 General data on Longido District ....................................................................................................... 132.1.2 Specific data on the 4 selected villages ............................................................................................. 192.1.3 Food Security situation of the 4 selected villages .............................................................................. 222.1.4 Problem tree as analysis of food insecurity ........................................................................................ 26

2.2 Target group .......................................................................................................................................... 272.2.1 Population of the four selected villages ............................................................................................. 272.2.2 Beneficiaries and vulnerable households ........................................................................................... 282.2.3 Gender analysis of the target groups ................................................................................................. 31

2.3 Link with national policy, BSF criteria and TRIAS strategy................................................................ 342.3.1 Tanzania Policy Context.................................................................................................................... 342.3.2 BSF criteria....................................................................................................................................... 452.3.3 TRIAS strategy ................................................................................................................................. 47

2.4 Links with other actors in the region .................................................................................................... 502.4.1 Longido and neighbouring District Councils ..................................................................................... 512.4.2 Other NGO s active in Longido and neighbouring Districts................................................................ 572.4.3 Private sector actors ......................................................................................................................... 62

3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT .....................................................................63

3.1 Methods used for project identification................................................................................................. 63

3.2 General project strategy......................................................................................................................... 69

3.3 General and specific objectives ............................................................................................................. 75

3.4 Expected results (ER) and activities ..................................................................................................... 77

3.5 Phase out and exit strategy .................................................................................................................... 89

3.6 Time table for execution......................................................................................................................... 93

3.7 Cross Cutting Issues............................................................................................................................... 933.7.1 Gender ............................................................................................................................................. 933.7.2 Fighting HIV-AIDS ......................................................................................................................... 953.7.3 Participation and Empowerment ........................................................................................................ 963.7.4 Environment ..................................................................................................................................... 973.7.5 Sustainability .................................................................................................................................... 98


3.8 Institutional organisation for project implementation ....................................................................... 1033.8.1 Role of TRIAS ................................................................................................................................ 1033.8.2 Role of Partners .............................................................................................................................. 1063.8.3 Other Stakeholders .......................................................................................................................... 1233.8.4 Programme Coordination ................................................................................................................ 125

3.9 Monitoring and Evaluation system...................................................................................................... 127

4. BUDGET ...........................................................................................................130

4.1 Resources.............................................................................................................................................. 1304.1.1. Investments.................................................................................................................................... 1304.1.2. Working Costs .............................................................................................................................. 1324.1.3. Personnel Costs.............................................................................................................................. 133

4.2 Budget per activity ............................................................................................................................... 134

5. REFERENCES...................................................................................................143

Overview of Annexes ................................................................................................................................ 145Annex 1. Programme Logical Framework ................................................................................................ 145Annex 2. Timetable Programme Execution, 2009 2013.......................................................................... 145Annex 3. Map of the intervention area...................................................................................................... 145Annex 4. Extracts from Partner Assessment ............................................................................................. 145Annex 5. Market Survey .......................................................................................................................... 145Annex 6. Baseline General....................................................................................................................... 145Annex 7. Baseline focussed ..................................................................................................................... 145Annex 8. Problem tree ............................................................................................................................. 145Annex 9. Problem tree programme response.......................................................................................... 145Annex 10. BSF Pastoralists Programme 2009-2013 budget....................................................................... 145Annex 11. Summary overview of projects of Ngorongoro District Council .............................................. 145

Overview of tables

TABLE 1: TARGET VILLAGES LIVESTOCK POPULATIONS...............................19

TABLE 2: CATTLE MARKET PRICES IN PRIMARY, SECONDARY AND URBANMARKETS................................................................................................................20

TABLE 3: OVERVIEW OF QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF FOOD .........................22

TABLE 4: WEALTH RANKING IN THE VILLAGES (DATA FROM LONGIDODISTRICT COUNCIL) ..............................................................................................23

TABLE 5: TARGET VILLAGES AND POPULATIONS, WITH GENDER AND AGEBREAKDOWNS.......................................................................................................28

TABLE 6: OVERVIEW OF RESPONSIBILITIES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT ANDCOLLABORATION WITH THE PROGRAMME.......................................................39


TABLE 7: LONGIDO DISTRICT COUNCIL TARGETS AND ACTIVITIES FOR2008-2011 ................................................................................................................51

TABLE 8: OVERVIEW OF OTHER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTORS INLONGIDO DISTRICT ...............................................................................................57

TABLE 9: INCLUSION OF MID-TERM EVALUATION RECOMMENDATIONS INTHIS PROPOSAL ....................................................................................................66

TABLE 10: ROLES OF PARTNER ORGANISATIONS AND TRIAS ....................110

TABLE 11: SUMMARY TOTAL BUDGET PER CATEGORY (IN EURO) .............134

TABLE 12: BUDGET DIVISION PER ACTIVITY (WORKING COSTS).................136


Abbreviations

AMC Arusha Meat CompanyBOF Belgisch OverlevingsfondsBSF Belgian Survival FundCCM Chama Cha Mapinduzi leading Tanzanian

political partyCORDS Community Research and Development

ServicesDED District Executive DirectorDGDC Directory General for Development

Cooperation of the Belgian GovernmentER Expected ResultERETO Pastoral Producer Association (a Maasai

word)FEWSNET

Famine Early Warning System Network

GDP Gross Domestic ProductIIED International Institute for Environment and

DevelopmentLCDO Longido Community Development

OrganizationLGRP Local Government Reform ProgrammeMWEDO Maasai Women s Development OrganizationMDGs Millennium Development GoalsMOU Memorandum Of UnderstandingNSGRP National Strategy for Growth and Reduction

of PovertyNGO Non-governmental organizationOCA Organizational Capacity AssessmentPINGOs Pastoralist Indigenous NGOsPWC Pastoralist Women s CouncilPAC Programme Advisory CommitteePCC Programme Coordinating Committee


RC Regional Coordinator (of TRIAS)RLTF Rangelands and Livelihoods Task Force (of

TNRF)SACCOS Savings and Credits Cooperative SocietiesSMEs Small and Medium EnterprisesSNV Stichting Nederlandse Vrijwilligers - Dutch

Development OrganisationSO Strategic ObjectiveTATO Tanzania Association of Tour OperatorsTAPHGO Tanzania Pastoralists and Hunter-Gatherers

OrganizationTEMBO Tanzanian education micro-business

organisationTGNP Tanzania Gender Networking ProgrammeTNRF Tanzania Natural Resource ForumTshs Tanzanian ShillingsUCRT Ujamaa-Community Resource TrustURT United Republic of TanzaniaVEC Village Executive CommitteeVEO Village Executive OfficerWEO Ward Executive OfficerWODSTA Women Development for Science and

Technology Association


1. Introduction

1.1 History of the programIn 2003, TRIAS initiated a pastoralist programme,Poverty Reduction through Social and EconomicEmpowerment of the Pastoral Women and Men inMaasai land in Northern Tanzania , with BSF fundingprovided over a five year period (2003 to 2008). Theoverall objective of the programme was to contributetowards poverty reduction among marginalized (agro-)pastoralist women and men in the target area. Thespecific objectives were to improve livestock productionthrough better infrastructure and support services,improve crop production, and empower womeneconomically. Activities carried out and achievementsrecorded included investing in villages livestockinfrastructure and support services and training womenin literacy and business skills. The programme wasplanned and implemented with two local partners. Thefirst, Community Research and Development Services(CORDS) was responsible for the programme slivestock development component and the other,Women Development for Science and TechnologyAssociation (WODSTA) for the gender component. Theprogramme operated in Monduli and Kiteto Districtsand was originally planned for expansion into SimanjiroDistrict as well.

At the end of the first year of programmeimplementation TRIAS conducted an internalevaluation. Generally, the performance was found tobe satisfactory. However, one partner, CORDS wasfound to have a low pace of implementation of theplanned activities and a very high over-expenditure inone budget post related with land, construction and


buildings. Similarly, CORDS was found not to fullyadhere to timely reporting on physical and financialprogress. Following this, TRIAS and CORDS stipulatedcorrective measures. One of the agreements was toincorporate one more partner to assist CORDS toimplement the component of HIV, not only becauseCORDS lacked expertise in that area but also toincrease the pace of programme implementation. Theslotted in partner organization was Maasai Women sDevelopment Organization (MWEDO). Besides theagreements made, the relationship between TRIAS andCORDS was not that much conducive. Similarly, thecollaboration between CORDS and WODSTA, the twoimplementing partners was not very favourable.

An internal mid-term evaluation of the programme wasconducted in July 2005 by Bethesda International andan external mid-term review in May 2006 by SouthResearch vzw. Both evaluations highlighted a range ofimportant achievements by the programme amongwhich included:• Increased knowledge and skills by women in the

target area as a result of training programmescarried out;

• Enhanced participation of women in localdevelopment activities and village decision-makingprocesses;

• Improved livestock infrastructure throughconstruction of facilities;

• Improved livelihoods of marginalized individualsthrough restocking livestock;

• Improved local organizational capacity throughestablishment of livestock management committeesand livelihood groups at the village level.


The two evaluations also made a number of usefulrecommendations for improving the design andperformance of this programme, including:• Focus on a smaller geographic area in order to

maximize impact• Focus on a more limited and strategically delineated

number of interventions• Design the project to be output-based rather than

activity-based• Strengthen overall coordination and collaboration of

the programme• greater emphasis on organizational capacity and

development at village level• Improve planning, M&E, including greater

involvement of the beneficiaries• Strengthen collaboration with local authorities and

other actors• Employ a more holistic approach• Emphasize the process of social change as a guiding

principle

These recommendations led to revision of theprogramme. In the beginning of year 4, partnershipwas still a challenge for TRIAS and the involvedorganizations and it became clearer every day that theprogramme had a lot of delay in execution and thatguaranteeing sustainability and defining the rightintervention approach was going to be difficult in therunning programme. For CORDS, the situation waseven worse due to unsatisfactory financialmanagement. Therefore, TRIAS, in consultation withBSF and partners, decided to phase out the programmeafter the fourth intervention year and to invest in theelaboration of a second phase proposal, based onexperiences of the first phase.


This second phase of pastoralist programme proposalhas incorporated the recommendations of the mid-termevaluations and experiences gained during the firstphase in order to maximize impact and effectiveness.

1.2 Relevance of the second phaseThis second phase will make use of the institutionalknowledge and skills gained in the first phase to targetthe food security situation of the poorest target groupswithin well-selected intervention areas. The chosenarea of four villages is one of the most food insecureand most marginalised areas in Tanzania. This holisticcoordinated program takes place in close collaborationwith local government authorities and other actors,among whom the implementers of the first phaseprogram

The first phase was difficult and knew manychallenges but it convinced both TRIAS and partners onthe need and relevance to support pastoralistcommunities with professional services. Thesecommunities are among the most marginalized andvulnerable in northern Tanzania. The Famine EarlyWarning Systems Network (FEWS NET), which isfunded by USAID, provides timely and rigorous earlywarning and vulnerability information on emerging andevolving food security issues. According to theirinformation, pastoralists with small herds in Arusha,Manyara, Dodoma and Shinyanga regions are amongthe key vulnerable population groups in Tanzania. Theybecame extremely vulnerable after losing their stock inthe 2006 drought and 2007 Rift Valley Fever outbreak.The periodicity of food insecurity for pastoralistsdepends on seasonality. The most critical period beingbetween October-January in the bimodal and October March in the unimodal rainfall areas.


Population growth in excess of 4% remains the normamong pastoralists. Government policies continue toprovide limited support to pastoralists or underminetheir livelihoods and global climatic and environmentalchanges (leading to a range of impacts includingincreased frequency of drought and disease outbreaks)stand to increase the vulnerability of pastoralistlivelihoods in arid landscapes such as those of Monduliand Longido Districts. In these districts, about aquarter of residents remain below the basic needspoverty line and per capita livestock numbers aredeclining as a result of human population growth,livestock disease and lack of market opportunities thatenable livelihood diversification. Social services areinadequate. As a result of these factors, the arearemains among the most food-insecure areas of thecountry.

Results form the mid-term evaluations havedemonstrated the relevancy and the appreciation ofthe intervention of phase 1 to the beneficiaries. Thefact that women have increased access to moreknowledge and information on different topics(livestock production, business skills, etc.) throughtraining and exchange is highly appreciated. Thecomponents of livestock production and womenempowerment have been considered as the rightissues to tackle. The two evaluations certainly provedthat the first phase of the programme, besides beingphased out during its fourth year, it was indeedrelevant and had some impact to the beneficiaries.TRIAS gained institutional knowledge and experience indesigning and implementing development interventionsin marginalized pastoralist communities, a detailed


understanding of development challenges in Monduliand Longido Districts and a network of individuals andorganizations in the area. This knowledge is valuablefor the design of the second phase programme andprovides a key rationale for TRIAS to continue work inpastoralist areas.

The choice of the area fits in the more geographicallyfocused Tanzania country strategy, which includesMonduli and Longido District. Both are overwhelminglypastoralist with respect to local livelihoods. The maincauses of relative marginalization of the area areenvironmental and geographic; the area lacks arableland as a result of low (300-500 mm.) levels of rainfalland the population is therefore entirely dependent onlivestock production in terms of its food supply (eitherdirectly or through trade for cash or agriculturalproducts).

The old partners will continue to work in the first phasearea. Besides these, there are still other actors in theold intervention areas. As the socio-economic situationof the target groups in the old and new interventionareas are similar, a close collaboration with actors inthe old area is foreseen.

Developing effective interventions that reducevulnerability and enhance the resilience of localpastoralist production systems remains a pressingdevelopment priority in Tanzania. The second phaseseeks to address these livelihood challenges bysupporting livestock producers to improve theirfood security by improving livestock productivity,develop new market opportunities, and diversify theirsources of income.


2. Context of the program

2.1 Socio-economic characteristics of the interventionregionMonduli and Longido Districts formerly constituted asingle district (Monduli), which was divided in two in2005.1 For phase II of the program, we have selectedfour villages in Longido District as intervention area:Noondoto, Orkejuloongishu, Gelai Melrugoi and GelaiLumbwa.Within Monduli and Longido districts, there are hugedifferences in the level of livelihood security andmarginalisation. The economic centres of Monduli town,Mto Wa Mbu and Makuyuni for example, are situatedalong important tarmac roads and offer severalopportunities for further development. On the otherhand, these four remote villages in Longido District aresituated in the most marginalized area of the oldMonduli District. These villages are also far moremarginalized compared to the intervention area ofphase I of this programme.

2.1.1 General data on Longido DistrictLongido District covers a total area of 8,361 km2. Thepopulation of Longido District in 2008, based on figuresfrom the 2002 population census and a 3.8% annualpopulation growth rate, is estimated at 92,244. Levelsof poverty are high, with about 24% of residents ofMonduli and Longido Districts below the basic needspoverty line. For basic social development indicatorssuch as Net Primary School Enrolment Rate and AdultLiteracy Rate, the area ranks among the bottom ten (of

1 Prior to 2005 what is now Longido District was Longido Division, one of threeadministrative divisions in Monduli District at the time.


more then 120) districts in Tanzania mainland (URT,2005). Less than 39% of rural households in LongidoDistrict have access to improved water supplies, lowerthan the national mean figure of 42%.

The district is primarily inhabited by Maasai andWaarusha (also Maa-speaking) (agro-) pastoralists.Farming is concentrated in areas of higher elevationand higher rainfall on the flanks of the districtsnumerous volcanic mountains. The programmehowever is not situated in those areas were farming ispossible. Most of the districts land, lies on the RiftValley floor and is arid or semi-arid, with rainfall ofbetween 300 and 600 mm. Rainfall is not only limitedbut also highly variable from month to month and fromyear to year, with frequent droughts. Surface water islimited and seasonally variable as a result of beingdependent on rainfall and groundwater potential ispoor in much of central and western Longido District(Meindertsma and Kessler, 1997). Most of the area hassoils with medium to low fertility, and because of lowlevels of rainfall has no potential for rain fedagriculture.

Characteristics related to pastoralism andlivestock keepingTranshumant pastoralism is the dominant form of landuse in the intervention area. Due to severaldemographic, environmental, socio-economic, andinstitutional factors, there are declining per capitalivestock holdings, which represent worseningeconomic and livelihood conditions for pastoralistcommunities. Such trends create a tremendous needfor diversified livelihood activities and sources ofincome in pastoralist areas. Where climatic conditions


permit rain fed agriculture, pastoralists in northernTanzania increasingly tend towards agro-pastoralismin order to improve their food security as well as theircash income. This is however not an option forimprovement of livelihood security in the four villages,because of unsuitable climatic conditions.Livestock keeping is the predominant livelihood forover 80% of the population. Traditional Maasailivestock management practices are adapted to dealwith the inherent vulnerability created by climaticvariability through flexible and extensive managementpractices. Rangelands are managed communally inorder to ensure mobility between different dry seasonand wet season pastures and collective access to keyresources such as water and mineral licks. Reciprocalagreements granting access to pastures betweenneighbouring communities are a key local institution forcoping with droughts and avoiding overgrazing ofpastures. Livestock in these pastoralist areas serve asboth a core source of food, mainly through milk andblood, as well as an inflation-free and highly mobileform of currency and store of value.2

Livestock markets in Tanzania are currently expanding(see Annex 5). These markets are all more than 90%dependent on smallholder producers, mainlypastoralists. Arusha municipality, which lies adjacent toLongido District and connected by good tarmac roads,is the centre of the national livestock trade, with one ofonly two modern abattoirs in the country and thelargest supply of livestock in surrounding areas. These

2 The minimum annual cash requirements for pastoralist households in MonduliDistrict is about $750, based only on food, clothing, and medical/veterinary supplies.The cash needs are increasing as education becomes more widely demanded withinpastoralist communities.


conditions create considerable market opportunitiesfor smallholder livestock producers.

Although indigenous Maasai rangeland and livestockmanagement institutions are well suited for their aridand unpredictable environment, a number ofcontemporary factors have weakened the traditionalpastoralist livelihood systems, reducing resilienceand enhancing local vulnerability. The most importantchallenges are:- A resurgence of livestock diseases following the

abrupt withdrawal of the government from provisionof veterinary and other extension services in the late1980 s and early 1990 s as a result of broadermacro-economic reforms being carried out inTanzania during that period. Disease and drought arethe two major constraints on livestock production inthe region.

- Loss of land and key dry season pastures to privateinvestment projects and government protected areasthroughout northern Tanzania.

- Human population growth.- Continually weak participation of pastoralists in

national policy formulation in influential sectors suchas land tenure, livestock, and wildlife.

This last point is particularly relevant to the project sformulation. Although pastoralism is recently, for thefirst time in Tanzanian policy-making history,recognised as a sustainable livelihood, many challengesremain, as the government continues to offer variableand limited support for pastoralism, often arguing thatpastoralism is inefficient and unproductive and seekingto replace these livelihood systems with more modernforms of livestock production (Mattee and Shem,


2006). Key specific institutional challenges thathave impact on pastoralism include:- Policies that restrict or discourage mobility, which is

a key pastoralist strategy for coping with droughtsand environmental variability;

- Land tenure policies which fail to secure pastoralistsrights to their lands or which favour land rights ofoutside actors (e.g. foreign private investors);

- Wildlife laws, regulations and managementinstitutions which restrict pastoralist uses oftraditional grazing areas and the ability ofpastoralists to engage in productive activities ontheir lands;

- Failure of government institutions to transparentlyresolve land use and tenure conflicts betweenpastoralist communities and other actors;

- Failure of district and national development planningprocesses to effectively integrate pastoralist land andresource use practices;

These factors are a significant constraint onpastoralists in the area and have been incorporatedinto the programme, by better organizing the targetgroup resulting in increased leverage, with respect totheir own strategic interests.

Characteristics related to tourism and huntingBesides livestock, the other prominent large-scale landuse in Longido District is wildlife-based tourism andhunting; over 90% of Monduli and Longido districts areenclosed within tourist hunting concessionsadministered by the Ministry of Natural Resources andTourism. A range of local photographic tourismventures and community-based initiatives have alsoemerged in parts of Longido District, representing animportant form of economic diversification. Overall, the


rapid growth of the national tourism industry, and itsfocus in the northern circuit, which runs throughLongido District, has led to considerable expansion oftourism activities in the area and increasingopportunities for local employment and income in thesector (see Annex 5). Tourism now represents about10-15% of GDP and has been one of the main driversof macroeconomic growth over the past decade.Community-based tourism joint ventures have beenformed in some areas leading to significant localeconomic impacts.Revenues earned at the village level have in someinstances been significant, such as in Sinya village ineastern Longido District, where income reached inexcess of $25,000 annually by 2003/04. The LakeNatron area on the western border of Longido Districthas also become an increasingly popular touristdestination, in large part due to the increases intourism volumes, coupled with substantialimprovements in infrastructure, mainly the roadconnecting the Lake Natron area to Mto wa Mbu to thesouth and Loliondo to the northwest. This road is underplanning to become a portion of the main tarmac roadlinking Arusha to Lake Victoria, which would greatlyimprove access to the area. Longido village itself hasbecome one of the more successful cultural tourismprogramme sites in northern Tanzania as a result ofthe area s diverse attractions and accessibility from theArusha-Namanga tarmac road.

While these local opportunities from tourism aresteadily increasing in the area as the national tourismindustry continues its rapid growth, they are howeverlimited by lack of appropriate skills at the local level,lack of private-community joint ventures, as well as


competition between local and external interests forcontrol over lands and natural resources.

