Document Type: Project Design and Implementation

AgroInvest is a five-year project (2011-2016) funded by USAID/Ukraine. The purpose of the Project is to provide technical assistance to accelerate and broaden economic recovery in Ukraine through support to the agriculture sector and increase the country’s contribution to global food security efforts. The contract is a Cost Plus Fixed Fee Term-type, Level-of-Effort contract with a ceiling of $18,755,641.

Project Scope of Work and Challenges Encountered During Year 4

AgroInvest will accelerate broad-based economic recovery through a more inclusive and competitive agricultural industry. AgroInvest is designed around three separate but interrelated component objectives, each supported by specific expected results under each component as illustrated below in the Results Framework.

Component 1 activities involve both a supply- and demand-side approach to supporting a stable, market-oriented policy environment. From the supply side, AgroInvest promotes the implementation of less volatile, more market-oriented policies that stimulate increased production and investments in the agricultural sector. On the demand side, Component 1 activities strengthen the capacity of industry associations to shape agricultural policies and provide public education on land rights among rural landowners. Under Component 2, AgroInvest focuses on stimulating access to finance by strengthening partnerships between financial service providers and value chain actors, including input suppliers and buyers, to increase sustainable access to financial services for small and medium sized producers (SMPs). Finally, Component 3 activities focus on creating a more effective market infrastructure for SMPs and increasing the profitability of farming through better access to markets, developing wholesale and regional markets, and capacity building for producer organizations (POs).

During Year 4, AgroInvest encountered numerous challenges. The unexpected political turmoil throughout the country, civil unrest in Kyiv, armed conflict in eastern Ukraine, and the annexation of Crimea all adversely effected AgroInvest activities. The events beginning in late November 2013 and still unfolding at the time of submission of this work plan caused the project to postpone or change locations of trainings, seminars, and mentoring visits to regions. AgroInvest was forced to halt all activities in Crimea in March 2014 at USAID’s direction and all Donetsk and Luhansk based activities, though minimal, have been put on hold until the security situation allows for safe travel to and from the region for project staff, local counterparts, and training participants. In most instances, the project has been able to mitigate the effects of these events through rescheduling or relocating events and activities.

Additionally, the situation has resulted in legislation being passed through the Verkhovna Rada to slow, and at times completely stall, over the past year. This has resulted in certain policy initiatives of the Project being delayed. With new Parliamentary elections set for October 26th , 2014, the Project anticipates additional disruptions in Year 5 in this area, but at this time it remains unclear as to the magnitude. The Project has seen that potential investors (foreign and domestic) are increasingly becoming apprehensive to invest in Ukraine due to the instability. This is having an adverse impact on AgroInvest activities, especially those under Component 3 which rely on external investment/funding for the actual contraction of the infrastructure work the Project is supporting.

Project Results Framework

The USAID Ukraine Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS) has set the Mission’s goal for the period from 2012 through 2016 as “A More Stable, Democratic, and Prosperous Ukraine”. AgroInvest is contributing to achievement of that overarching goal and more specifically supports CDCS Development Objective (DO) 2 “Broad-Based, Resilient Economic Development as a Means to Sustain Ukrainian Democracy.” In particular, the Project supports this DO by contributing to achieving IR 2.1: “Increased Investment Availability to the Emerging Middle Class” and IR 2.2 “Strengthened Private Sector Advocacy and Support Institutions.” Attainment of component objectives will allow AgroInvest to contribute to achieving both the Mission’s goal and the AgroInvest Project’s defined purpose of accelerating broad-based economic recovery in Ukraine through support to the agricultural sector.

Broad-based economic growth is dependent upon creating physical and managerial infrastructures and institutions that encourage business activity creation and development, attract investment, and create employment opportunities. AgroInvest is focusing on this growth by working closely with local small and medium sized producers (SMPs) and producer organizations to develop their capacities in the areas of business planning and application of modern agro technological methods that increase productivity and improve the quality of produce. Additionally, the Project works closely with financial institutions to stimulate access to finance so that the SMPs can acquire the funding they require for their agricultural activities.

