1 / 21

Conclusions from the mid-term external evaluation of the SRD Project Mr. Heimo Ker nen, Mr. Dotcho Mihailov, Mr. Iordan

Background and Context of the SRD Project? . The Project was undertaken by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forests (MAF) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Project is implemented by the MAF with UNDP support, and in partnership with the municipal administrations and local communiti

telyn
Download Presentation

Conclusions from the mid-term external evaluation of the SRD Project Mr. Heimo Ker nen, Mr. Dotcho Mihailov, Mr. Iordan

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. Conclusions from the mid-term external evaluation of the SRD Project Mr. Heimo Keränen, Mr. Dotcho Mihailov, Mr. Iordan Velikov and Ms. Liisa Häme 10.11.2005 Establishment and Operations of Local Leader Groups – Recommendations for Implementation of the LEADER + Initiative in Bulgaria Project “Sustainable Development of Rural Areas” Joint Initiative of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forests and the United Nations Development Programme

    2. Background and Context of the SRD Project… The Project was undertaken by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forests (MAF) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Project is implemented by the MAF with UNDP support, and in partnership with the municipal administrations and local communities in the target municipalities. The estimated project duration is from March 2003 to March 2006. The total project budget is USD 1,325,000, with funding coming from the MAF (800 000), UNDP (360 000) and the 11 municipalities 184 230). The general aim is to enhance rural development in Bulgaria. The Project supports a bottom-up approach in strategic planning and local development in eleven small rural municipalities. The Project was designed to strengthen the capacity of local communities to become leaders of sustainable rural development through support to the constitution, training and operations of Local Leader Groups (LLGs). (LEADER has proven to be a successful and effective bottom-up method in EU.)

    3. Background and Context of the SRD Project…

    4. Background and Context of the SRD Project… The goal of the project was to enhance the sustainable development of rural areas through support to participatory strategic planning and environmentally friendly job creation in eleven pilot municipalities. Activities were to focus on sustainable agriculture and forestry, and on alternative tourism. The Project also had to prepare the 11 municipalities to benefit from the EU Leader + Initiative. To achieve these goals during 2003 and 2004, the SRD Project applied the instruments of 1) establishment of LLGs, 2) development of LLG strategies, 3) development and implementation of community driven pilot projects and 4) introduction of a grants facility – the Demonstration Initiatives Fund - with 3 schemes (public-benefit projects, innovative projects, micro-credits).

    5. Mid-term Evaluation Objectives… Evaluate the establishment and operations of the 11 Local Leader Groups under the SRD Project in the period 2003-2004, and draw lessons learnt and recommendations for local-level actions based on the accumulated experience. Assess the status-quo of the national central and local level preparedness for implementing Leader, outline foreign Leader systems and best international practices, and recommend an effective Leader system for Bulgaria. Outline short- and long-term steps to be undertaken at the central and at the local level in order to achieve the desired implementation of Leader in Bulgaria and provide recommendations for up-scaling/nation-wide roll out of the SRD Project in 2005 and further.

    6. Mid-term Evaluation Process…

    7. Mid-term Evaluation Process (methods)…

    8. Findings… Relevance: all project activities were relevant to the project goals; but the “real LEADER” – real bottom-up principle is not so easy to implement (even in Finland). Process and results: Most of the projects have produced sustainable outputs and the efficiency of the implementation process is good. The results seem to be also good; but it was too early (February 2005) to evaluate final results and impacts.

    9. Summarized recommendations… The focus of the SRD Project was not predominantly on Leader preparations, but on obtaining immediate physical results through the provision of grants for learning-by-doing activities and networking in the 11 municipalities. Future interventions targeting preparations for Leader in Bulgaria, need to support co-operation and networking at the local level in a more “LEADER way”, ensuring wider participation of the local communities. The corresponding administrative set-up needs improvements vis-à-vis the current SRD Project, if it is to serve a real LEADER bottom-up and transparent programme.

    10. Summarized recommendations.. The LLG activities and the achieved results are at an early stage, but they are very important as incubators for mobilising rural Bulgaria and for contributing to sustainable local development. The priorities of the SRD Project generally fit the needs of the local communities. However, some of the project instruments could be improved to better suit the LEADER (bottom-up) idea.

    11. Summarized recommendations… The 11 LLGs vary greatly in size, composition, member profile, degree of influence on and by the local authorities, and understanding of the Leader principles. There is a need for further training of LLG members and LLG managements, as well as for ex-post monitoring of project results at the local level. (Project cycle management and Logframe are good tools to develop and promote the work of LLGs.)

    13. The Logical Framework Matrix…

    14. Summarized recommendations… The enlargement of the present groups into bigger Local Action Groups (LAGs) is important and obligatory in the future, vis-a-vis the EU requirements that a minimum of 10,000 inhabitants are covered by one LAG.

    15. Summarized recommendations… Generally, the SRD Project responded to the Leader philosophy of introducing innovative approaches and projects at the local level. However, many of the supported innovative projects did not seem inherently innovative, despite of being innovative for the respective area. On the whole, the SRD Project process significantly contributed to the building of capacity for project development and strategic planning in the targeted rural areas. This was achieved mainly in a "learning by doing" mode. The support to LLG establishment and operations could be improved, so that the LLG become more independent and more representative for the community.

    16. Summarized recommendations… Significant and effective assistance (in the form of on-line support and training) was provided to the LLGs by the Project Management Unit and project consultants for preparation of the LLG strategies and for elaboration of the project proposals. Future efforts shall focus on building capacity for independent operations of the LLGs, including in financial, administrative and communication matters.

    17. Summarized recommendations… There is a need for a stronger support in the initial set-up of the LLGs, including for training and coaching of moderators and for assisting LLGs with their PR activities. Such support could be subcontracted to a consulting company, an NGO, or a team of experts, experienced in participatory development methods. Overall, the commitment of Mayors to the SRD Project has rather had a positive than a negative impact. However, the Mayor’s influence on the LLG shall be regulated - for example, through a quota in the LLG Board. It is important that the Municipality is represented as an institution in the management bodies of the LLGs, so that political changes do not revoke the commitment of the local administration to the LLG.

    18. Summarized recommendations… It is important for initiatives like the SRD Project to create ownership and capacity not only within certain local institutions (LLGs), but also within the whole local community and area. LLGs are rather expected to be a medium, an instrument for community mobilisation, and not a substitute for the community stakeholders. There is a need for more transparency in the overall decision-making process (from centre to grass-roots, and vice versa), as well as for more “visible” results at the local level. The evaluators believe that this will contribute to local mobilization and capacity building.

    19. Summarized recommendations… The Leader system in Bulgaria should be as open and participatory as possible, while reducing bureaucratic burdens to a minimum. LEADER should be responsive to the needs of local stakeholders - ordinary people in the communities (and their associations) and local businesses (and their associations), as well as local NGOs.

    20. Summarized recommendations… The focus of a future SRD Project national roll-out should be on: strengthening the capacities of existing LLGs, disseminating the LLG experience and expertise throughout Bulgaria; strengthening the activities of a National Rural Network; involving new municipalities in preparations for Leader, while consolidating LEADER groups covering larger, Leader-eligible, areas.

More Related