Economic migrationOther sources of non-farm income are found mainly insemi-urban areas such as Monduli town and Mto waMbu, as well as outside the districts in Arushamunicipality where increasing numbers of peopleemigrate to find temporary or permanent labour. Thelimited nature of economic opportunities in rural areasresults in this emigration, particularly among therapidly expanding youth segment of the population.This can result in increased risks such as HIV-AIDStransmission and a weakening of traditional customaryinstitutions.

Emerging opportunitiesDespite these challenges and high levels of poverty andsocio-political marginalization in the district, a numberof contemporary developments present opportunitiesfor diversification of local livelihoods. Infrastructure inthe area is improving, with national and district levelinvestments in roads (as prioritized under the 2000-2003 Poverty Reduction Strategy), significantlyimproving the all-weather road network in the area.Private commercial trends have also improved thearea s infrastructure in the form of greatly improvedmobile phone coverage in the area, and increasingmobile phone usage by rural individuals includingpastoralists. National prioritization of education andchanging social values among pastoralist communitiesand political leaders, has led to increasing schoolenrolment of pastoralist children. Finally, high levels ofnational economic growth and public and privateinvestments are creating increasing market demands


for products from pastoralist areas such as livestockand tourism.

2.1.2 Specific data on the 4 selectedvillages

Located in the lowlands surrounding Mount Gelai andMount Kitumbeine, the area is remote and untilrecently all-season road access was limited. The area iswithin the arid portion Longido District, with annualrainfall of only 400-500 mm. and with the variabilitythat characterizes all of northern Tanzania.Groundwater resources in the area are generally poor.The area is rocky with patches of shrubs. As aconsequence, soils have low potential for cropproduction as the rooting zone is limited and bothwater storage capacity and nutrient contents are low.Additionally, soil alkalinity (PH) is very high.

The families highly depend on livestock. About 70% ofhouseholds buy and sell livestock during a given year,with over 90% of cash income from livestock comingfrom sale of live animals. The total number of livestockin the area, by village, is shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Target villages livestock populationsVillage Cattle Goats Sheep Camel Donkey

Orkejuloongishu 12,122 24,342 19,135 11 1218Gelai Meirugoi 15,700 16,469 12,781 0 2100Noondoto 6,215 1,110 1,110 0 894Gelai Lumbwa 8422 6342 4219 0 970

Livestock production in the area is most criticallyconstrained by regular drought conditions and disease;a baseline survey carried out in the target communities


found that all villages perceive disease to be increasing(see Baseline Survey in Annex 6). Per capita livestocknumbers are under pressure.

Primary livestock markets in the target area exist ineach village, although these are poorly developed interms of organization and infrastructure. The planexists to improve the market of Meirugoi to asecondary market. No credit is available tosmallholders in the surveyed communities except inGelai Meirugoi village.The main secondary livestock market is in Longido withadditional secondary market access obtained throughcross-border trade into Kenya. Prices obtainable forpastoralist producers range from 300,000-400,000Tshs. for bulls/steers in primary and secondarymarkets. The price in the Arusha terminal market forthese same animals can be as high as 700,000-800,000 Tshs (Table 2). This difference is the basis fora middleman-based livestock trade to fuel the growingurban and peri-urban meat markets. It also representsa major potential opportunity for smallholder producersin the target area to capitalize on growing consumerdemand and high urban prices and thereby increasetheir income from livestock production substantially. Asignificant comparative advantage that the target areahas is its proximity to Arusha, which is a major marketfor livestock products as well as processing and tradinghub.

Table 2: Cattle market prices in primary,secondary and urban markets

Market Price(Tshs)

Primary 300,000


Secondary 350,000Urban(Terminal)

700,000-800,000

Key constraints facing producers in terms of accessingmarkets, based on the comprehensive survey byNgigwana and Lendiy and the Baseline Survey include:- Distance to markets and poor infrastructure,

particularly during rainy season;- Excessive market fees and taxes (e.g. at secondary

markets);- Lack of financial support services or credit;- Lack of market information;- Lack of policy support to pastoralists;- Lack of modern processing facilities (e.g.

slaughterhouses).- Poor quality of animals and production techniques for

hides and skins

All these factors create an imperative on diversifyinghousehold income sources within the target area. Theother main natural resource found in the targetcommunities is wildlife. The short-grass plains hostseasonally abundant populations of antelope, gazelle,zebra, ostrich and elephants. The area is used mainlyas tourist hunting concessions, which generate revenuefor central and district levels of government. Atpresent, each of the villages reports earning anaverage of 1,300,000 Tsh village income from tourismand none of the villages report household-level tourismincome according to the Baseline Surveys.

Support to the target communities from non-governmental organizations is effectively non-existent,with no NGO s operating regularly in the area. With


Longido District recently established and stilldeveloping its own staffing capacity, districtgovernment support services are also limited. Despitethe lack of external support, the target villagesthemselves demonstrate fairly high internalorganizational capacity, supported by local politicalleaders. This is manifested in the formation of SACCOSgroups in the villages aiming to capitalize on micro-finance opportunities and create alternative income-generating activities. These groups are however ininitial stages of development and lack capacity fordeveloping effective business development plans.

Land tenure in the area is governed by the Village LandAct, 1999, and Land Act, 1999, which vestmanagement rights in customarily owned lands inelected Village Councils and their constituent VillageAssemblies. Almost all land in the target area is usedas customarily designated grazing areas. These includedry season grazing reserves, as well as wet seasongrazing areas, both of which are used and managedcommunally. Individual land allocations also exist,mainly for household calf grazing areas, individualsettlement, shops and in Gelai Meirugoi, farms. Accessto land is not a significant constraint althoughcontinued access to adjacent dry season grazing andwater sources on mountain slopes outside the targetvillages is an emerging issue. Ownership of land bywomen, although legally enabled, remains largelyprecluded by customary mechanisms.

2.1.3 Food Security situation of the 4selected villages

The pressures facing pastoralist production systems,coupled with the shortage of alternative livelihood,


contribute to high levels of food insecurity in thesevillages.The quantity and quality of food consumed variesaccording to the year and season. In good years, thesituation looks as explained in table 3.

Table 3: Overview of quantity and quality of foodPeriod ofthe year

Adults Children

January toAugust

2 meals per day;mainly milk andmaize-basedporridge

3 times a day;diet of milkand porridge

September toDecember(= late dryseason)

1 basic meal perday; namelymaize-basedporridge withwater. Seriousfood scarcity

1 basic mealper day;Serious foodscarcity

For example, although Tanzania s food security in thethird and fourth quarters of 2007 was generally good,Monduli and Longido Districts were one of only 17districts in the country facing moderately foodinsecure conditions at that time (FEWS NET, 2007).

Table 4: Wealth ranking in the villages (data fromLongido District Council)

Nr ofanimalsowned

GelaiMeirugoi

GelaiLumbwa

O/loongishu

Noondoto

Average

Destitute

0-5 23% 20% 18% 21% 21%

Verypoor

6-10 18% 21% 21% 16% 19%


Poor 11-40 21% 23% 16% 21% 20%Middling

41-60 23% 20% 25% 20% 22%

Wealthy

61 andover

15% 16% 20% 22% 18%

Table 4 gives the wealth ranking in the four selectedvillages, with the number of animals owned ascriterium for the level of poverty. By average 21% ofthe villagers are destitute, 19% very poor and 20%poor. This means that a total of 60% of the people inthe target area or ranked poor or lower, meaningowning less than 40 animals per family. Out of all thehouseholds, 253 have no livestock at all.

Following the remoteness of the target area as well aslack of necessary infrastructures, its per capita incomeis calculated at TShs. 110,000/= per annum (aboutUS$ 96) which is relatively low compared to that ofMonduli and Longido districts (TShs. 199,630/= perannum). The Regional average per capita income iscalculated at TShs. 350,952 per annum while theNational per capita income is calculated at TShs.320,044. The above data implies that average monthlyincome of the households in the 4 target villages isvery low, as one would expect from most marginalizedrural people in the country. On average the householdsare getting thus a monthly income of 9,167/= Tshs (±US$ 7).With such a small monthly income, only 34.9 percentof the households in the target area are food secured.Similarly, only 31.0 percent of the households canmeet their basic needs (food, school fee for children,health services, etc.) without incurring indebtedness.Furthermore, only 7.0 percent of the population hasgood living conditions (decent houses and home


environment). As a result of poor food security, 15percent of under five children are malnourished.

A typical family of 15 people in the target area requiresan estimated average of 75,000 Tshs per person peryear on food, with key staples including maize, sugar,tea, cooking oil and salt.

Social services in the area are limited but slowlyimproving. Each village has a primary school and for allfour villages there is a relatively new secondary school,which remains under further construction, located inOrkejuloongishu village. All villages have a dispensaryand mobile clinics, although the distance to healthservices varies from a quarter-day in Gelai Meirugoi toa full day in Orkejuloongishu. The main diseasesaffecting human-wellbeing in the area are malaria,diarrhoea, and pneumonia. The spread of HIV-AIDS inthe target area appears to be relatively low thus far butthe continued emigration of youths represents a majorcontinued risk. All villages have some water taps andboreholes, with the distance to these water sourcesranging from a quarter-day in Gelai Meirugoi andOrkejuloongishu to a half-day in Mfereji and Noondoto.

The Longido District Council has strategized in itsStrategic Plan 2008-2011, to have a food securitypolicy in place to save its people by sensitising herpeople to sell cattle for high prices and use the moneyreceived to purchase food when the prices are low andto store this food for their families. This includes thepromotion of storage facilities. Only 3.8% of the totalDistrict area is favourable for agriculture, which meansthat selling of excess-cattle is the only option topurchase externally produced food. However, the level


of cattle sold in exchange of cereals is too low. Betterunderstanding of the market mechanisms behindselling of food, will enable the pastoralist to buy thisfood at the right time.Another problem related to food security that theDistrict hopes to tackle, is the lack of food provision inthe schools. Children do not get a meal at school,which discourages parents to send their children to theschools. Children who attend schools have oftendifficulties to remain concentrated because of hunger.

The information on food security remains at this designstage of the programme somehow limited, because twoof the implementing partners, TNRF and UCRT, areinvolved in researches on the same topic, currentlytaking place but not finalised. TRIAS and partnersconsidered it a unique opportunity to workcomplimentary with other stakeholders in Longido andto avoid a duplication of efforts. TNRF and UCRT are ina position to influence the research design, to ensurethat relevant issues for the BSF Programme will betackled in the research. This BSF Programme will beallowed to make use of the research outcomes, tofinalise the focus and the preparations of the activitiesof this programme, according to the most recentfindings.It concerns a policy research of 1 year (2009) relatedto food security. It is a pastoral meat value chainanalysis for Longido, Monduli, Arusha and ArumeruDistricts. This study is financed by the InternationalInstitute for Environment and Development (IIED-UK),Vetaid and Ereto. Other organisations involved are(among others) TNRF, SNV, Pingos and Cords. InJanuary 2009, the field testing of the questionnaire willtake place. In March 2009, the full research will be


done. By May it is expected that the outcome will beavailable. TNRF and UCRT will lobby to ensure that the4 villages will get special attention in this research.Based on the findings of this report, around July 2009,a review session can take place to discuss if theprogramme and its indicators are properly in line withthe outcome of this study. Corrections could be madewhere necessary. Anyway, it is already mentionedrecently by the minister for State in the Prime MinistersOffice that the districts in Arusha and Manyara regionswill need food relief due to bad weather and low cerealcrop production.

2.1.4 Problem tree as analysis of foodinsecurity

This proposal is a continuation of the first phase of thePastoralist Programme. For that reason, the problemtree of the first phase is taken as starting point todevelop the problem tree for the second phase.Irrelevant topics for the chosen intervention area wereremoved and additional challenges were added.

The upper part of this problem tree looks as follows:

Unreliable food and livelihood security

Limited income from traditional source of income inpastoralist communities, namely livestock keeping

1. PoorlivestockProducti-vity

Undiversified livelihood activitiesand sources of household income

2. Unreliablemarket forlivestockproducts

3. Unfavorablelaws and policiesaffectinglivestock keepingamongpastoralists

4. Limitedincomegeneratingactivitiesfor women

5. Lack ofPrivatecommunityjointventures fortourism

6. Feweconomicopportunitiesfor poor peopleto diversify theirincome


Unreliable food and livelihood security is on the onehand due to limited income from the traditional sourceof income, namely livestock keeping and on the otherhand to the undiversified sources of income. Thecauses for limited income of livestock are poorproductivity, unreliable markets and unfavorable lawsand policies. These three topics will be tackled with theprogramme activities. Due to the climatic conditions,there are a few economic opportunities for poor people,but there is an economic potential in eco-tourism and itis possible to create a more conducive environment forwomen to diversify their livelihood activities. Bothaspects will also receive attention through the activitiesof this programme.Each of the six coloured boxes is further elaborated asshown in annex number 8 Problem Tree . Annexnumber 9 gives the same problem tree with anindication how each of the problems will be tackled inthis BSF programme.

2.2 Target group

2.2.1 Population of the four selected villagesThe target area for the project consists of fourcontiguously located villages in Kitumbeine Division ofLongido District: Noondoto, Orkejuloongishu, GelaiMeirugoi and Gelai Lumbwa. This area is chosenbecause it is the most food insecure and the mostmarginalized locale in terms of infrastructure andaccess to services within the two districts. A map isshown in Annex 3, with the target villages marked. Thepopulations of the four villages are provided in Table 5,giving a total population for the target area of 22,428distributed in more then 5,000 households. Thesevillages are ethnically almost entirely Maasai.


Table 5: Target villages and populations, withgender and age breakdownsVILLAGE Adult

femaleAdultmale

-15Female

-15Male

TOTAL

Gelai Lumbwa 1134 914 1274 767 4089Gelai Meirugoi 17O3 1202 1637 1058 5600Noondoto 936 816 864 784 3400Orkejuloongishu 2491 2335 2357 2156 9339TOTAL 6,264 5,267 6,132 4,765 22,428

2.2.2 Beneficiaries and vulnerable householdsSome of the programme interventions and activitiesare directed to all the inhabitants of the four villages.This is a deliberate choice of the programme partners,because of the following reasons:- According to the information of the Famine Early

Warning System for Tanzania, the pastoralistcommunities are among the key vulnerablepopulation groups for food security. They are veryvulnerable for shocks as drought and animaldiseases, because they rely solely on naturalresources;

- The whole of Kitumbeine Ward is remote and socio-economic marginalised and vulnerable compared tothe rest of the District;

- The programme aims (among others) to change andimprove some general policies and governmentsystems (e.g. boundary demarcations). Thesepolicies are of importance for all the villagers, fromdestitute up to wealthy;

- For reasons of programme ownership, it is importantto avoid conflicts in the villages. If the partnerswould only target the destitute and very poorpopulation groups, the risk is there that the richerpeople will create hard times for the partners by


boycotting some of the activities. To avoid such aconflicts between richer people and poorer people ,it is necessary to ensure that all villagers benefit inone way or another from the programme and towork with a homogeneous community;

- Also to avoid stigmatising the poorest populationgroups it is wise not only to target them but to offeractivities for the whole village.

Besides this generalistic approach, the programme alsoexplicitly targets those groups that are mostvulnerable and food insecure within the fourvillages. The main cause of (vulnerability for) food andlivelihood insecurity is poverty. Poverty is aconsequence of lack of capital. There are three types ofcapital:- Physical capital is a combination of productive andnon-productive capital. Productive capital has a directinfluence on the family income (e.g. machinery,resources etc) while non-productive capital is a bufferfor difficult times (jewels, house etc)- Human capital is related to the physical and mentalcondition of persons: good health and good schooling- Social capital is linked to the social contacts andsocial position a person has in society. A person withan active social life will find easily support in difficulttimes.(from Strategisch kader 2000-2011 voor de werkingvan ACTvzw met het BOF)

This division helps to recognise the most vulnerablepeople in the villages.Main course of vulnerability is lack of physical capital:

1.The 21% destitute and 19% very poor people fromthe wealth ranking, having respectively 0 to 5 and


6 to 10 animals. These households have no or fewmajor sources of income

2.Especially old people with big families withoutlivestock

Main course of vulnerability is lack of human capital:3.Disabled people and victims of different diseases

especially HIV/AIDS4.Households with no education

Main course of vulnerability is lack of social capital:5.Orphans6.Marginalised women example widows

Some characteristics of these most vulnerable peoplein the villages:1. They are stigmatized by the other villagers which

leads to social exclusion and lower social capital.2. They are often also physically isolated: poor

infrastructure (roads, bridges etc) to reach them,dispersed and isolated, far distance to social andhealth services

3. They have less or no livestock and if they have, theyare very vulnerable for problems related to livestock:

- livestock diseases and inaccessibility to livestockhealth services

- they receive no information from early warningsystems

- low quality of animal production- inaccessibility to market outlets for livestock and

food products4. Lack of or no access to resources:

- No control, management and benefit overnatural resources

- Scare grazing resources (water and pastures)- Children looking after livestock all day long

without water


5. Not heard by leaders- Pressing and dictatorial leadership- They have no decision making power- They are not represented in the village

institutions- They suffer of unfavorable policies

The following measures will be taken to ensure thatthese vulnerable groups will benefit optimally of theprogramme interventions.- It is crucial that the partners are from the start of

the programme open about the target group and theobjectives of this programme. It should be putclearly in a Memorandum Of Understanding betweenTRIAS/Partners and the villages/ District that theprogramme aims to deal with problems of foodinsecurity for the most vulnerable groups of thevillage. The monitoring of this MOU has to be done ina participatory way, with involvement of the mostvulnerable groups.

- All activities should have people from the mostvulnerable groups among the participants.

- Some activities are targeting groups of the mostvulnerable people only.

- Researches, market studies etc that are carried outin the framework of this programme, have to givespecial attention to the needs and situations of themost vulnerable groups

- Extra income, generated at village level fromtourism, should be directed to social services for themost vulnerable groups

2.2.3 Gender analysis of the target groupsThe Maasai society is polygamous with one man able tomarry as many wives as he can care for. Girls are oftenpromised in marriage at a young age. A father might


promise a daughter to a man so that he will herd forhim. This is one way to recruit labour in a society withdecreased labour force. The Maasai society is built onan age-group concept, which gives identity to eachmale. Female genital mutilation is widely spread in thevillages, regardless that it is forbidden by law inTanzania.

The main basis for the division of labour within thehouseholds is along age and gender lines. Men areresponsible for herding, marketing animals, planningand decision making in relation to the allocation offamily resources such as livestock. Women concentrateon tending and minding children, the sick and aged andcalves and kids, as well as on milking and preparingmilk products. All household chores also fall on womenand their daughters. These include house building, foodpreparation, curing herds and skins, collecting firewoodand water, shopping, grinding maize. Young,unmarried girls do a vast amount of work in thehousehold. They also occasionally substitute for boys inherding animals. The woman's responsibility for care ofcalves and kids is particular arduous and demanding.Women sometimes slaughter animals and are expectedto be present at the gate of the homestead when theherd arrives from grazing in the evening or leaves thehomestead in the morning. When there are labourshortages, women will assist in male - defined tasks,but it is very seldom that men will attend to femalework.

Gender issues with respect to livestock ownershipare an important component of poverty and livelihoodsecurity in the intervention area. Livestock and thecash from livestock sales are traditionally under the


control and ownership of men. Women therefore faceparticularly severe pressures in terms of economicempowerment and the need for strategies whichenable them to earn income directly. Women in Maasaisocieties are also traditionally marginalized from keydecision-making processes at the community level,where power rests with male elders and is enforced bythe cadre of young male warriors. Women routinelysuffer from domestic abuse. Because women areresponsible for the care of children, the marginalizationof women has a deleterious impact on social welfare ofthe communities as a whole. Improving the economicand social status of women in pastoralist areas istherefore an important developmental priority withmultiple dimensions.

Much of the life and culture of the Maasai militatesagainst girls' education. If they do manage to go toprimary school, they often begin when they are olderthan 7 years. Some fathers bribe teachers so that thegirls can be taken out of school to be circumcised andmarried off. If they do finish primary school, they areoften encouraged to fail their exams so they will not beselected to go to secondary school. Girls are not valuedas worth being educated because they will leave theirown homestead and become part of another familywhen they marry. Women occupy a subordinateposition in Maasai society.

It is important to realise that in the villages, thementality starts slowly to change. Elderly peoplestart realising the importance of women in modernsociety and their crucial roles to deal with differentchallenges in their lives. In all villages there are a fewmen who are exposed to communities with different


gender relationships and who want changes, starting intheir own families. Their daughters are notcircumcised, receive good education and are free tochoose their husband. These families can be used inthe programme as examples to discuss gender issueswith the beneficiaries.

