Integrating Environmental Safeguards into USAID Food Assistance Projects

1. Integrating Environmental Safeguards into USAID Food Assistance Projects Erika Clesceri, PhD, Bureau Environmental Officer; Tracy Thoman, PhD, Senior Program Officer; USAID DCHA, Washington FFP M&E Workshop Zimbabwe Programs Harare, September 2013

2. Session Timetable 5 min: Quickfire Challenge 40 min: Plenary Presentation Coffee Break 60 min: Break-Out Exercise 15 min: Plenary Stakeholder Feedback

3. Session Objectives By the end of this session, you will have: Discussed two types of USAID recommended environmentally-sensitive indicators. Identified opportunities for “greening” the project results frameworks and indicator systems. Learned about innovative approaches for environmental monitoring.

4. Quickfire Challenge (5 min): Question: How are the environment and food security related?

5. How is environmental degradation and climate risk related? Climate, Environment and Resiliency Source: Adapted from IPCC 2012, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC)

6. Causal Linkages between Food Availability and the Environment Poor AgriculturalInputs Salinization Poor CropProduction Poor Soil Fertility Erosion WaterShortage Drought, Desertificationand Climate Changes Poor Maintenance of Irrigation Canals, Water Use Conflict Lack ofIrrigation Soil Nutrient Mining Ineffective Pesticide Use Climate-Smart Agriculture Poor Soil Water Retention Food Insecurity

7. Reliance on groundwater likely to increase… African groundwater resources poorly understood….

8. Environmental Resilience Thinking • What ecological goods and services are needed for this project? • Are fuelwood stocks for cooking food aid in Zimbabwe well managed? • What harm(wastes or damage) to natural resources might result? • Will roads increase deforestation and erosion in Zimbabwe? • What are impacts of the environment (floods, droughts) on the project? • Is physical and social infrastructure capable of responding to flooding?

9. Goals for Sustainability The goal of Title II projects is to reduce food insecurity during the project. Communities will need to sustain their natural resources to support food security for generations to come… "Anybody can dig a hole and plant a tree. But make sure it survives. You have to nurture it….“ -WangariMaathai, Nobel Laureate (1940-2011)

10. Environmental Safeguards & Compliance Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) is… • A formal analysisthat identifies: • Potential impact of projects on the environment • Measures to mitigate these impacts IEE Environmental Mitigation Monitoring Plan (EMMP) is… EMMP • A formal planthat identifies: • Indicators • Frequency and Persons responsible

11. What is the Purpose of the EMMP? It is a management plan for Environmental safeguards, which are linked to project results and indicators.

12. Requirement in the FY13 Request for Application (RFA) for Zimbabwe Projects “The M&E Plan should include gender and environmental indicators to permit the measurement of food security gains while promoting gender equity and safeguarding environmental goods and services.”

13. Food for Peace Resultsand Indicator Frameworks Results Framework (RF) Indicator Performance Tracking Table (IPTT)

14. Cross Walking M&E with the EMMP… • Identify results in the RF that have an environmental component. • Compare results with analysis conducted in the EMMP. • Reflect the EMMP analysis in the IPTT indicators, where practicable. OK…, how? OK, how???

15. FFP Results Framework Assumptions CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES: Gender, Capacity Building

16. Environmental Issues Annotated for the RF

17. Greening the FFP Results Framework Assumptions CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES: Gender, Capacity Building, Environment

18. What does it mean in practice to have Environment as a cross-cutting theme in Food for Peace results and indicator frameworks?

19. What are some Environmentally-Sensitive Indicators? As for Gender, we have two types: • Stand-Alone Indicator. • Integration Indicator.

20. Purpose of Environmentally-Sensitive Indicators? • Stand-Alone Environmental Indicators To measure progress towards planned project environmental results, throughout the life of the activity. E.g., For Climate Change and Natural Resources Management But this alone is not enough…

21. Purpose of Environmentally-Sensitive Indicators? • Environmental Integration Indicators To measure progress towards planned project results while incorporating environmental mitigation measures, throughout the life of the activity. E.g., For Irrigation, Roads, Water, Sanitation, etc. A typical FFP project, will have more of the Integration type of environmentally-sensitive indicator, than the Stand-Alone.

22. Environmental ImpactSectors Whatsectors of the FFP Zimbabweprograms are associatedwithpotentialenvironmentalimpacts?

23. Stand-Alone Environmental Indicator Measuring Progress of NRM Investments… • NRM: (Indicator # 4.5.2-2): Number of hectares under improved technologies or management practices as a • result of USG assistance Measuring Natural Resources Management (NRM) and Climate Change Adaptability under Feed the Future (FtF) “…for both the projected future for agricultural landscapes and the needs of a growing world population, food security strategies must address the sustainable intensification of agriculture...Environmental degradation and climate change are critical cross-cutting issues that can affect the sustainability of FTF investments … “ USAID Feed the Future Indicator Handbook, V.7 http://feedthefuture.gov/sites/default/files/resource/files/Volume7_FTFNRM.pdf 23

24. Stand-Alone Environmental Indicator for USG Climate Change Investments… • Climate Change Adaptation: (Indicator # 4.8.2-26) Number of stakeholders with increased capacity to adapt to impacts of climate change as a result of USG assistance • Stakeholders with increased capacity include: • Implementingrisk-reducing practices/actions to improve resilience to climate change  • Usingclimate information in their decision making  USAID GCC Indicator Handbook (2012) http://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1865/GCC_Indicator_Handbook_Definition_Sheets_2012.pdf 24

25. Stand-Alone Environmental Indicator for Fuelwood Needs for Commodity Cooking • How much firewood does a typical FFP program use? • ~1 kg firewood/person/day x 70,000 beneficiaries x 365 d • ~30,000 MT of firewood /yr • Indicator: • Amount of fuel or time saved by improved practices • Measured with Kitchen Performance Tests (KPTs)

26. Cross Walking IPTT with the EMMP… Indicator Performance Tracking Table (IPTT) Environmental Mitigation Monitoring Plan (EMMP) Choose Environmental Integration Indicators for the IPTT by referencing the existing EMMP

27. Environmental Integration Indicator Approaches Simple Environment Integration in a Standard Indicator… For a Drinking Water Result Measured by the FFP Standard Indicator #40, % of HH using an improved drinking water source Ensure environmental integration by implementing in accordance with existing project EMMP analysis • EMMP helps to adapt “improved” to project • Does not constitute a change in the indicator!

