1. Introduction

CEAMP is successful because of its approaches and implementation strategies to a large extent:

• CEAMP’s activities are closely aligned to the community level. The Project Support Unit (PSU) of CEAMP and the district-level partners support and facilitate the project activities at village level.  The project activities, WBS 200 in particular, are deeply rooted in the communities and address local environmental needs.  The community and the key stakeholders, therefore, steer the activities with high level of ownership, which ensure the sustainability of the project activities.

• Environmental management (EM) activities supported by CEAMP’s activities (and an important part of the supporting expenses to achieve them) are planned and implemented directly at the community level and contribute to the improvement of living conditions of local people by improving the quality of community environment.

• The focus of the EM activities is poor and marginalized groups of people.  They form the majority of the target population of villages.  They are the constituents of all actual or future governing movements from the political spectrum.

• Inclusiveness of all stakeholders belonging to the community and genuine devolution of CEAMP’s implementation to partners belonging, residing and answerable to the communities to which they belong.

• In a nutshell, CEAMP gives preference to insiders’ perspectives through its community-centered mechanism [Village Environmental Facilitators (VEFs), Villagers’ Environmental Development Funds (VEDFs) and its Management Committees, which include women and CBOs/NGOs] and objectives over outsiders’ perspectives when it comes to EM.  Thus it enters into a genuine and transparent partnership with local communities

2. Learning: Local Development in General

• Establishing good rapport, building trust at the community level, adopting simple procedures, planning involving local partners and community people are the keys to rapid and effective implementation of project activities.

• When local partners are trusted, given authority and involved actively in the planning process, then:  a) implementation becomes more efficient and effective and b) local resources are enthusiastically mobilised, leading to a high level of community ownership that ensures sustainability.

• There is a direct relationship between proximity of funds and degree of access of target beneficiaries

• Higher level of local resource mobilization and community ownership are possible if:
  • Available financial and human resources are declared at the beginning, and transparent and simple mechanisms are established.
  • Planning methods and implementation approaches are clear and simple.
  • Planning, decision making and implementation are managed by local communities.

• Public/social audit is simple, and the best auditing system for local development activities. It ensures local accountability through transparency, thus promoting local democracy in the long run.

• An appropriate degree of balance between tangible development and capacity strengthening activities is important to move from immediate environmental needs to intermediate environmental needs.

• Complicated concepts can be simplified if local partners are made responsible for finding solutions locally. Flexibility in project management at the local level gives enough space so as to find appropriate solutions to diverse local issues.

• At first, participatory planning may appear time-consuming. Once it is managed, however, it pays in the implementation stage by making implementation effective and efficient. 

• People, even the poor, are knowledgeable, capable and ready for development at the local level. Usually, most development agencies underestimate local intelligence and capacity. It creates an environment of mistrust, thereby delaying implementation which results in a lower level of community ownership.

• Too much academic standardization may discourage the use of local knowledge/skills and reduce the confidence of the local people. It also discourages local innovations and adversely affects the social inclusion process.

• Changing human attitudes and organisational behaviour require a collaborative approach together with clear conceptual understanding. Local people need facilitation more than direction by development agencies.

• Nepotism and favouritism can be prevented to a large extent, if decisions are made at the local level. Local decision-making practices demand that decisions be transparent and more justifiable.

• If development initiatives are owned and led by local communities, development processes become a part of their daily life. With this approach, development activities are not much affected by the conflict situation, rather the development process helps to minimise conflict at the local level.

3. Learning: Environmental Management at Local Level   

• The quality of environmental assessment carried out and reviewed locally might be modest in terms of quality of report, but it is more practical, efficient in the implementation and monitoring phases. 

• Local Bodies could be more effective in managing local environment in collaboration with local stakeholders. National level need to a) trust them, b) support in capacity strengthening, c) provide necessary funds on regular basis, d) carry out regular monitoring and facilitation.

4. Learning: Gender Equality and Social Inclusion

• Gender and social inclusion issues are better addressed by local stakeholders, if positive discrimination policy is introduced, simple procedures are developed and communities are clearly oriented towards these policies and procedures.

• Building an important critical mass of women is necessary to increase participation of women and address environmentally related gender needs. 

• Changing men’s attitudes and behaviour is crucial for women to participate and effectively articulate their opinions at household, organisational and community levels.

• Gender and social inclusion help to build social harmony at the community level.

• Setting special targets and giving special focus (training, coaching, counseling, encouragement, etc.) to women and minorities are essential to bring them into the mainstream of development.

In a nutshell, incrementalist style of management was practiced by CEAMP to tackle the necessity for holism Vs reductionism and its abundance of narrowly focused data. CEAMP’s skill was identifying what was most appropriate for immediate action.

For details Please visit Project Activities