2.3 Link with national policy, BSF criteria and TRIASstrategy

2.3.1 Tanzania Policy ContextCentral policiesTanzania s policy environment is increasingly gearedtowards promoting macroeconomic growth, increasedinvestment and broadened participation in privateenterprises as the key to achieving the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs) and reducing the country shigh poverty levels.3 The National Strategy for Growthand Reduction of Poverty (NSGRP) is the most recentnational framework putting the focus on povertyreduction high on the country s agenda. The strategy iscommonly known by its Kiswahili acronym, MKUKUTA.It is operational from 2005 to 2010 and is built aroundthree general clusters :• Sustaining high levels of macroeconomic growth and

stability and reducing income poverty• Improving the quality of life and social well-being, in

particular with regards to social services such ashealth, water, and education

• Improving the quality of governance and ensuringaccountability in the management of public resources

The NSGRP recognizes that high levels ofmacroeconomic growth are a necessary but notsufficient condition for reducing poverty in Tanzania,

3 The programme contributes to MDG s: 1 Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger;3 Promote gender equality and empower women; 7 Ensure environmental sustainability.


and that improved macro-micro linkages are essentialto create enhanced economic opportunities for citizensand rural households. With respect to smallholderpastoralists, the NSGRP is notable in its explicitrecognition of pastoralism as a sustainable livelihoodfor the first time in Tanzanian policy-making history.The NSGRP also specifically calls for the livestocksector to increase its contribution to GDP from 2.7% in2000/01 to 9% by 2010.Specific recommendations made by NSGRP in relationto pastoralist livestock production include:- empowering pastoralists to improve livestock

productivity through improved access to veterinaryservices, reliable water supply and recognizingpastoralism as sustainable livelihood

- Improving quality of services to livestock producers- Promoting dairy and leather industries- Empowering pastoral institutions and promoting

efficient use of rangeland- Promoting livelihood diversification and off-farm

income-generating activities.Other relevant NSGRP include the following:- Promote private sector investment in lead sectors

including agriculture, tourism, mining andmanufacturing

- Develop and stimulate local tourism and small-scalebusiness activities to ensure link with the localeconomy

- Increase incomes from wildlife, forestry, andfisheries to local communities.

While the NSGRP is the key coordinating economicpolicy document, a range of sectoral policies are alsorelevant to this proposal. The proposed actioncompliments the Tanzanian Agricultural and Livestock


Policy (1997) which calls for the Ministry of Livestock toembark on accelerated cross-breeding of Tanzaniashorthorn zebu with selected exotic beef breeds underimproved husbandry. Further, the Policy recognizes theneed to promote communal initiatives for bettermanagement and integrated exploitation of rangelandsresources and participatory land use planning. Thispolicy also encourages the pastoral communities toform savings and credit institutions such as savingsand credit societies (SACCOS). In addition, financialinstitutions are encouraged to work with pastoralcommunities to develop appropriate credit systems.This will further contribute to the attainment of theSmall & Medium Enterprises (SMEs) DevelopmentPolicy (2003-2013) aimed at fostering job creation andincome generation through improving the performanceand competitiveness of existing ones and unleash theentrepreneurial potentials of females.A new draft National Livestock Policy is expected to bepassed by Parliament in order to update the 1997Agricultural and Livestock Policy. The new draft policyemphasizes increasing commercial opportunities andproduction in Tanzania s livestock sector. Specificpolicy objectives include:- Establishment of key production, processing and

marketing infrastructure- Promotion of commercial production of high quality

beef- Strengthening technical support services- Promoting establishment of livestock farmers

organizations.

Finally, both the 1999 National Tourism Policy and the1998 Wildlife Policy support the development ofcommunity-based tourism as a way to channel


benefits directly and diversify income opportunities forboth local villages and rural households. The NationalTourism Policy aims at, Involving communities in themanagement of tourist attractions located within theirareas and the making of development-related plansand decisions with regard to tourist attractionsespecially where such plans are likely to have a directeffect (positive or negative) on the livelihood and wellbeing of these communities. Tanzania s Wildlife Policypassed in 1998, also supports local communityparticipation in tourism, calling for Locating futuremajor tourist developments outside protected areas inorder to reduce negative impacts and enhance benefitsharing with local communities.Generally these policies are partially put into practice inthe country and the target area in particular.Government and local authorities lack resources(mostly financial) to enable put all policy items intopractice. On the other side, the communities fail tounderstand policy documents due to language barrier.Most documents are in English, which is not understoodby most people, especially in the rural areas. Inaddition, the language in policy documents is legal andnot widely understood. There is also a limitedaccessibility of the documents at grassroots as they areconcentrated at headquarters of ministries.

The programme is going to strengthen communityknowledge and awareness on livestock and tourismrelated policies and laws. Forums will be organised tosensitize communities or groups. This shall assist inadvocacy activities with policy makers and policyimplementers.


As a contribution towards these policies, the proposedprogramme will:- Improve livestock productivity in the target area by

introducing new breeds- Facilitate linkages between the target community

and private veterinary service providers and otherorganizations with resources and experiencesrelating to community-based animal health issues

- Create general awareness in the target area aboutmarket conditions for livestock products, facilitate adialogue about marketing and work with theproducer associations and develop a cooperativeapproach to marketing livestock products in order toleverage the market power of producers

- Carry out awareness-raising and training on tourismmarket trends, issues, and opportunities forpastoralist communities followed developingcommercial tourism joint ventures

- Village land and natural resource use andmanagement plans, with supporting village by-laws,will be developed. As part of this institutionalstrengthening programme, villages will also havetheir boundaries surveyed and obtain Certificates ofVillage Lands.

- Women s economic interests will be addressed mostdirectly by working with women s groups (SACCOS,etc.) to develop gender-specific marketing strategiesand business plans for products such as milk andhides.

- According to the NSGRP strategy, gender issues andHIV/AIDS pandemic undermine the foundations ofattaining the MDGs and targets. The proposed actioncomplements Government initiatives by taking onboard the two components as crosscutting issuesthroughout project implementation.


Structure of local government in TanzaniaThe Local Government (District Authorities) Act of 1982stipulates the functioning of the local governing bodiesin Tanzania. The Mainland is divided in 21 Regions,appointed by the central government. These have atotal of 120 Districts, elected by the people. TheDistricts are in rural areas made up of Wards, Villagesand Sub-villages.

The term local government refers to the three levelsof Village, Ward and District Councils. These localgovernments are for three quarters financed by grantsfrom the central government and for the remaining bytaxes and donations from (inter)national organizations.The next table gives an overview of the responsibilitieson each of the levels and the way how the programmeintends to collaborate with these levels. It has to benoted that the wards and villages remain with ratherweak and undefined mandates, just as the role of thecentral government institutions for oversight of LocalGovernments is still widely considered asunsatisfactory.Citizens can exert influence on the developmentplanning processes through effective participation invillage assemblies, lobbying to District Councilors,making submissions for drafting District level by-lawsand budgets, developing effective relationships withmembers of Council Committees.

Table 6: Overview of responsibilities of localgovernment and collaboration with theprogrammeVillage Council Ward Council District Council Members of the council:


Village Council Ward Council District CouncilThe VillageAssembly is opento all members ofthe village overthe age of 18.Meets at leastonce every threemonths.

The Assemblyelects the VillageExecutiveCommittee (VEC)between 15 and25 people, with achairperson.

Meets at leastfour times ayear andconsists of:

- Chairperson ofall VEC s- Councillor whorepresents theWard at Districtlevel, whochairs thecommittee- DistrictCouncillors wholive in the Ward- non- votingrepresentativesfrom NGO orcivic groups- WardExecutiveOfficer, whoacts asSecretary

- members electedfrom each Ward(elections every5 years)

- local Members ofParliament

- Any othermembers ofParliamentnominated by apolitical party inthe District

- 3 membersappointed by theMinister,responsible forlocal government

- Members electedby the DistrictCouncil fromamong personsnominated byPartyorganizations

- Members electedby the DistrictCouncil fromamongChairpersons ofVillage Councils

Responsibilities:- planning of

communalprojects

- planning andenvironmentalprotection

- approval andcoordination ofdevelopment


Village Council Ward Council District Council- providing help

or advice toindividuals orgroups ofvillagers intheir economicand socialactivities

VEC has threesub-committees:- finance,

economic andplanning

- social servicesand selfreliance

- village security

And optionalcommittees:- to support legal

affairs- as response to

specificcommandsfrom theDistrict level

- implementation of approvedprojects

- initiate andpromoteparticipatorydevelopmentin the Ward

projects andplans in thevillages in itsarea

- approve or rejectby-laws fromVillage and WardCouncil level

- pass its own by-laws, afterhaving postedthem as publicnotices.Following thepublicconsultationprocedure, by-laws are passedto the Ministerfor LocalGovernment, viathe Region, forfinal approval.

- All economic,development andsocial planning

- Others: Finance,planning &administration,environment,education, health& water

Level of Approval of by-laws:Formal plans and Plans to be The Regional


Village Council Ward Council District Councilby-laws have tobe approved bythe WardDevelopmentCommittee

approved andbudget to beforeseen by theDistrict

Administration,appointed by theCentralGovernment,supervises Districts

Employed staff: These officers areemployed for day-to-day tasks and to ensure thatdevelopment plans are correctly budgeted andimplementedVillage ExecutiveOfficers (VEO)

Ward ExecutiveOfficers (WEO)

Most senior is theDistrict ExecutiveDirector (DED) whois supported by theWEO and VEO

Planned programme collaboration percouncil levelClosecollaboration toensure integrationof activities in thevillage plans.Village councilorsare alsobeneficiaries ofservices ofprogramme,involved in:- training on

marketstructure +developmarketingstrategy

- study tours

Informalrelationship. Nodirectcollaborationwith the Wardlevel.

Streamline theprogrammeinterventions asmuch as possiblewith the LongidoDistrict CouncilStrategic Plan2008-2011 fordevelopmentprocesses.Formalised in theMemorandum ofUnderstanding.This is crucial,because the District(dis)approves by-laws and plansfrom the Village


Village Council Ward Council District Council(livestock andtourism)

- development ofjoint ventureagreementswith privatetourismoperators

- development ofvillage land useplans

- training ofvillagegovernanceinstitutions

- training inaccounting,programmemanagement,investment ofrevenues forsocial services

- attend trainingon HIV/AIDS

Council level.

Collaborate withthe appropriatedistrict technicalofficers to executeactivities.Cost-sharing toimplementHIV/AIDS trainingsessions in thevillages (withDistrict staff)

Approval of villageland use plans thatare developed atvillage level

Local Government Reform Programme (LGRP)-decentralisationThe essence of the LGRP is to transfer duties andfinancial resources from the central to the localgovernment levels. Local governments are consideredto be better placed to identify needs and public servicerequirements by encouraging citizens participation.The reform of local government involves the followingfive main areas: Fiscal decentralization, administrativedecentralization, political decentralization, service


delivery function of decentralization and last, changedcentral-local relations. The extent to which thedecentralisation results in improved services for thepublic, depends on the quality of local governance aswell as financial management.The decentralization process has reached severalachievements, as for example improve capacitybuilding, change in attitude, development in theprocesses of decision making, developments inaccounting and service delivery. But thedecentralization process is far from complete.Sustained commitment from political, administrativeand civic leaders is necessary. Devolution is a long-term process.

Challenges and constraints of thedecentralisationWhat follows are some of the general challenges in thedecentralisation process which are relevant for theinterventions of this programme.§ The leading political party CCM introduced the reform

programme, out of a realization of the need toliberalize the economy and policy, but CCM hasmaintained a high level of control of the process, andit continues to have a very clear political majority inboth Parliament as well as in Local Governments.CCM has no interest in radical changes.

§ Corruption is perceived as a widespread problem,although many people also have confidence incouncil officials.

§ Despite the decentralization process, still a lot of thepolicy formulation process is top-down. In somedistricts bottom-up planning is in practice an ad hocexercise.


§ There is a need for better governance by the localgovernment authorities, for example more efficientand accountable financial management at the localgovernments.

§ More civil society participation in fiscal and financialmonitoring could strengthen the legitimacy of localauthorities. There is a lack of mechanism forcontinuous dialogue with civil society.

§ There are no effective procedures in place forordinary people to use when they want to holdcouncil officials accountable. There is also a limitedcapacity of the poor and marginalized groups toparticipate.

§ Resource gaps at grassroot levels: The villagegovernments have hardly any financial resources andonly one staff member: a VEO.

§ In rural councils there is an urgent need to simplifyand streamline the existing planning and budgetingsystems. Local government authorities facenumerous and competing reporting requirementsfrom central government and are constrained by lackof technical and staff capacity.

The programme foresees the following activities,which can contribute to the strengthening of thedecentralization process:§ As civil society actors, the programme partners work

in open dialogue together with the District andVillage Authorities;

§ Villagers, with special attention for the mostvulnerable and marginalized, will be trained toenhance their participation in policy formulation fortheir own strategic interests, to strengthen bottom-up planning;


§ Introduction of and training on public expendituretracking system, which keeps the officialsaccountable;

§ Training of village authorities on financialmanagement and other issues.

Specifically for the new Longido District, the DEDmentioned the following challenges in the ongoingdecentralisation process.§ The criteria to receive financial resources from the

central government are very difficult for sparselypopulated big districts like the pastoralist populatedLongido District. The received amount is determinedby the number of inhabitants, although the overheadcosts remain the same as for other districts. Longidoreceives the same amount for fuel/transport as othermuch smaller districts, which makes field tripsalmost impossible.

§ As long as Longido District was a division of MonduliDistrict, it was neglected in terms of developmentprojects and personnel. The young district stillcarries this burden of the past but doesn t get extrasupport from the central government.

2.3.2 BSF criteriaBSF aims the improvement of the food security for themost vulnerable people in the poorest partnercountries, as to assure the survival opportunities forpeople threatened by hunger, malnutrition, povertyand exclusion .

The proposed programme directly addresses this coreBSF objective. According to survey conducted (annex7), it was only 34.9 percent of the households in thetarget area which were food secured. The number ofmeals per day affects the amount of nutrient intake of


people. As a result of poor food security in the area, 15percent of under five children are malnourished. Alsothe data from FEWS NET confirm that Pastoralists areamong the most vulnerable people for food insecurityand famine in Tanzania.

This programme is executed in Tanzania, which islocated in Sub Sahara Africa, ranked on number 159 inthe Human Development Index. Tanzania is a partnercountry of the Belgian bilateral DevelopmentCooperation.The programme gives particular attention tostrengthening of women and participation of women tothe development process. Gender is mainstreamed inall the programme activities and there are severalactivities specifically targeting women. In the design ofthe programme, a lot of attention went to participatorymanagement of natural resources, participation of thebeneficiaries and empowerment.

The programme employs a holistic and integratedapproach built around sustainably empowering peopleto improve their livelihood systems using existingmarket and natural resource-based opportunities. Foodsecurity in the target area depends on the vulnerabilityof communities to environmental conditions and theability of resident communities to sell livestock and buyfood when necessary (or occasionally to barter directlyexchanging livestock for grain at local markets).Providing support to pastoralist livestock productionsystems and taking advantage of existing opportunitiesfor non-farm livelihood diversification is essential toimproving the food security of the people in thisrelatively marginalized target area.


Capacity building of local groups and authorities willcontribute to the improvement of the basicinfrastructure in the intervention areas. Trias and theprogramme partners will work in close collaborationwith the government authorities on different levels andwith other stakeholders that are active in or relevant tothe intervention area.

2.3.3 TRIAS strategyThis programme is tightly embedded within the TRIASTanzania 2006-2012 strategy. The general strategicobjective sounds: The livelihood security of small-scale entrepreneurs and farm families in the South with representation of women, youth, the elderly andethnic minorities and their active participation in localeconomic development processes is enhanced in asustainable way .

This can be translated in three specific objectives,which are used in the logical framework of this BSFprogramme:1. Increased access to essential services: the targetgroup has access to appropriate and quality services,aimed at better utilization of local economicopportunities and focusing on micro-finance, businessmanagement (entrepreneurship), local and regionalmarketing.2. Strengthened organizations /movements: the targetgroup is organized in democratic and independentorganizations resulting in increased social and politicalleverage.3. Local economic development promoted: as aconsequence of interventions of local partnerorganizations the target group is embedded in andcan influence local social and economic development


processes resulting in increased institutional leveragewith respect to own strategic interests.

Also the 4 cross-cutting issues of TRIAS areintegrated in this BSF-programme: Participation of thetarget group, gender, sustainability and HIV/AIDS.The following TRIAS-strategies are applied in thisprogramme:• Strategy 1: Core Topics:TRIAS concentrates her efforts in three main topicsnamely: microfinance, small business management andlocal and regional commercialization.• Strategy 2: Activities with partnersIn order to achieve the wider development goals,TRIAS works with Tanzanian partner organizations. Notonly the specific financial support or services thatTRIAS offers contribute to development but the natureof the relationship between TRIAS and partners is ofcrucial importance to the quality of the developmentprocess. All the Tanzanian partners targetunderprivileged enterprising people. TRIAS givescapacity strengthening to its partners. In eachintervention area, TRIAS facilitates the interventions ofa group of partners who implement activities in thefield of local economic development. Some of thesepartners are grassroot-based: they work in thecommunities and intend to serve the target groups ona longer term. Other partners are rather servicedelivery organizations that bring a short termintervention, often towards local grassroot basedorganizations rather than directly to the finalbeneficiaries. TRIAS will fulfill a facilitating role forcoordination• Strategy 3: Production Chain Approach in marketing.


This approach takes care of all stages right fromacquisition of inputs, to production activities,harvesting, processing up to marketing of the finalproducts. When evaluating target groups, TRIAS andits partners will look at how their position and rolewithin production or value chain will be strengthened,either as individuals or groups. In this BSF program,only two sectors are selected: livestock production andtourism.• Strategy 4: Strengthening of TRIASIn order to realize its mission optimal, TRIAS Tanzaniacontinues to strive towards improvement of the qualityof its actions and program, through Resourcemobilization, Planning M&E and Institutionaldevelopment.

The target groups in the new TRIAS TanzaniaStrategy Plan can be defined as:ü Poor families who are economically active: Small

scale farmers and entrepreneurs. A clear povertyfocus is necessary.

ü Focus on pro-active families who are eager at seizingopportunities to develop their businesses

ü Special attention, where possible and relevant, for:women, youth, elderly people and ethnic minorities.

Concerning the intervention areas, TRIAS decidedonly to continue operating in geographical areas whereit was already active. The most important criteria forselection of intervention areas were the following:• It should be possible to combine focusing on poverty

and building up a strong institutional framework forLED.


• TRIAS should have an added value in theintervention area and it should be feasible tointervene in an efficient way.

• TRIAS prefers working in rural areas.• TRIAS Tanzania wants to improve its impact by

choosing a narrow geographical and thematic focus.• There should be basic economic opportunities for

development.• TRIAS also explicitly chose to continue for a defined

period of time with programs in some areas eventhough this choice is in contradiction with its otherprinciples for the selection of areas as to be able tohave an optimal consolidation of its programs. Thisprinciple was partly applicable for Longido District, toallow a proper consolidation of the efforts of BSFphase I. Those elements from the new strategy ofTRIAS that have the capacity to enrich the programin its new phase are used during the design of thesecond phase of the programme. A sustainablephase-out has to be accounted for in the designingof the second phase. For reasons of sustainabilitythese interventions need to be embedded muchstronger in local processes and dynamics.

The other selected intervention areas for the period2006-2012 are Babati and Monduli Districts (where aDGDC Programme takes place) and Mufindi District(consolidation of a BSF program).The DGDC-programme in Monduli District will focus onworking to support small-scale farmers to improvetheir productivity and agricultural income. The centralpartner of this programme is Mviwamo, the regionallevel of a Tanzanian membership organisation offarmers. TRIAS first decided including the villageMfereji, part of Monduli Juu Ward in Monduli District, in


the BSF Pastoralist Programme, because the village hassimilar characteristics as the other chosen villages. Asthe DGDC-programme also develops activities inMonduli Juu Ward, this decision was reconsidered. Toavoid duplication of activities and overlap of services tothe same group of villagers, it was decided to includeMfereji only in the DGDC-programme and to focus theBSF-programme on Longido District. An extraadvantage of this decision is that the actors of BSF-programme only have to collaborate with one DistrictAuthority, rather than two.

2.4 Links with other actors in the regionThe programme strategy is designed to maximizecollaboration among different actors and stakeholdersat local, district and national levels. For all localeconomic development support programmes of TRIAS,the most important actor in the region is the Districtauthority. Besides it is also crucial to workcomplementary and supplementary with other NGO sand with the relevant actors of the private sector. Thischapter gives an overview of the other actors and howthey relate to the programme.

