Maya biosphere project

The evaluation covers the period 1990-8/94. Given the realities of the Peten and Guatemala"s chaotic social, political and economic situation, the project, as expected, is going through a learning experience involving much trial and error. It faces imposing obstacles -- the urgent natural resource needs of impoverished inhabitants, powerful economic interests that make big money from (often illicit) primary resource exploitation, and massive migration and colonization by both the poor and the powerful -- with only weak control mechanisms at its disposal. Despite these constraints, the project has achieved many of its objectives and made progress towards several others. Despite a logically coherent design, the project treats the major institutional, social, economic, and political forces operating in the Peten as externalities. A policy component is needed, along with a process for incorporating all important economic and social groups in the Peten into the project, including the church, the army,. lumber interests, livestock interests, chicleros, etc. In addition, the activities of the project"s various implementing agencies are too dispersed. The project"s protection strategy needs to be redesigned to focus on the core zones, with conservation stations, control posts, marked limits, patrols, and attention to visitors. There is also need to decentralize the project"s management structure; the National Council for Protected Areas (CONAP), the chief Guatemalan coordinating agency, should focus more on coordination and planning and less on field implementation. The project is a central part of USAID/G"s Natural Resource Program, whose strategic objective is improved management of the natural resource base to support conservation of biodiversity, as measured primarily by the reduction of deforestation rates. After just 2 years of field implementation, it is probably too early to measure the project"s effects on regional deforestation rates. The project"s natural forest management strategy and activities need reconsideration. It may be possible for all parties to agree on a strategy for treating forest concessions if all agree that the benefits of forest management are best estimated if the forest is compared not with a virgin forest but with one that has been partially or totally destroyed. Although it is too early to declare the success of activities in ecological and economic terms, the following activities appear promising. (1) From 1991 through 1993, CARE trained 120 primary and secondary teachers in environmental education pedagogy, with a potential multiplier effect of 3,600 students trained in environmental topics per year. An additional accomplishment is the production of educational materials by the teachers, including a monthly supplement in a local newspaper. (2) In 1993, after a participative diagnostic process, CARE began agroforestry field extension in 15 communities. Solid work has begun with green fertilizers, live fences and trees in pastures, mixed orchards, management of natural forests on farms, and participative research on native plants. (3) Centro Maya is providing TA to the management of a cooperative-owned forest containing 93 caballerias of primary forest near the community of Bethel. This is a valuable experiment that bears watching. (4) Conservation International (CI) took responsibility for the Eco-School for Spanish in San Andreas. With a small investment, the Eco-School directly and indirectly generates employment and income for 93 people, which is significant in a small community like San Andreas. (5) A potpourri factory supported by CI-PROPETEN in the El Cruce dos Aguadas area has generated employment for 6 factory workers and 117 providers of primary material. The Mission comments that the evaluation failed to address several specific topics identified in the (probably overambitious) evaluation scope of work, particularly in regard to recommendations for improving project design; assessment of project achievement of the strategic objective, planned outputs, and desired impacts; and analysis of key management and financial issues.