|
Monitoring level: Project Objective
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
GEF Tracking Tool (TT) score
|
TT updates
|
At MTR and TE
|
DEA (PMU), validated by MTR and TE
|
Collaborative application of TT by relevant stakeholders with scoring duly justified through descriptions (see Table for justification at the baseline).
|
Assumption: TT reflects the stage of advance of Nagoya Protocol implementation in the country.
Risk: TT baseline scores are relatively high, leaving little room for tangible improvement.
|
2
|
Number of ABS agreements for priority species facilitated by the project
|
Normal monitoring of project pilots
|
When events happen and with annual progress reports summarized in the PIR
|
DEA (PMU), validated by MTR and TE
|
DEA’s ABS Database, project’s regular and ad hoc reports.
|
Assumption: What constitutes a new ABS agreement (as opposed to an arrangement e.g.) has been unambiguously defined.
Risk: Legal and comprehensive benefit agreements may take long to negotiate.
|
3
|
Mainstreaming of conservation concerns into pilot value chains:
(a) Direct (pilots targeted landscape)
(b) Indirect (national level)
(c) Conservation scheme for value chains in place
|
TT updates
|
At MTR and TE
|
DEA (PMU), validated by MTR and TE
|
SANBI can advise through activities relevant for Output 3.1.
|
Assumption: The “blanket” mainstreaming target is linked to one or more species distribution within SA.
Risk: It may not meaningful to monitor mainstreaming targets in a simplistic and area-based manner.
|
4
|
Level of mainstreaming of gender considerations in project monitoring (measured through the state of advancement in gender disaggregated data collection and analysis in ABS pilots - refer to Table )
|
Matrix scoring updates
|
At MTR and TE
|
DEA (PMU), validated by MTR and TE
|
Collaborative application of Gender Mainstreaming: Scoring Matrix by relevant stakeholders with scoring duly justified through descriptions – task overseen by the PMU.
|
Assumption: Gender Mainstreaming: Scoring Matrix reflects the feasibility of mainstreaming gender into targeted value chains.
Risk: Baseline scores for some questions in some of the pilots = 0, what means that it is not feasible to collect data regarding gender.
|
|
Monitoring level: Outcome 1 (R&D)
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
TT Section 2) ABS Pilots = X / max score 20 (10 x 2 pilots)
--PILOTS--
1.1 African Ginger product
1.2 N Cape R&D hub
|
TT updates
|
At MTR and TE
|
DEA (PMU), validated by MTR and TE
|
Collaborative application of TT by relevant stakeholders with scoring duly justified through descriptions (see Table for justification at the baseline).
|
Assumption: TT reflects the stage of advance of Nagoya Protocol implementation in the country.
Risk: TT baseline scores are relatively high, leaving little room for tangible improvement.
|
6
|
Research plan for priority Northern Cape species
|
Normal monitoring of project pilots
|
When events happen and with annual progress reports summarized in the PIR
|
DEA (PMU), validated by MTR and TE
|
DEA’s ABS Database.
|
Assumption: NC hub will develop quickly.
Risk: The NC Research Plan becomes quickly obsolete.
|
7
|
Number of patent registrations based on home-grown R&D facilitated by the project
|
Normal monitoring of project pilots
|
When events happen and with annual progress reports summarized in the PIR
|
DEA (PMU), validated by MTR and TE
|
DEA’s ABS Database.
|
Assumption: Patent registration will be achieved quickly.
Risk: Clinical trials do not yield satisfactory results.
|
|
Monitoring level: Outcome 2 (Value Chain Development)
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
TT Section 2) ABS Pilots = X / max score 60 (10 x 6 pilots)
--PILOTS--
2.1 Pelargonium
2.2 Aloe ferox
2.3 Honeybush
2.4 African Ginger cultivation
2.5 N Cape extension services
2.6 Rooibos ABS deal
|
TT updates
|
At MTR and TE
|
DEA (PMU), validated by MTR and TE
|
Collaborative application of TT by relevant stakeholders with scoring duly justified through descriptions (see Table for justification at the baseline).
|
Assumption: TT reflects the stage of advance of Nagoya Protocol implementation in the country.
Risk TT baseline scores are relatively high, leaving little room for tangible improvement.
|
9
|
Number of harvesters trained as per the sustainable harvester guidelines for the following pilots:
2.1 Pelargonium
2.2 Aloe ferox
2.3 Honeybush
|
Normal monitoring of project pilots
|
At MTR and TE
|
DEA (PMU), Activity coordinators
|
Regular and ad hoc porting from activity coordinators for each of the pilots.
|
Assumption: Training is useful and effective.
Risks: Training does not achieve critical mass.
|
10
|
Number of local community households for which members are employed in aloe cultivation, harvesting and processing
|
Normal monitoring of project pilots
|
At MTR and TE
|
DEA (PMU), Activity coordinators
|
Regular and ad hoc porting from activity coordinators for each of the pilots.
|
Assumption: The project will generate improved income in Tyefu Community.
Risks: Training does not achieve critical mass.
|
11
|
Total income (US$/annum) derived from project pilots
2.1 Pelargonium
2.2 Aloe ferox
2.3 Honeybush
2.4 African Ginger cultivation
2.5 N Cape extension services
|
Normal monitoring of project pilots / questionaries
|
At MTR and TE
|
DEA (PMU), validated by MTR and TE
|
Regular and ad hoc porting from activity coordinators for each of the pilots.
|
Assumption: The project will result in improved income.
Risks: Income measures change very little as a result of the project.
|
12
|
Cultivation area for Honeybush expanded
|
GIS measures
|
At MTR and TE
|
DEA (PMU), Activity coordinators
|
DEA’s ABS Database. Regular and ad hoc porting from activity coordinators for each of the pilots.
|
Assumption: The project will result in an expanded are under cultivation.
Risks: Area expansion is not significant.
|
|
Monitoring level: Outcome 3 (Capacity Development)
|
|
|
|
|
|
13
|
Conservation measures supported by the project and focusing on threatened species
- securing species’ survival
- protection of wild gene-pools
- habitat management
- sustainable transition towards cultivation
|
SANBI is expected to assist
|
At the baseline (status quo established)
|
SANBI and PMU
|
Regular and ad hoc porting from activity coordinators for each of the pilots.
|
Assumption: Conservation measures are needed in pilots.
Risks: It may be difficult to implement certain measures.
|
14
|
Number of Internationally Recognized Certificates of Compliance (IRCC) registered in the CBD’s ABS Clearing House Mechanism
|
Normal monitoring of project pilots
|
When events happen and with annual progress reports summarized in the PIR
|
DEA (PMU), validated by MTR and TE
|
DEA’s ABS Database
|
Assumption: IRCC are a token of advancement in ABS implementation.
Risks: Bureaucracy makes it less desirable for entrepreneurs to request IRCCs.
|
15
|
Adequacy of the National Recordal System viz. TK
|
Normal monitoring of project pilots
|
At MTR and TE
|
DEA (PMU), validated by MTR and TE
|
Comprehensiveness and quality of TK data recorded
|
Risks: It may be difficult to evaluate the adequacy of the National Recordal System in a relatively short-time scale.
|