2.4.1 Longido and neighbouring DistrictCouncilsThe policies, plans and budgets of Longido DistrictCouncil on community development are described inthe Longido District Council Tentative strategic plan2008 2011 . What follows is a summary of the mostimportant elements of this planning document. Thedocument is prepared through a SWOT analysis,brainstorming and Opportunities & Obstacles forDevelopment (O&OD) exercises in all 32 villages ofLongido District. The document will be finalised in


2009, with the involvement of all district stakeholders.Longido District has five broad objectives:§ Services improved and HIV/AIDS infection reduced§ Access and equitable quality social services improved§ Gender equity, good governance and community

empowerment improved§ Quality and accessible economic services and

infrastructures improved§ Natural resource management and environment

sustainable improvedThe District intends to start a stakeholders networkforum to strengthen their link with CBO s and NGO s toimplement jointly the District Development Plan. Toachieve the objectives, the following targets andactivities are planned, as elaborated in the next table:

Table 7: Longido District Council targets andactivities for 2008-2011General target for theDistrict

Activities planned in the4 targeted villages

1.Internal improvementof the administrationand human resources inthe District Council

/

2.To improve theprovision of clean andsafe water from 36% to70% by June 2010

09- 10: construction ofGelai Lumbwa waterscheme10- 11: rehabilitation ofwater pipe line at Noondoto

3.Good passage of 777kmof the road network

08- 09: routinemaintenance of the roadbetween Gelai and GelaiLumbwa10- 11: periodicmaintenance in Gelai


General target for theDistrict

Activities planned in the4 targeted villagesMeirugoi and Gelai Lumbwa

4.HIV/AIDS infectionreduced from 7.3% to2.5%. Sensitisation ofthe community onHIV/AIDS awareness

District Executive Directoragreed to give annualawareness creationsessions in the 4 villages insystem of cost-sharing withthe programme partners

5.To provideentrepreneurshiptraining and distributionof loans for economicgroups to reduce part ofpopulation belowpoverty line

Not specifically targeted(general targets are set forwhole District)

6.Educate all employmentauthorities on childlabour and lowenforcement


7.Contribute toeradication of genderdiscrimation practices


8.Involvement ofstakeholders inpreparation of villageland use plans

Programme partners areinvolved for the 4 targetvillages

9.Involve community inprotection andmanagement of wildlifeand create an enablingenvironment for tourismand investors


10. Combat deforestationand illegal harvesting of

Not specifically targeted(general targets are set for




natural resources whole District)11. Involvement of

community inconservation andprotection ofenvironment


12. Education sector:construction of schools;literacy classes;increase enrollment inschools; construction ofteacher houses;construction of pitlatrines; train schoolcommittees; procuredesks; provision ofteaching and learningmaterials; demarcateboundaries of theschools


New secondary school inOrkejuloongishu

13. To increaseagriculture andlivestock productions athouse hold levels toincrease food security

08- 09: soil conservationproject and study tour atGelai Lumbwa09- 10: soil conservationproject and study tour atGelai Meirugoi10- 11: study tour on soilconservation for MeirugoiVillage

14. Introduction of newcash crops - coffee

08- 09: train farmers oncoffee production in Gelai09- 10- 11: train farmerson coffee production at



Activities planned in the4 targeted villagesKetumbeine wards andGelai

15. To form 10 Saccosgroups


16. To increase quality oflivestock (meat andmilk): vaccination;construction of meatplant; construction ofcattle trough; improvelocal chicken; introducelivestock market;introduce artificialinsemination centers

08- 09: introduce livestockmarket and other goods atMeirugoi village and A.I.center in Ketumbeinedivision09- 10: introduce livestockmarket and other goods atLumbwa

17. To increase quality oflivestock: survey ofwater provision fromKilimanjaro mountain;disaster management;facilitate rangeimprovement; promotedairy cattle husbandry;facilitate youth incomegenerating activities;rehabilitate dip tanks

Not targeted

18. Capacity building ofvillage leaders on legalknowledge


19. To ensure goodgovernance and rule oflaw in wards andvillages

Programme partners areinvolved for the 4 targetvillages (training of villageleaders)




20. To enhanceparticipation ofcommunities in projectidentification,implementation andreport writing

Programme partners areinvolved for the 4 targetvillages

21. Improvement ofhealth care (services)


Water remains one of the main challenges for theDistrict, especially for Longido town. Many of thetargets are not specified for specific villages or wards,so they might or might not be implemented in the fourtarget villages of this programme. Other governmentinterventions are specifically targeted for thesevillages. During the planned consultation round withthe NGO s and other stakeholders in the District(2009), the District Council intends to agree on divisionof roles and tasks as to avoid overlap and duplicationof activities. TRIAS and partners will make use of thisopportunity to ensure a good integration of thisprogramme in the District Strategic Plan. However, sofar, the District Executive Director could guarantee thatthe TRIAS programme fits within the official Districtplans.

In terms of broader social and economic developmentinitiatives in Longido (and Monduli) Districts, the WorldBank has initiated through the government a majorwater infrastructure support programme which willserve a highly complimentary role in terms ofsupporting infrastructure and services essential to local


pastoralists. DANIDA is also developing a programmeto provide micro-credit assistance to livestockproducers for re-stocking depleted herds. Thegovernment, in line with its poverty reduction prioritiesarticulated in NSGRP, continues to make majorinvestments in both primary and secondary education,which has resulted in substantial national and localimprovements in enrolment and graduation rates. Inthe target area, this is manifested in the new andexpanding secondary school in Orkejuloongishu.

The programme will work closely with villagegovernments and collaborate with the appropriatedistrict technical officers in executing and adaptivelydesigning programme activities. The partners willensure that the programme effectively links intobroader administrative structures and developmentplanning processes in both districts. In Longido District,working closely with district officials, electedrepresentatives, and technical officers is particularlyimportant because this new district is currentlydeveloping its planning and service support capacity.Integrating this programme with those district-levelprocesses will be important to foster broad district-level support as well as to maximize the programme sbroader value within the district by contributing todevelopment strategies for other areas. AMemorandum of Understanding between the partnerorganizations and the district government will bedeveloped in order to ensure effective integration indistrict planning, budgeting, and service deliveryprocesses.

Annex 11 gives a summary overview of the projectsand activities of Ngorongoro District Council for the


period July 2008 till June 2009. This neighbouringdistrict receives much more funding then LongidoDistrict, mainly from the Central Government and theWorldbank. The partners UCRT and PWC have a goodworking relationship with the District Council, whichcan contribute to exchange of information in favour ofthis programme.

2.4.2 Other NGO s active in Longido andneighbouring DistrictsThere are according to the information of LongidoDistrict Council currently not that many organisationsofficially active in Longido District. Cords and Wodstastill have some ongoing activities in the interventionareas of phase 1 of this programme. LOOCIP iscurrently not active in the four villages of thisprogramme. The collaboration with IIED is intense,through the partner TNRF. There are positive workingrelations with Friedkin Conservation Fund, Mviwamoand Mwedo who are also active in the four villages,without overlapping the intended programme activities.

Table 8: Overview of other communitydevelopment actors in Longido DistrictActor(s)orProgramme

Topics/Themes

Interventions in4villages?

Complementarity withBSF Programme?Way(s) ofcollaboration with theprogramme partners

1.Cords Livestockimprovement

NO Cords works in differentvillages (namely theintervention area ofphase 1 of thisprogramme). Exchangeon programme progressis foreseen.


Actor(s)orProgramme

Topics/Themes



2.FriedkinConservationFund

Conservationandeducation

YES. Thisis huntingarea ofFriedkinsosometimes theyofferassistance

No direct overlap withactivities of thisprogramme. Positiveworking relation

3.IIED Water,education,leaderscapacitybuilding

YES theywill workin thewholedistrict

IIED works verycomplementary with theBSF Programme. Theyshare an office with oneof the partners, namelyTNRF, which leads to anoptimal collaboration. Anexample is the fact thatIIED will make researchdata from the 4 villagesavailable for the BSFprogramme

4.Ilaramatak

Livestock andlivestockproducts (egprocessing

NO Exchange on activitiesthrough LCDO


Actor(s)orProgramme

Topics/Themes



milk)5.LOOCIP

/SautiMoja

DevelopmentinterventionandHIV/AIDS

Probablylater

Currently no activities insame areas.LOOCIP is also aLongido- based NGOwhich exchanges a lot ofinformation with ourpartner LCDO.

6.Mviwamo

Membershiporganisation offarmersandpastoralists

Initialstage,they havejuststartedintroducingactivitiesto areasaroundKetumbeine.Nomembersyet in the4 villages

Mviwamo would like tostart a local network inthese areas as it is veryfar from Namanga,where they have a localnetwork (UUWANO). Dueto limited capacity,Mviwamo is slow tomove in the area.As Mviwamo is a partnerof TRIAS in the DGDCfunded programme,exchange andcomplementary workingis easy to achieve.

7.Mwedo Girlseducation

YES. Theyhavesponsoredsome girlsalso inthese

Programme partners canconsider to collaboratewith Mwedo to givescholarships to girls fromvulnerable families (fromthe tourism revenues)


Actor(s)orProgramme

Topics/Themes



villages8.SNV Support

toLongidoDistrictCouncilonlivestock andhidesandskins

Notdirectly

TRIAS and SNV have agood working relationand regularly exchangeprogress of programmesand activities in theirintervention areas.

9.Tembo Micro-businesseducation forwomenin 2villages

NO Exchange on activitiesthrough LCDO

10. Wodsta

Gender,lobbyandadvocacy

NO Wodsta works indifferent villages(namely the interventionarea of phase 1 of thisprogramme). Exchangeon programme progressis foreseen.

Other key NGOs with complimentary skills andcapacity, which are operating in parts of Monduli and


Longido Districts near the target area, include SandCounty Foundation and Vetaid. Sand CountyFoundation has expertise in natural resourcemanagement and community-based tourism, andactively collaborates on these issues with two of theprogramme partner organizations (UCRT and PWC) inNgorongoro District, adjacent to the target area.Vetaid is very active in community-based animal healthwork in pastoralist areas of northern Tanzania,including parts of Monduli District outside the targetarea as well as Simanjiro District to the south. Theyare not considered as a potential partner because theyare not active in Longido District and don t plan to startup activities in this District. Vetaid has expanded onthis work and now is working on livestock marketingissues with a similar approach to that developed by thisproposal. These on-going activities provide a strongsynergy with the livestock-related elements of thisproposal and numerous opportunities for collaborationand added value between Vetaid s work in this area inother northern Tanzanian locales.

The main NGO interventions that take place in theneighbouring Ngorongoro District are the following:§ Ereto: Restocking, water supply and HIV/AIDS§ Oxfam Pastoralists Programme: Food relief and

security, education support and women incomegenerating activities

§ Pastoralist Women s Council: Girls education, Womeneconomic empowerment, violence against women

The first two mentioned organizations can support theTRIAS programme by sharing experiences andinformation based on areas of interventions. Theexisting relationships between PWC/UCRT with the twoorganizations will enable the programme to prosper


towards positive results trough networking andlinkages.

Through one of the partner organizations, the TanzaniaNatural Resource Forum s (TNRF) Rangelands andLivelihoods Task Force, the programme will link tobroader national and regional processes related tothe formulation of key policies, laws, and governmentstrategies impacting on smallholder pastoralistproducers. Another key collaborator at the level ofdistrict and national policy advocacy is theInternational Institute for Environment andDevelopment (IIED) Pastoral Civil Society Programme.This IIED initiative operates in Kenya, Uganda andTanzania to strengthen pastoralist civil societyorganizations and works with them to develop effectivestrategies for influencing policy. The programme isbased in Arusha and is active with a range ofpastoralist and policy analysis and advocacyorganizations in northern Tanzania.In terms of policy issues and local livestock marketing,management, and animal health initiatives, theDANIDA-funded ERETO pastoralist programme, whichoperates in Ngorongoro District, will be an importantlink. ERETO is an active participant in the RLTF, soagain TNRF will play a key role ensuring that theproject capitalizes on the knowledge and experiencesof this complimentary pastoralist developmentinitiative.

A final key linkage for this programme will be the otherTRIAS local economic development programmepartners operating in an adjacent target area to thesouth in Monduli District (Kisongo and ManyaraDivisions). This project (2008-2010) focuses on


supporting smallholder agricultural entrepreneurs, in amore agriculturally productive target area and this mayprovide opportunities for creating linkages andspreading lessons in a way that adds value betweenthe two programmes. The programme will seek tocapitalize on opportunities for networking andexchange of knowledge and experiences amongsmallholders in these two adjacent TRIAS projects. Forexample, this may be valuable for developingcollaboration between the two programmes in relationto smallholder marketing, provision of micro-finance,organizational development and networking, andbusiness training.

2.4.3 Private sector actorsAlso important in terms of collaborative relationshipswill be private sector actors, for example with regardsto certain programme activities such as promotion ofcommunity-based tourism and marketing of livestock.Important linkages include the Arusha Meat Company,marketing associations of smallholder producers inareas (e.g. Longido) adjacent to the target area andtour operators that are members of the TanzaniaAssociation of Tour Operators (TATO). Private sectorcollaboration will be another mechanism for linkingtarget area-level activities with broader policy andlobbying interventions.

3. Description of the project

3.1 Methods used for project identificationThe process for delineating this second phaseprogramme involved extracting key lessons from thefirst phase project experiences; collecting new andupdated forms of baseline and economic feasibility


information; carrying out district, ward and village levelconsultations; evaluating both prior and newprogramme partners; and formulating the new projectstrategy and logical framework in a participatorymanner with the programme partner organizations.This second phase project proposal was preparedduring June-November, 2007. Based on the keylessons and recommendations from the first phase (seeTable 9), several initial review sessions were held withTRIAS staff followed by a review session of TRIAStogether with the first phase partner organizations. Theoutcome of these sessions, together with a review ofthe TRIAS 2006-2012 organizational strategy and BSFcriteria, provided initial parameters for conceptualizingthe second phase project.

Criteria for selection of programme partners weredeveloped using the TRIAS strategic guidelines forpartner selection, augmented by the following criteria:• Strong grassroots experience and organizational

capacity to operate within rural pastoralist areas andMaasai communities;

• Deep understanding of pastoralist livelihoods inTanzania, including resource use patterns, foodsecurity issues and institutional and policy issues;

• Extensive experience facilitating livestock, land andnatural resource management and enterprisedevelopment within Tanzanian context;

• Demonstrated ability to develop and implementcommunity-level projects in a strategic,participatory, and innovative manner. Among othersbased on existing reports of other programmes andrecommendations of previous or other donors (whichare available in the TRIAS regional office).


A working list of potential partners, including the twoprogramme partners from the last year of the firstphase programme, was developed and an assessmentof organizational capacities was carried out, which ispartly included as Annex 4.

As it is a second phase of the programme, TRIASwanted to continue this programme within the Districtswhere the first programme phase took place, toguarantee an optimal consolidation of the investmentsof the first phase. As the former Monduli District wasalso a selected intervention area for the strategy ofTRIAS, this became the selected District to choose atarget area for the second phase of this programme.Criteria for target area selection within the formerMonduli District were based on the followingconsiderations:• Official agreements made between the District

Commissioner (DC) of Longido and the RegionalCoordinator of TRIAS Tanzania after the terminationof partnership between TRIAS and Cords. As Cordscould guarantee a continuation of its activities of thefirst phase programme in the old villages , withother donor funds, the DC requested TRIAS towithdraw from these old intervention areas. The DCsuggested to focus on Kitumbeine Ward, where thelevel of food insecurity is much higher than in theold villages ;

• Recommendations from first phase programmeevaluations to have a more limited project area (i.e.small number of villages) to foster programmaticfocus and maximize impact;

• Relative socioeconomic marginalization and livelihoodvulnerability compared to other areas in Monduli andLongido Districts, as based on:


o Presence of other service delivery or capacity-building NGO s

o Proximity to district headquarters or other peri-urban areas (i.e. physical remoteness)

o Quality of infrastructureo Quality of social serviceso Access to secondary livestock and agricultural

marketso Level of local livelihood vulnerability as a result

of climatic and other environmental factors• Identification of tangible economic and livelihood

opportunities which would provide the logical basisfor strengthening pastoralist production systems interms of both security and market-based returns;

• Potential creation of value-added and networkingopportunities with the TRIAS DGDC programmeoperating in the neighbouring Monduli District, byselecting an adjacent target area.

Following development of these criteria, localconsultations and informal needs assessment werecarried out with Longido and Monduli District officialsand with village officials and community members inthe potential target area. A baseline survey wascarried out in order to develop greater understandingof local livelihoods, social services and economicactivities (Annex 6 and 7). In order to lay the basis fora local economic development strategy, a marketstudy was carried out analysing market opportunitiesand constraints in the livestock and community-basedtourism sectors in Monduli and Longido Districts (Annex5). It clearly delineated the significant opportunitiesthat exist for smallholder entrepreneurs in the twodistricts in these growing sectors and provided aninitial analysis of the main challenges and constraints.


After the of background information was analyzed, thetarget area identified, partners identified and generalproposed programme strategy and activitiesdelineated, dialogue was developed with theprogramme partners to develop the objectives andactivities of the programme in a participatory andcollaborative manner. Importantly, the interventionshave been designed not only around the needs of thecommunities (in terms of livelihood vulnerability andthe need for economic diversification), and around theTRIAS organizational strategy and BSF funding criteria,but also around the capacities and experiences of thenew programme partners. The aim of this proposal wasto be innovative in developing strategies for helpingcommunities in the target area to become more foodsecure, by using their resource base to create new andenhanced livelihood opportunities, but also to do this ina way that builds on the expertise and knowledge baseof the partner organizations and TRIAS.

Table 9: Inclusion of Mid-term EvaluationRecommendations in this ProposalRecommendation

Implementation within the Proposal

1.To havea moreholisticapproach for thelivestockcomponent

The programme targets improvements inlivestock production in the target area in aholistic manner and through a wide rangeof integrated interventions. Theprogramme aims to improve theproduction and health services in order tostrengthen productivity in the target area.It also addresses productive factorsthrough village land use planning and thecritical land tenure component of


pastoralist production by working toimprove village land management capacity.A major emphasis is placed on improvingmarket access, information and collectivestrategies by the target area producers.Institutionally, the programme addresseslivestock production at village, district andnational levels, strengthening villagegovernment institutions and working tomainstream local developmental concernsin district planning processes. Theprogramme also addresses national policyfactors.

2.Toreviewcommittees thathavebeen setandstreamline themin 1committee pervillage

There will be only one committeeresponsible for the project in each village.The main strategy is to strengthen theappropriate existing village governanceinstitutions responsible for livestock,tourism and natural resource managementthrough capacity building

3.Toconcentrate onworkable areaandhaveprojectbasis

The proposed target area consists of only 4contiguously located villages, all in Longidodistrict. A map showing the villages isshown in annex 3


closer tothe area

4.A closercollaborationwithlocalauthorities hasto belookedat

One partner, LCDO possess strong links tothe district governments and politicalrepresentatives. LCDO will ensure effectivecollaboration among TRIAS, other partners,district administrative and politicalstructures as well as other grassrootsauthorities. Moreover, in the currentproject coordination committee there isone representative from the district council

5.Moreinvolvement ofthebeneficiaries intheplanningprocess

In the process of developing this proposal,the beneficiaries were very muchconsulted. The starting point was to revisittheir already developed village plans. Alltheir needs, which fall within the BSFsupport, were collected. The beneficiarieswere then asked to prioritize their needs.Improvement of livestock productivitytogether with tourism ventures werepriorities.

6.Activities shouldbebasedonfeasibilitystudies

The process for developing activities forthis second phase programme involvedcarrying out district, ward and village levelconsultations with District and villageofficials and community members in thepotential target area. A baseline surveywas carried out in order to develop greaterunderstanding of local livelihoods, socialservices, and economic activities. Amarket study was carried out analysingmarket opportunities and constraints in thelivestock and community-based tourismsectors in both districts.


7.Monitoringshouldtap theresultsof theactivities

The existing M&E system will be improved,prior commencement of programmeimplementation. It will be designed so thatindicators are developed at all levels.TRIAS will also use a proper system tokeep record of collected data. Theprogramme Coordinator of TRIAS will havea specific role of ensuring that themonitoring system is in place andoperational.

8.To havea soundProjectAdvisoryCommittee(PAC)

Instead of having a PAC, the currentproposal foresees to have a ProgrammeCoordinating Committee (PCC). Thecommittee will have representatives fromthe partner organizations, TRIAS, Districtauthorities as well as the grassroots. Basedon its composition, the PCC is expected togather information from various levelsleading to programme strengthening. Thecommittee will have among other aspects arole of periodic programme monitoring andhence institute corrective measures as maydeem necessary

In December 2008, an intensive review of thisprogramme proposal took place, taking into accountthe recommendations made by BSF after analysing afirst version of this proposal. The major changes made,were:- Decision to have four target villages in Longido

District only, rather than three in Longido and one inMonduli. Mfereji, the village in Monduli, will beserved in another TRIAS programme. This makescoordination of the programme on District level mucheasier.


- Focus is put more strongly on food security and thetarget group is better defined

- A better insight in the ongoing programmes andactivities of other stakeholders in the interventionarea.

- Additional information is provided as per request ofthe donor.

3.2 General project strategyAccording to the 1996 World Food Summit: Foodsecurity exists when all people, at all times, havephysical, social and economic access to sufficient, safeand nutritious food which meets their dietary needsand food preferences for an active and healthy life . Inthis context, vulnerability can be defined as: Theprobability of an acute decline in food access, orconsumption, often in reference to some critical valuethat defines minimum levels of human well being .Vulnerability represents defenselessness, insecurityand exposure to risks, shocks and stress ... anddifficulty in coping with them.

Vulnerability is a result not only of exposure tohazards such as drought, conflict, extreme pricefluctuations, and others but also of underlyingsocioeconomic processes which serve to reduce thecapacity of populations to cope with those hazards. Thevulnerability status of any household or individual maychange over time. The determinants of coping capacityinclude- household levels of natural, physical/economic, and

human assets,- levels of household production,- levels of income and consumption,


- Importantly, the ability to diversify sources ofincome and consumption to mitigate the effects ofrisks that households face at any given moment.