In addition to economically focused activities, AgroInvest focuses on activities that build citizen and civil society capacity to meaningfully influence the development and monitoring of government polices at the national and local levels. As better governance can only be achieved through active participation of a broad range of diverse Ukrainian citizens, AgroInvest works with non-governmental organizations to build their capacities to be able to better advocate for their and their constituents’ interests. The industry associations with which the Project partners, play a critical role in counterbalancing the influence of elite economic and political forces. Through AgroInvest’s national public education and outreach campaign, even the most rural of citizens are provided valuable information that allows them to protect and understand their property rights.

The Project’s monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system, included in the Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP), is designed to measure and report on progress against established objectives and expected results using 35 indicators. These indicators and their associated annual and life-of-project targets are listed in the table shown in the PMP chart (Annex A). It is noted that the Project’s PMP plan was updated in Year 3 in response to the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) performance audit that took place in September/October 2012.

Georgian NGOs working at the intersection of women and economic development are well positioned to support the inclusion of more women-owned SMEs and farm families (including women and youth) in Georgia EPI value chain activities. Many Georgian NGOs and private consultants deliver business skills training. The trainer quality is uneven, and the curriculum is often generic and lacks relevancy to a specific value chain. By building the capacity of women- and youth-focused Georgian NGOs to develop their curriculum design skills and focus group methodology to design relevant, stimulating curriculum, these NGOs will be better prepared to support Georgian women working in EPI value chains. Competitive Georgian women business leaders and women-focused business associations have potential to model leadership and mentor young men and women entrepreneurs.

This report describes two activities to build NGO capacity:

• To design and adapt business skills curriculum, providing the potential to improve the sustainability of the NGOs and deliver a positive impact on women and youth involved in or who want to start businesses.
• To explore leadership and mentoring potential among women’s business associations and successful women business owners.

The scope for this consultancy and corresponding trip report was: (i) to advise upon and develop a sustainable PPP workforce education training model for Georgia’s apparel industry with existing vocational colleges and/or in-house factory training centers including equipment needs and factory layouts; and (ii) improve the capacity of export-ready Georgian apparel companies to promote their products and services to international brands and retailers.

Georgia has made great strides in privatization. Now, almost 20 years after the process began, the State has sold or closed almost all former State owned industrial enterprises. This report outlines a set of operational changes to help the Government of Georgia (GoG) improve how it manages and prepares remaining state property and state-owned enterprises (SOEs) for sale. Its focus is primarily on SOEs and remaining buildings and non-agricultural land. Aside from some hospitals and a few core enterprises (which should either stay in State ownership or only be sold in well-prepared tenders), the National Agency for State Property Management (NASP) of the Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development (MoESD) has very few real, operating companies left for sale. The report recommends a specific methodology how to analyze all still-functioning SOEs (other than the few core enterprises) and sell them as assets if their asset value seems greater than their going concern value.

While the Agency’s inventory of viable and potentially interesting, functioning enterprises is small, its inventory of unsold real estate – an unknown amount of which is locked in unpromising corporate shells – is overwhelmingly large. Some of these real estate assets are large, valuable and should generate substantial sales revenues. But the asset mix is very mixed, and includes many smaller and less attractive properties. Almost all are suffering from deferred maintenance under State ownership. Both private investment and government administration are dragged down by this overhang of an uncounted number of random, leftover State assets, many with low or negative market value.

The report suggests that the Agency change its perception of its core privatization task. Instead of being an entity, which manages and sells the shares of SOE’s, its primary privatization task really is managing and selling excess State owned real estate. To accomplish this task effectively, the Agency needs to remove assets from non-viable SOEs, place them in a temporary holding company, register and clear titles as efficiently possible, manage them properly, advertise them aggressively and sell or give them away. Clearly, the MoESD has done a great deal of good work, and is moving in this direction. However, current highly centralized rules, difficulties dealing with enterprise liabilities, a passive sales approach and tools not suited to the tasks block progress in a number of ways. This report discusses these blocks and suggests a variety of systemic approaches to remove them. One key recommendation is to include municipalities in the sales process for lower value assets of only local interest. Public education and transparent, simple, decentralized processes are especially needed to help the State justify shedding these assets in ways the public perceives as fair, without the “junk sales” harming sales of more valuable assets. Another key recommendation is for the Agency to become much more active as a seller, rather than waiting for others to initiate sales. As part of this re-activation of the Agency, this report suggests a careful review and re-definition of the role of third party agents in the sales process.

