Environment and development in coastal regions and in small islands

Coastal region and small island papers 9

Annex 4
WISE PRACTICE CHARACTERISTICS
AS AN EVALUATION TOOL

The wise practice characteristics and their definitions are listed below in italics. Workshop discussion items and, in some cases, recommendations are included under individual characteristics. One new characteristic was proposed; this is listed under ‘General comments’.

• Long-term benefit: The benefits of the activity are still evident ‘x’ years from now and they improve environmental quality.
  Potential benefits should be identified at the planning stage of the project, so that progress can be assessed during periodic evaluations. The timeframe of the long-term benefits (‘x’) should be identified for each project. Intangible benefits, e.g. confidence building, legal empowerment should be included. The issue of whether the benefits are project-confined or apply to a wider population also merits consideration.

• Capacity building and institutional strengthening: The activity provides improved management cap abilities and education for the stakeholder groups, as well as knowledge and efforts to protect the local coastal/marine environment.
  There was discussion as to whether these two items should be separated, for capacity-building deals with people, e.g. the number of fishermen trained, while institutional building deals with organizational units, e.g. a unit is established for integrated coastal management. However, in view of the fact that there are significant overlaps between the two, it was decided to retain the characteristic as one item.

• Sustainability: The activity adheres to the principles of sustainability (the extent to which the results will last and development continue once the project/programme has ended).
  The evaluation would need to determine different aspects of sustainability, e.g. financial, human.

• Transferability: Aspects of the activity can be applied to other sites in and/or outside of the country.
  The project planning process should define which project components are potentially transferable locally, nationally, regionally and globally.

• Interdisciplinary and intersectoral: The activity fully incorporates all relevant disciplines and all societal sectors.
  Due to budget and time resources, it may not be feasible to include all relevant disciplines; in such cases, priority disciplines need to be determined.

• Participatory process: Transparent participation of all the stakeholder groups as well as the involvement of individuals is intrinsic to the process.
  Identification of all stakeholder groups is a vital component of any project and its evaluation.

• Consensus building: The activity should benefit a majority of the stakeholder groups, whilst bearing in mind that in some cases certain under-privileged groups may need to be treated as special cases.
  This characteristic may need to be re-drafted to encompass the concept of benefit sharing (this might need to be linked to long-term benefit).

• Effective and efficient communication process: A multidirectional communication process involving dialogue, consultation and discussion is needed to attain awareness.

• Culturally respectful: The process values local traditional and cultural frameworks while also challenging their environmental validity.
  It was recommended that this characteristic should be termed ‘Locally sensitive’ instead of ‘Culturally respectful’.

• Gender and/or sensitivity issues: The process accounts for the many aspects of gender and/or other sensitive issues.

• Strengthening local identities: The activity provides a sense of belonging and self-reliance at various levels.

• National legal policy: The activity adheres to current government environmental, economic, legal and social policies.
  The definition needs rewording since it is sometimes necessary to change government policy. It was suggested that the definition should read ‘the activity progressively shapes current government environmental, economic, legal and social policies.’

• Regional dimension: The activity should embody the regional economic, social and environmental perspective.

• Human rights: The activity should provide freedom to exercise fundamental human rights.

• Documentation: The activity and the lessons learnt have been well documented.

• Evaluation: The activity has been assessed to determine the extent to which ICM has been achieved and/or wise practice characteristics utilized.

General Comments

• An additional characteristic was proposed, as follows:
  Cultural transformation: Positive ways in which the activity influenced existing cultural patterns or behaviour.

• Focus of evaluation: It was agreed that any evaluation should focus on project activities that have been achieved to date, not those that are likely to be undertaken in the future.

• Verifiable indicators: Wherever possible, it is recommended to use verifiable indicators.

• Linkage of characteristics: Some of the characteristics are linked and this should be taken into account in the determining of performance during an evaluation, e.g. the ‘Culturally respectful’ and ‘Strengthening local identities’ characteristics.

• Numerical or grouped evaluation indicators: Grouped indicators were used during the workshop trial, namely Full, Partial, None and Unknown. One suggestion was to use a scale of 1–10 instead.

Start		Introduction		Activities	Publications	Search
		Wise Practices	Regions		Themes