Assisting the poor marginalised target groups to bringthem a higher level of food security, requiresaddressing existing developmental and livelihoodchallenges in the target area, responding to local needsfor economic diversification and food security. Thisrequires for this programme employing an approachwhich a) strengthens the existing livelihood system,which is in this case overwhelmingly livestock-based;and b) provides opportunities for income diversificationto have more reliable income flows by using theexisting human, organizational and natural resources inthe target communities. This will reduce dependencyon livestock.The project s underlying strategy is therefore tostrengthen the existing pastoralist livestockproduction system and to create new economicopportunities based on real market trends andopportunities available to pastoralistcommunities and individuals living in remoterural areas. In order to achieve this, the project willdevelop a holistic approach that builds localorganizational and institutional capacity for managinglands and natural resources, as the foundation fornearly all livelihoods in this rural area.

The two sectors where the communities in the targetarea have substantial resources are livestock andtourism. Both represent substantial areas of potentialmarket access and economic opportunity that canresult in livelihood diversification and hence greaterlivelihood security on the part of the targetcommunities. Both sectors present opportunities for


smallholders in the chosen areas where infrastructureis relatively poor and agriculture is not an option.Livestock is the dominant livelihood activity forvirtually all the households in the target area andtherefore the focal point of developmentalinterventions for any pastoralist programme seeking toimprove household food security. For the effectivenessand sustainability of the programme, it is essential toaddress livelihood challenges related to the mainconstraints (see 2.2), namely productivity, marketingand institutional constraints. Existing opportunities inthe livestock sector, which the project aims to takeadvantage of, include:• Expanding markets which are accessible to the target

communities, including Longido and Arushamunicipality;

• Effective models for livestock quality improvementand veterinary service provision which have beendeveloped by one of the proposed project partners,Pastoralist Women s Council, in an adjacentpastoralist area;

• Existing strategies for linking local communities topolicy-makers and processes at the district andnational levels of government, coordinated by one ofthe project partners, Tanzania Natural ResourceForum;

The general project strategy for the component oflivestock is therefore twofold, local and institutional.(1) Locally, the programme strengthens the marketproduction chain of livestock by (1a) improvingproduction to ensure improved quality and quantity forthe market and by (1b) facilitating market access toexisting markets; The program will adapt and developeffective marketing strategies, in collaboration withother organizations working to improve pastoralist


marketing of livestock products in adjacent areas (e.g.Vetaid, see section 2.4). This will improve the range ofmarket options the pastoralist have for convertinglivestock into cash. On institutional level, theprogramme strengthens the lobby and advocacy powerof target groups.

In addition to livestock, the other highly valued naturalasset produced by this landscape is wildlife.Community-based tourism provides the means bywhich the target area residents may capitalize on thesenatural resources. The tourism industry is currentlyregistering high rates of growth and investment. Manypastoralist villages have been able to record high levelsof new and growing income from these activities and tomanage them as partners with private operatorsthrough village level institutional partnerships. Theprogramme can learn from these successful examples(see before). Tourism income will be generated at thecollective (village government) level, where it will beused to invest in social services such as health andeducation and at the individual level throughemployment and sales of local goods and crafts.In order to develop new livelihood opportunities fromtourism, which is based on the sustainablemanagement of the local resource base, as well as tointegrate it with livestock production activities, afundamental strategy of the project is to build villagecapacities, organizationally and institutionally, fornatural resource management. This will be done in linewith relevant government policies, district developmentobjectives and capitalizing on the extensive 10 yearsexperience that the UCRT possesses. This process willprovide them with greater organizational andinstitutional capacity to manage their affairs and drive


their own development agenda after this project. Alsofor tourism, the institutional component of lobbyingand advocacy is foreseen in the program.

It will be a challenge for the programme to ensure thatthe chosen target groups will benefit most of theefforts in tourism. It is a pitfall that the elites of thecommunity become the most benefiting parties. One ofthe project partners, UCRT, has experience working atthe community level to establish community-basedtourism ventures in pastoralist communities in theregion. In addition, SNV, the Dutch developmentcooperation organisation, has expertise and successfulexperience in Cultural Tourism Programs that benefitthe poor target groups. UCRT has an establishedproven system of pro-poor eco-community tourism.The system has several built-in controls to avoidabuses. UCRT develops action plans with the villagers.These action plans will explicitly favor the socialservices and the most vulnerable people of the villages.Some examples of measures the villagers could decideto include in the action plans:- To use a high percentage of the revenue to pay

school fees for the poorest girls of the village(sponsorship system)

- To use a percentage of the revenue to buytreatments for HIV/AIDS patients

Another measure that UCRT takes in all tourismprograms is to forebid cash payments, to avoidunacceptable spending of the extra income in thevillage. The payments have to be done through villageaccounts with regularly changing signaturies. Thevillage leaders will receive a financial managementtraining to be able to manage these accounts properly.


There will be a participatory monitoring system to allowthe villagers to control the spending of the income.

This pastoralist project adopts the strategy that therelevant institutional issues can and must beaddressed in a collaborative and innovative manner.Establishing better linkages between local communitiesand policy-makers and decision-makers at district andnational levels of government is a critical element in aprogramme such as this, which seeks to bolster thesecurity of pastoralist livelihoods. For this reason, theRangelands and Livelihoods Task Force of TNRF willplay the linking role, facilitating local advocacy effortsas well as other collaborations with like-mindedprojects and organizations. These policy-relatedstrategies will have the following central components:• Transferring lessons learned with policy implications

to district level and national policy-makingprocesses;

• Facilitating engagement between local communitiesin the target area and district level decision-makers;

• Providing a forum for sharing ideas and refinementof strategies for improving agro-pastoral livelihoods,including between the project and other projects withsimilar objectives;

As for all TRIAS programmes, a final essentialcomponent of the project strategy will be tocontinuously invest in building the capacities of thepartner organizations, particularly in terms of learningand information flows. The TNRF RLTF, as a centre oflearning and collective engagement in pastoralistdevelopment issues, will provide a key organizationalentry-point for the project to invest effectively inorganizational capacity building of all the partner


organizations. TRIAS stipulated in its 2006-2012strategy the priorities for the organisationaldevelopment services that TRIAS offers to its partnersduring consolidation phases of programmes (like thissecond phase programme): high priority has to begiven to organisational and financial sustainabilityactivities and strategies of the partners.Due to its nature, TNRF will also fulfil a kind ofadministrative coordinating role among the differentimplementing partners of the program. TRIASfacilitates the whole programme implementation andadministration.

3.3 General and specific objectivesThe logical framework for the programme is providedin Annex 1. Chapters 3.3 and 3.4 describe the mainelements of the programme logic.

The general objective for the programme is: Foodand livelihood security for the target groups in LongidoDistrict and their active participation in local, social andeconomic development processes is enhanced in asustainable way.The programme contains four specific objectives, underwhich expected results and activities are organized.The general and specific objectives are interconnectedand are structured based on the overall TRIASorganizational strategy.

Specific Objective 1: The target group has moresecure and diversified livelihood security throughimproved access to economic services.

It aims primarily at improving livelihoods throughappropriate interventions designed to strengthen anddiversify the target communities livelihoods. Theseinterventions involve the livestock and tourism sector,


and aim to improve security from livestock productionand to create new market opportunities in bothsectors. It also includes activities to increase thecapacity of the partners with respect to facilitating localeconomic development processes in these areas.

Specific Objective 2: Improved socialdevelopment services for the target group throughdemocratic and independent organisations.

This objective involves building the organizational andinstitutional capacity of the target communities todirect their own developmental activities. It involvesbuilding the capacity of village governance institutionsfor managing the communities lands and naturalresources, as the foundation for resource-based localeconomic development strategies. This also includesimproving the capacity of village government tomanage revenues resulting from village tourism jointventures and to invest them in community level socialservices in a democratic manner. Lastly, it alsoincludes organizing local producers groups, which willplay a key role in the production and market-baseddevelopment activities falling under the first specificobjective.

Specific Objective 3: Increased socio-economicand institutional leverage with respect to thetarget groups strategic interests.

The development of local opportunities from livestockproduction and natural resources does not dependsolely on the local resources and capacities. Theenabling institutional environment, which is shapedprimarily by governance and policy processes, iscritically important. This specific objective involves theproject s policy component, seeking to developeffective ways to influence the policy and institutionalenvironment. Firstly, we seek to increase the capacity


of the target communities themselves to influencepolicy at the district government level, while secondlywe seek to increase the capacity of the project partnersto influence policy at the district and national levels.

Specific Objective 4: The way of working ofTRIAS contributes to sustainability of the results ofthe partners.

This specific objective is solely concerned with TRIASorganizational management and performance incoordinating the overall project and is in line with theTRIAS organizational strategy (section 2.3.3).

3.4 Expected results (ER) and activitiesER 1.1: Improved quality of livestock

Improving the productivity of livestock is afundamental element of strengthening the livelihoodswith respect to food security and commercial marketingopportunities. The project does this by adapting theeffective methodology developed by PWC in LoliondoDivision for creating a Women s Solidarity Boma, whichwill serve as a mechanism for introducing new livestockbreeds and distributing them to the communitythrough sales and breeding. Main target groups arewomen, with special attention for the mostmarginalised women and other vulnerable groups insociety. Among the activities:- Several study tours to expose community members

to other pastoralist communities experiences withlivestock breed improvement efforts; Process ofanalyzing key lessons and ideas from theseinitiatives

- Establish Women s Solidarity Boma with necessaryinfrastructure on suitable area in terms of water andforage conditions; this Boma will serve to introducenew breeds.


- Develop protocols for distribution of livestock fromthe Boma. Distribution through the community willbe achieved by a) local livestock owners bringingheifers to the boma for breeding; b) selling improvedanimals from the boma at a reasonable price toindividuals or producer groups.

- Dissemination is accompanied by training about carefor these animals, including information regardingbreeding, forage and disease factors.

Livestock disease is one of the critical constraints tothe quality of the production throughout Tanzanianpastoralist communities, which should get thenecessary attention in this project. The strategy forimproving livestock health is two-fold.- Create linkages between the whole community and

veterinary service providers. This includes brokeringa contractual arrangement. The project willguarantee the private service provider the marketand will carry out a market demand survey (takinginto account the needs of the most vulnerable targetgroups) accordingly as an initial activity.

- TNRF will play a role of linking the project to otherorganizations (e.g. ERETO, Vetaid) with resourcesand experiences relating to community-based animalhealth issues. The project will carry out training ofcommunity health workers, working together withother experienced organizations.

Monitoring system for performance of improvedlivestock will be developed with village governments,producer associations and facilitating partners, toprovide feedback on the activities and enableadaptation of the investments accordingly.


PWC will play the lead role in these activities, withLCDO playing a supporting role at the village level interms of facilitating field activities. TNRF RLTF willprovide technical support to design a community-basedimproved breed performance monitoring system.

ER 1.2: Improved market accessibility andprice of livestock.

This component will capitalize on Arusha Region sgrowing market for beef, which is based on pastoralistlivestock. The project will target the Arusha municipalmarket, through the Arusha Abattoir, as its mainoverall marketing strategy. This market is readilyaccessible to pastoralist producers and offers prices upto 150 % greater than those in secondary marketssuch as Longido. Accessing these market gains requiresthe following programme activities, which are intendedfor the general public with special attention formembers of the Women s Solidarity Boma and theresponsible village leaders:- General awareness creation about market structures

and conditions for selling livestock products inregional markets and facilitate a dialogue aboutlivestock marketing objectives and challenges in thecommunity. This includes training and exchangevisits to pastoralist livestock traders and producers insouthern Kenya and Simanjiro District.

- Develop a cooperative approach to marketinglivestock products. This is required to leverage themarket power of producers and to develop a formalcommercial relationship with Arusha Meat Company(AMC). Development of a demonstration Bomawhere individual producers may sell their livestock tothe producer association for sale on to AMC will be apart of this system. This centralized point of sale is


necessary for working with AMC, which will beresponsible for transporting livestock from the targetarea to their abattoir, per their normal arrangementswith producers in rural areas.

- For the above-mentioned activities, improving theinformation flows to local producers will be animportant component of improving market access.The project will develop a marketing communicationssystem, using simple technologies such as mobilephones. Micro-credit may be employed in order toenable producers to purchase mobile phonesindividually. This system will also address issuessuch as climate forecasting information obtainedthrough regional meteorological services as totransmit this information to producers.

Under this expected result, the programme partnerswill also support the food security strategy of LongidoDistrict Council to sensitise villagers to sell cattle anduse the money received to purchase cereals/food atthe most favourable moments and store food for theirfamilies. LCDO, PWC and the District will lead thedevelopment of a participatory strategy for foodstorage in the communities. If needed, simple suitablestorage facilities can be constructed.

The TNRF RLTF will provide a coordinating role withrespect to collaboration and information collection andanalysis within the context of livestock marketingactivities. The RLTF will bring together the partners andother organizations working on similar marketingissues in nearby pastoralist areas to ensure sharing oflessons and added value amongst these complimentaryefforts. This may include utilizing externally contractedtechnical support for more sophisticated market


analysis and business planning required to support thepartners efforts at the target area level. Building theknowledge of all partners and strengthening thecoordinating role of the RLTF in this manner willcontribute to the sustainability of these livestockmarketing interventions.

An additional product that may present significantmarket opportunities is leather. The project willinitially analyze leather market opportunities and workwith key private sector (Asilia Leather) actors todevelop a strategy if it is determined that significantmarket opportunities exist. This is an emerging marketbut unlike that for beef, the leather market is largelyexport-dependent which makes it more difficult toaccess, control prices, meet standards and integratesmallholder producers into the value chain.

PWC and LCDO will facilitate these activities at thetarget area level, while TNRF RLTF will play a role as aforum for marketing information collection and sharing,as well as for facilitating strong links with othercollaborating organizations.

ER. 1.3: Improved benefits from community-based eco-tourism for the target group.

These activities intend to create new local economicopportunities from the expanding community-basedtourism sector in northern Tanzania:- Carrying out basic awareness-raising and training in

the target area on tourism market trends, issues andopportunities for pastoralist communities. Studytours will be organized to visit leading community-based tourism initiatives in pastoralist villages. Thesetours will also include District government leaders to


ensure their understanding of and support for theseventures.

- Market trends analysis to enhance terms of localunderstanding of tourism market issues andopportunities, a resource inventory of tourismassets.

- Tourism development plans will be developed basedon these studies, using private sector expertisethrough collaboration or contracting as necessary.Again using TRNF, through the Community-basedTourism Working Groups, as a central coordinatingbody for information sharing and forging ofpartnerships with other organizations or privatecompanies.

- Developing commercial tourism joint ventures. Thekey to the success of this outcome is the facilitationof strong business-based partnerships between thevillages in the target area, through their corporateVillage Councils and private sector tourism investors.Strong existing models for these types of venturesexist in many locales of northern Tanzania (seesection 2.2 and Annex 5), and UCRT has extensiveexperience in facilitating such community-privatepartnerships.

Community-based tourism at the village level will bemanaged by the Village Council and village-privatejoint ventures will generate income, annual lease feesand per bed-night fees, to the Village Council which willthen be spent on social services. Individual enterpriseopportunities in terms of employment at camps orthrough sales of local goods and crafts will also begenerated.Development of village level tourism ventures (ER 1.3)will proceed in tandem with ER 2.1, as the


development of basic land use plans providing for thezoning of village lands to incorporate tourismdevelopments and integrate them with traditionalgrazing patterns. Village-by laws will also provide thelocal institutional framework for managing tourismventures.

After these tourism ventures will be initiated, continualcapacity building will be carried out through skillstraining done in collaboration with other stakeholdersand institutions will be strengthened to build effectivecommunity-private partnerships and local managementcapacity. Under ER 2.3, women s economic interestswill be integrated through gender-specific training andincome-generating activities (e.g. beads and craftwork)developed in concert with the tourism developmentprocess and associated market analyses.

UCRT will play the lead role, with LCDO playing a keyrole of linking local tourism developments to districtlevel planning processes. TNRF will link the partnersand target communities to tourism operators and othercollaborators working on community-based tourism inpastoralist areas of northern Tanzania.

ER 1.4: The capacity of the partnerorganizations to provide business developmentand marketing services is strengthened.

The capacity of partner organizations for facilitatinglocal economic development and service provision willbe improved through a range of activities.- Certain activities under ER 1.1 and 1.3, are based on

well-proven methodologies developed by one of theproject partners (PWC or UCRT). For these activities,an important focus will be to transfer these skills to


LCDO, which is the most local partner in terms ofhaving arisen out of the target area communities butlacks sufficient skills and capacity.

- For some activities under ER 1.2, related to moresophisticated livestock market analyses and businessdevelopment planning processes, all partners needto improve skills and knowledge in certain key areas:value chain analyses, business planning andmarketing strategies. These needs will be served byusing the TNRF RLTF as a central coordinating hubfor knowledge, information exchange, partnertraining and collaborative analysis. The RLTF will playthe central role in terms of building the knowledge ofthe partners and bringing in knowledge from externalsources, which may be deployed by the partners.This will play a key role in terms of facilitatingconstant learning and reflection on the project sstrategy and outputs.

ER 2.1: Improved earnings from eco-tourismand other economic activities at villagecommunity level

The programme builds the long-term capacity of villageinstitutions to manage the target communities landsand resources in the interests of their sustainabledevelopment. This ER therefore provides a necessaryfoundation for the livelihood-strengthening strategiesand activities elaborated in ER 1.1-1.3, and is closelyinterconnected and for planning purposes, integratedwith those activities. UCRT will be the lead partner forthose activities.- At sub-village level, discussions will be held about

threats, opportunities and constraints relating to thevillage customary land use patterns, resource baseand environmental assets and formulating


sustainable management strategies. Issues relatingto livestock pasture, water sources and minerals, aswell as tourism and wildlife management, will beaddressed in an integrated manner to lay the basisfor expanding economic opportunities.

- Villages will have their boundaries surveyed andobtain Certificates of Village Lands according to theprocedures described in the 1999 Village Land Act.This step is required by law to formalize communityland tenure and is important in pastoralist areas tosecure land rights and avoid future conflicts.

- Village land and natural resource use andmanagement plans, with supporting village by-laws,will be developed in a participatory manner involvingthe entire community including all social groups. Thisprocess involves carrying out awareness-raising onthe land use planning process.

- Village governments receive training on legal andpolicy issues revolving around land tenure, designedto increase their capacity to address key issuesaffecting the community. Gender will be integratedinto these activities.

- The appropriate village-level institutions- includingvillage land councils and adjudication committeesrequired under the Village Land Act and the villagenatural resource committee and livestock committee-will be established (where needed) and strengthenedthrough training and knowledge-building. Linkages ofvillage level plans and regulations to district planningprocesses will be established and strengthened.

ER 2.2: Capacity of target area communitiesto manage financial resources and invest insocial services is increased.


A key outcome of activities under ER 2.1 and 1.3 isthat the target communities village governments willincrease their revenue receipts from the tourism jointventures, a collective communal resource, as withtourism ventures on pastoralist lands elsewhere innorthern Tanzania. Thus, its ultimate impact on locallivelihoods will depend on the performance of thevillage governments to invest these resourceseffectively in service provision to the communities. Theproject will work to build the capacity of the targetcommunities to manage revenues and invest in village-level social services, which will benefit especially themost vulnerable target groups.

The project will invest in training Village Councils andAssemblies in accounting and project management andwork with the community to develop transparentprocedures for reporting revenue received by thevillage government to their community. Training will becarried out through village seminars as well as studytours to nearby areas with over a decade experience.UCRT will play the lead role in these activities, buildingon their extensive work in this area in nearbypastoralist communities.

ER 2.3: Management capacity of the livestockkeepers and gender-based groups fordiversified livelihood security isstrengthened.

Community organizations for undertaking productiveand business activities will be built throughout theprogramme. These activities will be linked to theactivities under ER 1.1-1.3, as these groups will largelyserve as the organizational mechanism forimplementing the plans and strategies.


- Livestock producers groups will be formed fororganizing local pastoralist producers and leveragingaccess into markets for livestock products. Thesegroups will take the lead role at the target area levelfor implementing the business plans developed underER 1.2. These groups will be based on traditionalage-set groupings, which provide the basis forcollaboration among pastoralists. The producers willreceive, after a needs assessment, the necessarytraining on business skills, marketing and financialmanagement.

- Women s economic interests will be addressed mostdirectly by working with women s groups to developgender-specific marketing strategies and businessplans for products such as milk and hides. Newincome generating activities for women can beintroduced (linked to livestock and tourism),strengthened by training on business skills,marketing and financial management.

- Micro-credit schemes will be developed andimplemented for the different groups, to make thenecessary capital available for their business plans todiversify their livelihoods.

PWC and LCDO will play the lead role in carrying outthese organizational activities, and will fully integratethem with activities under ER 1.1-1.3.

ER 2.4 More respect by villagers for vulnerabletarget groups as women and HIV/AIDS victims

As a contribution to improved social developmentservices, it is crucial that some of vulnerable targetgroups get more respect in society, especially(marginalised) women and HIV/AIDS victims. On theone hand, the partners will integrate gender and


HIV/AIDS in all other programme activities. On theother hand, this ER combines some specific activities:- Representatives from the local communities, men

and women, who have decided to apply in their ownfamilies different gender relations that favour girlsand women, will testify on their decisions andexperiences. This will lead to discussions with thevillagers and inspire them to apply new practices.LCDO, as a local partner, will take care of theseactivities, supported by PWC.

- Awareness creation and education on HIV/AIDS willbe tackled by District staff, in a cost sharing systemwith the programme partners. One objective is toerase the stigma on HIV/AIDS victims. The link withthe District for organising this activity will be madeby LCDO.

