Study Landscape & Lifescape Analysis

Dear Moderator,

Kindly help publishing below announcement at devjobs.id. Many thanks.

EQSI Project Management on behalf of Yayasan Kalla, welcomes applications
from qualified candidate (s) or firm(s) to conduct study as per the the
term of reference below.

Interested applicants should submit their application by email to
[email protected], cc: [email protected] indicated *“Landscape
and Lifescape Analysis”* at the email subject. *Closing date: May 16, 2016.*

More about Yayasan Kalla at www.yayasankalla.com;
www.yayasankalla.org; www.mediakalla.com.

<http://www.mediakalla.com>

*Terms of Reference*

*Landscape and Lifescape Analysis for EQSI Project*

*Project & Organization Background*

EQSI, Economic, Quality and Sustainability Improvement from Community
Centered Cocoa Fermentation Stations, Diversified Agro-Forestry and
Agribusiness Systems and Social Development is a collaboration project
between MCA-I, Kalla Foundation and its consortium: Kalla Kakao Industry
and Lembaga Ekonomi Masyarakat Sejahtera (LEMS).

The project aims at a future of sustainable Cocoa farming, with
agro-forestry based on economic development and poverty reduction for
villages/sub-districts that are substantially dependent on Cocoa
production. The scope is for reforesting degraded lands, improving
agriculture, promoting agro-forestry and intercropping agribusiness on
Cocoa farms, improving hydrologic conditions, and providing community
centered fermentation centers to raise quality and value of Cocoa produced.

The project addresses technical and economic requirements, provides for
environmental and spatial land use issues, provides learning, and considers
potential risks and social and gender impacts and opportunities, will be
implemented over 2.25 years, across three districts in 20 priority villages
in Southeast Sulawesi Province of Indonesia.

Our Sustainable Agriculture Project, set in selected Cocoa-growing
landscapes of Sulawesi Island, aligns to and supports MCA-I’s Compact
between USA and Indonesia. Green Prosperity (GP) the largest project of the
Compact, seeks to address critical economic growth constraints while
supporting the government of Indonesia’s commitment to a more sustainable,
less carbon-intensive future. Assistance given will be enduring
cooperation focused on sustainable economic, agro-forestry and agribusiness
and social development, especially for communal efficiency and technical
strengthening of post-harvest practices – particularly for Cocoa
fermentation methods.

*Information about the organizations:*

Kalla Foundation was established on April 24, 1984. It works with the
vision to improve education and welfare of the poor, and protect the
environment for sustainability and integrity of ecosystem. More about
organization can be found at www.yayasankalla.com and www.yayasankalla.org.

*MCA-Indonesia:*

Millennium Challenge Account – Indonesia (MCA-Indonesia) is a trustee
institution that represents the Government of Indonesia to implement a
five-year (2013-2018) Millennium Challenge Corporation’s Compact Program, a
major pillar of the United States-Indonesia Comprehensive Partnership and
the largest single pledge made by the United States to Indonesia to date.

MCA-Indonesia has three projects under Compact Program: Green Prosperity,
Community-based Health and Nutrition to Reduce Stunting and Procurement
Modernization. Our projects are designed, managed and implemented by
Indonesians, for the Indonesian people. Our most important development work
happens where it should be: the districts and the villages. Our goal is to
reduce poverty through economic growth. Our program is country-driven,
reform-centered, and results-focused in order to maximize its effectiveness
and long-term sustainability.

*TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR A SHORT-TERM ASSIGNMENT*

*Title of assignment*

*Project EQSI Landscape and Lifescape (L/L) Analysis*

*ToR Reference Number*

001

*Date of issue:*

10 May 2016

*1. Background*

Cocoa is an important cash crop in Indonesia, cultivated by an estimated
one million smallholder farmers. It is an important economic driver in
rural Sulawesi Island. Indonesia is the world’s third largest Cocoa bean
producer behind Cote d’Ivore and Ghana, in a market where supply is tight.
Changes in Indonesian policy and export taxes have led to significant
increases in Indonesia’s Cocoa processing capacity, supporting many jobs.
But Cocoa smallholders suffer from declines in production, negatively
impacting household income. The two most significant reasons for low
production are aging trees and pest infestations. It is estimated pests
reduce yield by 40%.

