Document Type: Studies

The goal of the five-year the People, Rules and Organizations for the Protection of Ecosystem Resources (PROSPER) program is to “introduce, operationalize, and refine appropriate models for the community management of forest resources for local self-governance and enterprise development in targeted areas.”

In cooperation with curriculum development specialists identified by the Ministry of Education, PROSPER developed seventy-two lesson plans for grades 1 through 6, covering the four main subject areas – Science, Social Studies, English and Mathematics. The lesson plans include detailed lesson descriptions, lists of resources, learning objectives, key concepts and methodologies for evaluating students’ understanding thereof.

The environmental education curriculum development process involved multiple stakeholders including the MoE, EPA, FDA, and civil society organizations. Beginning in March of 2016, PROSPER initiated a review of the curriculum materials. The review included an examination of the curriculum based on recognized best instructional practices in the environmental education field. Also, interviews were conducted with teachers who had been trained with the environmental education curriculum in November of 2015. Eight teachers from the Buchanan area schools, seven teachers from the Tappita area schools, and thirteen teachers from the Sanniquellie region were interviewed for their feedback on the curriculum. Both the analysis of the curriculum and the interviews provide significant information concerning the areas of strength and potential areas of growth for the curriculum materials.

The goal of the five-year People, Rules and Organizations for the Protection of Ecosystem Resources (PROSPER) program is to “introduce, operationalize, and refine appropriate models for the community management of forest resources for local self-governance and enterprise development in targeted areas.”

In cooperation with curriculum development specialists identified by the Ministry of Education, PROSPER developed seventy-two lesson plans for grades 1 through 6, covering the four main subject areas – Science, Social Studies, English and Mathematics. The lesson plans include detailed lesson descriptions, lists of resources, learning objectives, key concepts and methodologies for evaluating students’ understanding thereof.

The process to develop the environmental education curriculum involved multiple stakeholders including the MoE, EPA, FDA, and civil society organizations. On June 7, 2016, the MoE and PROSPER, with the assistance of a local facilitator, held a Lessons Learned Workshop to reflect on skills and experiences and to document best practices from this process. The workshop gathered relevant stakeholders to review best practices in curriculum development, examine the process used by the MoE in partnership with PROSPER to develop the lesson plans and distill from this examination a list of best practices and lessons learned. The participants were fully engaged throughout the day and accomplished the workshop outcomes.

Review of formal primary school curriculum, adult literacy curriculum, and non-formal education materials, identifying opportunities to integrate environmental themes

This report is in fulfillment of Deliverable 23 (formerly Deliverable 26); “Report summarizing findings of review of formal primary school curriculum, adult literacy curriculum, and non-formal education materials, and identifying opportunities to integrate environmental themes.”

The report covers findings and analyses from the formal primary school curriculum, including opportunities identified to integrate environmental themes. Unfortunately, there were very limited adult literacy and non-formal education resources found with opportunities for integration of environmental themes. The Ministry of Education (MoE) and other education stakeholders had coinciding opinions about what should be considered the “target” for integration of environmental themes. These priorities for integration are discussed in further details below.

Following consultations with MoE officials, a consensus was reached that PROSPER will take the lead to work with partners to identify and prioritize environmental themes, while the MoE will lead the identification of opportunities within the national curriculum for the integration of those themes.

The PROSPER Project offers opportunities for non-formal education within the project target areas through its established objectives.

The overall goal of the People, Rules and Organizations Supporting the Protection of Ecosystem Resources (PROSPER) program is to introduce, operationalize, and refine appropriate models for community management of forest resources for local self-governance and enterprise development in targeted areas of the country. The three primary objectives of the program are:

1. Expand educational and institutional capacity to improve environmental awareness, natural resource management, biodiversity conservation, and environmental compliance;
2. Improve community-based forest management leading to more sustainable practices and reduced threats to biodiversity in target areas;
3. Enhance community-based livelihoods derived from sustainable forest-based and agriculture-based enterprises in target areas.

