Terms of Reference for State Policy Dialogue on Natural Resource Management

 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION (FAO)

 

Terms of Reference (TOR)

State Policy on– Natural Resource Management

 

Green-Ag: Transforming Indian Agriculture for Global

Environment Benefits and the Conservation of Critical

Biodiversity and Forest Landscapes

 

Prepared by

State Project Management Unit,

Green-Ag Project Aizawl,

Mizoram

 

GEF Project ID: GCP/IND/183/GEF

FAO Project symbol: 637244

GEF Project ID: 9243

Recipient Country: India

 

I. Position Information

Job Code title: Consultant – State Policy Dialogue on Natural Resource Management

Duty Station: Home based/Office

Reports to: State Project Management Unit, FAO Green Ag Project, Aizawl,

SAMETI Building

 

II. Background Context

International development policy has come to a consensus that environment-poverty linkages are critical in determining development outcomes. Poor people in developing countries are particularly dependent on natural resources and ecosystem services for their livelihoods. Increasingly the poor live in areas of high ecological vulnerability and relatively low levels of resource productivity. The position of the poor at such ecological margins, as well as a low level of access and rights over productive natural resources, is a major factor contributing to rural poverty. Much of the extensive debate over poverty in the last decade has in fact turned around the question of how poverty, vulnerability, livelihoods and access to resources are linked. The following concepts and definitions have become widely accepted points of reference in these debates about development.

 

Vulnerability is closely linked to access to resources (capital assets) because these are a principal means by which people reduce their vulnerability. It is the access to resources, assets and entitlements that together give people the capabilities to pursue livelihood strategies that may have direct material as well as more individually subjective objectives.

 

Concerns over the sustainability of natural resource use are not new; however the last decade has seen significant changes in the approach to questions of access to resources and its links to poverty. Central to the changed approach - as the concepts described above suggest - is a people centered focus and a dynamic view of well-being based on a recognition of the vulnerability dimension of deprivation and poverty. Both in theory and practice approaches to the issue of poverty-environment linkages now tend to start with a consideration of how people themselves define poverty and the assets they draw on in pursuing their livelihood strategies. Questions of what role access to natural capital plays in local livelihood strategies now tend to be seen in dynamic interrelation with how other capital assets, such as social, physical, human and financial assets are used.

 

This change in the conceptualization of poverty, vulnerability and livelihoods in relation to access to natural resources can be partly attributed to:

 Emerging empirical evidence on the nature of poverty-environment linkages and the types of livelihood strategies adopted by the poor.

 Related changes in theories on poverty-environment linkages.

 The international policy environment and the new poverty reduction agenda.

 

Two environmental narratives in particular occupied polar extremes of the debate over poverty environment linkages. One position was centrally concerned with demographic issues and the carrying capacity of the resource base and argued that there was a mutually reinforcing negative vicious circle between environmental degradation and poverty for which state intervention was required. The other polar extreme agreed that whilst there was a negative association between poverty and environmental degradation, this was caused by state interference in local resource management practices. Sustainable development had in fact been a past reality and could only be achieved again if local communities were given back rights and control over natural resources.

 

It is now more generally accepted that the conditions under which the poor can manage natural resources are contingent on internal and wider institutional structures, as well as on the specific character of the natural resources themselves. Perhaps for the first time in modern development planning there are no dominant environmental narratives. Environmental facts are treated with caution and it is appreciated that data on the environment can be flawed and based on dubious scholarship. (Taken from http://www.fao.org).

 

Natural Resources are the biggest assets of rural communities. Their livelihoods primarily depend on the use of natural resources like soil, water and trees. Sustainable management of these resources is critical to sustaining and improving the livelihoods of rural communities. Sustainable management of these resources is also critical from climate change point of view.