Globally, in the last century Cocoa farming has been responsible for
substantial deforestation, land degradation and adverse impacts on
atmospheric CO2. Indonesia’s modern Cocoa boom started in the early 1990s,
now many trees have reached an age of 20 to 25 years, becoming no longer
viably productive. Cocoa uses more land than other crops in the project’s
target districts, Kolaka Utara, Kolaka Timur and Kolaka (Sulawesi Tenggara).

The broad social context in which Indonesia’s rural households seek to lift

themselves from poverty creates formidable development challenges. Low
literacy and numeracy levels and weak participation in local development
planning and decision-making are strongly linked to a social structure and
frequently pro-male societal norms and values. Land ownership is badly
skewed and uncertain tenure can be an issue. In Indonesia’s hilly
sub-districts of Sulawesi Tenggara, differences in the size and
productivity of landholdings relate directly to food security and income
distribution. In an average year, some 85% of hill and surrounding
sub-district households do not produce enough food to feed themselves
adequately. The Government of Indonesia (GoI) has responded to this
situation with the goal of sustainable poverty reduction through creation
of economic opportunities for the poor and marginalized households, and by
encouraging their participation in development activities in agro-forestry
and agribusiness sectors.

Encouraging sustainable management of natural resources by giving community
user groups usufruct rights to national forest can be Indonesia’s creative
response to the forest degradation that has occurred through encroachment,
mining and overuse. The GoI agrees that an effective way of supporting
sustainable resource management practices is to help Community Groups
become sustainable institutions. Project EQSI design and implementation
supports this.

The GoI initiatives for Local Self-Governance supports decentralization and

devolution of powers and responsibilities to local bodies. With that,
Project EQSI has confirmed support from the districts (*kabupaten*) Kolaka
Timur, Kolaka and Kolaka Utara as well as the Project’s target
sub-districts (*kecamatan*). We have obtained individual signed letters of
support confirming the mutual commitment between the Project EQSI
consortium and each village head (*kepala desa*), pledging willingness to
support the bid preparation and project implementation within each
sub-district. The letters of support confirm the village heads’
understanding of Project EQSI scope and Green Prosperity co-operation
requirements. At national level, there is an enabling environment for
local-level community forestry, sustainable agriculture and watershed
management strategies.

In structured interviews and informal discussions with stakeholders and
three participatory workshops held at national, sub-district and village
level, the EQSI consortium team captured the following interrelated sets of
problems:

· There is scope to improve coordination and functional linkages
between local, sub-district and national levels that impede the use of
lessons drawn from previous community forestry, agribusiness and watershed
management projects.

· Poor penetration and inconsistent activity from NGOs and Cocoa
traders and processors for holistic solutions to the Cocoa farming
sustainability problem.

· Declining income with few alternative sustainable income
generation opportunities for smallholder Cocoa farmers and forest users,
particularly for the poor and marginalized.

· Limited capacity in local organizations to plan, promote and
implement sustainable land use practices in Cocoa farming, silviculture,
national forest areas and watersheds.

· Increasing environmental degradation coupled with low income
potential, especially in upper slope communities.

· The consequences are:

· Issues for governance and equity within Community Groups, leading
to risks that community management will not continue to receive sufficient
local-level commitment.

· insufficient and uneven availability of support for planting
material (nurseries or *bibit*, scions, seeds and clones) for Cocoa and
other agro-forestry species, fertilizers, training, and appropriate farm
chemicals.

· Rural poverty; livelihoods are not enhanced and vulnerability to
food insecurity remains high.

· Pressure on natural resources continues; reducing forest cover,
habitat, biodiversity and other intrinsic values.

· Damage to the environment, reduced Carbon Cycle for sequestering
of carbon, and increased GHG.

There is a high dependence on family labor and reluctance to use hired
labor. Various non-production demands on labor time also exist resulting in
labor shortages for Cocoa production. Gender division of labor for
particular activities may also constrain labor supply. Both men and women
work on Cocoa lands, with men typically responsible for planting and
pruning while women weed; both harvest. Women tend to be responsible for
finances in Cocoa households. The consequence of this is that crop
management inputs are limited and productivity is low relative to potential
yields.