The purpose of this assignment is to analyze the current status of accreditation and conformity assessment system in Georgia and present a concrete, integrated, and actionable Road Map for improvement of these systems. As a result of this improvement, Georgian products would be able to be tested and certified locally and cost effectively in accordance with international standards by duly accredited conformity assessment bodies (CABs), such as laboratories and product certification bodies that are, in turn, accredited by an internationally recognized accreditation body. Such an outcome would directly boost export competitiveness of Georgian products on U.S., European, and other markets by reducing the accreditation-related nontariff barriers (NTBs) for Georgian products as well as significantly foster improvement in general quality.

Since Georgian Accreditation Center (GAC) is not currently a signatory of International Accreditation Forum’s (IAF) multilateral agreement (MLA), ANSI will be invited to conduct assessments and accredit several of the most promising certification bodies and laboratories. Furthermore, based on the value chain analysis conducted earlier by the Economic Prosperity Initiative (EPI) project as well as the analysis of one of the best potential impact, it was decided to focus on the food sector.

This Road Map was developed based on research of available materials, time spent on the ground meeting with key stakeholders, as well as the experience and knowledge of the author. It calls for timed and interrelated activities along the major three tracks:

1. Education, Consulting and Assistance. This track would entail critically needed capacity building for GAC and the Georgian CABs and other related interested parties. This includes a GAC study tour visit to the United States, including meetings with ANSI staff and U.S. officials, observation of ANSI assessments of product certifiers and laboratories, ANSI assessor training for GAC staff, workshops on U.S.-focused implementation of the related international standards, direct consulting for product certifiers and laboratories, as well as assistance with achieving and maintaining ANSI accreditation.

2. ANSI Accreditation. ANSI would conduct a preassessment of several third-party laboratories and third-party product certification bodies that are already accredited by the GAC and have food products in their scopes. Based on the results of these preassessments, EPI will choose one of each and subsidize a full accreditation assessment mission by ANSI. GAC staff will be able to attend these assessments as observers and build their professional capacity. Some of the GAC staff can be potentially qualified as ANSI assessors themselves, which will support the third track described below.

3. International Participation and Recognition. GAC would significantly benefit from international recognition by IAF and International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC), the same way ANSI is. This track would entail attendance of IAF/ILAC and Pacific Accreditation Cooperation (PAC) and Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC) plenary sessions with guidance from ANSI staff, membership in these entities, application for PAC MLA and APLAC mutual recognition agreement (MRA), subsequent joint peer evaluation of GAC by PAC and APLAC, ANSI direct assistance to GAC with corrective actions, and eventual achievement by GAC of PAC MLA and APLAC MRA status.

The PROSPER program scope of work notes that “The successful management of Liberia’s natural resources depends not only on government agencies and communities directly responsible for their management, but also on an educated citizenry that can make informed decisions about the use and management of these resources by government agencies, the private sector, and communities.” To contribute to building an educated citizenry, PROSPER is charged by USAID with working with key institutions to build their capacity to develop effective outreach campaigns to communicate information that will lead to changes in the way citizens think about and make decision about their natural resources.

This report of the first annual PROSPER-supported outreach campaign, submitted in fulfillment of Contract Deliverable no. 5, presents an overview of the preparation and implementation of an intensive three-month public outreach and awareness campaign on community forestry and environmental issues conducted from May to July 2013 under the theme, “Make Community Forestry Rights Real”.

The report provides synopses of the approaches and best practices used to plan, prepare, and implement the campaign, and highlights of the campaign launch events as well as activities covered during the campaign rollout. The report also gives a brief background of the outreach campaign and describes some of the major challenges encountered.