ER 3.1: The target community is empowered toinfluence policy processes at district levelthrough networking and lobbying.

This ER is to enhance the ability of the communities toinfluence policy and social service delivery at the levelof district government. This issue is therefore acrosscutting one with respect to activities under allprevious ER s. Activities involve training the targetcommunities- through their various customary andformal organizations and institutions- in key policy andgovernance issues, which will enable them tounderstand how district decision-making processesaffect their livelihoods. Of particular importance arebudgeting processes and the project will carry outbudget tracking training exercises at village level, usingmethodologies developed in other parts of Tanzaniaand employed by various civil society organizations.Training activities will develop a local level dialogue on


how to formulate effective lobbying and networkingstrategies for influencing district policies decisions,which will be implemented in an adaptive manner.

All four partners will play roles in these activities. LCDOwill play a key role in linking the target area withdistrict decision-makers and political representatives.TNRF will utilize its Community Forums programme totrain customary pastoralist institutions on key policy-related issues and facilitate collective action ongovernance issues by these local institutions.

ER 3.2: All partner organizations have improvedcapacity to influence policy processes at districtand national levels.

This ER is directed at the same institutional issues asER 3.1, but it seeks to build the capacity of thepartners for networking and advocacy through a rangeof capacity-building activities. Strategies for advocacywill be developed by the partners and integrated intotheir organizational strategies and planningframeworks. This will include engagement in(inter)national policy networks as required. Thesestrategies will target district development planningprocesses as well as national laws and policies thataffect pastoralist livelihoods in key ways.

TNRF will play the lead role in this ER, through theRLTF and its other working groups, working to addresspolicy issues at the national and district level. Trainingactivities for the partners will be organized throughthese bodies and will contribute to the long-termsustainability of capacity-building interventions.


ER 4.1: Efficiency and effectiveness of localpartner organisations increased throughsupport of TRIAS.

- TRIAS and the programme partners will form thePCC.

- They will develop additional protocols for M&E in aparticipatory and adaptive manner. The coordinatingprogramme officer will be hired by TRIAS andinfrastructure for programme management put inplace by all the partners. The initial period ofprogramme implementation will involve developing amore detailed schedule for programme activities,with the full participation of the target areacommunities, collaborating organizations and thedistrict governments. Partners will develop their owncoordinating mechanisms for jointly implementingthe activities described herein, which will benecessary for implementing the programme. TRIASwill conduct multi-disciplinary monitoring visits andannual monitoring PRA s are planned. TRIAS will alsoensure timely and quality mid- and end-termevaluations of the programme.

- The collaboration with the District and the Villageswill be formalised through an MOU, in which thefocus, target groups and exit strategy will be clearlyspelt out.

- TRIAS advisor focuses on capacity building of thepartners according to the organisational capacityneeds, related to financial and organisationalsustainability, planning, monitoring and evaluation.

3.5 Phase out and exit strategyThis second phase of the pastoralist programme is alsothe last phase, the consolidation phase. After five yearsthis programme will be finished. It is the responsibilityof TRIAS and partners to ensure a logic flow in the


programme design, so that the programme will beclosed after a proper phasing out. For reasons ofprogramme ownership, it is important that all actorsinvolved are aware of this time limitation. This isnecessary to avoid unrealistic expectations. Allinterventions of the programme should reach theirimpact within the programme period. After theprogramme, beneficiaries have to be able to go onwithout support of TRIAS or partners and the partnershave to be able to continue without support of TRIAS.Also the ownership of investments and rolling funds willbe made clear to the involved stakeholders. For thepartners this ownership is described in the ProgrammeConventions with TRIAS and for the beneficiaries this isincluded in the Memorandum of Understanding.Towards the end of the programme, a stakeholdersworkshop will be organised to discuss the exit of theprogramme in depth. This workshop will involve thebeneficiaries, the Village Councils, Ward developmentcommittees including the Ward Councillor and the WardExecutive Officer, the district council including thelivestock department and the NGO s active in the area.

PWC will organise over the five years of theprogramme a series of target groups trainings to buildand enhance their capacities to take charge of theprogramme components of PWC after the end of theprogramme. This includes mainly the ownership andmanagement of the Women s Solidarity Boma and thecross breed animals that produce higher quality meatand milk. The registered cooperative livestockassociations will take over the responsibilities for theseactivities after 5 years, following the same proceduresas succesfully applied before in similar projects of PWC.


UCRT’s activities will have the following logic to ensurea smooth exit after five years.* Community Based Natural Resource Management.§ Impart sense of ownership of to community from

the outset§ Establish village institutions through local

government reform programme§ Train village institutions on their roles and

responsibilities§ Village general assemblies will take over and

continue activities related to Natural ResourceManagement after the end of the programme.

* Community Based Eco-tourism§ Facilitate formation of village Natural Resource

Committee in each village§ Train Village Institutions on roles and

responsibilities in relation to eco-tourism assets invillage lands

§ Build the capacity of village general assemblies tobe able to make any changes to the villagecommittees related to eco-tourism

§ Build the capacity of the village councils onfinancial management and accountability,especially related to the eco-tourism. Thesecouncils remain responsible after the end of theprogramme.

* Community Capacity Building§ To impart the sense of ownership of the projects

from the beginning of the programme§ Build the capacity of all Village Institutions on

their roles and responsibilities when exercisingtheir powers

TNRF’s activities will have the following logic to ensurea smooth exit after five years.


ER 1.4 Strengthening business and marketing servicesof partners§ Introduction of the concept and identify needs of

the involved partners§ Training of partners§ Partners improve the training of the villagers

based on the concepts of the training§ Communities have improved access to business

development and marketing services§ After the programme, the target communities are

capable of accessing the business developmentand marketing strategies whenever needed.

ER 3.1 Community empowerment to influence policy atthe district§ Formation of lobby groups§ Thourogh training on policy processes§ Training on Public Expenditure Tracking System§ Development of Public Expenditure Tracking

system§ After the programme, the trained lobby groups are

well organized and participate in policy processesat district level

ER 3.2 Improved capacity of partners to influencepolicies at district and national level§ Introducing the concept of policy and networking

to the partners§ (Increased) participation of partners on policy

influencing process§ Integration of policy and advocacy strategies into

partners strategic planning§ After the programme, partners have fully

operational policy and lobbying strategies andcapable of influencing policies at district andnational level.


LCDO fulfills a supportive role to the activities in whichPWC and UCRT take a lead and will follow their exitstrategies. At the same time, PWC and UCRT arebuilding the capacities of LCDO so that they, as agrassroot based organisation, can provide thenecessary support to the beneficiaries and to othertarget groups in Longido District after the end of thisprogramme.

Also TRIAS applies an exit strategy towards theimplementing partners, to strengthen their capacitieson the long term. The programme advisor of TRIASgradually shifts responsibilities and task ofcoordination, administration, monitoring and evaluationtowards the implementing partners, over the five yearsof the programme.In chapter 3.7.5 Sustainability , more relevantinformation on phase out is included.

3.6 Time table for executionA timetable for execution of the project is provided inAnnex 2, and is based on the results and activitiesdescribed in the logical framework provided in Annex 1.A guiding principle of this programme will be the use ofadaptive management strategies to adjust theprogramme s activities based on feedback fromexperiences and the views of partners, collaboratorsand target communities.

3.7 Cross Cutting IssuesThere are five cross-cutting issues interwoven in theprogramme, namely: Gender, fighting HIV/AIDS,participation & empowerment, sustainability andenvironment. These are the four cross-cutting issues ofthe TRIAS strategy, together with the topic


environment , which is added because of thevulnerability of the intervention area.

3.7.1 GenderIt is recognized that gender equality is essential forachieving effective long-term economic development,food security and social justice. It is also a reality thatpastoralist communities such as those in theprogramme s target area maintain traditionalinstitutions and customs that, although changing insome instances, retard the goal of gender equity.

The programme design treats this critical gender issuein two ways. First, the programme integrates genderconcerns into each set of results and activities. Forexample, ensuring women s participation is anessential part of the process of formulating effectivevillage land use plans and by-laws, as is ensuringwomen s participation on village committees and localgoverning institutions. These issues will therefore beintegrated into programmatic activities (in this case,those under logical framework result no. 1). Similarly,women s participation and economic development willbe integrated within the broader set of activities aimingto improve target area income from livestock andtourism. For example, women s groups will bespecifically targeted with micro-credit extensionenabling women to own and produce livestock, basedon a successful programme of one of the partnerorganizations (PWC) in an adjacent district. PWC is awomen s membership organization and one of the mainprogramme partners, which will ensure that genderactivities and issues are effectively integrated into allprogramme activities of all partners.Especially at the introduction phase of activities thatare intended for women, men should be informed


properly on the activities and the benefits. Withoutpermission of the husband, the wife will not be able toparticipate fully in the activities.

Secondly, there are foreseen special activities targetingwomen s position in the intervention areas, as tocontribute to a better gender balance in the villages.The activities of the women solidarity boma aredirected to the most vulnerable women. These womenwill also receive business skills training.Based on the gender analysis of the intervention area,it is also decided to include gender awareness trainingsin the programme. It is noticed that there are a fewexposed men and women in each of the villages, whohave chosen for different gender relations in their ownfamilies. The gender awareness sessions will make useof these exposed people, to share their views andopinions with the other beneficiaries. This method isbased on a successful programme of Care Internationalin Burundi, named Abatangamuco, The enlightenedcombatants . The method will make use ofenlightened exposed men and women from the local

communities, for example from our partner LCDO.These people will share about their own experiencesand explain why they decided to deal differently withtheir daughters and wifes than the traditional Maasaiculture does. Such a personal testimonies from peoplewho are close by the villages, bring a very directmessage to the target groups. LCDO will take a lead inthese activities, supported by PWC.

3.7.2 Fighting HIV-AIDSHIV-AIDS is a cross-cutting issue because of thetremendous social and economic implications that theHIV-AIDS pandemic presents. It ranks second tomalaria as killer disease in Longido District. Maasai


communities are considered particularly at risk fromHIV-AIDS because of cultural practices and relations,as well as from growing urban-rural migration andinterchange. Cultural practices which place thesecommunities at risk include polygamy, pre-maritalsexual encounters between young warriors andunmarried girls, female genital mutilation, and thetradition of inheritance of wives who are widowed, bytheir former husband s siblings.

As with gender issues, the approach to HIV-AIDS takenhere is to integrate and mainstream it within the basicsets of results and activities described in the logicalframework. HIV-AIDS awareness raising will beincorporated into ALL community awareness-raising,training and gender empowerment activities carried outduring the course of the programme. This is animportant point of attention for all partners. Thisapproach of mainstreaming the topic in all otheractivities was also confirmed by the experience ofVetaid as the most efficient way to tackle this challengein programmes for Pastoralist Communities.

On top of the mainstreaming, the programme willorganise specific activities around HIV/AIDS, incollaboration with the Longido District Council, who hasongoing activities on this topic. The activities will beorganised in a system of cost sharing. The district willprovide the trained staff and the knowledge, theprogramme partners will provide the transport andother necessary logistics to bring the District staff tothe 4 intervention villages. We aim to organise at leastone awareness raising training per village per year, formore or less 25 people (including village leaders).LCDO is the responsible partner for these activities


3.7.3 Participation and EmpowermentEffective development interventions are those whichempower impoverished and marginalized individualsand communities to take charge of their lives based ontheir own interests, knowledge, and aspirations. Thisprogramme is designed to facilitate that process ofempowerment through an active collaborative processguided by the donor, partner organizations and targetcommunities in a participatory manner. Theprogramme will serve to empower the targetcommunities in the following basic ways:• By consistently emphasizing the transfer of

knowledge and skills to the target communities• By ensuring that the entire programme, including

operational activities and targets, is developed in aparticipatory manner;

• By ensuring that target communities are able toprovide feedback to the programme as a componentof M&E systems;

• By building the target communities institutionalcapacity to independently manage the lands andresources that their livelihoods depend upon;

• By taking an entrepreneurship-based approach thatwill build self-sufficient local enterprises andproductive networks of commerce.

These empowerment-related issues are integrated intothe programme s objectives and activities (logicalframework) as well as its M&E system.

3.7.4 EnvironmentThe programme seeks to support local environmentaltraditional knowledge and institutions as a foundationfor local economic development. The programme willaim to strengthen local environmental and natural


resource management institutions, for examplethrough strengthening village government institutionsand through training on local land tenure rights. Theprocess of participatory land use planning anddevelopment of village by-laws will substantiallyimprove local level environmental management andregulation.

Both livestock production and tourism enterprises aredependent on sustainable environmental managementand community-based conservation practices.Improved incomes from these sectors will createincentives at the community level for long-termenvironmental protection in a way that supports locallivelihoods. The programme strategy will thereforecontribute in multiple ways to enhanced environmentalsustainability at the level of the target communities.According to the local indigenous knowledge andunderstanding, the carrying capacity of theenvironment in the four villages is not in danger andwill also not been brought in danger by this 5 yearprogramme. The partners will document the traditionalsystems of grazing pasture sharing over the boundariesof the villages. This kind of indigenous systemsprotects the natural environment. Livestock as well aswildlife are mobile and don t stay permanently withinthe four villages, so the burden on the interventionarea is limited.It is also important to realise that the productivity oflivestock will go up because of the programme but thiscomponent will go hand in hand with improvedmarketing. This will lead to a status quo or minorincrease in number of livestock.


In addition, by linking local livelihoods to broaderdistrict planning and national policy formulationprocesses, the programme recognizes thatenvironmental issues and institutions at these higherscales must also be addressed. The programme willcontribute to environmental sustainability in both thetarget area and more broadly by addressing theimportance of policy processes to these issues.

3.7.5 SustainabilityThe sustainability of the programme s interventions is acritical aspect of its overall effectiveness. The issue ofsustainability is integrated into the overall programmedesign and logical framework structure. We candistinguish between sustainability on the level of thebeneficiaries and the partners.

First concern is sustainability on the level of thebeneficiaries. A first aspect to ensure both short andlong-term acceptance of project activities andsustainability of the project results is theparticipatory approach of the project, wherebyproject activities are planned, implemented andreviewed jointly with the beneficiaries and relatedstakeholders. Involvement of the target group in allphases of the project cycle installs the sense ofownership by the beneficiaries. Voluntarily, they willhave contributed from their own limited resources.Management of activities is gradually transferred to thetarget groups as explained in the exit strategy,supported by needed capacity building. Theimplementing partners only support them in achievingtheir own livelihood goals. Results, changes andimprovements are thus realized by the target groupsthemselves, being a major guarantee for continuity.


The continuance of activities after the end of theprogramme is also founded on the promotedcommunity structures/committees. Theprogramme will establish grass root structures tooversee the programme interventions. The committeeswill be supported with relevant capacity buildingservices to equip them with necessary skills toundertake their roles. The capacitated committees areexpected to continue with their roles even beyondprogramme conclusion and hence sustainability of theprogramme. During programme implementation aclose collaboration will be established among thecommittees and relevant government departments(livestock, community development, natural resources,etc.). Committee members will remain linked with localgovernment and the partners through exchangemeetings and contacts. Also there will be an increasednetworking and collaboration between the governmentand other actors in the intervention areas.A focus throughout the different results and activitiesclusters is institutional capacity building and training(i.e. transfer of knowledge) at the community andhousehold level. This will work to ensure that thetarget communities capacity to engage in successfulcommercial enterprises over the long term is enhancedin a sustainable way.

Financially, the funding provisions for theimplementation of the needed activities after the endof the project vary among the various activities and theresponsible actors. After the end of the project,accumulated income from the SACCOS, that is,interests accrued from the credits will be used forcontinuation of provision of loans. By creating anenabling institutional environment for example,


through lobbying with the Members of Parliament andcouncilors, it is anticipated that resources will beobtained from support organizations/ institutions(Government, other NGOs, private sector, etc.) basedin Tanzania.In addition, selection of programme partnerorganizations has been done with a strong emphasis ongrassroots presence and linkages. This will alsocontribute to the sustainability of the programme; forexample, the partner organization based in Longido(LCDO) has a long-term relationship with the targetcommunities and will continue to operate in the areabeyond the end of this programme cycle. This is afurther rationale for the emphasis in the programmedesign on building the capacity of the partnerorganizations.The programme integrates its activities with LongidoDistrict planning processes so as to promoteinstitutional sustainability of the programme s benefitsand activities.

Secondly it is crucial to pay enough attention tosustainability on the level of the partners.Institutional sustainability of the implementingpartners is expected through strengthening of theircapacity. Partners will be trained in the appropriateareas as determined during the organizational capacityassessment. Besides the capacity needs identified,TRIAS will continue to build the knowledge andcapacity of partners on participatory approaches andproject management so as to enhance their skills andefficiency. Close collaboration will be establishedamong the individuals, community structures and localgovernment structures which are very instrumental forthe continuation of interventions. Similarly, specific


institutional development support will be structurallyintegrated in the project. Together with the fact thatthe project partners have the pastoralists issues centralto their mission and the project will have strengthenedtheir capacity for implementation, provides evidencethat they will continue to implement similar activities inbroader defined or different locations.

It is a fact that financial sustainability is andremains the main challenge for most NGO s inTanzania. The four partners are independentorganizations with their own strategies and policies.Three of the four partners are well establishedorganizations with strategies in place. They have astrategic plan which includes a chapter on the budgetand on fundraising strategies. It is also important thatTRIAS pays special attention to capacity buildingactivities for partners related to financial sustainability,especially during consolidation phases of programs.Basically there are three ways to work on financialsustainability, which the TRIAS advisor will exploreintensively with each of the partners:o To introduce measures to improve cost effectiveness

in the way of working. This can be done for examplethrough cost sharing or cost recovery. Communitieswill be mobilized to contribute initial capital andother fees from their own pockets like in initiatingincome generating activities, paying of localfacilitators, etc. This will create more sense ofownership.

o To apply donor diversification to have a moresecured basis of funding. This includes exploringlocal sources of funds (fundraising) and seekingfunds from financial institutions locally as well asinternationally.


o To have own income generating activities. NGO s arelegally allowed to have income generating activities,as long as the generated income is used to serve themission and objectives of the organization. Legalimplications have to be examined careful wheneverengaging in such an activities. Examples of incomegenerating activities are to offer services at a fee; todevelop new product packages for sale (i.e. trainingmanuals, linkage fees and commission). Thesemeasures create seed funds for continuation withfuture activities.

Examples from the partnersSome partners (e.g. TNRF) are membershiporganizations and hence members contribute annuallymembership fee. The fee covers a small part of theoperation cost of their offices. A second element incovering the operation costs of their offices are incomegenerating projects. This is a major strategy fordecreasing in the medium term the dependency ofthese organizations from foreign donors.TNRF has further opted for a strategy of conducting itsoperations in partnership with other organizations andinstitutions. This strategy assists to controlexpenditures and increase efficiency amongst othersdue to experience exchange. Working in partnershipshas proved to minimize budget requirements andeasier to obtain financial assistance both from localactors and foreign donors. In addition, this comprises afirm funding diversification practice.

UCRT developed a five years strategic plan, 2006 till2011. The following strategies are planned to securefunds for the organization: develop a fund raisingstrategy; build the capacity of UCRT staff on proposal


writing skills; facilitate community s contribution todevelopment projects; Publicize UCRT s programmework. The TRIAS advisor will assist UCRT in theimplementation of these strategies

LCDO is a young community based organisation. Theorganisational capacity assessment conducted showsthat financial sustainability is their main organisationalchallenge. LCDO commits itself to engage on differentfunding strategies, with support of the TRIAS advisor:§ Write a detailed financial strategic plan.§ Establishment of system for contributions by the

beneficiaries.§ Built interest of the hunting and photographic

companies in the villages to contribute yearly directto the development account of the villages.

• Donor diversification: Seeking financial support fromother willing stakeholders such as the DistrictCouncil, donors etc

3.8 Institutional organisation for project implementation

3.8.1 Role of TRIASTRIAS Tanzania formulated in its strategy anenvisioning statement on its own role and added value,namely: TRIAS Tanzania is acknowledged forsupporting partners to become strong actors in localeconomic development processes, to reach sustainableimpact on organised small-scale farmers andentrepreneurs . TRIAS fulfils several roles in all itsprogrammes, so also in this BSF-programme.

1. Facilitation of LED-processes- Advise on coordination of TRIAS programmes:responsibility for the overall programme administrationof the programmes. Each of the partners is responsiblefor its own contribution in this administration. The


advisor facilitates and gives advice on collaborationbetween the partners and with other stakeholders. Thecoordinating role in the field is in hands of thepartners.As capacity building of partners is a crucial componentof the TRIAS-programmes, the programme advisor isalso responsible for the follow up of the capacitybuilding activities of the implementing partners. Alsoguarding the cross-cutting issues is a part of the tasksof the programme advisor.- Initiating the value chain approach of an economicsub sector: Support to economic sectors needs aholistic approach. Given that the value chain approachis such a holistic approach the focus of TRIAS Tanzaniais on a few economic sub-sectors; in this case onlivestock and on tourism.- Networking and linking: TRIAS has to network withother important actors and at the same time build thecapacity of partners in networking. For example, thecollaboration with the local government is formalised ina MOU.

