World Resources Institute Comments on the Forest Investment Program Results Framework

first_imgThe Forest Investment Program (FIP) is a targeted program within the framework of the Climate Investment Funds that supports developing countries’ efforts to reduce deforestation and forest degradation (REDD). The FIP Results Framework is a tool to monitor and evaluate the implementation of FIP funds. Following are WRI’s comments suggesting ways to improve the FIP Results Framework.For full text, download the PDFSee also: WRI Comments on the Climate Investment Funds Results FrameworksWRI welcomes the opportunity to comment on the December 2010 version of the FIP Results Framework. This analysis focuses on the Framework’s governance related results and indicators, drawing on the Governance of Forests Initiative Framework of Indicators, a diagnostic tool for gathering evidence-based research on the strengths and weaknesses of forest governance Civil society partners in Brazil and Indonesia have piloted these indicators, with support from WRI; this work has provided valuable insights into the types of evidence that can be gathered to assess forest governance institutions and practices.This analysis identifies five areas of the FIP Results Framework where we believe improvements in governance would lead to the desired results. We suggest potential governance indicators for each area, and describe what kind of evidence would be needed respond to these indicators. As much as possible we sought to refine or replace indicators rather than add additional ones.Our comments are structured as follows:Overarching recommendationsGovernance indicator recommendationsAdditional commentsIn addition, we have included an Annex where we provide information about the type of evidence that could be used to support claims of governance improvements for many of the indicators we recommend.Main RecommendationsOverarchingNarrow the FIP Project/Program results and align them more clearly with the results on governance sought at the “Catalytic Replication Outcome” level.Focus on “process” rather than “outcome” indicators to assess governance at the “Project/Program Outcome and Outputs” level.Focus governance indicators on assessing implementation of actions, rather than on the existence of rules, policies or laws.Project/Program IndicatorsChange the forest management indicator to capture whether protected areas are effectively being managed, not just whether they are being formed.Include tenure indicators that assess the administration of land tenure laws and the existence of mechanisms to resolve land tenure conflicts.Refine the indicators related to the empowerment of local communities and Indigenous Peoples to more accurately capture what is meant by “empowerment”.To continue reading, download the PDFlast_img

About the author

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *