Garba Tula Governance Assessment Final Report ... - Land Portal

Garba Tula Governance Baseline Assessment, April 2011
governance challenges (see Annex 3), not least that its legal status is currently not yet firmed up 11 (i.e.
legitimacy), it does not yet have viable long-term sources of funding or income generation (i.e.
direction), and it has very limited management and technical capacity (i.e. performance). Therefore, in
as much as IUCN has identified RAP as a key local partner in achieving its long-term natural resource
governance aims in Garba Tula under the ADG Project, it will be important to provide capacity building
assistance to strengthen the governance of RAP itself, in particular in the key governance areas
mentioned above.
In providing this governance strengthening support to RAP, it will be important to bear in mind that
strengthening the governance of RAP is only a means to an end – i.e., strengthening natural resource
governance in Garba Tula – not the end in itself. In this regard, RAP is a locally-based NGO that is very
well-placed to support and promote effective natural resource governance in Garba Tula, but besides
the organisation’s potential role in service provision as outlined in this section, it does not represent a
Garba Tula natural resource governance mechanism in its own right.
6. Logical framework and related Garba Tula NR
governance indicators
Table 8 overpage provides a summary logical framework based on the proposed project objectives and
associated outputs described in the previous section. The indicators provided are lower level “effect” 12
and “implementation” 13 indicators that are designed to measure improvements in Garba Tula natural
resource governance mechanisms brought about through project interventions. “Impact” indicators
measuring the long-term biodiversity conservation and natural resource livelihood impacts brought
about by the project are detailed in section 7 below.
NB: Indicators are the tangible and quantifiable measures that can be used to assess the change brought
about by the project, and do not in themselves describe specific quantities or timelines. Once the
project action plan as set out in section 5 above is agreed on, it will be necessary to define specific
targets for the indicators that are to be achieved by the end of the project. In line with best project
implementation practice, such targets should be SMART, i.e. Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic,
and Time bound.
11 RAP management is currently considering establishing RAP as a Trust
12 Effect indicators measure the short to medium term behavioural or systemic changes that the project makes a
contribution towards, and that are designed to help achieve the project’s impacts. These can include: Behavioural
changes: Adoption of new practices, changed attitudes on issues; Systemic changes: improved institutional
competency, implementation of new or revised policies, effective decentralising of decision making processes.
13 Implementation indicators measure the delivery of project outputs. These can include: Physical structures,
trained individuals, formation of institutions, establishment of service delivery mechanisms, policy instruments and
plans, implementation of pilot and demonstration projects
33 | P a g e