BACKGROUND

The absence of effective public education and awareness efforts in Liberia concerning environmental and natural resource issues hampers efforts to implement policies aimed at the sustainable management of Liberia’s forest resources. The recent, highly-publicized private use permit (PUP) scandal, alleged fraudulent community forest applications, and other instances of non-compliance with major forest policies and laws have provided clear evidence of the Forestry Development Authority’s (FDA) limited capacity to impact and change behaviors through sensitization in the forestry sector. Liberia’s failure, to date, to harness effective public education to avert the pillage of its forest resources has contributed to the rapid, ongoing decline of the Upper Guinea Forest of which Liberia is home to nearly 40%.

Four years following the passage of the Community Rights Law (CRL) in 2009 and the subsequent promulgation of the CRL Regulations, the Government of Liberia and the FDA have made no significant effort to disseminate those important laws that recognize and legitimize the role of local communities in the management and governance of the country’s forest resources. Hence, the integrity of valuable forests resources and biodiversity and the rights of forest communities are still being undermined by threats such as illegal logging and poaching, and by concession agriculture and mining schemes approved without informed, prior consent of communities.

In August 2012, USAID/PROSPER supported a two-day intensive workshop held in Kakata focused on the Community Forestry Working Group (CFWG) which had been dormant for over fifteen months. The CFWG was established by the FDA in 2007 to facilitate input from communities and other key stakeholders into the development and eventual implementation of laws and policies relevant to community forestry, including the National Forestry Reform Law, the Community Rights Law, and regulations guiding their implementation.

The primary objectives of the workshop were to assess the status of the CFWG in the hope of reactivating the group and strengthening its capacity to assume the role of conducting public outreach on environmental issues and community forestry. Since outreach was the main thrust of the workshop, the 32 participants drawn from agencies of Government, civil society organizations (CSOs) and private sector institutions shared experiences, lessons learned and best practices related to outreach and advanced ideas and themes on how to strengthen outreach campaigns to increase public awareness and understanding in community forestry. Two months later, in October 2012, the CFWG met in Monrovia where it reconsolidated, and with PROSPER’s facilitation began developing messages and designing strategies it would apply during the pilot testing of the first outreach campaign. Both the August and October workshops represented an application of formative communications research, a best practice that involves conducting focus groups or interviews with key stakeholders on the issues that affect them and using that information to guide the design of communications campaigns and materials.

The People, Rules, and Organizations Supporting the Protection of Ecosystem Resources (PROSPER) program is designed to introduce, operationalize, and refine appropriate models for community management of forest resources for local self-governance and enterprise development in Grand Bassa and Nimba counties. 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; and
3. enhance community-based livelihoods derived from sustainable forest-based and agriculture-based enterprises in target areas.

PROSPER requested a review and evaluation of the fourth annual outreach campaign and related products based on Deliverable 11, a series of brochures, radio programs, and community theater designed to educate the Liberian public in community forest development, land tenure and rights, and environmental awareness; as well as Deliverable 15, a series of brochures, radio programs, and community theater developed to support community forest management in Liberia.

This assessment was designed to look at the impact of the communication tools on the communities included in the fourth outreach campaign. It is based on the results of the Lessons Learned (LL) Workshops held in Sanniquellie from September 8 to 9, 2016. This workshop brought together community representatives from all three PROSPER sites to discuss interpretations of key messages, understanding of the materials, thoughts on accessibility and appropriateness of the communication channels used, and suggestions for improvement. Also, it compares the results from the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors (KAB) baseline established in March, 2014 and endline survey for forest communities conducted in September, 2016 after the fourth outreach campaign. Finally, this report examines the information gathered from independent interviews conducted by the communications consultant with members of the Community Forestry Working Group (CFWG) and Community Forestry Management Body (CFMB) in Buchanan, Sanniquellie and Tappita.

The PROSPER program scope of work notes that “The successful management of Liberia’s natural resources depends not only on government agencies and communities directly responsible for their management, but also on an educated citizenry that can make informed decisions about the use and management of these resources by government agencies, the private sector, and communities.” To contribute to building an educated citizenry, PROSPER is charged by USAID with working with key institutions to build their capacity to develop effective outreach campaigns to communicate information that will lead to changes in the way citizens think about and make decision about their natural resources.