 

The turning point and good news could be that the India’s government has started to shift its priorities in terms of how it manages the country’s economy and natural resources. Some radical changes are visible on the ground like Renewable energy is gaining momentum; traction and ambitious solar and wind targets have been set. Sugar-bean, a less water-intensive crop, is being discussed at length in lieu of sugarcane. Less water-intensive rice cultivation is also a priority in certain regions.  https://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2014/07/indias-faltering-energy-productiondamaged-

water-resources-demand-modis-close-attention/)

 

Improved land resource management and delivery system has significant social and economic impact on individuals, community and State. The land and property related activities generate about 30-35 % of the GDP of the country. The National Advisory Council (NAC) in its concept paper envisages utilizing aerial survey and digital technology for updating of land records and developing a web based land resource information system under the National Common Minimum Programme (NCMP) of the Government of India. (Courtesy: https://dict.mizoram.gov.in/page/land-resource-information-system)

 

The Indian Council of Agriculture Research is also taking the Natural Resource Management seriously and is conducting basic and strategic researches to develop technologies for conservation, management and sustainable utilization of the natural resources ensuring food, nutritional and environmental security in the country. The NRM research programmes have been prioritized within the perspective of different themes, viz; Soil Inventory and Characterization, integrated Soil-Water-Nutrient Management, Watershed Management, Resource Conservation Technologies, Crop diversification, integrated weed management, integrated farming System including Agroforestry, dryland farming, arid, coastal and hill agriculture, abiotic stress management, climate resilient agriculture, conservation agriculture, waste water utilization, solid waste management and applications of nanotechnology to enhance nutrient and water use efficiency. The Division is conducting research in farmers' participatory mode addressing issues at ground level and developing location specific, cost effective, ecofriendly, socially acceptable scientific farming practices keeping in view the farmers' resource availability, traditional indigenous technology knowhow and grass root farm innovations.

 

2) OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSIGNMENT

Based on the above a detailed programme document will now be developed in close consultation with the State Technical Coordinator, State Project Management Unit, Aizawl. The Consultant will be responsible to develop and finalize the detailed programme document for support FAO, India

 

3) SCOPE OF WORK

Scope of the work of the Consultant:

1. Carry-out a desk review of all existing documentation related to the NRM sector in

India and Mizoram state, including but not limited to:

Draft Programme Document for future support

Programme Document and related reports

National Programme Document and related reports

International NRM Documents

Other relevant documents (especially other related project funded state programme, national or international aided)

 

2. One-day meetings and discussions with all stakeholders

Programme meeting with stakeholders/beneficiaries and counterparts on the NRM to seek inputs/comments to finalize the documents and finding including policies adoption for implementation. The Meeting will also meet with previous State Programme/project

Director and Programme Coordinator and other relevant actors including previous project management and technical staff, government counterparts, donors, civil society,

UN personnel. In addition the meeting may wish to conduct a site visit to the Province at local constituency level to broaden the scope of inputs at the stakeholder level.

 

3. Facilitate a workshop

The SPMU will conduct workshop with all stakeholders, relevant UN Agencies, national and international experts and government representatives. The purpose of the workshop will be to discuss and agree on the content of the policy, programme document and implementation modalities, and identify potential obstacles during the above mentioned mission.

 Develop and finalize the narrative of the programme document, including executive summary; situation analysis (country’s context, policy context, programme context); strategy (including linkages to other programmes of the state, national and international funded project or programme); mechanism to ensure coordination with SPMU mechanism as well as synergies with civil society support programme and Community programmes; management, coordination and implementation arrangements (in line with existing national and sectoral coordination structures).

 Provide a Presentation of the policy with all the stakeholders

 __________Update the concept note

 Others: Performs any other duties related to the finalization of the Policy dialogue as required by SPMU/NPMU

In carrying out his/her tasks, the Consultant should: consider the state context and the elected bodies’ cultural and socio-political dynamics including thematic areas like climate change, environment, human rights, gender equality and decentralization;

 ensure alignment with stated priorities and mechanisms (taking into account the roles and functions of the proposed Policy dialogue for development project support);

 ensure coherence with other programmes of development partners and other programmes in the governance sector

 Engage with counterparts at the state government counterparts from the legal sector agencies and others, at all appropriate levels. The Consultant will apply participatory methods to this work.

 take into account other NRMs approved results frameworks for governance and public administration reform, legal sector master plan, civil society support programme and community in order to ensure synergies and maximize Policy comparative advantage as the leading partner in the governance sector;

 Since some other agencies and development partners may also be interested to support the programme, assess whether the programme could be jointly implemented (parallel, pooled or pass-through funding)

 Use FAO tools about development and other relevant to safe-guard Natural Resource

Management Programme and governance-related programmes.

 Ensure that the programme is human-rights based and gender sensitive

 Take fully into account the lessons learned and findings from field and secondary data. In particular define a robust set of management arrangements to ensure sustainability and

ownership of the programme’s interventions.

