Haiti Restoring Paradise - regenerating the natural and community resilience by Netherlands Red Cross
Please find below the
The new version of the proposition has been completed to address the comments from the judges. The question of feasibility seems to be much clearer with 1/ a consistent theory of change 2/ explanations about the proponents' previous experience in Haïti (dams) and 3/ the wide range of partners involved, including credible local organizations. The pilot proposition of the "three pearls" seems to have a real potential of demonstration, and the high profile of the Red Cross will help to scale up this pilot project if successful. I would strongly recommend, if implemented, to set a monitoring, evaluation and learning tool (MEL), based on indicators of change (the indicators listed in the proposition are more outputs based than outcome based).
This proposal, based on the philosophy of "Commonland and its four returns" is interesting. It is localized in Haiti, with a pilot region in a well-delineated region, and centred on restoration, anti-erosion actions and re-plantation, which are in fact key challenges in the region. The systemic aspect, integrating landscape restoration and early disaster warning tool is original and well explained. However, the feasibility of the project is impossible to judge because of the lack of a robust theory of change.
There are many layers of this proposal that need to be unpacked: 1) Awareness: who will you target, why and how? 2) Policy: How will you link this work to Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) policy instruments at local and national level? How will you promote buy-in and scaling-up among communities and government? 3) Biophysical land restoration: What will the interventions be based on and who will you work with to help identify and implement these (e.g. community, research institutes, government, universities, etc.). Incorporating landscape restoration into DRR planning isn't novel, but applying this to create "green pearls" in Haiti is interesting, with more experience and good practice in the field needed.
The project would gain in strength if the proponent provides more detail with regard to: - beneficiaries - area of intervention (estimated hectares) and impacts - further information of costs - how to engage with communities and local government and partners for ensuring sustainability of results.
What measures does the project team propose to increase ownership among locals and long-term feasibility of the project? How will the project secure the funding of the project? What considerations are made regarding community members and previous land users who may be displaced due to landscape restoration initiatives? How can the project work to serve these people and ensure that they are not driven to modify the landscape following the intervention?
No comments have been posted.