This report of the “Public outreach and awareness building approaches field tested with relevant GOL agencies (FDA), target communities, and other identified stakeholders along the themes of sustainable natural resource management, land tenure and property rights, environmental compliance, and community-based forest management”, is submitted in fulfillment of Contract Deliverable no. 5a.

The report provides a synopsis of the approaches and best practices used to plan, prepare, and implement the annual campaigns on community forestry issues in keeping with the Community Rights Law (CRL) and the CRL Regulations. It highlights some of the launch events of the fourth annual outreach campaign as well as activities covered during the campaign rollout. Finally, the report describes the evolution of the different channels of communication over the course of the PROSPER project.

BACKGROUND

The absence of effective public education and awareness efforts in Liberia concerning environmental and natural resource issues hampers efforts to implement policies aimed at the sustainable management of Liberia’s forest resources. The highly-publicized private use permit (PUP) scandal, alleged fraudulent community forest applications, and other instances of non-compliance with major forest policies and laws have provided clear evidence of the Forestry Development Authority’s (FDA) limited capacity to impact and change behaviors through sensitization in the forestry sector. Liberia’s failure to harness effective public education to avert the pillage of its forest resources has contributed to the rapid, ongoing decline of the Upper Guinea Forest of which Liberia is home to nearly 40%.

Several years following the passage of the Community Rights Law (CRL) in 2009 and the subsequent promulgation of the CRL Regulations in 2011, the Government of Liberia and the FDA did not disseminate those important laws that recognize and legitimize the role of local communities in the management and governance of the country’s forest resources. Hence, the integrity of valuable forests resources and biodiversity and the rights of forest communities were still being undermined by threats such as illegal logging and poaching, and by concession agriculture and mining schemes approved without informed, prior consent of communities.

In response to these issues, PROSPER in collaboration with the FDA re-activated the CFWG in 2012. In October of that year, the CFWG met in Monrovia where it reconsolidated, and with PROSPER’s facilitation began developing messages and designing strategies it would apply during the pilot testing of the first outreach campaign. This work represented an application of formative communications research, a best practice that involves conducting focus groups or interviews with key stakeholders on the issues that affect them and using that information to guide the design of communications campaigns and materials.

The CFWG agreed that the goal of the first outreach campaign was to address the overarching problem of high community forest degradation and depletion in Liberia due to:

1. Lack of knowledge about community forestry rights, which:
   1. Prevents communities from being able to effectively negotiate with third-party investors who are able to lease and exploit large areas of community forest land, displacing communities and destroying community forest land
   2. Prevents communities from seeing the value of putting in place community forest management systems, without which there are no safeguards for preventing degradation
   3. Keeps communities in poverty and increases conflict between neighbors and within families
2. Lack of knowledge about sustainable forest use practices among communities, and particularly among women, who are primary users of the forest resources; this lack of knowledge has harmful environmental effects
3. Attitudes that lead community members to focus on personal gain and benefits from forest use, rather than the broader interest of the community and country
4. Behavior of local authorities, who may pressure communities to engage in unfair transactions or may execute transactions without community input for personal gain
5. Behavior of community members, who engage in unsustainable shifting cultivation and slash-and-burn farming. Farmers typically move agricultural activities to a new part of the forest every three years because soil fertility becomes depleted.

The first annual campaign was followed up with a second campaign, which focused on the process of managing community forests and strengthening public understanding of the CRL. Ten key messages on the CRL and community forestry management were developed in collaboration with the CFWG. The audience focus expanded to include policy makers and government ministries as well as broader stakeholders across Liberia.

Carrying forward lessons learned from the first annual outreach campaign, the second campaign supported communities in taking control of the campaign from design to implementation. This included PROSPER supporting community forestry leaders in planning their rollout activities and in developing budgets that were used for community outreach focused on the CRL and other community forestry management issues. The outcomes and lessons learned from the first two outreach campaigns informed the planning and subsequent implementation of the communication approaches for the Fourth Annual CF Outreach campaign in Q2 of FY16.