28. People are using, but this may not be what we mean by an “improved” drinking water source… In addition to the WHO-UNICEF JMP definition in the PIRS, the EMMP unpacks the project-specifics of what is meant by an “improved” water source

29. Environmental Integration Indicators Depending on local context, the project may identify the need to track environmental integration indicators, in addition to Standard. • For roads, • # of road borrow pits or quarries restored • % of roads with community resource use committees functioning

30. AdditionalEnvironmentalIntegrationIndicators Rooted in the EMMP

31. Timeline IEE Approved Year 1 ESR Year 2 ESR Year 3 ESR Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Report on Environmentally-Sensitive Indicators in the ESRs and IPTT Report on Indicators in the annual Environmental Status Report (ESR) to inform PREP and the IPTT

32. Program: CRS Madagascar, Title II, SALOHI Program • Objective: GGS is an approach to where PVO and community members adopt an “environmental reflex” for project activities • Approach: Tailored EMMP Yes/No Scorecards; Ranked Red, Yellow, Green; Monitored Monthly, Reported in IPTT as: • % communities with “green” status in GGS • Purpose: Compare results between communities to monitor progress, and where to focus more effort CASE Study: Environmentalmonitoring, Go Green Strategy (GGS) “Took environmental compliance beyond the dry rules and regulations to permit understanding underlying values behind USAID’s environmental policy.” -SALOHI COP

33. Key Lessons Learned in GGS • Field Agents originally found that the scorecard was too cumbersome with data entry, therefore changed collection method to Recall. • Posting the GGS in the communities was critical, so they understand what they’d be scored on • Competition between community members within one region was very effective incentive (Prize of 100 Fruit Trees!)

34. Value of the GGS in SALOHI • “…for field agents and community to know what “green” communities look like, and for [communities to practice] trash/ compost pits, cyclone proof housing of local materials, protected water and forest resources available for food and firewood today, and in the future.” -SALOHI COP GGS Contacts: Jennifer Peterson, SALOHI COP, Jennifer.Peterson@crs.org and Zoely Ramanase, SALOHI Environmental Coordinator, zoeli.ramanase@blueline.mg

35. Potential Research Area: Community Perception Indicators • Capacity building to mitigate potential negative environmental impacts within communities is a critical aspect of project EMMPs. • We want this capacity to be sustainable, but how do we know sound environmental practices will continue once our projects end? • Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices: we can impart the knowledge, but how do we measure if the community key stakeholders VALUE the practice? Practices will only be sustainable if they are valued.

36. WHY USE COMMUNITY PERCEPTIONS? Sustainability • Prior to Intervention: Measuring community perceptions of environmental best practices before an intervention could provide information regarding what attitudes should be targeted for maximum sustainability. • End of Intervention: Measuring these perceptions at the end of our intervention could tell us if our capacity building efforts were successful and therefore if environmental best practices are likely to be sustained once we leave.

37. Session Results • Discussed two types of USAID recommended environmentally-sensitive indicators. • Stand-Alone Environmental Indicators and Environmental Integration Indicators • Identified opportunities for “greening” the project results frameworks and indicator systems. • Cross Walk your IPTT with EMMP! • Learned about innovative approaches for environmental monitoring. • Go Green Strategy (GGS) and Community Perception Indicators

38. For more information contact: Dr. Erika Clesceri Bureau Environmental Officer USAID, Bureau for Democracy Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance eclesceri@usaid.gov

39. Break-Out Exercise1 hour

40. Break-out Exercise • 1. Explain how the project can use the EMMP to make the IPTT more environmentally sensitive. Specify two examples. • 2. Explain how the project can use data collected from environmentally-sensitive indicators to modifyproject interventions. • 3. How do you plan to measure community capacity in environmental sustainability best practices?

41. WV PROPOSED “GREEN” INDICATORS What do we mean by functional? Functional is described in the EMMP.

42. CNFA Proposed “Green” Indicators

43. Ancillary Slides, For Reference Only

44. Guidance for greening results and indicator frameworks

45. Green Recovery and Reconstruction (GRRT) • UNHCR / CARE International FRAME Project Environmental and Sustainability Indicator Guidance

46. Green Recovery and Reconstruction Toolkit (GRRT), WWF & Red Cross Modules: Opportunities for Green Recovery and Reconstruction: An Introduction Project Design, Monitoring and Evaluation Environmental Impact Assessment Tools and Techniques Strategic Site Selection and Development Materials and the Supply Chain Construction Water and Sanitation Livelihoods Disaster Risk Reduction Organizational Operations

47. Project Design, Monitoring and Evaluation

48. Recognised gaps in available tools Needed innovative and appropriate approaches Needed an approach which addressed the whole cycle of programme management Needed a system which could reach across all sectors Wanted a product that could be used by different stakeholders and is capable of being adapted for different situations UNHCR Environmental Indicator Framework FRAME PROJECT

49. EXAMPLE OF A FRAME SCORE CARD

50. New! USAID Sector Environmental Guidelines