Lupande CBNRM land use planning project ZM003801 WWF Zambia coordination office: mid term internal progress review

Lupande CBNRM land use planning project ZM003801 WWF Zambia coordination office: mid term internal progress review

Evaluation of CBNRM land use planning project in Zambia

This paper reports on a participatory progress review of the Norad funded WWF CBNRM Lupande Game Management Area (GMA) Land Use Planning Project. The review aimed to assess the impact and relevance of the Land Use Planning (LUP) Project to date in relation to project objectives, target groups, partners and other affected parties; and to determine whether the project is on track, and to review and improve its implementation strategy.

The review found that the LUP Project is relevant and supports land use-planning efforts in the Lupande GMA. However, some of the main critical issues which emerged from the review include:

  • weak project design: the design of the LUP Project was inadequate from the outset, although efforts have been made to ensure that a project document is in place that outlines indicators and specific targets
  • conflicting power relations among key local governance institutions in Lupande: there is a power struggle in the Lupande GMA among the three key authorities. Clear understanding of the respective roles, functions and responsibilities of each has not been sufficiently discussed and communicated to the Lupande populace
  • lack of inclusive consultative participatory process: land use planning process has not been sufficiently participatory and has largely been project driven. The project team has struggled to secure community support for the land use planning process, even though there is a clear need and understanding of the importance to plan for future tourism developments in the Lupande GMA by all stakeholders
  • conservation versus rural development: while the intent of the LUP was to facilitate the development of a land use plan and map, the project, due to pressing community needs, has been compelled to respond to, and by and large take on a rural development face. This shift in focus has definitely affected project progress and delayed the delivery of key project outputs.

[adapted from author]