Labor shortage is a major constraint to increasing Cocoa production and
fermenting Cocoa. Labor shortages may be associated with one or more of the
following factors:

• lack of cooperation among household members in Cocoa production

• reduced access to labor from the extended family

• rising cost of hired labor (there is limited and sporadic use of hired
labor, usually for specific tasks including harvesting, establishment and
rehabilitation of Cocoa)

• High mobility (out-migration) of family members, especially males.

Combining labor shortages, declining production, and the slender premium
paid for fermented beans, result in the majority of Indonesia’s Cocoa
harvest not being fermented and not meeting requirements for good quality.
There is NO chocolate flavor in Cocoa beans without fermentation.

*2. Description of the assignment*

*2.1 Overall programme objectives*

MCA Indonesia’s SGIP and ESMS (Environment and Social Management System)
require that selected Grantees will undertake Landscape and Lifescape
Analysis in all GP investment projects, the report and revised/ expanded
project design will be the first deliverable after signing grant agreement
and mobilization.

Lifescape Analysis is a participatory assessment of the people (women, men
and different social groups), institutions (formal and informal) and
relationships within, and with, the landscape. The analysis seeks to
understand how social structures and social context affect the livelihoods
of communities and, in turn, shape the natural resources and the potential
to manage them well within a particular landscape. This analysis identifies
key social and gender constraints, ways to mitigate risks of social
jealousy/conflict, and reduce elite capture of benefits. Landscape Analysis
is an assessment of bio-physical and agro-ecological system, consisting of
topography, agricultural lands, water-bodies, forest, vegetation, land use,
and settlements in the GP project location area.

The objective of the combined L/L Analysis is to understand in detail
environmental, social, gender and institutional issues in the targeted
intervention areas in order to inform/revise/expand a project design that
ensures equal access and opportunities to women, poor and marginalized
groups and takes into consideration the environmental constraints and
opportunities within the investment landscape for the GP Project. This
analysis will help the process of community consensus/agreement on proposed
project, as well as informing beneficiary selection, understanding
their needs and constraints, ways to improve their economic productivity
and income by offering a menu of choices; develop benefit sharing process
with communities, governance and social accountability mechanisms and
identify key partners in the local areas.

*2.2 Specific objectives of this assignment*

Project EQSI requires appropriately qualified and experienced Agroforestry
and Rural Development Specialists to undertake a Cocoa and Agricultural
Sector Analysis in conjunction with Project EQSI key personnel. The final
analysis piece will be a report, with recommendations, to be submitted to
Project EQSI Consortium and MCA-I.

Proposed work to contribute to the Cocoa and Agriculture Sector Analysis
may include:

> Workshops with Project EQSI (and MCA-I if required) staff and other
stakeholders to discuss issues and share information;

> Desk review work, based on evaluations and assessments to date of MCA-I’s
GP programs;

> Synthesis of other analysis conducted by international organisations,
NGOs, academic organisations and/or contracted specialists;

> Field trips in Sulawesi Tenggara, including with MCA-I programs;

> Focus group discussions in representative villages;

> Case studies of other rural development programs in Sulawesi Tenggara as
well as other international Cocoa and rural development programs.

The following questions will guide the analysis:

> What are the key gaps and constraints (socio-economic, institutional and
agronomic) in the cocoa and agri-food sector, given current government and
donor institutions, policies and programs?

> What is the balance between subsistence and market-oriented agriculture
in Sulawesi Tenggara? Where is there potential for improved growth,
efficiency or innovation?

> What is the role of gender and youth in subsistence and market cocoa and
agriculture, and what policies are in place at present?

> How can interventions in cocoa and agriculture best target
sustainability?

> Where can we make the best impact on poverty reduction for cocoa
smallholders, given binding constraints?

> Would a strategic framework on broader rural development enhance the
impact of MCA-I’s work in cocoa and agriculture?