 Ensure that there is a clearly defined exit strategy to ensure that the focus of the support which will lead to measurable outcomes and impacts is captured in the programme document.

 

4) DELIVERABLES AND TIMELINE

The consultancy will be managed through an output based approach, where each component of deliverables are as listed below:

Key deliverables are:

 25% Desk Review and Stakeholder consultation conducted (Hold meetings and discussions with Programme beneficiaries and counterparts on the State programme)

 25% Revised Narrative Programme Document (including Results framework)

 40% Final narrative of National Resource Management, including executive summary; situation analysis (country’s context, policy context, programme context); strategy (including linkages to other programmes of the FAO); mechanism to ensure coordination with state Government Line Department mechanism as well as synergies with SPMU, NPMU, FAO and civil society support programme and Community programmes; management and coordination arrangements (in line with existing national and sectoral coordination structures); legal context (compliance with FAO regulations);

TOR; risk logs

 10% Preparation of supportive document for the launching of the NRM, PowerPoint presentation and finalization of the concept note on State Policy dialogue

Approximately not exceeding two months of total consultancy divided per outputs as described in the above bullet points.

 

Deliverables Description Timing (from contract signing date)

Payment

Desk Review Secondary data/information collected from

State Department and other literature review.

Within the first week

30% of the Field survey/Data agreed cost collection

Field survey completed and analysis of results.

Next three weeks

First Draft Report

Submission

Draft report submitted which will be review and examine by Green-Ag Project Team.

Two weeks before end of contract agreement.

30% of the agreed cost

Final Report Submission

Final report submitted and approved by Green-Ag Project Team.

Last penultimate Week

20% of the Presentation and agreed cost consultation with all the stakeholders

Meeting conducted with Government official/policy makers and all stakeholders for implementation of the policy. (there may be multiple presentation, meeting etc). Date may be fixed by the SPMU

End of contract

The finding maybe presented before expert in the field and on successful presentation, contract will end. Date will be fixed from SPMU

20% of the agreed cost

Note: The total duration of the consultancy would be not exceeding two months from the date of signing of the contract. Reports submitted to SPMU, Aizawl should be in electronic (on CD/DVD) and colour hardcopy formats (05 copies draft, 15 copies final versions). This should include all data, manuals etc.

 

5) REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE

Knowledge and skills:

 Advanced university degree (Masters and equivalent) in development studies, economics, management, political science, public administration, international relations, or related field.

 Excellent knowledge of the project/programme management for parliamentary support

 Knowledge and demonstrated experience with NRM

 Knowledge, particularly in the areas of human rights-based approaches to programming, gender equality and women’s empowerment, Results Based Management (RBM) principles, environmental mainstreaming, climate change and adaptation, is highly desirable.

 Excellent knowledge of the social, political and economical situation of the Mizoram

State

 Substantive knowledge of development issues

 Knowledge of FAO and its mandate in the area of democratic governance and

programme development

 Excellent analytical and conceptual thinking

 Good interpersonal and communication skills

Experience:

 At least 10 years of relevant professional experience at national and international level

NRM sector is required, preferably in developing countries

 Experience in developing frameworks for Natural Resource Management-support

programmes for countries in transition period would be an advantage.

 Substantive knowledge on gender mainstreaming and Human Rights based Approach

 Desirable but not essential to have experience of working with legislatures in

Communist countries.

 Past experience of developing FAO or other International Programmes

 Good skill in convincing others

 

Languages:

 Excellent written and spoken English.

 Excellent report writing skills as well as communication and interviewing skills in

English.

 Expert in power point presentation

 

6) REVIEW TIME REQUIRED

The State Project Director and State Technical Coordinator, SPMU will review the consultant’s outputs and provide comments as per a pre-agreed timeline with appropriate adjustments as necessary.

 

7) CONSULTANT PRESENCE REQUIRED ON DUTY STATION/SPMU PREMISES

NONE  PARTIAL X INTERMITTENT  FULL-TIME

IF FULL TIME – PLEASE ADD BELOW FOR JUSTIFICATION

If the assignment requires full time presence on UNDP premises, a sound justification on why a full time presence is required.

 

8) All findings, and all related documents will be the property of the FAO, SPMU, Aizawl, and publication of the abstract or whole, in other platform will amount to infringement of the property of the FAO, and is strictly prohibited without prior permission.