This trip report describes the visit of potential Turkish investor, Kardem Tekstil, to Georgia to learn more about the Georgian apparel investment climate and local apparel market.

Kardem Tekstil visited Georgia between 1 and 4 June 2011 to learn more about Georgia’s apparel investment climate and local apparel manufacturers. The company is interested in both establishing a manufacturing base and establishing new outsourcing relationships with Georgian apparel manufacturers. The trip was initiated, designed, organized, and implemented by EPI and the Georgian National Investment Agency (GNIA) after meeting the owner of Kardem Tekstil, Mr. Zeki Erdogan, at the 4th Istanbul Fashion and Apparel Conference in Turkey in May 2011.

Kardem Tekstil’s owner, Zeki Erdogan, General Manager, Bumin Fisek, and Sales and Marketing Manager, Ilke Onelge, held meetings with high level representatives of the Government of Georgia (including the Minister of Economy and Sustainable Development), Georgian apparel manufacturers, Turkish-owned apparel manufacturers, and Poti Free Industrial Zone, while visiting Tbilisi, Kutaisi, Ozurgeti, Poti, and Batumi.

The Kardem representatives also visited potential investment sites in Ozurgeti and Kutaisi that the hosts suggested, where they saw land options and former factory buildings that are under state ownership or private ownership that can be used for apparel manufacturing.

As a result of their trip, Kardem gave trial orders of 3,000 pieces to one of the local apparel manufacturers, Laura Gachava. They also expressed an interest in investing in the Georgian apparel sector to set up a clothing manufacturing facility in Guria or Kutaisi. However, Kardem representatives requested more information on Georgia’s labor market in order to make an informed decision. ACT, EPI’s subcontractor, was subsequently tasked with implementing the labor market survey.

In September 2011, USAID funded a visit to Georgia by eight of the top wine experts in the United States (U.S.). A group of wine experts and journalists were recruited and briefed by the 2020 Development Company LLC team who has been involved with Georgian wine since 2006, shortly after the Russian embargo. This group included four Masters of Wine (MW), a wine maker and three of the top journalists, bloggers, and wine twitter experts in the U.S. The first appendix of this report provides a summary of the observations and recommendations for Georgian wine and tourism industries that were discussed by the group prior to their return to their home or summarized from the reports that each Opinion shaper (OS) provided. The remaining appendices comprise the remainder of the individual reports. The final appendix is a report provided by EPI’s staff member.

Globally, there are about 300 individuals who have achieved the distinction of MW from the UK-based Master of Wine Institute. This designation is known around the world as the most distinguished degree available to wine industry experts. There are currently 30 MWs in the U.S. According to the Masters of Wine website, the objectives of the MW program are to ―promote professional excellence and knowledge of the art, science and business of wine‖. The MW program requires the MWs to pass three parts of the examination (Theory, Practical, and Dissertation). These individuals are experts in all aspects of the wine industry from grape production to winemaking, distribution, and marketing. On the OS trip to Georgia, there were four MWs from the U.S. The exposure of Georgian wine to these leading wine experts will leverage their experience and exposure not only to the U.S. wine industry, but the extended network of the global Masters of Wine network.

The trip also included three top U.S.-based wine journalists; one traditional journalist who is also the founder of the Dallas Wine Competition and two bloggers and wine tweeters with significant following. Both of these bloggers are experts in wine tourism. Luiz Alberto owns a wine tourism agency in Italy and Diane Letulle is often a speaker at wine tourism conferences, including one in Brescia, Italy in October 2011. As an added bonus, Luiz Alberto, one of the wine bloggers has a web-based portal to sell consumer wines direct through the Internet and specifically through terminals his company has established in Italian wineries. This concept can be duplicated in Georgia and this option will be explored further in this report.

The OS are the experts on wine and their views and suggestions are going to be specific in their recommendations on wines and to wineries. The recommendations of this document can be utilized as a blueprint for future efforts in support of the Georgian wine and wine tourism industries.