One of the key activities identified to support attainment of Objective 1 was the following:

Activity 1.1: Collaboratively support the development and/or modification of primary, formal and non-formal school curricula to increase knowledge and understanding related to natural resources, their management, and the related rights and responsibilities of government and citizens

In order to achieve Activity 1.1, Tetra Tech ARD’s scope of work (SOW) calls for it to conduct an initial review of existing curricula to determine how PROSPER can integrate themes related to Liberia’s biological resources and threats to their sustainability, global climate change issues, various agency management of the nation’s resources, and citizens’ NRM rights and responsibilities into existing lesson plans. To support the PROSPER team in conducting the review and in developing/modifying curricula, the SOW directs the program to constitute a Curriculum Development Working Group (CDWG) composed of participants from the Ministry of Education (MOE), USAID Liberia’s Teacher Training Program (LTTP), Core Education Skills for Liberian Youth (CESLY), Buchanan Renewables, ArcelorMittal, and NAEAL—all involved (at that time) in the development of formal and non-formal curriculum development or delivery.

The constitution of the Curriculum Development Working Group is listed as a Contract Deliverable (no. 25). Although PROSPER’s monthly and quarterly reports from 2012 provide information on the process followed in forming the CDWG and the main activities carried out with the CDWG, USAID requires a separate report formally documenting the achievement of the deliverable. The present report is submitted in fulfillment of that requirement. The next two sections provide: 1) a brief history of the establishment of the CDWG and, 2) a timeline of CDWG establishment and summary of its principal activities. Appendices to the present report provide a selection of background documents on the constitution of the CDWG and its operations, including meeting minutes. Specifically, Appendix I includes notes from consultative meetings with USAID and the Liberia Education Team (Appendix 1.1); Agenda for the introductory meeting with MoE where the collaboration was first discussed (Appendix 1.2); a concept note prepared in preparation for activities to be conducted under Activity 1.1 (Appendix 1.3); a summary of discussions had between PROSPER and MoE staff regarding curriculum strengthening (Appendix 1.4); and an email that provides PROSPER management with an internal update on progress of the CDWG (Appendix 5). These documents serve to further document the process followed to establish the CDWG. Appendix II contains documents that demonstrate the operations of the CDWG. This includes an invitation to the first CDWG meeting (Appendix 2.1) and meeting minutes documenting the proceedings from several meetings (Appendices 2.2-2.4).

The goal of the five-year People, Rules and Organizations for the Protection of Ecosystem Resources (PROSPER) program is to “introduce, operationalize, and refine appropriate models for the community management of forest resources for local self-governance and enterprise development in targeted areas.” That goal is to be achieved through the accomplishment of three major objectives:

• Expanded educational and institutional capacity to improve environmental awareness, NRM, biodiversity conservation, and environmental compliance
• Improved community-based forest management leading to more sustainable practices and reduced threats to biodiversity in target areas.
• Enhanced community-based livelihoods derived from sustainable forest-based and agriculture-based enterprises in target areas.

An important activity under the first objective is to support the development of environmental education content for Liberia’s primary school curriculum. PROSPER’s approach to this activity involves close collaboration with the Ministry of Education (MoE), which is responsible for national curriculum and education standards.

Activity 1.1: Collaboratively support the development and/or modification of primary formal and non-formal curricula to improve knowledge and understanding related to natural resources, their management, and the related responsibilities of government and citizens.

In cooperation with curriculum development specialists identified by the Ministry of Education, PROSPER developed seventy-two lesson plans for grades 1 through 6, covering the four main subject areas – Science, Social Studies, English and Mathematics. The lesson plans include detailed lesson descriptions, lists of resources, learning objectives, key concepts and methodologies for evaluating students’ understanding thereof.

The Consultant was hired by Tetra Tech to support the USAID-funded People Rules and Organizations Supporting the Protection of Ecosystem Resources (PROSPER) program in Liberia. In partnership with the Forestry Training Institute (FTI) and other forest sector partners, PROSPER has invested in building up Liberia’s forestry education to support the long-term goals of building the capacity of Liberians to manage their forests more sustainably, and with more equitable distribution of benefits from these resources.

Since 2012, the Consultant has provided technical assistance to FTI to build the capacity of its faculty, update the Institute’s course structure, and create a community forestry curriculum. The community forestry curriculum, designed by USAID|PROSPER in partnership with the FTI Faculty, provides FTI faculty with rigorous and up-to-date curricular materials as they train future fieldworkers who will help communities through the verification process to become recognized forest communities and develop and implement management plans, among other activities, in accordance with the Community Rights Law. This contributes to PROSPER’s overall goal by building the capacity of the forest practitioners who will support the growth and dissemination of community forestry as a viable management model in Liberia.