2. Facilitation of exchange processes- TRIAS organizes regular partner meetings forexchange purposes so that the different programmescan exchange their lessons learned- Exchange visits among different intervention areasand programmes- M&E moments to systematize lessons learned andshare them with others.- Exchange of experience with TRIAS partners in othercountries

3. Funding of partnersTRIAS has long term complementary partnerships toimplement programmes and reach its target groups.TRIAS channels funds from its donors to its partners to


support their development and the implementation oftheir activities within the framework of programmes.

4. Advisory servicesApart from funding, partner organizations receiveadvisory and facilitation services on a number of ODissues on the spot for example by way of individualcoaching and guiding of management, board,employees or by organizing workshops, meetings etcetera for all the staff of the organization. The followingtypes of advice are provided:- Technical advice directly linked the programme cyclemanagement.- Advise on OD, with the emphasis on processfacilitation. For a more in-depth advice about specifictopics, outside training or consultancy is an option. Inthis BSF programme, which is a consolidation phase,TRIAS focuses the attention on strengthening theorganizational and financial sustainability of thepartners. This is a strategic choice for all consolidationphase-programmes.- Advise on technical economic issues, for examplemicrofinance, marketing, business development,regional commercialization, pastoralism etc

5. Strategic alliances.Trias Tanzania searches for opportunities to build upstrategic alliances to strengthen its own expertise,objectives and scope of activities and enable partnersto gain knowledge and expertise from such alliances.The main aim of these strategic alliances is to avoidduplication of efforts.

6. Quality controlTRIAS Tanzania enhances the quality of theprogrammes implemented by its partners and byTRIAS itself through an elaborated system of reporting,monitoring visits and evaluations. A comprehensive


PME system assists in raising the efficiency,effectiveness and impact. Quality control also refers tocontrol on correct spending of the funds by theimplementing partners. This is necessary becauseTRIAS is final responsible towards the co-financinginstitutions. The monitoring visits are done by amultidisciplinary team, including at least the advisorand the financial officer.

Who is who?The Regional Coordinator sees to it that there iscoherence and consistency in the package of servicesdelivered to the partner organizations. It is the role ofthe Regional Coordinator to manage the regional team.The Programme Advisor should ensure that alladministrative matters with respect to the programmeare adhered to as per the guidelines of Trias, thisincludes the financial reporting by partnerorganizations and the application of financial guidelinesof Trias developed for partner organizations.The Finance & Administration Officer needs to ensurethat all financial matters are taken care of. The Finance& Administration Officer has to provide support at thelevel of the partner financial reporting and applicationof guidelines and see to it that all other administrativeservices are adhered to as per the needs of theRegional Office. Funds are dispersed to partnersaccording to agreed timetables and logisticalarrangements, and adequate backstopping is provided.Thematic Services. There is expertise available inTRIAS, among the advisors, on Local EconomicDevelopment Strategy (Value Chain, Microfinance,Business Development, Marketing, MembershipOrganization) and on OD and ID issues.


Office Administration and Support Services. These areneeded for the running of Regional Office. This set ofservices accounts for the running of the informationand communication systems and its logistics andtechnical (repairs) needs to outright security of theoffice premises.

3.8.2 Role of PartnersThe main implementation role will be executed by fourlocal organizations, all of which are new partners toTRIAS. The selection of new partners has beennecessitated by the selection of the relatively remoteand marginalized target area and the criteria forpartner selection (see 3.1). The two partners carriedover from the first phase programme (WODSTA andMWEDO) were both gender-based organizations basedin Arusha with limited capacity to carry out a holisticlivelihood-based programme as has been developed forthis second phase.

The rationale for selecting four new partnerorganization is based on the following:• Need for a stronger grassroots capacity and

expertise in organizational capacity-building andenterprise facilitation in livestock and tourism;

• Need for partner organizations which could take thelead role in facilitating the local economicdevelopment processes in the Maasai targetcommunities;

• Need for a partner with the ability to link the targetarea and lead field partners with district and nationalpolicy processes for purposes of lobbying;

• Need for a partner organization with a strongexisting linkage to the Longido District governmentand local political representation;


• While either of the two organizations from the firstphase programme could have played the role ofworking on gender-related issues, it was decided toselect another gender-based Maasai women sorganization (PWC) which is membership-based, hasa proven track record in an adjacent district, andwhich has pre-existing collaborative relationshipswith two of the other partners.

It was determined to design the second phaseprogramme with four new partner organizations withthe roles as described below. Importantly, in order toavoid some of the problems of the first phaseprogramme, particularly the issues of a) lack ofcoordination of activities among partners and b) lack ofintegration of programme activities with village anddistrict government processes, a strong emphasis hasbeen placed in second phase programme design onselecting partners with pre-existing successfulcollaborative relationships. We hope that this will leadto a more harmonious programme implementation.All partners have the following responsibilities relatingto the programme:• Execution of activities and achieving results as

indicated in Annex 1 and 2;• Reporting (both narrative and financial) to the

regional office of TRIAS in Arusha on the progress ofthe programme using the TRIAS and BSF format as itis stipulated in the partnership agreement and yearlyconventions;

• Informing TRIAS and BSF if information askedregarding the programme.

On the next page, there is included a visualisation ofthe different roles and ways of collaborating among the


programme partners. Table 10 provides a depiction ofthe division of roles in the programme amongst thepartner organizations, based on their respectiveexpertise and capacities.


BSFPASTORALISTPROGRAMME

ACTORS

OTHER

ACTORS:

among

othersIIED,Vetaid(livestock),FaidaMali

(marketing), SNV(Cultu

ralTouris

m,livesto

ck,hidesand

skins)

Capacitybuildingon fieldactivities

Capacitybuildingon fieldactivities Lobby and

advocacy,

networking

L&A, NTW L&A, NTW

Intensive collaboration

Coordinating rolein programme

Target groups in the 4intervention villages

LCDO: Grassrootsbased organization,

(IGA s, SACCOS,gender )

UCRT: Field activitiesrelated to Tourism

PWC: Fieldactivities related to

Women Solidarity Boma

TNRF: Support topolicy and lobby &

advocacy processes

TRIAS: Channeling funds of donors; support on coordinating level;providing capacity building to partners and advise; providing quality control

DISTRICT COUNCIL OF LONGIDO


Table 10: Roles of partner organisations and TRIASOrganization Relevant

Areas ofExpertise

Major Programme Roletowards beneficiaries

Major ProgrammeRole towards otherpartners

UCRT

UjamaaCommunityResourceTrust

- Grassrootsorganizational capacitybuilding inpastoralistcommunities

- Facilitatingcommunity-based landand naturalresourcemanagement

- Lobbying forcommunityrights atdistrict level

Lead role facilitating fieldactivities in the targetarea, including activitiesrelated to:- Enterprise development

and marketing strategiesfor tourism

- Communityorganizationalstrengthening, mainly fortourism and naturalresource management

- Capacity building ofLCDO as to enablethem to implementsimilar grassrootactivities in the futurein Longido District

- Working with otherpartners on lobbyingand institutionalleveraging of thetarget groups

PWC Women s Lead role facilitating - Capacity building of


Organization RelevantAreas ofExpertise



PastoralistWomen sCouncil

socialempowermentand economicdevelopmentin Maasaicommunities

gender-basedcomponents of all fieldactivities in the targetarea,- Livestock productivity

improvement (women ssolidarity boma)

- Livestock health servicesimprovement

- Development ofmarketing strategies/systems and businessplans for livestock,

- Strengthening ofcommunity gender basedgroups

- Develop micro-creditschemes for groups

LCDO as to enablethem to implementsimilar gendergrassroot activities inthe future in LongidoDistrict

- Collaborating withother partners ongender issues so as toaddress them in anintegrated manner





LCDO

LongidoCommunityDevelopmentOrganization

Localknowledge ofdevelopmentand socio-political issueswithin LongidoDistrict

Supporting and graduallyco-facilitating fieldactivities implemented byUCRT and PWC, related to:- Care and management

of improved livestock- Animal health care

services- Marketing and business

development- Develop centralised

demonstration boma- Awareness raising on

tourism opportunities- Livestock producer

associations- Gender and HIV/AIDSFacilitating districtgovernment support for

Integrating programmeactivities from thetarget area in districtplanning anddevelopment processes;





target communitiesdevelopmental interests

TNRF

TanzaniaNaturalResourceForum

Lobbying andadvocacy onpastoralistlivelihoods andnaturalresourceissues at thenational andregional levels.

Capacity strengthening ofthe target communities onrelevant national policydiscourses

- Analyse marketinformation andopportunities

- Lead role incoordination ofprogrammeadministrative issues(supported by TRIAS)

- Capacitystrengthening ofother partners

- Linking target area-level activities tonational and localgovernment policyprocesses




Major ProgrammeRole towards otherpartners- Facilitate

collaborativelinkages betweenTRIAS andprogramme partnersand otherorganizations andprivate sector actors

TRIAS Successfulcoordination ofimplementation of severaldevelopmentprogrammesExperiencewithprogrammes inpastoralistareas and with

To form and review PCC

Ensuring execution of andparticipating inparticipatory M&Eexercises.

- Capacitystrengthening ofpartners onorganisational andinstitutionaldevelopment

- Provision of technicaladvise to partners

- Facilitation of LED-processes

- Programme





programmesof BSF

coordination- Funding- Quality Control

More detailed information on the histories, strategies, and organizational capacities ofthe different partner organizations can be found in Annex 4.


3.8.2.1 Ujamaa Community Resource Trust (UCRT)General informationUCRT is a community-based service organization, whichhistory goes back to the late 1990 s. UCRT has establisheditself as a leading community-based organization workingwith (agro-)pastoralist and hunter-gatherer communitiesthroughout northern Tanzania. UCRT takes anempowerment-based approach to rural development andpoverty reduction, focusing on developing participatorystrategies whereby local communities can develop andimplement their own methods for improving theirlivelihoods. A central element of their approach deals withincreasing community capacity to manage lands andnatural resources through activities such as land useplanning, village organizational development, andenterprise development. UCRT has facilitated theseprocesses in areas such as community-based tourism inover thirty villages. UCRT operates out of offices based inArusha and Loliondo (Ngorongoro District) and relies on adecentralized network of local field officers. Theorganization has substantial capacity for grassrootsfacilitation with 27 staff in total. They currently operateimmediately adjacent to the programme target area, onthe western side of Lake Natron in Ngorongoro District.

UCRT s 2006-2010 strategic plan describes four focalareas for their activities:• Community Based Natural Resources Management:

Focused on training communities, facilitating formationof Village natural resources committees, communityland use plans, village by-laws and land certificates,eco-tourism.


• Community Livelihoods support: Focused on improvingliving standards through savings and credit schemes,education scholarships, harvest of forest resources,small scale agriculture and livestock improvement.

• Community Capacity Building Programme: Focused onprotection of community land, education scholarshipsfor girls and boys.

• Institutional Capacity building of UCRT: Development ofhuman, financial and material resources. Includesdeveloping a fundraising strategy.

Major conclusions from the Organizational CapacityAssessment (OCA) of UCRT:

UCRT has a strong staff presence at the community leveland would provide a good mechanism for communityoutreach. The programme on land advocacy is unique andpractical in enabling communities to claim their landrights. UCRT s main challenge is the dwindling financialresources. UCRT has a positive relationship with DoroboSafaris but might need to run more independently.Likewise, UCRT might benefit from the expansion of theBoard of Trustees to include more technical people andthose from the regions as earlier planned.

In this programmeUCRT will have primary responsibility for executing theoverall programme at the level of the target area. UCRTwill take the lead in facilitating all activities underexpected results 1-3, working with other partners andTRIAS in a coordinated and fully integrated manner.


Content-wise, the focus of UCRT is on introducing thecommunity-based eco-tourism as a way of diversifying thesources of income of the villagers in the target area.UCRT will also contribute to the capacity building ofanother partner, LCDO.

3.8.2.2 Pastoralist Women’s Council (PWC)General informationPWC is the leading gender-based community developmentorganization in Tanzanian Maasailand. It was founded in1998 and is based in Ngorongoro District, where most ofits work has been carried out. This membership-basedorganization counts 37 women s groups and 695individuals who pay a small annual subscription. Theorganization is governed by a General Assembly and anExecutive Committee.PWC s approach to women s empowerment anddevelopment in Maasai communities is to give womenaccess to education and economic assets, accompanied bygeneral community-level sensitization and capacitybuilding. A core element of the livelihood-basedcomponent is granting women loans of heifers in order togive them ownership of livestock; this programme hasbeen very successful and fully sustainable where it hasbeen practiced by PWC.

The organization has worked on the following main areasof activities:• Education: Promoting girls education. Provision of

education facilitators. Management of Community-owned Secondary School with 180 children

• Women s Economic Empowerment: supporting women sgroups with a revolving credit scheme with 370


participating women and training. Establish women ssolidarity Boma and livestock upgrading and production.

• Small Scale Farming: Raising awareness on foodsecurity and promotion of home gardens and productionfor the market. Provision of ox-ploughs.

• Eco-tourism & Cultural Tourism: Coordinatingscholarships for girls provided by tour companies.Coordinating family hosting of students tourists infamilies of members of PWC.

• Health: Focused on Primary Health Care, HIV/AIDSawareness creation, maternal health, immunization andlinking women to health services.

• Institutional Capacity Building: Training on roles andresponsibilities, in lobbying and advocacy, land rights,position of women, government laws.

Major conclusions from the Organizational CapacityAssessment (OCA) of PWC:

PWC manifests innovation in their approaches of women sempowerment, especially the Women s Boma and theRevolving Credit Schemes which are owned and managedby women. These have been used as entry points forraising women s awareness about other issues. PWC hasbeen tested through periodic evaluations that showpositive growth and track record of the organization. Theyhave a strong grassroots among their beneficiaries. PWChas helped women to improve their self confidence andbargaining power and boosted women s enterprisecapacity. A major challenge is resource mobilization andthe demands for expansion of the geographical area ofcoverage.


In this programmePWC has existing collaborative relationships with (amongothers) UCRT, which will facilitate collaboration andintegrated work in this programme. Improvement oflivestock production through the women s solidarity boma,including provision of the necessary trainings, will be themain block of activities under the lead of PWC. PWC willhave primary responsibility for facilitating gender-targetedissues. Like UCRT, also PWC will contribute to the capacitybuilding of LCDO and will work in a fully collaborative andintegrated fashion with the other partners.

3.8.2.3 Longido Community DevelopmentOrganization (LCDO)General informationLCDO is a community-based development organizationheadquartered in Longido. Unlike UCRT and PWC, LCDO isa relatively new organization (established in 2003) withouta proven track record and presently with limited capacity.The organization s mission is to empower communitymembers for the eradication of poverty through promotingquality education, skills, training, manage use of availableresources, motivating development.

The rationale for incorporating LCDO, despite its presentlimited capacity, as a programme partner is two-fold.First, given the four target villages are in Longido District,it is essential to build the capacity of local organizations inthe district and to incorporate such locally basedorganizations into the programme structure. Second,LCDO does possess strong links to the Longido Districtgovernment and political representatives and will play thelead role in ensuring effective collaboration of the


programme actors and the district administrative andpolitical structures. LCDO will therefore take the lead inensuring that the target communities interests aresupported by district-level planning processes, and thateffective links with all branches of district government aremaintained.Two of the five programme areas of LCDO are relevant tothe expected results:• Economic Activities: Plans for income-generating

activities through (micro-enterprise) training, provisionof soft loans, improvement of livestock breeds, animalhusbandry and marketing and establishment ofcommunity ranches. Plans to promote better use ofwildlife and natural resources. Plan to carry out trainingin land ownership and land laws.

• Community Capacity and Networking: trainingcommunities in leadership, establishment of anetworking system and M&E.

Major Conclusions from Organizational CapacityAssessment (OCA) of LCDO:

LCDO s programme areas are more than 90% similar toprogramme areas of a similar organization (LOCIP) withinthe same area of operation and without the kind ofresources and capacity available to the former. Theorganization has to re-strategize around resourcemobilization and reposition itself to work on areas wherethey have a comparative advantage, e.g. the area ofpolitical mobilization and advocacy. LCDO might have tostrengthen alliances and collaborative partnerships withorganizations and the district offices to help theorganization start up and build a positive track record.


In this programmeThe programme will optimally make use of the grassrootsposition of LCDO, close to the villagers and close to theDistrict Authorities. LCDO will work together with UCRTand PWC in executing activities under expected results 1-3, although its role will be more of supporting theseactivities and in the progress of the programme buildingits own capacity to facilitate such activities at thegrassroots level in Longido District in the future. Thecapacity building of LCDO is an important element for thesustainability of the programme.LCDO will also play an important role for the aspectsgender and HIV/AIDS in the programme.

3.8.2.4 Tanzania Natural Resource Forum (TNRF)General informationTNRF was initiated informally in 2001 and registered early2006. During this brief period TNRF has becomeTanzania s leading network for addressing naturalresource governance issues, with the objective ofimproving the management of the country s resources forthe benefit of its citizens livelihoods. TNRF is amembership-based organization, currently with about 350members from around the country, administered by asecretariat based in Arusha. TNRF also works closely withthe Policy Forum, the civil society coalition of NGO sworking to influence government policy and based in Dares Salaam. TNRF is structured around thematic workinggroups ; in the areas of Forestry and Rangelands &Livelihoods, Human & Wildlife Conflict and Community-based Tourism. For the purposes of this programme,


TNRF s Rangelands and Livelihoods Task Force (RLTF) willbe the main linkage.

The RLTF plays a core role of linking local and community-based organizations with national level policy dialogues; anumber of programme partners and collaboratingstakeholders (UCRT, PWC, IIED, PINGO s Forum andVetaid) have been key participants in the RLTF since itsestablishment.Based on an analysis of the main constraints, which limitrural development and sustainable natural resourcemanagement in Tanzania s rangelands, RLTF hasdeveloped the following strategic activities:• Supporting communities and local-level organisations to

better understand and identify their policy needs inrelation to current policy and practice;

• Facilitating communities engagement with policy-making processes, so that they better understand andrespond to rural people s needs;

• Working with development programmes in facilitatingthe communication of their policy findings in support ofrural communities and livelihoods;

• Providing technical support to the development of policyand law through directly working with parliamentariansand ministry officials;

• Supporting communication and application ofappropriate policy and practice in the rangelands withcommunities and in partnership with government;

• Supporting a process of stakeholder policy feedback andpolicy development

Main conclusions on Organizational Capacity Assessment(OCA) of TNRF:


TNRF is spearheaded by collective action by memberorganizations and individuals on a voluntary basis. As aresult, its programmes will be sustained by constantnurturing of the zeal, passion and expertise within theorganization. The organization is strengthened by thecollaborative initiatives at district level and its nationallinkages. The relationships of TNRF have potential to builda critical mass and strong advocacy chain for TNRF, fromgrassroots to national level.

In this programmeThe role of RLTF will be to link local issues and concerns,by working with the target communities as well as theother programme partners, with relevant national policydiscourses. This will ensure that the programme engagesin policy lobbying activities in a strategic, collaborativeand effective manner. TNRF will also link programmepartners and TRIAS into its collaborative network, withother organizations working on similar developmentissues, or private sector actors engaged in livestock ortourism. TNRF plays among the implementing partners theadministrative coordinating role for this programme.

3.8.3 Other StakeholdersIn chapter 2.4 Links with other actors in the region , anelaboration is made on the other stakeholders in andaround Longido and how the programme partners intendto collaborate with them.In terms of institutional structure of the programme, theother key stakeholder besides TRIAS, the partnerorganizations and the target communities, is the districtgovernment of Longido. This collaboration will bestructured and formalised officially through a


Memorandum of Understanding with the District Council,with LCDO playing the main linkage between the Districton the one hand and the partners and TRIAS on the otherhand, as described above.

At the village level, effective engagement will be ensuredand ownership of the programme fostered by workingthrough field coordinators chosen collaboratively by thevillages and partner organizations. This will followestablished protocols for facilitating communitydevelopment processes developed by UCRT and PWC intheir areas of operation, which has proven effectivenessfor ensuring strong ownership of projects by the targetcommunities. These coordinators and local resourcepeople will ensure coordination between partnerorganizations and village governments.

Also the other NGO s and private sector actors who areactive in the villages or in similar areas of expertise, willbe involved in the programme, as described in section 2.4.

Conflict management strategyThere are different types of actors and stakeholders activein the intervention area, some of them having conflictinginterests. If there happens a serious conflict in theintervention area, chances are high that it will have anegative influence on the programme implementation.Even more, some components of the programme as forexample the empowerment of the target groups toenhance their lobby capacity might indirectly initiate thiskind of conflicts among actors.


According to the District Government, there are currentlyno conflicts going on in the 4 targeted villages., Theimplementing partners will do whatever is possible toavoid such conflicts but if they happen, partners will applythe following steps of conflict management:1. Call a stakeholders meeting together, with all relevantinvolved actors for this specific conflict: Districtgovernment responsible people; Village governmentpeople; Partners and TRIAS; Other organizations whohave an interest in the conflict (eg NGO s);Representatives of the beneficiaries; Privatecompanies/people with an interest. During this meeting,participants seek a solution or a way forward2. After this stakeholders meeting, partners will takeappropriate actions for follow up. If necessary there mightbe a review of programme activities to ensure that theprogramme can still reach the set objectives in aneffective and efficient way. TRIAS and the partners willinform the donor and ask permission if fundamentalchanges in the programme are needed.