Areas and sub-topics that the analysis should consider include:

> Cocoa Farming practices, seeds, agricultural inputs, extension services,
seed and post-harvest storage, formal and informal marketing and value
chains, irrigation, water resources and land care;

> Income-generating agricultural activities, including export
opportunities;

> Other agricultural sub-sectors, such as livestock, fisheries and
agroforestry;

> Farmers’ decision making: incentives, risk management and production mix;

> Labour and employment in agriculture, including rural-urban migration,
linkages and productivity;

> Gender in cocoa farming rural development, including household roles in
subsistence agriculture and market processes;

> Climate change adaptation and linkages to livelihoods, including around
water resources and changing rainfall patterns;

> Current programs and policies of GoI and other development partners, and
institutional capacity in relevant GoI bodies;

> Key crops;

> Cross-sectoral linkages of the cocoa agriculture sector with sectors such
as water and sanitation, infrastructure, health and education, particularly
as they relate to cocoa smallholders rural livelihoods.

The specialists will report directly, and on technical matters, to Project
EQSI Project Director and will work closely with the MCA-I team.

They will:

> Facilitate team workshops with stakeholders where key decisions will be
made in the development of this analytical piece;

> Author the report, synthesising pieces of analysis as well as findings
from consultations, field visits and literature review, with close
consultation with Project EQSI team and MCA-I.

Project EQSI may also contract specialised short-term inputs from experts
in specific fields as required, to help answer the key analytical
questions. The Specialists will help to identify the work required and will
support the preparation of Terms of Reference for these positions.

* Approach:*

A Separate L-L Analysis will be carried out for each unique and
representative element of the target project landscape so Sampling
framework is stratified for:

• Stakeholder Assessment,

• Baseline Study,

• Livelihoods Component,

• Governance Component,

• Environment Component,

• District Boundaries, Highland, Lowland

• Cocoa lands,

• Non-forest Lands,

• Protection Forest,

• Production Forest – including Cocoa,

• Degraded Lands,

• Convertible Production Forest,

• Limited Production Forest,

• Forest Reserves,

• Agro-ecological zones,

• Socio-cultural-economic factors,

• Successful and Failing Cocoa Producing Areas,

• Value chain producers,

• Related significant income-earning activities.

The results of the analysis will be conveyed using a template prepared by
MCA-Indonesia. The report will:

• Detail information gathered on different landscape and lifescape
elements,

• Highlight differences in risks posed to each landscape and lifescape
element,

• Develop a strategy on how risks, if present, will be mitigated.

*Desk Literature Review*

As the first phase of the L-L Analysis, conduct a literature review in
order to identify any/all critical information on the environmental,
social, economic and institutional conditions and challenges within the
project location (investment landscape) that need to be addressed in order
to implement a successful Sustainable Cocoa Partnership project.

This first phase desk review will include review of the literature on
communities, small holder farmers, their economic activities, institutions,
topography and natural resources.

*Conduct Fieldwork:*

The second phase of the L-L Analysis will involve fieldwork to be
undertaken in representative sample locations to validate the desk review
findings, understand challenges and risks at the field level, appraise both
successful and failing similar and related programs for understanding key
issues in order support the development and inclusion of key need based
interventions, an inclusive and effective beneficiary selection and
stakeholder involvement process

For communities targeted for fieldwork, produce at least one
community/social map, one natural resource map, one livelihood assessment,
seasonal calendars and activity profiles of the community, and one transect
walk.

Produce a series of detailed maps that define the geographic boundaries of
the Investment Landscape (IL) and Development Landscape (DL) with
topography, natural and land use resource mapping (including forest area
and actual forest cover, and any peat lands), major rivers and roads,
location of beneficiaries, community livelihood patterns, and
administrative boundaries.

* L-L Analysis Findings Report*

Produce a L-L Analysis Findings Report(s) that will :

(i) summarize findings;

(ii) include maps that cover investment landscape with topography, natural
and land use resource mapping (including forest area and actual forest
cover, and any peat lands), major rivers and roads, location of
beneficiaries, community livelihood patterns, administrative boundaries

(iii) identify key social and environmental constraints and opportunities;
and

(iv) Document how the findings refined (or will refine) the final project
design and oversight strategy.