In April 2014, the Consultant wrote and compiled a comprehensive set of curricular materials on community forestry including lectures, learning activities, and readings for Liberia’s national Forestry Training Institute. For faculty and students, the Consultant created an Internet-based course hosted on a digital learning management system (Canvas) that allows for free mobile downloads and surmounts some of the considerable material and financial obstacles that the faculty and students of the Training Institute face in terms of accessing learning materials on community forestry. Another major task undertaken by the consultant was to provide support and training for the FTI faculty in integrating student-centered teaching techniques into their classroom.

OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSIGNMENT

The specific objectives are as follows:

• Assess the relevance of the contents and the efficacy of the delivery/ implementation of the community forestry curriculum; with a view to annually update the curriculum through the life of USAID|PROSPER to ensure that the final product adequately serves the needs of Liberia’s forestry sector.
• Review, refine and update syllabi and lesson plans to reflect interactive teaching techniques and learner-centered principles, and the incorporation of additional resources made available through the digital archive created for FTI.
• Review and revise the institution’s monitoring and evaluation systems for both faculty and students to support implementation of community forestry curriculum developed by FTI faculty with support from PROSPER.
• Conduct refresher training for FTI Faculty in participatory teaching techniques.

The Scope of Work for the assignment is found in Attachment 1. This Final Report includes a brief account of each tasks listed above as well as key findings and recommendations on how to further support the Forestry Training Institute and other sectoral partners.

Community forestry is the management of forest resources by communities for commercial and non-commercial purposes to further their own livelihoods and development. Under the Liberian Community Rights Law of 2009 with Respect to Forest Lands (CRL), communities are granted legal rights over the areas of forest resources they have traditionally used, once they have completed the procedure elaborated in the Regulation to the Community Rights Law of 2009 with Respect to Forest Lands, as Amended (CRL Regulation). This requires following a nine-step process (“the Nine Steps”) to ensure that members of the community fully understand and support the application for Authorized Forest Community (AFC) status. It also requires the establishment of representative bodies with their own governing rules, to regulate the use of forest resources and ensure the effective administration of the AFC. Once the Nine Steps have been completed, a management plan to provide a framework for the use, access, and sustainable management of forest resources must also be drafted. These requirements are explained in the CRL Regulation.

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has been supporting the development of community forestry in Liberia since 2007 through two community forestry projects implemented by Tetra Tech and other partners: the Liberia Land Rights and Community Forestry Program (LRCFP); and the People, Rules and Organizations Supporting the Protection of Ecosystem Resources (PROSPER) Project. Through these programs, USAID strives to build the capacity of local partners and encourage better coordination between governmental, non-governmental, academic, and private sector organizations involved in forestry and community forestry.

SUMMARY

This report outlines the history and process of the “harmonization” of the 2011 Regulations to the Community Rights Law of 2009 with Respect to Forest Lands (CRL Regulations of 2011), with the Community Rights Law of 2009 with Respect to Forest Lands (CRL). It includes a general overview of the background to the harmonization process, together with a description of the various steps that were taken to amend the CRL Regulations of 2011 by the Liberian Forestry Development Authority (FDA), with the direct support of USAID-PROSPER. Submitted along with this report is a USB stick, which contains the relevant documentation indicating the support provided by USAID-PROSPER, in the following folders:

1. First Proposed Amended CRL Regulation and Invitation to Comment
2. Initial Written Comments
3. Final Harmonization Report and Timeline
4. Proposed Amended CRL Regulation (September 19th 2016)
5. Summary of Proposed Amendments for Publication and Broadcast
6. Notice of National Vetting Workshop and Attendance Sheet
7. National Vetting Workshop (November 2nd 2016)
8. Written Comments
9. Justification Document
10. FINAL REGULATION (February 17th 2016)

The intellectual property rights (IPR) “system” involves creative individuals and entities, government agencies and the specific laws that provide the detailed framework for the acquisition and protection of patents, industrial designs, trademarks, geographical indications, copyrights and related rights, integrated circuit layout designs and undisclosed information/trade secrets.

This report on Georgia’s IPR environment concludes that the overall level of IPR awareness is perceived to be very low among Georgia’s business, legal and government sectors. All sectors are in need of significant assistance to raise awareness. In addition, meetings with representatives of Georgian businesses, entertainment industry, the legal community, higher education, and government agencies provide a picture of very low awareness among the general population, which contributes to a domestic market that creates an obstacle to promoting IPR as a tool for business and economic growth. Based on these findings, it is recommended that the EPI project undertake a variety of activities aimed at raising awareness among the general public about IPR, educating businesses about the role of IPR as a tool for promoting business assets to generate revenues, assisting Georgia’s IPR agency, Sakpatenti, to become the government’s primary promoter of IPR, and strengthening government institutions that are critical to the protection and enforcement of IPR assets that are commercially used for business and economic development.