In case conflict management is necessary, the lead will betaken by TNRF (who has a coordinating role among thepartners) and by TRIAS (who is towards the donor thefinal responsible for the use of the funds).

3.8.4 Programme CoordinationSuccessful project implementation through the multi-partner arrangement requires proper governance andmanagement. Implementation responsibility and authorityis fully decentralized to respect the autonomy of eachpartner. Each local partner is fully responsible for theimplementation and management of own activities and


related budget. Towards this aim, each local partner hasdesignated a staff member, a Project Coordinator , asresponsible for the project. Also, every partner willoperate a specific bank account for the project funds andappoint a capable accountant. The regional office of TRIASwill provide training and advice and monitor the accountkept by the partners.

To keep the project partners focused on the attainment ofthe common specific objective and ensure complementaryimplementation a Project Coordination Committee(PCC) will be instituted. Its main goal is to reviewprogress, constraints, achievements, strategies andapproaches used. The PCC provides an opportunity for theprogramme partners and TRIAS to collectively reviewprogress and ensure effective discharge of mutualresponsibilities. The team consists of 10 members as perfollowing break down: one member from the managementof each NGO, one grassroots representative from eachvillage, one representative of TRIAS and onerepresentative from Longido District Council, who will bedesignated in consultation with the District ExecutiveDirector. The PCC will meet every quarter to discussoverall progress, coordinate activities and agree on plans.If needed, the meeting can also make strategicadjustments to the project. Following are terms ofreference for the PCC:• Receive progress reports from each NGO and advise on

programme progress, challenges, effective strategies,and other unforeseen issues;

• Provide input on M&E (see section 3.8);


• Respond to changed circumstances, interruptions, orunforeseen events in an adaptive and collaborativemanner;

• Facilitate collaboration among programme partners,including TRIAS;

• Facilitate networking of the programme with otherstakeholders ;

• Devise mechanisms of strengthening and sustaining theprogramme;

• Resolve problems which may occur among theprogramme stakeholders;

• Ensure adherence to programme procedures, guidelinesand regulations;

• To facilitate capacity building of each NGO

This committee is specific to the project and obviously nothierarchically above or replacing the implementing NGOsor their representative structures or grassrootscommittees. It is only expected to operate for the durationof the project. It is expected that joint action will be fullyinstitutionalized within existing structures and operations.

TNRF will take up an administrative coordinating roleamong the partners. For the implementation of the fieldactivities, UCRT will take the leading role in thisprogramme. Both organizations will of course get supportin their coordinating role from the TRIAS advisor and theTRIAS programme coordinator.

3.9 Monitoring and Evaluation systemLogical framework approach


Log-frame planning is TRIAS preferred way to plan,organise, and implement projects. This approach, as alsoused by BSF, will serve as a guideline for monitoring andevaluating the support from BSF to TRIAS and localpartners. During the implementation of the proposedproject, different log-frame levels will be subject ofevaluation in regard to the criteria Impact, Sustainability,Effectiveness, Efficiency and Relevance . Monitoring andevaluation are management tools, which should bereliable, timely, easy to assimilate, containing easy to useinformation and introduced and implemented at all levelsof the project to guarantee impact and success.

TRIAS applies the same standard approach for M&E in allits programmes. Whenever a new programme (phase) isstarted up, TRIAS makes during the initial phase thenecessary adjustments and adaptations to the M&Esystem for the specific requirements of that programme.An information mapping takes place to define the needsfor information of the different stakeholders and a systemfor data collection and management in function of theprogramme indicators - will be developed. The logicalframework (Annex 1) provides basic quantifiable andempirical indicators, which can be used to track progress.The M&E system tracks progress at all levels of the logicalframework:- Activity level: keeping track of conducted activities and

reached beneficiaries is mostly important for day today, quarterly and annual monitoring and planning

- Result level: crucial for annual monitoring. For thisreason, the programme foresees in annual indicators onresult level. This level gives information on the broader


economic, technical and social effects of theprogramme.

- Objectives level: the objectives should be reached atthe end of the programme. So this level is centralduring the end evaluation and the progress at this levelwill also be included in the mid-term evaluation.

Adaptive management by PCCThe programme s M&E system will be based around asystem of adaptive management. This entails trackingprogress, analyzing constraints, progress, and challengeson a consistent basis, and adapting the programme sstrategies and activities as may be required based on thisprocess. This ensures that the programme will be able torespond to unforeseen events in an effective manner. ThisM&E system will also be based on ensuring theeffectiveness of mutual feedback mechanisms betweenthree parties: TRIAS, as the overall coordinator; the localpartner organizations, as the implementing actors; andthe target communities. Organizational coordination andplanning mechanisms will be employed for ensuring this,as described in sections 3.8.4. The core mechanism forM&E and for facilitating adaptive management decision-making processes will be the PCC composed of TRIAS andall project partners.

Regular input from the target communities will be anadditional component of the M&E system. Theimplementing partner organizations will designmechanisms for regular input from the targetcommunities; feedback from the target communities willthen be incorporated into the PCC process. An annualinstitutional feedback system to guarantee input from the


target communities will take place. In each village, anannual PRA with a representative group of villagers will behold to discuss the progress of the programme and toreceive inputs for adaptations where needed.

Regular planning and monitoringAccording to TRIAS internal guidelines, implementation ofactivities is further supported by quarterly planning andfollow-up. These proceedings enable the self-evaluation ofactivities, important to realistically plan for the nextquarter. TRIAS also ensures that implementation ofactivities and utilization of funds is in line with the setobjectives and expectations of the donor. Through theAdvisor, Programme Coordinator and Financial Officer,TRIAS conducts frequent monitoring visits to theimplementing partners and the target group. These visitsemphasize on proper application of accountingprocedures, to adhere to allocated budgets and to haveproper administrative procedures. Onsite visits to thetarget group in their homes, fields or businesses allowdirect feedback and determine (immediate) action to beundertaken.Normally, the TRIAS Regional Advisor, based in Brussels,conducts a monitoring visit at least once a year. Findingsand recommendations of these visits are reflected inmission reports, which are added to the progress reports.

Mid-term and end evaluationA mid-term review will be carried out in year three, incollaboration with the donor organization and TRIASheadquarters. BSF as donor will be involved in the writingof the terms of reference. The outcome of this mid-term


evaluation will also feed into the PCC adaptivemanagement process.

At the end of the programme an evaluation is foreseen.The purpose is to analyze achieved results of theinterventions, assess its impact, draw lessons and identifygood practices for grassroots poverty eradication. Theproject partners will jointly define terms of reference ofthe evaluation and choose the external evaluators.Participation of BSF delegates is anticipated. If BSF judgesit necessary, it will organize and finance a final evaluation.

TRIAS also ensures that all partners are well trained onthe M&E system so that they are able to take up theirresponsibilities.

4. Budget

4.1 Resources

4.1.1. InvestmentsInvestments for the beneficiaries:§ To make the programme more effective, there will be a

field office within the intervention area, as evenrecommended by the external mid-term evaluation ofphase 1. In order to make the programme sustainable itis anticipated to construct a two rooms office. Thebudget for construction of the field office is placed underTRIAS. Equipping and running of the field office isequally placed under the 4 partners, as they all will usethis field office.

§ Small equipment for the field office and furniture


§ Solar installment and bush link for the field office basedin the target area at Orkejuloongishu

§ Construction of storage facilities for cereal/food in thevillages is foreseen and the budget for this is also placedunder TRIAS.

§ Demonstration sites in the form of women solidarityboma s and for livestock improvement and livestockhealth services will be constructed.

§ Livestock for demonstration purposes and for improvedcross breeding will be bought. As an input for the targetgroup, breeders and vet tool kit are purchased once (asa start up). Later the target group will make their owncontributions to the services.

Investments for the partners:Programme partners will make full use of their existingresources and means to the greatest extent possible.However, all organizations need additional, but different,means for successful programme implementation.Equipment necessary for a smooth implementation of theprogramme include:- 5 computers (1 for each partner and TRIAS) during the

first year and 2 more in year three and four,- 5 printers (1 for each partner and TRIAS) (including 1

for the field office),- 4 laptops (two for TRIAS and 2 for the partners),- 1 photocopier for all the partners,- other small equipment for partners and TRIAS and

furniture- transport means like: two vehicles for field work and 6

motorcycles: As motorcycles are crucial for field officersin this programme, 5 are budgeted during the first year


and 1 other during the third year.. The budget forpurchasing the 2 programme vehicles and the 6motorcycles is placed under TRIAS. Both vehicles andmotorcycles will be available for programme activities ofall partners: one vehicle will be coordinated by UCRT asthe lead organization facilitating work in the target area,and one will be coordinated by TRIAS.

- Fuel and maintenance of the motorcycles and vehicles isalso foreseen and is budgeted as increasing operationalcosts in years 2-5.

- Additional investments include solar installment andbush link for LCDO Longido office. UCRT will also need 4GPS for land demarcation and LUP maps for the 4villages. There will also be purchased 1 video cameraand 1 digital camera for communication anddocumentation purposes.

All investments done will stay property of TRIAS for theduration of the programme. Handing over agreements willbe signed between TRIAS and the local partner at the endof the programme, specifying destination and conditionsfor further use of these funds and assets. TRIAS mightdecide to transfer funds or assets to other organizations ordirectly to beneficiaries when this ensures better use ormanagement in the line of the programme approach.Balances of funds and assets will be returned to TRIASwhen the partnership agreement comes to an end duringexecution of the programme.

4.1.2. Working CostsOther resources and supplies needed include: contributionto operating cost of the 5 offices such as telephone, fax,office stationery, workshop facilities maintenance and


repair costs. A large part of the activities is training,awareness raising, empowerment, exchange visits etceterafor the target community as well as for the partners. Theprogramme will contribute to the development of trainingmaterials, trainers, coordination, surveys, resourcepersons, training, workshops, demonstrations, meetings,organizing costs (venue, stationers), the cost of M&E andpart of cost of provisions for participants during activitiesand capacity building costs (like governmentrepresentatives and other stakeholders). Fuel andmaintenance of the motorcycles and vehicles is alsoforeseen and is budgeted as increasing operational costs inyears 2-5.

4.1.3. Personnel CostsThe programme contributes to financing a limited numberof staff needed for the implementation of the programmeand those hired specifically for the implementation by theinvolved organizations. The staff funded by the programmewill work fully integrated in their respective organizations.At the same time, other employees, financed from ownresources of the organizations, will contribute to theimplementation of the programme. Financial support willbe given to the following staff:• One TRIAS Programme Advisor, responsible for overall

coordination and facilitation of the programme as well asfor technical support by TRIAS. The advisor will be anexpert in pastoralism and will report to the RC of TRIAS.

• One Programme Coordinator for each local partner tomanage and coordinate the activities of theirorganizations, including planning and monitoring,financial and activity reporting.


• One Field Officer for each partner as the mainimplementing person.

• Two Resource persons for the whole programme. Thesewill be permanently located to the programme site. Theywill be a major link of the communities to theprogramme implementers. They will also be responsiblefor bull centers, facilitation of breedings, link thecommunities with veterinary services, etc.

• One Account Assistant for each partner responsible forfinancial matters;

• Two Drivers for the whole programme;• Five Security Guards;• The Heads of the four implementing partners will devote

10% of their time in the programme.In order to guarantee sustainability of services deliveredand to make partners more financial sustainable, it wasconsidered to reduce the personnel costs each year.

4.2 Budget per activityThe budget for the programme is attached in MS Excelbudget file. Each partner organization developed its ownbudget depending on the activities of each result for therespective programme component. Generally, the budgetfor the first year is large compared to the consecutiveyears because of the investments. Years 4 and 5, thebudget goes down, to ensure a good phasing out of theactivities of the previous years. Table 11 gives a summaryof the total budgets per category.The total budget is 2,359,672.00 Euro, out of which2,005,721.00 Euro (85%) will be contributed by BSF andthe remaining by TRIAS. Of the total budget 48.5% will befor the benefit of the target group, about another 43% willbe for working costs and capacity building of the partners


and TRIAS. 8.5% will be for administration cost of TRIASBrussels.

Table 11: Summary total budget per category (inEuro)

Out of which:Category TOTAL1. For

Target group2. For

Partners1. Investments

(includinginput targetgroup)

292,100.00 185,850.00 106,250.00

2. Working costs(includingparticipativeM&E)-> detailedbreakdown intable 12-> Remark:most activitiesare not a onetime activitybut arestretched out,take severaldays or weeksand needclose follow-up

948,000.00 658,000.00 290,000.00

3. Personnelcosts

869,000.00 295,000.00 574,000.00

4. Other costs: 50,000.00 50,000.00


Monitoring,evaluation,internationalmissions andmidterm andend termevaluations

5. Administrationcosts forTRIAS

200,572.00

TOTAL FOR5 YEARS

2,359,672.00 1,138,850.00 993,250.00

Out ofwhich: - 85%contributionby BSF

2,005,721.00

- 15%contributionby TRIAS

353,951.00

It is estimated that from the total budget for workingcosts about 34% will be used directly for women or forgender awareness creation (for details, see table 12). Theother activities target the community in general, sowomen as well as men will benefit of their impact.From the budget for investment that is directed to thetarget group, we could say that about 64% is directed infirst instance to the women, namely most of theinvestments for the Women s Solidarity Boma (includinglivestock) and the food storages.


Table 12: Budget Division per Activity (Workingcosts)Item Major Activities Budget

EUROBudgetwhich isdirectlyforwomenorgenderactivities

1.1.1 Undertake study tours toadjacent areas in northernTanzania and southernKenya to learn about newbreeding techniques andlivestock techniques.

21,500 17,000

1.1.2 Establishment of Women sSolidarity Boma.

18,000 18,000

1.1.3 Development and support inimplementation of protocolsfor disseminating improvedlivestock from Boma throughbreeding and sales.

7,000 7,000

1.1.4 Trainings on care andmanagement of improvedlivestock breeds.

45,000 38,000

1.1.5 Carry out market demandsurvey for veterinaryservices in target area.

16,000

1.1.6 Develop protocols for privateservice provider concessionwithin the target area, andnegotiate service provision

21,000


agreement betweencommunities and saidveterinary service provider.

1.1.7 Select community healthworkers and carry outtraining on animal healthcare in the target area andprovide them of transportmeans.

40,000

1.1.8 Implementation ofcommunity-based monitoringsystem for tracking improvedlivestock performance.

41,000 21,000

1.2.1 Carry out educationaltraining on beef marketstructure (e.g. value chain,pricing) in the target area.

38,000 18,000

1.2.2 Carry out study tours tosouthern Kenya and northernTanzania with targetcommunity members tolearn about marketingstrategies and marketconditions in those areas.

21,000 11,000

1.2.3 Design and implement acooperative livestockmarketing strategy for thetarget communities, usingtheir organized producerassociations and workingwith other market actors(Arusha Meat Company asmost important private

34,000 17,000


partner to help producersmake higher price of theirlivestock).

1.2.4 Develop centralizeddemonstration boma orholding pen for coordinatingonward sales to livestockbuyers.

12,000 12,000

1.2.5 Analyze market informationconstraints and developmarketing informationcommunication system usingsimple availabletechnologies. (cell phones)

25,000

1.2.6 Joint action with LongidoDistrict Council forawareness creation onmarket principles behindselling of food/cereal cropsand development of jointstrategy to use income fromsold cattle to purchase foodand store food crops insuitable storage facilities

18,000 5,000

1.2.7 Analyze market opportunitiesand value chain for leatherproducts and exports innorthern Tanzania withrespect to smallholder tradeopportunities.

28,000

1.3.1 Carry out awareness-raisingtraining on tourism marketstructures, trends, and

40,000 20,000


community-private tourismventures.

1.3.2 Conduct study tours tonearby community-privatetourism ventures in Longido,Monduli, and NgorongoroDistricts.

20,000 10,000

1.3.3 Conduct basic resourceinventory in terms of tourismassets in the target area.

20,000

1.3.4 Develop tourismdevelopment plans for thetarget area based on 1.4.3and also outputs from 2.1.3

21,000

1.3.5 Facilitate joint ventureagreements between privatetourism operators and villagegovernments in the targetarea.

14,000

1.4.1 Partner organizations receivesystematic training inbusiness development,marketing and marketinganalysis; production chaindevelopment; microfinance

28,000

2.1.1 Analyze and documentcustomary land use patternsand land use issuesdiscussed at the targetcommunity level.

12,000

2.1.2 Carry out village boundarydemarcation and processvillage Certificates of Village

31,500


Land.2.1.3 Develop village land use

plans in an inclusive andparticipatory fashion, basedon traditional pastoralistresource use zones andrules, and formalize throughvillage by-laws passed byvillage governments andapproved by district councils.

40,000

2.1.4 Develop village governanceinstitutions required forimplementation of nationalland legislation andstrengthen through - trainingon roles, responsibilities, andauthorities - training on legaland policy issues relevant topastoralist livelihoods andmanagement of naturalresources

37,000

2.1.5 Coordinating committees forvillage governments andprivate tourism jointventures will be formed andstrengthened throughparticipatory training.

20,000

2.2.1 Village governments aretrained in accounting, projectmanagement, and reportingprocedures.

20,000

2.3.1 Local livestock producer 35,000 25,000


associations are formed inthe target area and trainedin business development,marketing, production chainand financial management.

2.3.2 Gender-based livelihoodgroups are formed in eachtarget village and trained innew income generatingactivities for livelihooddiversification, businessdevelopment, marketing andfinancial management.

35,000 35,000

2.3.3 Micro-credit schemes aredeveloped and implementedfor the differentproducer/livelihood groupsusing existing private/publicfinancialorganizations/institutions.

32,000 22,000

2.4.1 Gender-awareness trainingsessions by enlightened menand women to present anddiscuss different options ofgender relations

22,000 22,000

2.4.2 Training on HIV/AIDS byDistrict Extension staff incollaboration withprogramme partners

12,000 12,000

3.1.1 Carry out training of targetcommunities in key districtgovernance and decision-making areas such as budget

22,000


tracking.3.1.2 Establish Community Forums

in the target area forfacilitating training ofcustomary leadershipinstitutions in policy-makingand governance processesand issues.

25,000 12,000

3.2.1 Partner organizations aretrained in key pastoralistpolicy, governance andinstitutional issues andtrends.

22,000

3.2.2 Partner organizations,working through the TNRFRLTF, develop andimplement collaborativestrategies for networking,lobbying and advocacyactivities at district andnational levels and integratewith operational strategies.

25,000

4.1.1 PCC is formed, functioningand reviewed as necessary.

7,000

4.1.2 Participatory monitoring andevaluation protocols aredeveloped and adaptivelyimplemented. Including:multi-disciplinary monitoringvisits by TRIAS; annualmonitoring PRA with thebeneficiaries.

8,000


4.1.3 Participatory developmentand implementation of MOUbetween TRIAS/ Partnersand Villages/DistrictAuthorities. Including: clearexplanation of focus on foodsecurity and most vulnerabletarget groups; exit strategyand handing over

3,000

4.1.4 Capacity Building process ofprogramme partners onfinancial and organisationalsustainability; planning,monitoring and evaluation

8,000

Total working costs: 948,000 321,000

5. ReferencesAct vzw. 2000. Strategisch kader (2000-2011) voor dewerking van ACTvzw met het Belgisch Overlevingsfonds.

De Boodt, K. 2007. Empowering approaches forunderstanding empowerment. For Care International inBurundi.

District Executive Director. 2009. Longido District Council;Tentative Strategic Plan year 2008/2009 2010-2011.Longido District Council.

FEWS NET. 2007. Tanzania food security outlook. Thirdand fourth quarters, 2007. USAID. Available at:

http://www.fews.net/centers/files/Tanzania_200706en.pdf


Mattee, A.Z. and M. Shem. 2006. Ambivalence andContradiction: A review of the policy environment inTanzania in relation to pastoralism. Drylands Issue PaperNo. 140. International Institute for Environment andDevelopment, London, UK.

Meindertsma, J.D. and J.J. Kessler. 1997. Planning for aBetter Environment in Monduli District. Monduli DistrictCouncil, Monduli.

Ngigwana, L.L. and J. Lendiy. 2004. Livestock MarketsSurvey in Longido Area, Monduli District. Report presentedto CORDS.

Peters, B., G. Madundo, and E. Mponeja. 2006. Mid-termreview: Final report. Poverty Reduction through Social-economic empowerment of the Pastoral Women and Menin Maasaïland in Northern Tanzania (2003-2007). SouthResearch vzw.

TRIAS Tanzania. 2007. Strategy Policy Paper 2006-2012.

United Republic of Tanzania (URT). 2005. Poverty andHuman Development Report 2005. Research and AnalysisWorking Group/ Mkuki na Nyota Publishers, Dar esSalaam.

Oral source: Several meetings with Mr Christian Laizer,District Executive Director of Longido District (+255 784420 380)


Overview of AnnexesAnnex 1. Programme Logical FrameworkAnnex 2. Timetable Programme Execution, 2009 2013Annex 3. Map of the intervention areaAnnex 4. Extracts from Partner AssessmentAnnex 5. Market SurveyAnnex 6. Baseline GeneralAnnex 7. Baseline focussedAnnex 8. Problem treeAnnex 9. Problem tree programme responseAnnex 10. BSF Pastoralists Programme 2009-2013 budgetAnnex 11. Summary overview of projects of NgorongoroDistrict Council

supporting food security and livelihood security through ...food security and livelihood security...

Documents