*Methodology*

Various participatory rural appraisal (PRA) tools such as focus group
discussion (FGDs); key informant interview (KIIs); natural resource
mapping, participatory community/social mapping; livelihood mapping,
vulnerability and trend analysis; transect walk; and participant
observation will be used for L/L analysis. The firms working on L/L need to
develop a field guide on Tool package that will include the FGD guide, the
semi-structured KII questionnaire, and gender analysis tools such as

(i) activity profiles;

(ii) access and control profiles;

(iii) socio-political profiles; and

(iv) Income and expenditure profiles.

Workshops and participatory forums at the national and Landscape levels
will be organized to present the key findings and recommendations from the
Lifescape analysis. The workshops and forums will seek to refine and
validate the analytical methodology through additional feedback in small
and large group discussions.

The following PRA tools need to be used…

a. Gendered natural resource assessment. Involves facilitating a
session where participants are asked to map out key structures and natural
resources in their surrounding communities. During the exercise, researcher
note differences in preferences and identification of natural resources
between men and women and how this relates to gendered roles,
responsibilities and decision- making. Following the exercise, researchers
conduct a series of walks in the areas to better understand participants
and to better visualize problems and opportunities in their communities.
Method allows researchers to study the values placed by participants on
existing resources and their interaction with the environment, what
policies guide them, and who has influence over them.

b. Transect walks and direct observation. These are systematic

walks with key informants through the area of interest, observing, asking,

listening, looking, and seeking problems and solutions. The findings can be
mapped on a transect diagram. Most transect walks result in the outsiders

discovering surprising local practices such as indigenous conservation
practices, multiple uses of plants, and a great variety of crops.

c. Wealth rankings and social/community maps. Wealth ranking is
used to classify households according to relative wealth or well-being.
Informants sort cards, each with one household name on it, into piles. The
wealthiest are put at one end, the poorest at the other, and as many piles
as desired are made. The process is repeated with at least three
informants. Another method is to conduct the ranking directly on a social
map. Villagers are then asked to indicate on the houses the relative wealth
classes. Individual assets such as land ownership, animals, and tools can
be marked for each household. Wealth rankings are useful for leading into
other discussions on livelihoods and vulnerability; producing a baseline
against which future intervention impact can be measured; providing a
sample frame to cross-check the relative wealth of informants who have been
or will be interviewed; and producing local indicators of welfare.

d. Key informants interview (KII). This is guided interviewing
and listening in which only some of the questions and topics are
predetermined; other questions arise during the interview. The interviews
appear informal and conversational, but are actually carefully controlled
and structured. Using a guide or checklist, the multidisciplinary team
poses open-ended questions and probes topics as they arise. New avenues of
questioning are pursued as the interview develops. KIIs are a central part
of all participatory methods.

e. Seasonal calendars and activity profiles. Seasonal
constraints and opportunities can be diagrammed month by month throughout
the year. Ceremonies can be used as a cross-check so that names of months
are agreed upon.

f. Ecological oral history. Method follows a framework similar
to a semi-structured interview, but the focus is grounded in the
story-telling of participant’s environment. Qualitative method that allows
for the researcher to assess changes in the environmental landscape from
the perspective of individuals who have lived on the land for a long period
of time and have a significant relationship with the land.

h. Time lines and local histories. Historical analyses have been found to
be a good icebreaker for field exercises and include detailed accounts of
the past, of how things have changed, particularly focusing on
relationships and trends. These include technology histories and review,
crop histories and biographies, livestock breed histories, labour
availability, trees and forest histories, education change, and population
change.

*2.3 Risks and Assumptions*

*Risks*

· Relevant key staff of Ministry of Health, Supervising Agency, do
not monitor the mission;

· Low transfer of knowledge during the execution;

· Limited collaboration from the different stakeholders of the
mission.

*Assumptions*

· The MoH and other stakeholders involved implements the project
after its approval.

· The next government maintains its commitment towards reaching the
MDG objectives.

*Coverage of the study*

3 districts (Kolaka Timur, Konawe and Konawe Selatan), 20 villages, of
South-East Sulawesi, Indonesia

0093376
Visit Today : 209
This Month : 6851
Hits Today : 1605
Total Hits : 345838
Who's Online : 13
Visit Us On FacebookVisit Us On TwitterVisit Us On YoutubeVisit Us On Instagram