GOVERNMENT ENTITIES

Sakpatenti, Georgia’s Intellectual Property agency that is responsible for accepting applications, examining applications and deciding whether to grant legal recognition of the different types of IPR applied for, has some, but not all, the necessary internal mechanisms to be an effective intellectual property office. Internally, it does not have manuals for standard operating procedures for the various tasks it must undertake. In addition, it does
not have a trademark examiners manual that would ensure greater uniformity for the examination, review and decision making for trademark applications.

Sakpatenti, as the primary IPR agency of the Georgian Government, lacks the training and skills to be an active source for IPR outreach (awareness and education for the business sector and other relevant government agencies). In order for Georgia’s businesses to take greater advantage of the IPR system, Sakpatenti should receive training that improves its ability to explain its functions and the functions of other relevant agencies such as customs. In addition, Sakpatenti should be able to effectively communicate the importance of IPR as a tool for business and economic development.

Government entities such as customs, police and prosecutors have very little understanding of the role of IPR in economic development. As a result, the enforcement entities of the government cannot appreciate the importance of IPR and why protecting owners and enforcing the law has any economic importance to the country. While the laws make violations of IPR subject to civil and criminal penalties, the lack of interest in enforcement of
the laws is, in part, a lack of awareness and understanding of why these laws should be enforcement.

In addition to the perception that enforcement agencies are unaware of IPR, the judiciary is also viewed as uneducated about IPR and, to the extent any judges have IPR experience, it is inadequate to result in meaningful protection of IPR through judicial proceedings. Thus, the combined effect of low IPR awareness by enforcement authorities and judges is a lack of confidence in the IPR system by the few businesses that take steps to protect their IPR.

BUSINESS SECTOR

The business sector lacks sufficient IPR awareness to take full advantage of the IPR system. The lack of awareness includes both inadequate knowledge about the general legal structure that different technical, creative, and commercial activities can be protected by different IPR laws. In addition, the lack of awareness is related to the fact that there is little to no explanation provided about how the acquisition of IPR results in commercial activities that can generate revenues for a business as a tool for economic growth.

The lack of understanding the potential benefits of IPR results in an inability to fully and commercially exploit assets for medium and long-term business growth, which in turn can deprive the national economy of the full benefits of IPR’s role in economic development.

USAID/EPI brought a consultant who is a hazelnut marketing expert to Georgia on a two-week visit. The consultant’s deliverables were to observe and analyze which if any improvements needed to be made to the hazelnut value chain. In order to market hazelnuts to the most profitable markets, and in order to ensure that hazelnuts are of the best quality that they can be, this Georgian hazelnut assessment was conducted.

Currently, in Georgia, most hazelnut production takes place in small farms and gathering conditions in two major regions of the country: east and west. The hazelnut key value chain players were met with and discussions were held. Harvested hazelnuts are handled by collectors who speculate on the market and deliver product to packers. Packers select product for two distinctive channels: inshell and shelled hazelnuts and do some further processing, including roasting, blanching, slicing, dicing and paste production. The value chain was investigated and improvements to the hazelnut value chain in Georgia were recommended.

The purpose of this scope of work was to: 1) identify and analyze the major policy, regulatory, and institutional constraints limiting the growth and development of the agricultural sector in Georgia; and 2) recommend in detail how EPI can apply its resources to address these constraints and factors.

As per direction from the EPI team, we focused on issues that affect high value agriculture, given the value chains the EPI project has selected to focus on: fruits and vegetables (fresh and processed), hazelnuts, and wine. Through a combination of desk research and interviews, we determined that there is not a significant number of existing policy constraints in the agricultural sector that are value chain-specific. The constraints we identified and determined to be relevant to EPI’s objectives and value chains were mostly cross-cutting. One major policy-related issue surfaced, which was land tenure and the related policy and regulatory measures and their implementation. In this paper, we suggest that addressing this is essential to future development and competitiveness of the sector. The other issues this report addresses are: taxation, food safety, and intellectual property rights. These, we note, are considerably narrower in focus than the issue of land ownership.