 

Appendix 3

Please keep in mind the project documents (read carefully) to orient the expected outcome while conducting the work as provided below

‘Policy Dialogues’ established to inform and facilitate discussion of priority issues related to agriculture, environment, including climate change and development, including gender issues, at national and state levels, including options to shift current investments in agricultural development to support more environmentally sustainable practices

 

1. Whilst the Project’s steering Committees at the national and State levels will primarily provide policy guidance for project implementation, the project will support additional platforms that will bring together members of these committees and other senior policy makers (experts from the government, academia, the private sector, non-governmental organizations and farmer representatives)to prioritize, analyze and discuss priority issues and concerns related to mainstreaming of environmental concerns in the agriculture sector.

 

2. The dialogues may be built around key themes identified by FAO’s Sustainability Assessment of

Food and Agriculture Systems1. The project will also take into consideration FAO`s Strategy on

Climate Change and FAO Policy on Gender Equality as formulated in the context of Attaining

Food Security Goals in Agriculture and Rural Development and ensure that such dialogues include gender and social equity issues.

 

3. These dialogues will be facilitated by project-funded experts. Dialogue participants will assess the wider policy context for agriculture, environment and development in their respective

States and at the national level and prioritize key issues driving unsustainability in agriculture. Participants of these dialogues will identify and prioritize critical issues at the national level and each of the States that are in need of in-depth analyses for informed decision making. Upon request from dialogue participants, the project will commission analyses and studies to other relevant experts and or think tanks. These reports are intended to be used as policy briefs on options to shift current investments/ policies/ programmes driving unsustainability in agriculture to more sustainable practices, based on national and international experiences.

 

4. These Dialogues will lead to formulation of policy recommendations to be considered by the agriculture and other relevant sectors to support mainstreaming of environmental concerns into the agriculture sector. In addition to providing important information and analyses to decision makers on relevant issues, the Dialogues are expected to be a mechanism to cement inter-sectoral partnerships and to raise awareness and capacities of key policy makers on environment-agriculture-development nexus. It is expected that at least 110 senior policy makers at National and State levels will participate in these dialogues and benefit from increased awareness on issues and policy options related to sustainable agriculture and global environmental benefits.

 

5. It is expected that analyses from the dialogues above, combined with field experiences of the project will contribute to integration of Green Landscape approach into National and State

Development Plans/ development visions and sectoral plans, so that these plans include support actions, including funding for maintaining and expanding Green Landscape activities. By the end of the project, several national agriculture related policies/plans and State agriculture policies and plans are expected to integrate environmental concerns. At the national level, the project http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3957e.pdf will work with MoAFW to identify and better incorporate indicators and monitoring related to the achievement of GEBs within the nation’s agricultural policy framework.

 

6. Some possible key issues these dialogues could examine include:

 Input subsidies versus outcome based support for agriculture sustainability: The GoI currently invests billions of dollars annually on inputs such as fertilizers, water, fuel, seeds, and pest control. These investments promote increases in agricultural production, but often also lead to perverse environmental outcomes. These incentive measures take many forms from subsidies to purchase guarantee programmes. The project will enable the GoI to address this issue by supporting assessment of current subsidies and the redirection of these to incentives outcome based subsidies. Current government subsidies to farmers are mostly based upon inputs (e.g., total amount of urea distributed). Studies could examine potential for adoption of an outcome-based approach to subsidies. Outcome-based subsidies related to soil health (e.g., a 1% increase in soil organic matter), water table levels (e.g., a sustained 50-cm rise at the crucial juncture after wet season harvest), or tree cover (e.g., a 5% increase) would drive the sorts of effort and innovation that are urgently needed for these outcomes. This may include facilitating and incentivizing groundwater management committees for increasing groundwater levels in 1m increments; community forestry and grazing organizations for achieving biodiversity targets for sustainable forest management in grazed areas (e.g., populations of targeted species); and, farmers and pastoralists for achieving or maintaining sustainability certification (e.g., with components for biodiversity-smart, climate-smart, pollinator friendly, or organic production). These interventions could increase subsidy effectiveness, reduce subsidy costs, and/or increase the value to the recipients for the same cost. Incentives would be designed to encourage farmers to coordinate through institutions such as BMCs to strengthen communities, achieve the desired scale of outcomes, enhance community assets, and deliver GEBs.

