Final evaluation of the Norad and WWF-Norway funded Semuliki River Catchment and Water Resources Management Project, Uganda

Background:
The Semuliki River and its catchment are shared between Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The Project mainly worked in two Ugandan sub-catchments: Mubuku/Nyamwamba, Kasese District and Lamya/Lower Semuliki, Bundibugyo and Ntoroko Districts. Major threats to the water resources in the area include: deforestation, poor land management, various small-scale sources of pollution, weak institutional arrangements and climate change. These threats result in deteriorating water quality and quantity. The water resources are used for domestic purposes, agriculture, irrigation, hydropower, mining, fisheries and tourism/national parks. A water sector reform process in Uganda moves towards integrated water resources management (IWRM), which the Semuliki River Catchment and Water Resources Management Project (SRCWRM) sought to pilot.

The objective of the final evaluation was to assess whether the Project had achieved its purpose and outputs, to guide future interventions, and also to assess if the Project had contributed to organisational learning and documentation of lessons for WWF and other stakeholders - particularly the Department of Water Resources Management (DWRM) that plans to roll-out IWRM across Uganda. The evaluation assessed the relevance and quality of the project design, effectiveness, efficiency, impacts and sustainability and replicability.

Purpose/objective:
The overall goal of the Project was to ensure that ecosystem functions of the Semuliki River catchment conserves water, biodiversity and other natural resources to meet basic human needs and sustain ecosystem functions. The project purpose was: “By the end of 2012, plans and structures for integrated water resources management are functioning for at least two sub-catchments feeding the Semuliki River and processes recorded to guide national IWRM rollout.” The Project had seven main outputs.

Methodology:
The evaluation was commissioned by the WWF Uganda Country Office in collaboration with WWF-Norway and conducted in November 2012 by two external experts in water resources management. The Consultants reviewed project documents and IWRM literature for Uganda and Africa, particularly the Nile Basin. Meetings were held with WWF, central government (DWRM) and in the field with government and non-government stakeholders in the two sub-catchments. A one-day stakeholders’ workshop was held to discuss initial evaluation findings.

Key findings:
The Project was highly relevant to Uganda’s policy and development frameworks and the needs of water resource management and catchment protection of the Semuliki River Basin. Overall, the achievement of the Project was rated ‘moderately satisfactory’ - the second highest evaluation ranking. The Project was successful in piloting IWRM interventions and provides a basis for replication of its institutional mechanisms for possible roll-out to other catchments in Uganda. The Project’s participatory multi-stakeholder approach in the design of sub-catchment management plans drew inputs from key players, which was appreciated by stakeholders. Project lessons can inform the design of the approach to IWRM in Uganda. The initial delays in the Project prevented greater achievement, but were rectified with a new project management. The lack of clarity from the regulator on the detailed IWRM frameworks to be implemented in Uganda also reduced progress as the water sector reform process moved much more slowly than anticipated.

The Project was commended for listening to and working with partners in the sub-catchments. This also contributed to the increased awareness among water users and communities of linkages between water resources and catchment management, which was also appreciated by hydropower operators and the water supply agency in the area. These operators now engage with watershed associations and have invested in catchment conservation. The DWRM Albert Water Management Zone office staff worked closely with the Project.

The comprehensive capacity building increased IWRM capacity substantially and was important in producing the two catchment management plans (CMPs) for the Mubuku/Nyamwamba and Lamia/Lower Semuliki sub-catchments and establishing 13 water user groups (WUGs) that implemented pilot IWRM initiatives. IWRM is still a very new concept in Uganda and continued capacity building is required for further IWRM roll-out.

Lessons learned includes that IWRM takes time as it involves developing new structures and changing well-established patterns of behaviour, which requires awareness creation, capacity building and pilot activities. Most of these are incremental – building on each other and it is not possible to operate actions in parallel. A staggered approach is preferable. As work starts in one or more sub-catchment(s) some communities can be identified as “early adopters” (e.g. communities with existing social institutions or with a pressing issue around water). This allows the Project to learn and the communities can be used as demonstration cases for later communities. “Seeing is believing”. Study tours or exchange visits can play a catalytic role in raising awareness, highlighting problems and solutions and promote learning and building support, particularly for a new and challenging concept to grasp like IWRM.

Livelihood improvement activities should be an integral part of IWRM work as these contribute to the initial buy-in and to sustainability, especially where communities are not being impacted majorly and directly by reduced water resources.

There is an urgency to develop an institutional framework for local level IWRM in Uganda. Institutions developed under the Project may not be supported in the future IWRM frameworks. A key issue to consider is scale – at what level would the groups operate? The WUGs need to be big enough to access sufficient internal resources – by having large and diversified enough ranges of water users as members. WUGs also need a clear mandate.

Recommendations:
The evaluation’s recommendations included: WWF-UCO and the DWRM should seek ways to continue the Project, building on the good work initiated in order to strengthen the institutions formed and implement more activities as well as further integration with the national-level IWRM roll-out process; knowledge, best-practices and processes of plans development and implementation should be widely disseminated; IWRM projects should be based on a clear catchment assessment that includes a knowledge, attitudes and practices survey and clarity on the institutional set-up; and DWRM should utilise lessons from the process of setting up sub-catchment plans under the Project for future clarification of IWRM structures, roles and responsibilities at various levels.

Comments from the organisation, if any:
WWF-Norway generally agrees with the evaluation findings and recommendations. The evaluation should have analysed the implications of the IWRM policy vacuum further. Clarifications on the IWRM frameworks and the degrees of decentralisation of roles, responsibilities and resources are essential to clarify further IWRM development in Uganda.

There are currently no plans for WWF-Norway to provide further support for the Semuliki project. After the Project ended, WWF continues to work in parts of the project area through a separate climate and energy project. Some funding comes from Norad and WWF-Norway.