The presentation of Paul Hatanga, Project Manager with the Chimpanzee Sanctuary and Wildlife Conservation Trust (Chimpanzee Trust), to the IIED-hosted Innovations for equity in smallholder PES: bridging research and practice conference. The presentation, made within the first session on strategies to promote the inclusion of smallholders and communities in PES schemes, focused on a pilot project that pays farmers to conserve and restore forests. More information on Hatanga's work: http://www.iied.org/paying-local-communities-for-ecosystem-services-chimpanzee-conservation-corridor. The conference took place at the Royal Botanic Gardens in Edinburgh on 21 March. Further details of the conference and IIED's work with PES are available via http://www.iied.org/conference-innovations-for-equity-smallholder-pes-highlights, and can be found via the Shaping Sustainable Markets website: http://shapingsustainablemarkets.iied.org/.

1. Innovations for equity in smallholder PES: bridging research
and practice
Botanical Gardens, Edinburgh conference 21st March 2014
Paul Hatanga M, Project Manager
Chimpanzee Sanctuary & Wildlife Conservation Trust (Chimpanzee Trust )
Email: conservation@ngambaisland.org

2. Project context
Background
Problem
Opportunities
Project Design
PES Scheme design & implementation
Strategies for inclusion of small holders
Lessons learned
Personal reflections
Conclusion

3. Chimpanzees require suitable forest habitats to survive.
The Albertine rift forest system in Uganda is important
for chimpanzee corridors
Uganda has about 5000 wild chimpanzees . 10% are
found outside protected forests in western Uganda
(Uganda Chimpanzee Population Census, 2002)
Uganda’s deforestation rate is currently 92,000ha
(approx. 2.6%). It is more than twice(5.1%) outside
protected areas.
Without innovative conservation approaches, it is
estimated that there will be no more forest
ecosystems left in the next 15 years.
PES offers a great opportunity to address the problem
but there is limited evidence of its effectiveness
Map

4. Chimpanzee Trust Uganda
Mission-To promote chimpanzee conservation &
environmental management for sustainable development
Programs
Ngamba Island Chimpanzee Sanctuary
Conservation of Wild chimpanzees and their
habitats
Environmental education and partnerships
PES Scheme context in Chimpanzee Trust
Uganda
Achieve sustainable management of chimpanzee
habitats outside protected areas in AR

5. PES
Scheme
Evaluation
Forest
&
Forest
Owner

6. Divide target recipients into two groups before the
intervention
Target population
140 Villages
Random assignment
Treatment-70 villages Control-70 villages
Don’t
give
PES
Give Program

7. Average household size: 7
93% of household heads are male
Half of household heads completed primary school
Average per capita weekly income: 4 USD
Forest land sizes
Median forest size 0.80 ha
Average forest size 1.54 ha
75% of participants had less than average land size
Land ownership
Only 2.8% of the forest owners have registered land
titles
52% own 1 piece of land
36% own 2 pieces of land
Land disputes:
32% of PFOs had a dispute on their land
Usually relating to land boundaries

8. Lessons from drawn from else where-IIED i.e.
Costa Rica, Bolsa Floresta scheme, ECOTRUST etc
Round table discussions by partners
Forest interventions and measurements
Package for payments
Scheme and research design
National level consultation workshop
Legal advice from NEMA & Chimpanzee Trust
Lawyer
Buyer side-Hydro power company, oil company,
water company
Pre- design consultations with target beneficiaries
and potential buyers of ES.

9. Community
consultation
Voluntary
application by
participants
Verification
of
participants
Forest
assessment
baselineContract
negotiation
and signing
Sign up
payment
Monitoring-
Community
based
Annual
payment

10. Incentive cash
payment Approx.
$35/ha/year
Sensitize, create
awareness, train
Monitor and advise
PFOs
Seedlings for
reforestation/enric
hment planting
Forest
management
based on agreed
interventions e.g.,
Regulated
harvesting
Enrichment
planting
Re-forestation
No opening
new land for
agriculture

11. Consultation meeting
Subcounty level
Village level-involving village leaders
Private forest owner level consultation meeting
Application and contract process
Ensured consent at household level
Verified land-ownership with local leaders to minimize land related
conflicts
Assessed presence and status of applying forest
Community monitoring
Identified from community
Interviewed jointly with local leaders
Trained in project and its structures
Accessible payment modality. Minimize bank
charges and walking distances
PFO identity card
Copies of all documentation
The frequently asked questions
With monitors and local leaders

12. 18%
82%
Proportion of applicants (413) signing contracts
Not signed Signed contracts

13. 42%
51%
7%
Compliance Monitoring -Year 1
Complied Partly Complied Didn’t comply
54%38%
8%
Compliance Performance-Year 2
Complied Partly Complied Didn’t Comply

14. Compliance performance;
Improved trust and confidence in project
Community monitoring and extension support
High motivation to get withheld payment
amount (25%)
Non compliance;
Low survival of planted seedlings in year 1
Family and community land use management
disagreements with contracted PFOs.
Most non complying PFOs have small forest
area & would rather convert to agriculture
(In Year 1, median was 1.2ha & In year 2, median was 0.9ha)

15. Dealing with unclear land tenure required
more time in assessment and verification
Protracted family negotiations to obtain
consent
Seasonal priorities vary and delay
engagement
Short term benefits versus long-term
benefits
Problem animals
Pressures for hire-purchase agreements

16. Land Ownership: In areas where land documentation is not in place,
land-based conflicts may affect level of participation. Working with
local leaders to verify landownership increased confidence
Community Monitoring: Working with community based monitors
improves trust and provides effective feedback to participants
Conservation Cost: The project interventions have cost to
participants and non participants. Not integrated in calculation
Partnerships: Identification of proper capacity needs for scheme
implementers e.g. Post Bank executing payments, NEMA/CSWCT
Design of Randomized Experiments: Randomized controlled
experiments require very close collaboration between implementers
and evaluators to minimize contamination and ensure consensus e.g.
mode of payment was feared to affect the study
Leveraging funding: Collaboration with IIED and impact evaluation
specialists helped leverage funding for the research projects
Private Sector Investment: Private sector would like to commit
funding but is carefully waiting for evidence
CSO, Gov’t, Donor & Research Partnership: Promotes win-win
collaboration

17. Participation across gender. Who drives the agenda?
Culture and tradition. What is the place of communally accepted
cultural and traditional norms? How do we consciously influence
them
What stake do the non-forest owners have? How do we spread
benefits beyond direct beneficiaries
Timing of negotiations. Who sets the time “enough” & what are the
pertinent issues across the board
Documentation of social impacts. What system is in place to have
these documented.?
How about social learning. What system is in place to cultivate social
learning amongst the peers
The buyers, the sellers, the proponents….where do they meet to
share concerns.
Government commitment & enabling policy. Is it there? Is it
enabling, facilitating or just directional without ability to proactively
influence.
PES schemes in areas with poor land tenure/documentation systems
have potential of enhancing management rights

18. Finalize analysis of research findings
Presentation of project results in national and
international fora
Generating policy documents/briefs
Publication of research findings
Lobbying government commitment for PES policy
and allocation of funding
Marketing the PES scheme based on evidence
generated
Scaling up

19. Small holder farmers have potential to
respond with consistent engagement
within acceptable communal norms
Government-Civil society partnership
Research and implementation projects are
rigorous
We are looking forward to analysis and
publication of results on PES effectiveness
in mid 2014.
Short narration