 Direct Payments to Support Green Landscape Conservation Strategies: Under the existing policy framework, subsidy payments are not made directly to farmers. There are potential benefits of policy changes to transition the payments of subsidies and entitlements away from payments to inputs producers instead to direct payments, including asset-based support, to intended beneficiaries (e.g., smallholder farmers). For example, the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act has demonstrated many benefits of the direct payment scheme on a large scale, and there are numerous benefits to shift other payments to a similar system (e.g., increased efficiencies, reduced leakages, improved transparency and accountability, faster payments to beneficiaries, reduced opportunities for beneficiary fraud, reduced opportunities for benefit-related exploitation). Such a transition takes advantage of trends in governmental programmes (e.g., death and disability insurance schemes) that increasingly rely on direct debits and payments to individual bank accounts rather than routing payments through intermediaries. For instance, the National Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare provides Rs. 50,000/ha for 3 years to subsidize individual farmers to transition from non-organic to organic production. This could be harnessed and applied to Green Landscapes through capacity and awareness improvements. Under the Pradhan Mantri Krishi Vikas Yojana, organic farming is promoted through cluster approach and Participatory Guarantee System (PGS) of certification. The financial assistance could be given to clusters of different sub components for mobilization of farmers, for organic seeds, to harvesting biological nitrogen. These studies will include strong considerations of gender and social equity issues. The government is also promoting direct e-transfer of support to households and linking of such schemes to adoption of agro-ecological approaches could also be considered.

 incentivizing stronger environmental and social considerations in agriculture – such as through social protection programmes: Several government programmes also have a direct bearing on local production. This includes social safety net programmes such as the Mid-Day Meals Scheme, Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), Public Distribution Systems (PDS) and goods to support GoI operations such as cantonments, state hospitals, tribal schools and social welfare schools. The Central Government spends billions of dollars annually on such programmes. Mostly, the Central Government is responsible for procurement, storage, transportation and bulk allocation. The State Governments are responsible for distributing these food and other items to consumers through a network of “fair price shops”. The current system focuses on a few high yielding crop varieties that are transported and distributed across the country. Often, purchases for these programmes are guaranteed by contract with individual farmers. With GoI purchase guaranteed, these contracts serve as strong encouragement for farmers to produce certain crops in a specified, sustainable manner, but often this acts as an incentive to convert biodiverse agricultural systems to monocrops. Farmers would have a strong market incentive for more sustainable practices if these purchase programmes undertook additional criteria for purchasing agrobiodiversity products or environmentally friendly products, and the demand would help to reinforce sustainable local farmer practices that also yield additional environmental benefits. GoI leading the charge on local procurement would improve the supply efficiency of safety net programmes, reduce post-harvest losses, reduce transportation emissions, and incentivize production that is harmonized with environmental, agricultural, and social objectives.

 

Policy briefs, advocacy and awareness-raising materials developed to inform discussions and decision making on priority issues related to agriculture, environment and development (target: 10 national policy briefs, 15 state briefs)

 

7. The project will support the development of different types of policy briefs. They will be:

 built on issues identified by national and state dialogues as priority issues and will include lessons from around India and from other parts of the world (Output 1.1.2)

 built specifically on lessons and experiences of this project

 jointly developed with other GEF and/or other projects/ programmes as appropriate

 aimed primarily to promote strong environmental mainstreaming into agriculture and related programmes and investments.

 

The project will also develop other advocacy and awareness raising materials aimed at multiple stakeholders- and these may be linked to addressing key threats or overcoming key barriers to promoting Green Landscape planning or plan implementation. At the State level, some potential issues that the project could cover include options to mitigate human wildlife conflict in a sustainable and cost-effective way. In some States, particularly Odisha and Madhya Pradesh, policy options to promote sustainable energy alternatives to firewood from natural forests could be of strong relevance. State specific issues’ analyses will also be supported – such as options to promote environment friendly sand/soil mining (such as in Madhya Pradesh); documentation of successful initiatives on sustainable jhum in other parts of Northeast India as well as agrobiodiversity value of traditional jhum plots in Mizoram; policy options to address Akhand Shikaar in Odisha; study on linkages between indigenous technical knowledge and biodiversity in Odisha; and  environmentally/GIB friendly locust control measures in Rajasthan.