Download Study

General

Study Overview

Title:

Impact Evaluation of the Communal Climate Action and Landscape Management Project

Study is 3ie funded:

No

Study ID:

RIDIE-STUDY-ID-6748065392cf3

Initial Registration Date:

11/27/2024

Last Update Date:

07/19/2024

Study Status:

Ongoing

Location(s):

Burkina Faso

Abstract:

This research is a collaboration between DIME, the World Bank project team, and Burkina Faso’s Ministry of the Environment, Energy, Water, and Sanitation’s Communal Climate Action and Landscape Management Project (CCALM). The research will focus on evaluating activities built around a community-centered development project with an emphasis on its impact on natural resource degradation, economic outcomes, and social cohesion.

The study will use a difference in differences approach between participating villages and their associated conservation areas that were selected into the project and a set of comparison villages and conservation areas that would have been included in future rounds if further resources were available.

The study will focus on 22 of the CCALM communes, within those communes, on a sample of three villages: one near a selected forest conservation area and two near non-selected forests that could have been selected as conservation areas.

We hypothesize that changing land use planning and local forest governance will impact peoples’ livelihoods and forest usage, especially for high impact groups such as people using forests for non-timber productive activities, farmers who may want to gain greater access to agricultural land, and herders whose animals sometimes encroach on protected forests. Further, the community driven approach of the project is likely to impact peoples’ attitudes about community land usage and other measures of social cohesion. 

Registration Citation:

Categories:

Agriculture and Rural Development
Environment and Disaster Management

Additional Keywords:

Community driven development, natural resources, forest conservation, social cohesion

Secondary ID Number(s):

Principal Investigator(s)

Name of First PI:

Sylvan Rene Herskowitz

Affiliation:

World Bank Group

Name of Second PI:

Daan van Soest

Affiliation:

Tilburg University

Study Sponsor

Name:

World Bank Group

Study Sponsor Location:

United States

Research Partner

Name of Partner Institution:

Programme de Gestion durable des Paysages Communaux pour la REDD+ (PGPC/REDD+)

Type of Organization:

Government agency (eg., statistics office, Ministry of Health)

Location:

Burkina Faso

Intervention

Intervention Overview

Intervention:

The program has a two-stage implementation approach. The first stage consists of consultation with leaders at the commune-level to define and choose forests as communal conservation areas (CAs) needing resources to support preservation. A set of conservation area-level consultations are then done with village leaders representing key groups with vested interests linked to that CA. Through a participatory dialogue approach called “Terristories”, these leaders design a land management strategy and plan investments aimed at improving land management practices and reducing pressure on their CA. These investments constitute a mix of productive activities for nearby villages as well as public resource-targeted activities to improve management of natural resources. Implementation of these investments will be deployed in a second stage roughly six to twelve months after the initial planning consultations. 

Theory of Change:

The Theory of Change is built on the challenges of the current landscape management practices, compounded by climate change impacts, which has led to poor livelihoods outcomes for forest-dependent communities in Burkina Faso. The project supports three areas of change: (a) decentralized management of natural resources; (b) institutional strengthening; and (c) entrepreneurship and sustainable development of value chains. Expected short- to medium-term outcomes include improved integrated landscape governance and management, improved policy and institutional framework, and new streams of revenues. Long-term outcomes include increased stability and conflict prevention linked to natural resources management, effective decentralized management of natural resources, and enhanced climate resilience and mitigation in rural areas. In addition to aligning with the Country Partnership Framework objectives, the Project Development Objective-level outcomes align with Burkina Faso’s long-term goals for sustainable growth laid out in its Second National Plan of Economic and Social Development (2021–2025) and other sectoral strategies.

Multiple Treatment Arms Evaluated?

No

Implementing Agency

Name of Organization:

Projet de Gestion Communale des Paysages Communaux pour la REDD+ (PGPC/REDD+)

Type of Organization:

Public Sector, e.g. Government Agency or Ministry

Program Funder

Name of Organization:

World Bank Group

Type of Organization:

NGO (International)

Intervention Timing

Intervention or Program Started at time of Registration?

