Sri Lanka : final evaluation of the shared control of natural resources [SCOR] sub-project -- final report

The revised (1995) purpose of SCOR was to identify, develop, and field test models for increasing the sustainable productivity of natural resources -- mainly land and water -- in a watershed context. SCOR contributed to policy changes in the agriculture, irrigation, and forestry sectors that created openings for positive changes in watershed management through increased user control of natural resources. SCOR developed institutional innovations that took advantage of these openings. These have operated well at the project level, and some have been adopted at the national level. SCOR's overall approach had a number of distinctive features: it was first and foremost an integrated watershed approach that sought to (1) improve interdisciplinary understanding of changing biophysical, socioeconomic, and political systems; and (2) balance conservation with development, protecting the key functions of these systems upon which productivity depends. SCOR also used a participatory approach, seeking to promote broad, multi-leveled participation and collaborative relationships among a range of government agencies, local groups, NGOs, and individuals. Finally, it was a learning, "action research" approach, seeking to fill important gaps in our understanding of change and the impacts of alternative decisions. The specific mechanisms that SCOR employed to carry out these approaches were many, including local resource user groups, a cadre of catalysts, financial and technical support through subwatershed-based "mini-projects", market-oriented farmer companies, and various arrangements for sharing resource management responsibilities and benefits between the state and local people. With some exceptions, SCOR's activities to increase productivity will yield positive benefits only in the mid to long term. Most have not been adopted on a wide scale because they do not provide sufficient short-term benefit to the farmer. Nonetheless, through its support to farmer organizations and innovations in organizational forms, SCOR has helped develop new income options for farmers. Overall conclusions are as follows: (1) SCOR's innovative approach created a considerably greater awareness and common understanding of the importance of watersheds and conservation. Particularly in Nilwala, SCOR helped reinforce a sense of stewardship and responsibility among some public and private leaders for creating a wider public good through investments that are longer term or more distant from their immediate constituencies. Although neither an easy nor a complete accomplishment, this was an important one. SCOR's success did not, however, extend to the level of the individual farmer and farm household. Under SCOR, small holders and chena cultivators were seldom heard. It is not yet clear whether the innovations in productivity, resource management, and institutional modes and capacities to which SCOR contributed are well-established enough to be sustained. In this regard, the short time-frame of the project imposed a serious constraint. The role of multiple leadership, at all levels, was critical to SCOR's achievements. Committed leadership played a key role in balancing differing interests and building trust and commitment. Given the project's complex structure, a key task facing project leadership was to concentrate the project's limited resources on activities where success was most likely. It was appropriate not to narrow too much the focus at the design stage (when the least was known). After the mid-term evaluation, however, a concentration of focus was essential, yet proved difficult due to the differing interests among project participants. In the end, the lack of focus and the lack of sufficient consensus on priorities hindered project progress and achievement and its sought-for transformation from "project" to "program". Numerous lessons learned are detailed. (Author abstract, modified)