Yes

Start Date:

06/15/2022

End Date:

06/30/2028

Evaluation Method

Evaluation Method Overview

Primary (or First) Evaluation Method:

Regression discontinuity

Other (not Listed) Method:

Additional Evaluation Method (If Any):

Difference in difference/fixed effects

Other (not Listed) Method:

Method Details

Details of Evaluation Approach:

The study has been designed to utilize a difference in differences approach. In this setup, we will include respondents from a total of 66 villages (3 villages per commune). Within each of the 22 communes, treatment villages were selected by CCALM based on criteria such as proximity and dependency on the forest. Using the list of forest areas in the commune, our study compares the lowest-ranked CCALM forest area to the highest-ranked non-selected forest area. For each forest area (the lowest-ranked CCALM one in the commune, and the highest-ranked rejected forest area), nearby villages were selected that are dependent on the nearby forest. Within villages, sampling was conducted to include up to 30 respondents per village, explicitly targeting average representatives as well as local leaders of herders, non-timber forest producing households, farmers, internally displaced populations (if present), and a selection of six villagers from a random walk for a total target of 1,980 household interviews. For the non-randomly selected types of villagers, we will interview two households identified by local leaders as being local leaders for that group and randomly select another four from local village rosters of their group. All of these groups may not be present in every village and, if so, we will draw additional randomly selected villagers to the sample. 

Outcomes (Endpoints):

Indicators of land use management:

• Respondents’ willingness to adhere to local forest use rules and customs.

Indicators of the impact on internal conflict:

• Extent to which people expect internal conflicts will emerge in the next three years (maybe to be adjusted depending on when the endline will take place)
  • Or the extent they think they themselves will be involved in conflicts;
• Most important sources of conflict: over land within the commune, about land use and access to land in the vicinity of the village (and specifically in the nearby conservation area), non-land related conflicts, etc.
• Perceptions about the internal mediation procedures, as measured by for example the commune’s resilience to exogenous shocks (like climate change).

Indicators of external conflict:

• Extent to which people expect conflicts with non-village members will take place in the next three years. 
• Views on the rights and resources that may be granted to Internally Displaced People moving into the area.

 

Unit of Analysis:

Conservation area

Hypotheses:

Research questions: 

1. What is the impact of the intervention on forest cover in conservation areas? 
2. What is the impact of the intervention on the livelihoods of different types of households (farmers, herders, NTFP producers)? 
3. What is the impact of the intervention on social cohesion?
   1. Occurrence of conflicts (internal and external) between villagers and between communities, including transhumant herders and refugees (IDPs). 

 

Hypotheses:

1. The intervention improves the forest cover in conservation areas and reported forest usage.
2. The intervention significantly betters the livelihoods of households.
3. The intervention boosts social cohesion.
   1. 1. Drop down in occurrence of conflicts (internal and external) between villagers and between communities, including transhumant herders and refugees (IDPs).

Unit of Intervention or Assignment:

Conservation areas/Village

Number of Clusters in Sample:

66

Number of Individuals in Sample:

22 communes, 66 conservation areas (22 treatment and 44 controls); 1,980 households, including 198 villager representatives.

Size of Treatment, Control, or Comparison Subsamples:

66 total conservation areas (22 treatment and 44 controls). 660 treatment households and 1,320 control households.

Supplementary Files

Analysis Plan:

Other Documents:

IRB approval: Generic Documents - Full Board Approved - IRB ID_ 2023_09_7.pdf
Visa Statistique (Local IRB): Visa Statistique - CCALM IE.pdf
Research protocol: CCALM Research Strategy Proposal_EN.pdf

Data

Outcomes Data

Description:

Using both baseline and follow-up data, the research team will assess changes in economic, social, and environmental outcomes and whether implementation areas change their trajectory relative to those in the non-implementation areas. The baseline survey will also be used to collect retrospective data from participating households and to confirm whether intervention and non-intervention areas are following similar trends in the years leading up to the intervention.

Data Already Collected?

No

Data Previously Used?

Data Access:

Data Obtained by the Study Researchers?

Data Approval Process:

Approval Status:

Treatment Assignment Data

Participation or Assignment Information:

Yes

Description:

Data Obtained by the Study Researchers?

Data Previously Used?

Data Access:

Data Obtained by the Study Researchers?

Data Approval Process:

Approval Status:

Data Analysis

Data Analysis Status:

Study Materials

Upload Study Materials:

Registration Category

Registration Category:

Prospective, Category 1: Data for measuring impacts have not been collected

Completion

Completion Overview

Intervention Completion Date:

Data Collection Completion Date:

Unit of Analysis:

Clusters in Final Sample:

Total Observations in Final Sample:

Size of Treatment, Control, or Comparison Subsamples:

Findings

Preliminary Report:

Preliminary Report URL:

Summary of Findings:

Paper:

Paper Summary:

Paper Citation:

Data Availability

Data Availability (Primary Data):

Date of Data Availability:

Data URL or Contact:

Access procedure:

Other Materials

Survey:

Survey Instrument Links or Contact:

Program Files:

Program Files Links or Contact:

External Link:

External Link Description:

Description of Changes:

Study Stopped

Date:

Reason: