RAS/98/G31 - UNDP/Global Environment Facility - Tumen River Strategic Action Program
A sub-regional Initiative to protect Transboundary Biodiversity and
International Water Resources in Northeast Asia and to attract Green Investment
http://www.TumenNET.org
TumenNET PROJECT
EVALUATION OF THE SMALL GRANTS
PROGRAMME (SGP) TRANCHE I
INTERNAL EVALUATION REPORT
Tumen River Strategic Action Programme (TumenNET)
Prepared for:
The Tumen River Strategic Action Programme
(TumenNET)
Prepared by:
M. Badarch
Director of Mongolian Nature and Environment Consortium
Ying Zhou-Tala
EIC manager of Project Coordination Unit, TumenNET project
With contribution from:
Li Li
Jilin Provincial Publicity and Education Center
of Environmental Protection
Vladimir Karakin
Russian Far East Branch of the World Wide Fund for Nature
Park Eun-Kyung
Director of Environment and Culture Institute,
Republic of Korea
Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia,
November 2001
Table of Contents
Section
Page
ABBREVIATIONS
2
PREFACE
3
1.
Introduction 4
1.1.
Background of the SGP
4
2.
Evaluation objectives and methodology
5
2.1
Objectives
5
2.2
Methodology
5
3.
Small projects performance
6
4.
Conclusions and recommendations
8
4.1 Conclusions
8
4.2
Recommendations 8
Annex 1
Annex 2
Annex 3
Annex 4
1
Abbreviations
EIC
Education, Information and Communication
NGO
Non Governmental Organisation
PCU
Project Coordination Unit
PD
Project Document
PI
Partner Institution
ROK
Republic of Korea
SGP
Small Grant Programme
TOR
Terms of Reference
2
PREFACE
The evaluation was conducted by an independent team of two persons: M. Badarch,
director of Mongolian Nature and Environment Consortium, Ying Zhou-Tala, EIC
manager of Project Coordination Unit (PCU), TumenNET project. The evaluation
started on 24 October 2001 and completed on 9 November 2001.
The evaluation team would like to thank Mr. D. Druzhin, Deputy Governor of
Hasanskii district of Primorsky Krai, Russia, Mr. A. Dashnyam, Aide-de-camp to the
Governor of Kentii Province, Mongolia, Ms. Yang Shuhua, Deputy Director of
Publicity and Education Centre of Environmental Protection of Jilin Province, Mr. Li
Yuan Xie, Vice director of Environment Protection Bureau of Hunchun city and Mr.
Chai Jingchun, Deputy director of Environment Agency of Yanji city, Ms. Park Eun-
Kyung, director of Institute of Environment and Culture of Korea for their assistance
to carry out this evaluation.
Our special thanks and gratitude also goes Mr. Gunther Mau, Chief Technical Adviser
of Project Coordination Unit, TumenNET project and Mr. Alexander Tkalin,
Programme Officer, PCU for their substantial guidelines for preparation and
arrangement of this evaluation.
The evaluation team also thanks to Ms Dolgorsuren, Environment Agency of Khentii
province, Mr. Vladimir Karakin, Russian Far East Branch of WWF, Ms. Li Li, Jilin
Provincial Publicity and Education Centre of Environment Protection and their staff
gave generously of their time to support the mission's work.
3
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1
BACKGROUND OF THE SGP
The SGP is implementing since August 2001 as part of the Tumen River Strategic
Action Programme (TumenNET) which is funded by the Global Environment Facility
(GEF) and implemented by the China, Russia, Mongolia and ROK.
According to the Project Document (PD) the TumenNET development objective was
stated as "to protect the transboundary biodiversity and international water protection
in Northeast Asian countries and to ensure sustainable development through taking
environmental considerations into account while exploiting the natural resource
production base of the country".
The SGP was established as a grants program, targeted at local communities around
project areas, with the following specific objectives:
· Provide grants to support small-scale assistance for communities that are located
in the immediate project areas;
· Raise the awareness of transboundary biodiversity and water issues affecting those
communities;
· Showcase how environmental and community-based projects can improve the
economic situation of communities through alternative income generation
measures;
· Act as a promoting agent for the activities of the Tumen River Strategic Action
Program (TumenNET).
The project's of the Small Grants Programme (SGP) is targeted at the immediate
grassroots in the project areas and aims to provide support for village-level initiatives
that showcase examples of hands-on and practical village self-help projects projects
that reduce environmental pollution while at the same time contribute to raising living
standards. Preference will be given to projects that can demonstrate positive impacts
on biodiversity and water pollution and that involve cross-border partners.
Each SGP grant does not exceed $5,000 and involve substantial in kind contributions
by the applicant(s). The SGP is targeted at local villages and local communities in the
immediate proximity to the project areas.
Up to the present time, the Program has provided financial resources, on a grant basis,
between US$2000 and US$5000 per project aimed at addressing social and economic
issues such as increasing health and education, income generation, and development
of basic infrastructure. Support has also been provided to projects more related to
environmental conservation.
According to the Project document, at the end of a two-year period (June 2002) at
least 50 Small project proposals would have been funded in 5 countries.
At this point, a total of 29 projects are being implemented in key Project Targeted
areas of China, Russia, Mongolia and Republic of Korea. Annex 1 presents a
summary of all the projects.
4
The management, control and monitoring of the projects are handed by Partner
institutes in each participating country.
2.
Evaluation objectives and methodology
2.1
Objectives
This report represents an internal evaluation of the Small Projects implemented under
the Tumen River Strategic Action Programme (TumenNET). According to the TOR
(Annex 2) of evaluation which was developed by the Project Coordination Unit
(PCU) the main objectives of the evaluation were:
· To see how the objectives set by the current SGP have been met.
· To learn from the success and failure experiences of the current small projects for
better future management and implementation of small projects.
2.2
Methodology
The evaluation methodology defined and provided by the PCU, emphasized special
attention to the following review/analysis criteria: Project Suitability, Effectiveness
and Sustainability. The evaluation involved two stages: the provision and revision of
background information and the analysis of this information and preparation of the
evaluation report.
The evaluation was focused on 14 projects selected randomly. The evaluation team
conducted questionnaires (annex 3), targeted at the organizations implementing the
projects and the target group/beneficiaries, aimed at collecting information on the
results and impacts of the small projects.
The projects were visited and the questionnaires were carried out at the site of the
projects where the SGP leaders were interviewed, as well as the project beneficiaries.
The evaluation team had meeting with 35 individuals including project managers,
representatives of local Government and local communities and project beneficiaries.
Extensive project background references and individual project related documents
were provided by the partner institutions. Consultations with project staff and
members of the Project selection panel were also conducted.
The evaluation team aims to provide both a critical analysis of past and on-going
project activities and a basis for using this experience to improve the implementation
of the on-going projects.
The evaluation team prepared a draft work plan one month prior to the start of the
mission.
A TOR of evaluation together with an outline timetable mission was circulated to
Partner institutes in mid-June 2001.
5
The Initial TOR of evaluation and timetable mission was amended in the light of
comments received during second Awareness Meeting, which was held in Khentii
town, Mongolia.
3.
SMALL PROJECTS PERFORMANCE
Twenty-nine small projects within the SGP were funded from August 2001 in project-
targeted areas of Mongolia, China, Russia and Republic of Korea.
The majority of the projects focused in environmental awareness, education, health
and environment conservation in TumenNET areas.
The evaluation team visited 14 project sites where had meeting with 45 individuals
including project staff and the officials of the local Government.
Consultations with some members of SAP PU (in Russia and China) and some
members of the SGP selection panel (in Mongolia) were also conducted.
In terms of the content, most of projects included well-detailed realistic and important
information such as expected results, required resources and activities to carry out.
During the project evaluation we had highlighted to estimate the current and future
sustainability of the projects.
Local communities are the target areas of the projects. Therefore, the sustainability of
the projects is heavily dependent upon the local economic and social conditions
characterized mainly by poverty, which is closely related to unsustainable practices of
resource use.
The long-term sustainability of these projects will also depend on the local
communities or beneficiaries' capacity to contribute to the maintenance and operation
of projects.
In addition, the good levels of sustainability are mainly associated with:
(a) The adequate organizational structure, good capacity of the project managers to
lead their projects. (Project 2, Mongolia, project 5, Russia, project 12, Korea). For
instance, well established a partnership between Korean Federation for
Environment Movement and Yanbian Prefecture University on crane monitoring
programme in northeast Asia. Also, there were hired the local people who assisted
to monitor cranes on their farmland. It also helped the local communities to
increase their income generation of local community.
(b) Training provided by some of the projects to the staff. Key human resources were
empowered to continue the activities after funding from SGP. (project 2,
Mongolia and project 12, Korea, Project 9, China) There were trained of poor
local people for making products using wastes of forest/willow, training students
for monitoring of cranes and clean up rivers.
6
(c) The mechanism established by the organizations to help sustain the project
activities including operation and maintenance. (Project 6, Russia)
(d) The level of positive response of target groups to the products produced and
services provided by the projects. In project of healthy project in Khentii,
Mongolia, for example, the facilities and services provided by the poor
community seem better when compared with others in the area.
(e) The direct benefits to project beneficiaries. Projects were built on practical
realities and needs of the target groups (most of projects).
(f) The association of the projects to policy initiatives at local levels by the local
governments. For instance, project 9 and 11 in China and project 4 in Russia are
strongly financially supported by the local governments.
Annex 4.
(g) The significant contribution by the PIs into their
The list of evaluated small Projects
projects, the strong sense of ownership and low
1. Healthy environment, Khentii province, Mongolia
dependency on external supports (most projects)
2. Willow, Khentii province, Mongolia
3. Ecotourism development, Khentii province,
Mongolia
(h) The strong possibilities of some of the project
4. You should know, love and protect the place you
to gain access to additional resources in order to
live in, TV authority of Vladivostok, Russia
expand their activities or enterprises (project 1,
5. Environmental education, Education authority,
Mongolia)
Khasan district, Russia,
6. Organization of solid wastes dumping ground,
Russia
The evaluation was focused on 14 projects listed in
7. Protection of rare wetland species in Tumen
annex 4. Up to the present time, the Program has
Region, Hunchun city, China
provided financial resources, on a grant basis,
8. Awareness raising of environmental protection in
between US$2000 and US$5000 per project aimed
regional developing, Hunchun city, China.
9. Exemplary propaganda and education among
at addressing transboundary biodiversity and
rural masses in Tumen Region, Yanji village,
international water protection and social and
Yilan Town, Yanji city, Yanbian Prefecture,
economic issues such as increasing health and
China
education, income generation, and development of
10. To save mother river Tumen River action of
basic infrastructure. Support has also been provided
Green children, Yanbian prefecture China
11. Prevention and control of soil erosion of Mopan
to projects more related to environmental
village and villagers awareness raising of
conservation
environmental protection, Mopan village,
Changan town, Tumen city, China
The performance of some projects was affected by
12. Crane Monitoring program by locals, Korean
the following weaknesses:
Federation for Environmental Movement,
Republic of Korea with collaboration of Yanbian
University
· Insufficient transparency for announcement and
13. Drawing, photographic contest and art exhibition
selection of Project. (Project 5, Russia, Project
of the Tumen river, Korea
1, Mongolia)
14. Children 's Green Steps for Tumen River, Korea
· Lack of or poor analysis/definition of the issues to be addressed. Some projects
jumped from the identification of the products to be produced or services to be
provided to project activities without further analysis and without taking into
account all of the potential problems that could interfere with their success
(Project 2, Mongolia and project 4 Russia)
· The lack of site visits by the members of PI and SAP PU in order to validate and
enhance key information provided in the proposals (most of evaluated projects).
7
· Poor budget planning characterized by underestimation of costs and lack of
planning for important items. For instance, some activities cannot be executed due
to shortage of project budget (Project 4, Russia, Project 1, Mongolia and Project
14, Korea).
· Lack of incorporation of environmental concerns or reference to environmental
considerations within the process of project identification and design project
proposals at local level (e.g. Project 8 and 11, China).
4.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1
CONCLUSIONS
The evaluation team made the following conclusions:
· The mechanism set up for the implementation of the SGP is simple, practical and
follows a bottom up approach.
· The Criteria used for the approval of the projects were very relevant and
appropriate. In general, the SGPs have been selected adhered to those Criteria.
· The SGPs met genuine basic needs of the communities such as health care,
education, ecotourism, village development, improving the drinking water quality
and prevention flood disaster benefiting communities directly. An average of 5000
local people have benefited from the SGP.
· Most of the projects adhered to the work plan detailed in the original project
proposal in terms of the activities carried out, good products and services
provided. In terms of the proposed schedule, most of the projects had delays due
to different factors.
· The 95 percent of evaluated SGP were cost-effective.
· Women and poor households have been the main beneficiaries of the SGP.
· Projects supported the promotion of income generation and environment
conservation funds at the local levels.
· People of village communities had benefited from the upgrading of training at
project sites.
· The SGP has promoted the involvement of NGO's through training their staff.
· The SGP has supported other poverty related activities at national and local levels.
· The sustainable impacts of the SGP on poverty were: the increased income and
self-confidence of the households who go on to implement successful SGP.
4.2
RECOMMENDATIONS
· Local administrations, all NGOs implementing projects as well as the local
communities of the key areas of TumenNET have the same options to continue
supporting the SGP. It is recommended to implement second Tranche of the SGP
for conservation of Transboundary biodiversity and international water protection
activities in targeted areas.
· The second Tranche of the SGP should be focused on supporting community
initiatives more directly related to transboundary biodiversity conservation
activities in Tumen River, Mongolian plateau, Daurian Steppe zones as well as
Supra regional zone or at least in supporting more integrated approach to address
the social, economic and environmental needs of the areas providing alternatives
8
to proper use of natural resources which are located in targeted areas. It is
recommended to identify and financially support at least two regional community-
based initiatives in the above zones. Such initiatives should include rural
development and environmental conservation components; consequently, its cost
might be higher than the current projects.
· The capacity building and organizational development of NGOs in targeted areas
of TumenNET are important in successful implementation of SGP. It is suggested
to organize training of NGO staff, which will implement SGP in targeted areas.
· Different mechanisms should be identified and utilized to involve local people
from the very early stages of the process of project implementation. The SGP
should be seen as a complementary mechanism and not the main one. In most of
the targeted areas, local people, especially herders/ farmers/ hunters, are still
associating the local administration with conflicts on use of natural resources.
Therefore, effective educational/awareness activities need to be carried out by the
local communities in order to promote better understanding of the existence of the
transboundary biodiversity conservation. It is recommended to establish effective
linkages activities of the SGP and environment public awareness programme at
local level in order to benefit from the extensive experiences gained by this
initiative in environmental public awareness, and to promote their support on
more integrated awareness approaches.
· It is recommended to prepare case studies of successful project experience as well
as to prepare brochures and other awareness materials as a basis to disseminate
information on the implementation of the SGP.
· In order to promote transparency of project identification, selection process and
enhance the views of selection panel, the NGOs, the private sector, and local
people should participate in the selection panel and in the decision making
process. The role of the SAP PU should also be enhanced. It is recommended to
consider a more balanced work within both PIs and SAP PU in each country in
order to promote transparency of project selection. There is needed to include the
NGOs, the private sector, and local people should participate in the composition
of the selection panel and in the decision making process.
· Considering the key role in implementation of the SGP by the local communities
in terms of the project development and implementation, its experience,
capabilities are important. Efforts should be made towards further enhancement of
the local community's capacities in project development, monitoring and
evaluation.
· In terms of the capacity at local level, it is important to highlight the existence of
other initiatives such as local Poverty Alleviation, local Agenda 21. Though
projects differ in some areas, in practice, some of their objectives, frame of
activities, target areas, have similarities especially in the cases of projects towards
economic and social development and sustainable use of transboundary
biodiversity and international water in specific cases. It is recommended to
improve the linkage of SGP and local programs such as Poverty Alleviation, local
Agenda 21
9
· In order to make the Criteria for the SGP relevant and appropriate as compared
with the purpose and objectives of the TumenNET Project and to make them self-
explanatory and comprehensive facilitating its application there is a need for
improvement in terms of the content and format of the current Criteria.
· It is recommended appropriate and relevant SGP criteria by reviewing, improving
and enhancing the content and format of the current Criteria. With regards to the
applying organizations, it is also recommended to define within the criteria the
organizations eligible for support.
· Emphasis should be placed on practical training that brings knowledge/awareness
to the implementing groups in project implementation stage. By building relevant
skills and knowledge and encouraging the practice of trans boundary biodiversity
and international water protection activities at the local level, especially when
local communities are part of the initiative. Special training should be designed
for PIs to enhance their capacities and skill in their roles as facilitator in the small
projects.
· Better priority needs to be assigned to monitoring and evaluation of the projects at
the local level. Monitoring of the projects especially by the PIs and SAP PU need
to be strengthened. The establishment of a monitoring guidelines and participatory
program evaluation are recommended.
· It is suggested to develop a coherent and practical monitoring and evaluation
system for the projects incorporating different levels, from the LA/PIU to the
project groups. It is recommended that PIs develop a simple format to be used by
the project managers for the preparation of project final reports in order to obtain
the relevant information needed about the implementation of each project.
· In order to draw out and communicate lessons learned from this exercise, it is
recommended to prepare case studies on successful projects and disseminate the
information through different approaches among the implementers of SGP.
· It is recommended to identify the priority project options for second Tranche of
the SGP by the PCU with collaboration Lead Agent in line of decision of second
TumenNET Council meeting.
· It is recommended the Partners Institutes should build strong communication
channels with grantees, provide grantees full information of TumenNET which is
the source of the fund, therefor indication of TumenNET including logo and full
tile should appear on any promotion materials which utilised the SGP fund.
· It is recommended to develop and implement the following projects in future in
TumenNET areas:
1. Establish clear mechanisms for transboundary Conservation of the
Mongolian Plateau, Daurian Steppe Zone and Tumen River Zone.
10
These mechanisms could be covered legal status for transboundary areas,
institutional frameworks for transboundary protected area management, and
resolution for park/people conflicts through local participation and development of
economic alternatives.
2. Support ecotourism opportunities in TumenNET area.
The environment sound economic benefits from community based ecotourism
serve as incentives for local people to initiate conservation measures, such as
using renewable energy to reduce fuel woods consumption, improved waste
management, support for restoration of cultural sites, and an appreciation for
protecting wildlife as attraction to resources. For this reason, future TumenNET
project could arrange community based ecotourism activities that will be
component of all its biodiversity conservation programs.
3.
Support to local community participation in Transboundary
Biodiversity Conservation.
As we know, there are transboundary problems such as illegal hunting, harvesting,
logging, grazing and wildlife trade. These conflicts could be solved though
community participation is one of the most critical issues for transboundary
conservation. Consultation with local communities increases the potential for
environment sound management in border areas.
11
Annex 1
Summary of projects
Please visit our website for summary of SGP projects:
http://www.tumennet.org/project/proj_index.htm
Annex 2.
Terms of Reference
Small Grants Program Evaluation - Tranche I
Background
The Tumen River Strategic Action Program, or TumenNET in short, is a 2-year and
US $6.8 million initiative to protect transboundary biodiversity and international
water resources in Northeast Asia, and attract green investment. The Global
Environment Facility (GEF) contributes US $5 million to the project and the United
Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) has been contracted to facilitate
international inputs and overall coordination. The project is implemented and
managed by the Governments of participating countries through a network of regional
lead agents and national partner institutions (http://www.TumenNET.org). Five
countries participate in the project at present. They are the People's Republic of
China, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (pending full participation),
Mongolia, the Russian Federation and the Republic of Korea. Japan recently joined
the TumenNET Council as observer.
The project area is characterized by its unique and rich biological diversity (eg the
Amur tiger, the Mongolian gazelle, and several crane species) and boasts
internationally significant waters such as the Tumen River with its tributaries and
Peter-the-Great Bay. The region is abundant with natural resources, has a vast human
resource potential and is strategically located at the nexus of consumer markets in
Asia, the Americas and Europe. An accelerating pace of economic development and
associated urbanisation will put pressure on natural resources and can pose significant
threats to the environment, if managed unsustainably. This can result in irreversible
damage to national as well as global environmental resources.
TumenNET relies on a strong participatory and community focussed approach to
ensure that the Strategic Action Program (SAP) is action-oriented, financially feasible
and responsive. Local ownership is a key ingredient in that process and a series of
consultative meetings are being held at the local government and grassroots levels to
identify environmental priorities, generate and validate information, and ensure
community relevance of interventions proposed in the SAP. A complementary
Awareness-Raising Program (ARP) and Small Grants Program (SGP) under the
project aim to raise environmental awareness among affected communities and
provide resources to grassroots areas. SGP funds will be dispersed in two Tranche,
one in May 2001 and, following an independent evaluation of its effectiveness, a
12
second Tranche in early 2002. These TORs are for the evaluation of Tranche I of the
SGP.
Objective
The overall objective of the evaluation is an assessment of the operational
effectiveness and efficiency of the Small Grants Program, including its administration
at national and regional level, the system adopted for the submission and selection of
grant proposals, and national and regional monitoring of its implementation. The
evaluation is forward looking in its approach and will recommend realistic and
achievable ways to improve the delivery and impact of the Small Grants Scheme
within the constraints under which the TumenNET project operates.
Scope of Services
· Assess the community relevance of the SGP and discuss in how far it contributes
to the TumenNET participatory approach at both national and regional levels.
· Appraise the effectiveness of national selection processes, including advertising
the program, the use of national/local languages, its access by grassroots
communities in the target areas, comprehension of local language guidelines,
establishment of selection panels, transparency and fairness of selection process
and timing. Make recommendations for improvements where required.
· Appraise the efficiency of the awarding of a grant, including effective
management of agreements with UNOPS, translations, fund transfer, etc and make
recommendations for improvements where required.
· Assess the suitability of selected grant proposals against the SGP guidelines and
make recommendations for improvements in the selection process if and when
required.
· Evaluate the appropriateness and likely impact of monitoring arrangements set up
by the national managers of the SGP program and make recommendations for
improvements where required. Discuss cost effective methods for regional
monitoring by the AWARE Lead Agent.
· Assess, if possible at such an early stage, the likely benefits of the Tranche I grant
to recipient communities and their short to medium to long-term impact.
· Discuss and assess the commitment by local communities towards the program
and the effectiveness of any support structure by local government. Assess the
political willingness of local Government to support the program and identify
areas for improvements.
· Discuss with stakeholders, and make recommendations on, the type of grant
projects that could be best pursued in each country.
· Assess the level of gender equity and involvement of disadvantaged groups in all
project design and implementation activities.
· Assess the degree (initial perhaps) of networking among SGP managers in the
different member countries and evaluate the successes and shortcomings of these
networks. Identify opportunities for future networking.
13
Reporting
The consultant will report to the Project Coordination Unit in Beijing. While in
country, the consultant will work with, and through, the AWARE Lead Agent and
Partner Institutions.
Payment of contracted services will be linked to achievements of agreed milestones
and is subject to acceptance by the Project Coordination Unit of the quality of the
contracted services.
Outputs
1)
Draft evaluation report within 3 weeks of return to home base.
2)
Final report, incorporating any comments from the PCU, within 1 week of
receipt of these comments.
All reports are to be submitted by email in a WORD compatible format to the CTA,
Mr Gunther Mau, at gmau@public.un.org.cn
Milestones
1)
Execution of contract
15% of contract value
2)
Acceptance of draft report
40% of contract value
3)
Acceptance of final report
45% of contract value
Preliminary Evaluation Schedule
The evaluation team will comprise an independent consultant from Wetlands
International, a representative of the Lead Agent of the AWARE component and a
representative of the Project Coordination Unit. The evaluation is scheduled to begin
in October 2001 commencing with a briefing in Beijing. The evaluation will be
undertaken over a period of approximately 30 days, not necessarily consecutively,
with 20 person days estimated for the field mission, and 10 person days at home base
for finalizing of the evaluation report. Preparation and finalising of the report is the
responsibility of the independent consultant. Sites to be visited:
China Mongolia
Beijing (Project Coordination Unit);
Ulaanbaatar (capital) and selected
Changchun (capital of Jilin Province) and
location(s) in Eastern Mongolia
selected location(s) in Yanbian Prefecture
Russian Federation
Republic of Korea
Vladivostok (capital of Far East Region)
Seoul (capital) and selected
and selected location(s) in Primorsky Krai
location(s) in its vicinity
____________________
14
Annex 3
Organizations Questionnaire
1. Organization: Korean Federation for Environmental Movement (KFEM)
2. Address: 251, Nuha-dong, Jongro-Gu, Seoul, Korea
Tel: 82-2-735-7000 Fax 82-2-730-1240
3. Project name and purpose: Crane Monitoring by locals
4. Name of project leader and members
Project leader: Kim Choony (Ms.) kimchy@kfem.or.kr
KFEM side
(* indicates participants to visit on site of the Tumen River from Oct 21
to Oct 28. Therefore 7 of 10 visited to Tumen River on site with their own money)
*1. Mr. Park, Jong Hak, Volunteer activist as a photographer at Citizens Information
Center for Environment that is one of the affiliated organizations to KFEM
*2. Mr. Choi, Jin Ha, Director of ChungNam Province local agenda 21
3. Mr. Kim, Jeong Soo, Senior Researcher, Citizens Institute for Environmental
Studies that is one of the affiliated organizations to KFEM
*4. Ms. Kim, Choony. Chief of International Affairs, KFEM -- Project leader
*5. Ms. Lee Hye Kyung, Secretary General, Incheon KFEM
*6. Mr. Bok, Jin Ho, Volunteer PD of Public relations, KFEM
*7. Mr. Kim, Kyung won, Director, Korean Wetlands Alliance (KWA)
*8. Ms. Jang, Ji Young. Chief of Wetlands and Tidal Flat Team, KFEM
9.Ms. Oh He Won, International Coordinator, KFEM
10. Dr. Glen Harrison, Volunteer of International Affairs of KFEM,
Senior Researcher, Oak Ridge National Lab.(Tennessee, USA) He suggested KFEM
make a contact to Yanbian University to implement KFEM's SGP project through
Seoul National University and edit English for this project. He made this wonderful
project as a match-maker between KFEM and Yanbian University.
Yanbian University side (Geographic Dept.)
(4 of 5 professors visited to Tumen River to educate the local people and implement
SGP project.)
*1. Prof. Jang, Sam Hwan
2. Prof. Nan, Ying (In Seoul National University from Yanbian University) He
introduced Prof. Ju Wei Hong (Seoul Natioinal University from Yanbian University)
who is expert on this issue and Professors' from Yanbian University.
*3. Prof. Lee, Qwang --- Project leader
*4. Prof . Jeon, Kyung Mu
*5. Prof. Zhu Wei Hong (In Seoul National University from Yanbian University)
She had a major role as a member of working group of this project between Yanbian
Univ. and KFEM.
International Crane Foundation
Mr. Jim Harrison, Vice Secretary General, International Crane Foundation - He
provided all the material such as posters, post cards with KFEM and we provided
15
them with local people along the Tumen River area such as Hunchun, Kyungsin and
Bangcheon area.
Goldman Environmental Foundation
Ms. Lani Alo, Program Associate, Goldman Environmental Foundation
Ms. Amy Morris, Program Assistant, Goldman Environmental Foundation
KFEM submitted SGP project to Global GreenGrants Fund through the Goldman
Environmental Prize. Both of them contacted Global GreenGrants Fund to implement
this project.
Global Green Grants Fund and Tides Foundation
Ms. Beatrice Szadokierski, Director of Administration & Finance, Global Greengrants
Fund . She tried to send money to KFEM before implementing date and we
successfully received money before our departure.
Korean Chinese Children Nationwide Newspaper of China
Mr. Choi, Chung gil : Chief Director, Korean Chinese Children's nationwide
newspaper of China. He will cover KFEM's SGP program to his newspaper.
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·
Solving social problems: Frankly speaking they do not have any social problems
but political problem that is Reunification of Korean Peninsular. We have had
deep discussion on it, and we concluded South and North Korea is needed to
reunify as soon as possible because senior citizenship along the Tumen river are
getting older. They really want to see Unified Korean peninsular.
·
Increasing the standard of living: Highly Yes. We selected 24 local people from
Hunchun, Kyungsin and Bangcheon area who have lived along the Tumen
iver side and paid for 50,000 won per person as a labor fee that 50,000 won
accounts for 8,300Yuan(currency 1Yuan:166Won) and 42 USD
(Currency 1200 Won: 1 USD). They will monitor 5 times in Autumn, 2001.
·
Strengthening community awareness: Highly Yes.
1) For KFEM side, we learned a lot the historical, geographical and environmental
backgrounds as well as tourism sector from the local peoples and Professors
from Yanbian University. We understood what is real border area and border
area management. For Koreans, we do not have border concept because we
cannot access to border area between North and South Korea, and we do not
have land border between Korea and Japan.
2) For local people side, we have seen many local peoples' awareness.
One Chinese who live in Kyungsin area who was not a member of selected 24
locals accessed to us and explained that he have seen Crane. And when we met
24 locals, all of them told us they do not know how important Crane is before
Yanbain
16
University explained our SGP program. But after the first visit of Yanbian
University, they could sincerely understand why Crane lives at their region.
3) When we provided money with local people, they strongly do not want to take
their labor fee. They said to protect ecosystem and Carne along Tumen River
is their duty without money. They want to monitor Crane without money. We
made hard effort to persuade them.
4) We would like to say one of the evidence more on community awareness. Mr.
Shin, is a bus driver of our transportation Even though his job is bus driver but
his awareness on Crane marvelously increased. Whenever he talked, they
mentioned Crane.
Lastly, all about this was great opportunity and unbelievable experience for us.
And under the circumstances, we would like to recommend one of the local
people to the "Excellence Awards".
·
Protecting environment and natural resources: As we mentioned already, local
people have seen Crane many times. But whenever they see Crane, they
understood it is one of the nature but they do not know critically Crane is one of
the protected species. Through this SGP, they have known they should protect
Carne and river mouth of Tumen River from the development. And because Crane
and Tumen River are connected each other. Also they have known why 5
countries and United Nations make the efforts to protect international waters and
trans-boundary bio diversity.
So the SGP of KFEM contributed to protect nature and environment along the
Tumen River side.
·
Providing employment: We hired 1 bus driver for our site visit which is 3 times to
implement our SGP. It will be continued by 11. Nov. 2001.
6. What kinds of products does the project produce?
300 copies; Educational Material on Crane by KFEM
500 copies; Record card for Monitor purpose by KFEM
1 Placard by KFEM
3 pieces of Crane Digital Dying (Hooded Crane, Red-Crowned Crane, White-nape
Crane) by KFEM
70 post cards ; International Crane Foundation
40 posters on Crane: International Crane Foundation
4 sets educational material for Kids ; International Crane Foundation
And we have had another ideas and project items along the river mouth of Tumen
River
7. Who benefited most from your project?
·
Local people: Strongly Yes.
·
Local authorities:
·
Group implementing the project: Secondarily Yes.
·
School age children: We distributed postcards to local people and let them give
postcards to their children and kids.
17
·
Students: When Professors from Yanbian University make a lecture to the
students on Crane and ecosystem of Tumen river, it will be another great
opportunity
8. Project serves mostly for (specify), which is % of the population.
·
Local community: 100 %
·
Women: 17% of 100 %
·
Children: 15 % of 100 %
·
Herders:
·
Others:
9. How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP? We got to know from (specify)
·
Radio:------------------------------------
·
Newspaper: -------------------------------------------
·
Internet, e-mail networks: ---------------------------
·
Word of mouth:-----------------------------------
·
I was invited to submit the proposal: to United Nations and Global GreenGrants
Fund in collaboration with Goldman Environmental Foundation
·
Other:
10. Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·
National SGP manager: ----------------------------------------------------------
·
People who have been involved in small projects before: -------------------
·
Relatives and friends: -------------------------------------------------------------
·
Other
Dr. Glen Harrison who is a Senior Researcher at Oak Ridge National Lab based in
Tennessee, USA and a volunteer at the International affairs at KFEM helped me to
find out right contact point in Yanbian Prefecture when I made a question how to
implement this project. He introduced Geographical Department of Seoul National
University to me since he knows there are professors from Yanbian University.
Mr. Kim, Kyung won who is a director of Korean Wetlands Alliance gave me idea
when I invited to discuss which items will be reasonable to give economic benefit to
local people and raise awareness on environmental protection
Prof. Nan, Ying and Prof. Zhu, Wei hong : I contacted them after Glen Harrison
helped me out. They have worked and contacted between KFEM and Yanbian
Univeristy.
We could implement the SGP owing to their well arrangement between KFEM and
Yanbian University.
Replace: (((11. What is your opinion on SGP project selection procedure?
Selection is fair on competitive basis: Surely Yes.
Selection is not satisfactory:
Do not know about their selection procedure:
11. Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable?
Please explain if not
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
Yes.
12. Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes:
18
No: *
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel: ---------------------------------
Local Government: ------------------------------------
National SGP manager: -------------------------------
Please explain the nature of our difficulties: No participation from North Korean side,
and Tumen River is not adjacent area to South Korea.
13. Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation? No
14. Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
·
Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen properly ------------
·
Inappropriate guidelines of SGP --------------------------------------------------------
·
Inadequate contact with national SGP manager------------------------------------
15. What is your opinion about your project budget?
·
Just right ---------
·
Too much --------
·
Too small ; I got a matching fund but it was small. Allocated money for SGP to
Korean NGOs was something small.
16. How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·
Very good : Surely Yes. Because we made stakeholders widened from domestic to
international society such as Fund Sources that are Goldman Environmental Prize
and Global GreenGrants Fund(Tides Foundation) which is and educational
material provider which is International Crane Foundation. We met local people
and gave money to them, saw their sincere attitude, and witnessed marvellous and
untouched river mouth of the Tumen River. In addition to, many activists from
Korea who works for wetlands and migratory birds conservation travelled to
Tumen River and impressed a lot. In order to allocate most money by UNDP and
Global GreenGrants Fund to project, participants from ROK contributed their own
money to trip from Korea to China. And finally we have many ideas to implement
on this area. Lastly much more important reason to evaluate `excellence' on this
project is we do not have any language barrier between Yanbian University and
KFEM, and local people and KFEM even though our SGP site was in China not in
Korea. All of us fully understood what we said among us.
Not to mention, it was great job. We appreciate all of stakeholders and supporters to
this project.
·
Good --------------------
·
Satisfactory ------------
·
Bad ----------------------
17. Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project?
There was no natural river mouth, flood plain, sand hill, and dike in Korea since every
river has been developed and straightened by cement and concrete. It was great for us
to see natural area along the Tumen River. We will try to protect natural shape that we
mentioned already in collaboration with Yanbian University and International
Society. And also we would like to expand our concept not only ecosystem
protection but also alternative energy system in the border area. We would like to
implement alternative energy system after the feasibility studies. All of these will be
helpful to local people.
19
It will be come true, local people use electricity without giving any harm to
environment. And we will develop the educational programs for local people as well
as kids. Their current understanding on nature and environment is not educational but
natural. If we will implement educational program for them, they will be much more
concerned about it.
18. Please list priority project type for future SGP that require urgent attention in your
area. Try to prioritize these!
These will be collaborated with Yanbian University and implemented, if money is
applicable and SGP will be continued by UNDP and GEF..
Project on implementing wind energy facilities at the border area
Project on Crane Monitoring by locals in the HeirungJang Province
Project on environmental education on Desertification to the local people
Project on Inviting school children of Yanbian Prefecture to Korea to take part in the
School Children's environmental education program organized by KFEM.
Organizations Ouestionnaire
1. Organization: NGO "Territory for Future"
2. Address : 692707, Andreevka, Naberezhnaya St., 2, Khasanskii district, Primorskii
krai
3. Project name and purpose: Equipment of the ground for solid waste (dump)
4. Name of project leader and members
Project Leader Naumov Vitalii
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·
Solving social problems: V
·
Increasing the standard of living:
·
Strengthening community awareness: V
·
Protecting environment and natural resources: V
·
Providing employment:
6. What kinds of products does the project produce?
The quality of environment has improved
7. Who benefited most from your project?
·
Local people: V----------------------------
·
Local authorities: ------------------------
·
Group implementing the project: V------
·
School age children: V--------------------
·
Students: ---------------------------------
8. Project serves mostly for (specify), which is ....... % of the population.
·
Local community: V
·
Women:V
·
Children:V
·
Herders
·
Others: Tourists
20
9. How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP? We got to know from (specify)
·
Radio:------------------------------------
·
Newspaper: -------------------------------------------
·
Internet, e-mail networks: ---------------------------
·
Word of mouth:-----------------------------------
·
I was invited to submit the proposal: ----------------------------
·
Other: Mass-media ---------------------------------------------------
10. Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·
National SGP manager: V----------------------------------------------------------
·
People who have been involved in small projects before: -------------------
·
Relatives and friends: -------------------------------------------------------------
·
Other: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable?
Please explain if not
yes ------------------------------------------------------------
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
yes
12. Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes: -------------
No: V--------------
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel: ---------------------------------
Local Government: ------------------------------------
National SGP manager: -------------------------------
Please explain the nature of our difficulties:-------------------------
13. Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation? The
problem of creation the legal dumps turned out to be more complicated than it
seemed in the beginning. This is de to very strict federal restrictions and
legislation.
14. Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
·
Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen properly -V
·
Inappropriate guidelines of SGP
·
Inadequate contact with national SGP manager
15. What is your opinion about your project budget?
·
Just right Enough---------
·
Too much --------
·
Too small --------
16. How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·
Very good --------------
·
Good V--------------------
·
Satisfactory ------------
·
Bad ----------------------
17. Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project? The main project output is control over solid waste pollution in the given
area, which contributes to sustainable development of the territory of Gamov
peninsula. The activities under the project significantly reduce contamination of the
coastal waters and the adjacent territories of the Troitsa Bay. Creation of the solid
21
waste disposal grounds adds noticeably to conservation of the unique natural
complexes. The future objective is to keep maintaining as well as better equipping the
grounds for solid wastes. Also, the important issue in the future is to cooperate with
the local government in order to find more favourable legislative grounds for such a
valuable (from the conservation point of view) object operation in the future
18. Please list priority project type for future SGP that require urgent attention in your
area. Try to prioritize these!
1. Support creation of NGOs on the basis of local community.
2. Biodiversity conservation in the coastal area.
3. Financial aid and support of the nature protected areas ( in this particular area
Far Eastern State Marine Reserve, Nature Park Khasanskii, Barsovyi
Refuge).
Organizations Ouestionnaire
1. Organization: Educational TV Channel
2. Address : Fokina St., 18, Vladivostok, Primorskii krai, Russia
3. Project name and purpose: "You should know, love and protect the place you live
in" 3 TV programs will be made and broadcasted on local TV
4. Name of project leader and members
Project Leader Galieva Svetlana Project coordinator
Rupinets Elena Executor
Statsenko Anatolyi - Executor
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·
Solving social problems:
·
Increasing the standard of living:
·
Strengthening community awareness: V
·
Protecting environment and natural resources: V
·
Providing employment:
6. What kinds of products does the project produce?
The quality of environment has improved 3 video films and video plots on
environmental problems in the Tumen River basin; TV programs will be copied and
distributed among educational departments, libraries and schools-
7. Who benefited most from your project?
·
Local people: V----------------------------
·
Local authorities: ------------------------
·
Group implementing the project: -----
·
School age children: V--------------------
·
Students:V ---------------------------------
8. Project serves mostly for (specify), which is ....... % of the population.
·
Local community: -80%
·
Women:
22
·
Children:
·
Herders
·
Others: -20%
9. How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP? We got to know from (specify)
·
Radio:------------------------------------
·
Newspaper: -------------------------------------------
·
Internet, e-mail networks: ---------------------------
·
Word of mouth:V-----------------------------------
·
I was invited to submit the proposal: ----------------------------
·
Other ---------------------------------------------------
10. Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·
National SGP manager: ----------------------------------------------------------
·
People who have been involved in small projects before: -------------------
·
Relatives and friends: -------------------------------------------------------------
·
Other: Staff of Educational TV channel -------------------------------------------
11. Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable?
Please explain if not
yes ------------------------------------------------------------
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
yes
12. Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes: -------------
No: V--------------
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel: ---------------------------------
Local Government: ------------------------------------
National SGP manager: -------------------------------
Please explain the nature of our difficulties:-------------------------
13. Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation?
Lack of fuel in the remote places, not sufficient funding of the organization
14. Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
·
Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen properly V
·
Inappropriate guidelines of SGP
·
Inadequate contact with national SGP manager
15. What is your opinion about your project budget?
·
Just right ---------
·
Too much --------
·
Too small V--------
16. How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·
Very good --------------
·
Good --------------------
·
Satisfactory V ------------
·
Bad ----------------------
17. Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project? Trips to Khasanskii district were conducted. Scripts for the future video
programs were prepared. 4 informational environmental video plots were broadcasted
on Educational TV channel
23
18. Please list priority project type for future SGP that require urgent attention in your
area. Try to prioritize these!
1. Environmental education of the local young people.
Organizations Ouestionnaire
1. Organization: NGO "Environmental Center "My Planet"
2. Address: 690090, Oktyabrskaya St., 27, room 417,Vladivostok, Primorskii krai,
Russia
3. Project name and purpose: Development of youth movement on nature protection
in south-western part of Primorye Improvement of the qualification of the members
of the youth ecological movement.
4. Name of project leader and members
Project Leader Golobokova Elene Project coordinator
Korolev Sergei executor
Skripova Kira - executor
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·
Solving social problems:
·
Increasing the standard of living:
·
Strengthening community awareness: V
·
Protecting environment and natural resources: V
·
Providing employment:
6. What kinds of products does the project produce?
Qualification of the young inspectors have been improved, level of poaching has
reduced in the region
7. Who benefited most from your project?
·
Local people: V----------------------------
·
Local authorities: ------------------------
·
Group implementing the project: ------
·
School age children: --------------------
·
Students:V ---------------------------------
8. Project serves mostly for (specify), which is ....... % of the population.
·
Local community: V
·
Women:
·
Children:
·
Herders
·
Others:
9. How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP? We got to know from (specify)
·
Radio:V-----------------------------------
·
Newspaper: V------------------------------------------
·
Internet, e-mail networks: ---------------------------
·
Word of mouth:-----------------------------------
24
·
I was invited to submit the proposal: ----------------------------
·
Other: ---------------------------------------------------
10. Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·
National SGP manager: ----------------------------------------------------------
·
People who have been involved in small projects before: -------------------
·
Relatives and friends: -------------------------------------------------------------
·
Other: Local government, local community------------------------------------------
11. Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable?
Please explain if not:-----------------------------------
yes ------------------------------------------------------------
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
yes
12. Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes: -------------
No: V--------------
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel: ---------------------------------
Local Government: ------------------------------------
National SGP manager: -------------------------------
Please explain the nature of our difficulties:-------------------------
13. Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation? Yes
14. Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
·
Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen properly -V
·
Inappropriate guidelines of SGP
·
Inadequate contact with national SGP manager
15. What is your opinion about your project budget?
·
Just right
·
Too much --------
·
Too small Additional funding was required --------
16. How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·
Very good --------------
·
Good V--------------------
·
Satisfactory ------------
·
Bad ----------------------
17. Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project? At the first stage of the project conditions for work of youth environmental
non-governmental organization were created: Young members of the organization
were educated. Cooperation with governmental environmental structures of the
Khasanskii district was established
18. Please list priority project type for future SGP that require urgent attention in your
area. Try to prioritize these!
4. Environmental education of local community
5. Sustainable development of the Khasanskii district (Development of
ecological tourism)
6. Anti - poaching activities
Development of non-governmental organizations in the region
25
Organizations Ouestionnaire
1. Organization: Won-Buddhism Women's Association
2. Address : #412, 1-3 Heuksuk-dong, Dongjak-ku, Seoul 156-071 Korea
3. Project name and purpose: Children's Green Steps for Tumen River
4. Name of project leader and members
Project leader : Han, Jihyun (Korea)
Camp Counselor : Sa, Jinwon (Russia)
Moon, Youngsik (China)
Jang, Kumhee (Korea)
Jeong, Jiyeon (Korea)
Park, Jieun (Korea)
Guide : Kim, Jungsong (China)
Chang, Yong (China)
Kim, Haksoo (China)
Volunteers : Jun, Wongu (medical service)
Kim, Kwonjae (video recording)
Park, Kyungsuk (water pollution test)
Kwon, Sookkyung (drawing contest)
Participants : Choi, Hyunchul (China)
Ahn, Joonryung (China)
Lee, Miyung (China)
Cho, Moonah (China)
Moon, Yojin (China)
Yang, Hong (China)
Lee, Kwang (China)
Kim, Dongmae (China)
Cho, Keumdan (China)
Park, Hak-keun (China)
Choi, Misun (China)
Bang, Jun-ui (China)
Bang, Hyangran (China)
Kim, Ryomoon (China)
Choi, Enbyul (China)
Kim, Jiwon (Korea)
Lee, Youhyun (Korea)
Han, Jiwon (Korea)
Sa, Mijoo (Korea)
Kim, Saerom (Korea)
Kim, Wooram (Korea)
Park, Dukjun (Korea)
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·
Solving social problems:
·
Increasing the standard of living:
·
Strengthening community awareness: V
·
Protecting environment and natural resources: V
·
Providing employment:
26
6. What kinds of products does the project produce?
(1) Video recording tape
(2) Children's pictures (from drawing contest)
(3) Web community for participants' solidarity (under constructing)
7. Who benefited most from your project?
·
Local people: ------------V----------------
·
Local authorities: ------------------------
·
Group implementing the project: ------
·
School age children: ----------V----------
·
Students: --------------V-------------------
8. Project serves mostly for (specify), which is ....... % of the population.
·
Local community: 57%
·
Women: 63%
·
Children: 63%
·
Herders (Camp Counselor & Local guide): 23%
·
Others(Volunteers): 14%
9. How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP? We got to know from (specify)
·
Radio:------------------------------------
·
Newspaper: -------------------------------------------
·
Internet, e-mail networks: ---------------------------
·
Word of mouth:-----------------------------------
·
I was invited to submit the proposal: ---------V-------------------
·
Other: ---------------------------------------------------
10. Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·
National SGP manager: -------------V---------------------------------------------
·
People who have been involved in small projects before: -------------------
·
Relatives and friends: -------------------------------------------------------------
·
Other: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace: (((11. What is your opinion on SGP project selection procedure?
Selection is fair on competitive basis: ----------------------------
Selection is not satisfactory: ---------------------------------------
Do not know about their selection procedure: -------------------)))
11. Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable? Yes
Please explain if not
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal?
Yes, we were given some good guidelines for writing this proposal and there have
also been explanations by national SGP manager.
12. Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes: -------------
No: ------V--------
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel: ---------------------------------
Local Government: ------------------------------------
National SGP manager: -------------------------------
Please explain the nature of our difficulties:-------------------------
13. Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation?
27
1) There was not enough cooperation by local authorities. We were going to
invite Russian children for this camp but they couldn't come. The Chinese
Consulate in Khabarovsk refused to issue these children's visa for fear of
trafficking. We have explained several times and sent an official document
identifying this was a part of UN project, which turned to be fruitless. We
were sorry for the lacking of official interest not for the lacking of public
awareness.
2) The project could have been implemented more efficiently if the payment
process had been simple. We were informed that the fund would be granted
over three times $3,000 before the project, $1,500 after the project and
$500 after the report. But we came to know that this process is a little rigid
to face the dynamic situation. Moreover, we received $3,000, which was
supposed to grant before the project, on August 18th, 20 days after the
project completion. We have not received the rest yet. It disheartens the
project team spiritually and inflicts an economical loss due to the gap of
foreign exchange rate.
14. Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
·
Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen properly
·
Inappropriate guidelines of SGP
·
Inadequate contact with national SGP manager
15. What is your opinion about your project budget?
·
Just right ----V-----
·
Too much --------
·
Too small --------
16. How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·
Very good --------------
·
Good ----------V----------
·
Satisfactory ------------
·
Bad ----------------------
17. Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project?
We made a 10-minute videotape with the recordings of project activities. This is a
very brief material but we intend to launch an environmental education program with
this videotape as the foundation.
We have almost 40 pictures that children drew in the contest. Three prize pictures
are supposed to be sent to Beijing for making 2002 calendar of Tumen project.
Children also made some writings about their experiences and impressions after this
project. We carry these writings in WBWA's monthly newsletter and two of them
were also reported in a weekly newspaper.
We are building a web community for continuing communication among
participants and publicizing our program to increase public awareness.
We hope to establish annual (or regular) children's environmental summer camp at
Tumen river area rather than a one-time event through all these efforts.
18. Please list priority project type for future SGP that require urgent attention in your
area. Try to prioritize these!
Organizations Questionnaire
1. Organization: Chongshan Town Government
2. Address: Chongshan Town, Longjing City, Jilin Province, China
28
3. Project name and purpose: Protection of drinking water source in the upper
reaches of Tumen river of Chongshan town Longjing city
4. Name of project leader and members: Yin Xiangji
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·Solving social problems:
·Increasing the standard of living:
·Strengthening community awareness:
·Protecting environment and natural resources:
·Providing employment:
6. What kinds of products does the project produce? The activities of protection
Korean pine.
7.Who benefited most from your project?
·Local people:
·Local authorities:
·Group implementing the project:
·School age children:
·Students;
8.Project serves mostly for (specify), which is 100% of the population.
·Local community:
·Women:
·Children:
·Herders:
·Others:
9.How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP?
We got to know from (specify)
·Radio:
··Newspaper:
·Internet, e-mail networks:
·Word of mouth:
·I was invited to submit the proposal:
·Other:
10.Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·National SGP manager:
·People who have been involved in small projects before:
·Relatives and friends:
·Other:
11.Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable? Yes. There is a clear
guideline.
Please explain if not:
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
12.Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes:
No:
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel:..................................
Local Government:....................................
National SGP manager:...............................
Please explain the nature of our
difficulties:........................................................
29
13.Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation? Yes.
14.Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties? Fund.
·Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen
properly..................................
·Inappropriate guidelines of
SGP............................................................................
·Inadequate contact with national SGP manager.......................................
15.What is your opinion about your project budget?
·Just right...........
·Too much..............
·Too small ............
16.How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·Very good..................................
·Good
·Satisfactory...................................
·Bad.............................................
17.Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project
We finished works by plan.
Future objectives:
Pilot people to rid the unhealthy habit of littering at the riverside and guarantree the
water quality through environmental publicity and education and setting up garbage
treatment facilities.
18.Protect water source of Tumen river region and prevent international tour
resources.
Organizations Questionnaire
1. Organization: Correspondence Association Environmental Protection of Yanbian
Prefecture
2. Address: 136 Renmin Road, Yanji City, Jilin Province, China
3. Project name and purpose: Exemplary propaganda and education among rural
masses in Tumen region
4. Name of project leader and members: Jin Songzi
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·Solving social problems:
·Increasing the standard of living:
·Strengthening community awareness:
·Protecting environment and natural resources:
·Providing employment:
6. What kinds of products does the project produce?
7.Who benefited most from your project?
·Local people:
·Local authorities:
·Group implementing the project:
·School age children:
·Students;
8.Project serves mostly for (specify), which is 100 % of the population.
·Local community:
·Women:
·Children:
30
·Herders:
·Others:
9.How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP?
We got to know from (specify)
·Radio:
··Newspaper:
·Internet, e-mail networks:
·Word of mouth:
·I was invited to submit the proposal:
·Other:
10.Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·National SGP manager:
·People who have been involved in small projects before:
·Relatives and friends:
·Other:
11.Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable? Yes. There is a clear
guideline.
Please explain if not:
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
12.Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes:
No:
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel:..................................
Local Government:....................................
National SGP manager:...............................
Please explain the nature of our
difficulties:........................................................
13.Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation? No.
14.Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
·Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen
properly..................................
·Inappropriate guidelines of
SGP............................................................................
·Inadequate contact with national SGP manager.......................................
15.What is your opinion about your project budget?
·Just right...........
·Too much..............
·Too small ............
16.How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·Very good..................................
·Good
·Satisfactory...................................
·Bad.............................................
17.Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project?
Constructing toilets and making exhibits.
Future objectives:
31
Make bulletins of environmental protection education, workshop and distribute
propaganda materials for women.
18.(1) Protect wood frog.
(2)Protect Korean pine.
(3)Ecological tour publicity of environmental protection.
(4)Protect endangered species
Organizations Questionnaire
1. Organization: Society of Environmental Protection Science of Yanbian Prefecture
2. Address: 136 Renmin Road, Yanji City, Jilin Province, China
3. Project name and purpose: Exemplary conservation of natural forest in Tumen
region
4. Name of project leader and members: Ren Huanying
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·Solving social problems:
·Increasing the standard of living:
·Strengthening community awareness:
·Protecting environment and natural resources:
·Providing employment:
6. What kinds of products does the project produce?
7.Who benefited most from your project?
·Local people:
·Local authorities:
·Group implementing the project:
·School age children:
·Students;
8.Project serves mostly for (specify), which is 100 % of the population.
·Local community:
·Women:
·Children:
·Herders:
·Others:
9.How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP?
We got to know from (specify)
·Radio:
··Newspaper:
·Internet, e-mail networks:
·Word of mouth:
·I was invited to submit the proposal:
·Other:
10.Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·National SGP manager:
·People who have been involved in small projects before:
·Relatives and friends:
·Other:
11.Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable? Yes. There is a clear
guideline.
Please explain if not:
32
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
12.Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes:We think there are many project, but the SGP is lot.
No:
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel:..................................
Local Government:....................................
National SGP manager:...............................
Please explain the nature of our
difficulties:........................................................
13.Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation? No.
14.Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
·Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen
properly..................................
·Inappropriate guidelines of
SGP............................................................................
·Inadequate contact with national SGP manager.......................................
15.What is your opinion about your project budget?
·Just right...........
·Too much..............
·Too small ............
16.How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·Very good..................................
·Good
·Satisfactory...................................
·Bad.............................................
17.Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project?
(1) Held up workshop.
(2) Held up a course of lectures.
(3) There are 2 publicity tablets.
Future objectives:
Plant ecology trees.
18.(1) Build organic food and green food base.
(2)Build national level `Beautiful environmental town'.
Organization's Questionnaire
1. Organization: Industrial Association of Environmental Protection Science of
Yanbian Prefecture
2. Address: 136 Renmin Road, Yanji City, Jilin Province, China
3. Project name and purpose: Prevention and control of soil erosion of Mopan village
and villagers' awareness raising of environmental protection
4. Name of project leader and members: Shi Yanming
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·Solving social problems:
·Increasing the standard of living:
·Strengthening community awareness:
·Protecting environment and natural resources:
·Providing employment:
33
6. What kinds of products does the project produce?
7.Who benefited most from your project?
·Local people:
·Local authorities:
·Group implementing the project:
·School age children:
·Students;
8.Project serves mostly for (specify), which is % of the population.
·Local community:
·Women:
·Children:
·Herders:
·Others:
9.How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP?
We got to know from (specify)
·Radio:
··Newspaper:
·Internet, e-mail networks:
·Word of mouth:
·I was invited to submit the proposal:
·Other:
10.Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·National SGP manager:
·People who have been involved in small projects before:
·Relatives and friends:
·Other:
11.Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable? Yes. There is a clear
guideline.
Please explain if not:
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
12.Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes:
No:
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel:..................................
Local Government:....................................
National SGP manager:...............................
Please explain the nature of our
difficulties:........................................................
13.Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation? No.
14.Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
·Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen
properly..................................
·Inappropriate guidelines of
SGP............................................................................
·Inadequate contact with national SGP manager.......................................
15.What is your opinion about your project budget?
·Just right...........
·Too much..............
34
·Too small ............
16.How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·Very good..................................
·Good
·Satisfactory...................................
·Bad.............................................
17.Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project?
We finished some works by the plan.
18.(1) Protect Korean pine.
(2)Protect wood frog.
(3)Prevent soil erosion.
Organization Questionnaire
1. Organization: Number Two Primary School Attached to Baihe Forestry Bureau
Antu County
2. Address: Baihe Forestry Bureau, Antu County, Jilin Province, China
3. Project name and purpose: Construction of national green school and local
awareness raising of biodiversity protection
4. Name of project leader and members: Wang Guijun
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·Solving social problems:
·Increasing the standard of living:
·Strengthening community awareness:
·Protecting environment and natural resources:
·Providing employment:
6. What kinds of products does the project produce?
7.Who benefited most from your project?
·Local people:
·Local authorities:
·Group implementing the project:
·School age children:
·Students;
8.Project serves mostly for (specify), which is % of the population.
·Local community:
·Women:
·Children:
·Herders:
·Others:
9.How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP?
We got to know from (specify)
·Radio:
··Newspaper:
·Internet, e-mail networks:
·Word of mouth:
·I was invited to submit the proposal:
·Other:
35
10.Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·National SGP manager:
·People who have been involved in small projects before:
·Relatives and friends:
·Other:
11.Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable? Yes. There is a clear
guideline.
Please explain if not:
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
12.Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes:
No:
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel:..................................
Local Government:....................................
National SGP manager:...............................
Please explain the nature of our
difficulties:........................................................
13.Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation? No.
14.Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
·Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen
properly..................................
·Inappropriate guidelines of
SGP............................................................................
·Inadequate contact with national SGP
manager.............................................................
15.What is your opinion about your project budget?
·Just right..............
·Too much..............
·Too small ............
16.How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·Very good..................................
·Good
·Satisfactory...................................
·Bad.............................................
17 .Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project?
Broaden the environmental knowledge of natural resources and biodiversity of local
mass through students propagating. Raise students' awareness of environmental
protection, induce them to attach importance to the issue of environmental protection
policy, environmental resources, environmental morality.
Future objectives:
Raise the local mass' awareness of environmental protection.
Organization Questionnaire
1. Organization: Water Conservancy Station of Xiaoshahe Town Antu County
2. Address: Xiaoshahe Town, Antu County, Jilin Province, China
3. Project name and purpose: Raising villagers' environmental awareness and
promoting better life style in Xinpingling village
36
4. Name of project leader and members: Wang Qingshui
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·Solving social problems:
·Increasing the standard of living:
·Strengthening community awareness:
·Protecting environment and natural resources:
·Providing employment:
6. What kinds of products does the project produce?
7.Who benefited most from your project?
·Local people:
·Local authorities:
·Group implementing the project:
·School age children:
·Students;
8.Project serves mostly for (specify), which is % of the population.
·Local community:
·Women:
·Children:
·Herders:
·Others:
9.How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP?
We got to know from (specify)
·Radio:
··Newspaper:
·Internet, e-mail networks:
·Word of mouth:
·I was invited to submit the proposal:
·Other:
10.Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·National SGP manager:
·People who have been involved in small projects before:
·Relatives and friends:
·Other:
11.Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable? Yes. There is a clear
guideline.
Please explain if not:
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
12.Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes:
No:
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel:..................................
Local Government:....................................
National SGP manager:...............................
Please explain the nature of our
difficulties:........................................................
13.Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation? Yes.
14.Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
37
·Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen
properly..................................
·Inappropriate guidelines of
SGP............................................................................
·Inadequate contact with national SGP manager
15.What is your opinion about your project budget?
·Just right..............
·Too much..............
·Too small ............
16.How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·Very good
·Good
·Satisfactory...................................
·Bad.............................................
17.Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project?
We satisfied with the project.
Future objectives:
Raising the public awareness of protection waterhead.
Organizations Ouestionnaire
1. Organization: Traditional Medical Center of Khentii province
2. Address: Kherlen soum, Khentii province, Undurkhaan town
3. Project name and purpose: Healthy environment
4. Name of project leader and members:
R. Baigalmaa project leader
R. Khishgee member
D. Davaasuren member
Ts. Valyasuren member
S. Altantsetseg member
N. Bayart-Od member
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·
Solving social problems:
·
Increasing the standard of living:
·
Strengthening community awareness: +
·
Protecting environment and natural resources: +
·
Providing employment: +
6. What kinds of products does the project produce? We planted endurable medical
plants such as cranberry, caragana, dasiphora, barberry, and hippophae in 3 ha areas.
7. Who benefited most from your project?
·
Local people: + (especially women and elder people)
·
Local authorities:
·
Group implementing the project:
·
School age children: +
·
Students:
8. Project serves mostly for (specify), which is ....... % of the population.
38
·
Local community: +
·
Women: +
·
Children: +
·
Herders or farmers
·
Others:
9. How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP? We got to know from (specify)
·
Radio:
·
Newspaper:
·
Internet, e-mail networks:
·
Word of mouth: +
·
I was invited to submit the proposal:
·
Other:
10. Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·
National SGP manager: +
·
People who have been involved in small projects before: +
·
Relatives and friends:
·
Other:
11. What is your opinion on SGP project selection procedure?
Selection is fair on competitive basis: +
Selection is not satisfactory:
Do not know about their selection procedure:
12. Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable?
Yes: +
No:
Please explain if not:
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
Yes, we did.
13. Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes:
No: +
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel:
Local Government:
National SGP manager:
Please explain the nature of our difficulties:
14. Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation? Yes,
we had some unexpected difficulties. For example: We had to do the cultivation of a
soil 2 times. Also we had to exterminate rodents. The fund is not sufficient to carry
out these activities.
15. Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
·
Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen properly +
·
Inappropriate guidelines of SGP
·
Inadequate contact with national SGP manager
16. What is your opinion about your project budget?
·
Just right
·
Too much
·
Too small +
39
17. How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·
Very good
·
Good +
·
Satisfactory
·
Bad
18. Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project?
This project gave us a good opportunity to plant medical plants by ourselves. We
planted medical plants around the Traditional Medical Center and Children's camp in
3 ha areas. Our center will regularly use flowers, leaves and stems of the herbs for
medical treatment. Also it will reduce the expenditure for medicine. While planting
herbs, we are conducting trainings on planting and usage of medical plants among
children and local people. In the future we will extend the plantation area.
19. Please list priority project type for future SGP that require urgent attention in your
area. Try to prioritize these!
Organizations Ouestionnaire
1. Organization: Nature Conservation Council of Khentii province
2. Address: Room N52, Governor's Office, Khentii province, Undurkhaan town
3. Project name and purpose: Willow
4. Name of project leader and members
Project Leader L. Chuluun
member D. Batjargal
member N. Tumurbaatar
member G. Damdinjav
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·
Solving social problems:
·
Increasing the standard of living:
·
Strengthening community awareness: +
·
Protecting environment and natural resources: +
·
Providing employment: +
6. What kinds of products does the project produce?
We conducted training on cleaning up willow forest, preparation and plantation of
willow grafts and production of willow products for 34 people of 15 households and
employed 32 people. We prepared 500 willow grafts with collaboration of secondary
school. We produced 500 baskets, 300 brooms and 10 willow forks for collecting
dung.
7. Who benefited most from your project?
·
Local people: +
·
Local authorities:
·
Group implementing the project:
·
School age children:
·
Students:
40
8. Project serves mostly for (specify), which is ....... % of the population.
·
Local community: +
·
Women:
·
Children:
·
Herders
·
Others:
9. How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP? We got to know from (specify)
·
Radio: +
·
Newspaper: +
·
Internet, e-mail networks:
·
Word of mouth:
·
I was invited to submit the proposal:
·
Other
10. Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·
National SGP manager: +
·
People who have been involved in small projects before:
·
Relatives and friends:
·
Other: related experts
11. Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable?
Yes
Please explain if not
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
Yes
12. Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes:
No: +
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel:
Local Government:
National SGP manager:
Please explain the nature of our difficulties:
13. Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation? Yes,
we had.
14. Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
·
Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen properly: +
·
Inappropriate guidelines of SGP:
·
Inadequate contact with national SGP manager:
15. What is your opinion about your project budget?
·
Just right +
·
Too much
·
Too small
16. How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·
Very good
·
Good
·
Satisfactory +
·
Bad
41
17. Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project? The main objective of our project is to raise awareness of local people on
protection and appropriate use of willow along the Kherlen river. The future objective
is to exterminate willow fungus infections and to attract attention of local
administration and related environmental organisations. As today 40% of willow
around the Undurkhaan town is infected by the willow fungus.
18. Please list priority project type for future SGP that require urgent attention in your
area. Try to prioritize these!
Organizations Ouestionnaire
1. Organization: Ecotourism Association of Khentii province
2. Address: 4-33, Building C-79, Khentii province, Undurkhaan town
3. Project name and purpose: Ecotourism Development
4. Name of project leader and members:
B. Tumurbaatar project leader
B. Tumur member
D. Tumurbaatar member
D. Lkhagvaa member
L. Ganbaatar member
G, Sarankhuu member
5. In what area the SGP requirements were met by your project?
·
Solving social problems:
·
Increasing the standard of living: +
·
Strengthening community awareness: +
·
Protecting environment and natural resources: +
·
Providing employment: +
6. What kinds of products does the project produce?
a) We are producing national clothes, paintings, and woodcarvings related to history
and culture of Khentii province.
b) We bought and made operational 3 gers to receive domestic visitors.
c) We took about 150 photos of historical and cultural monuments related to history
of Great Chinggis Khaan and Khentii province for the creation of website.
d) We also produced video and photo album on the project implementation.
7. Who benefited most from your project?
·
Local people: +
·
Local authorities:
·
Group implementing the project:
·
School age children:
·
Students:
8. Project serves mostly for (specify), which is ....... % of the population.
·
Local community: +
·
Women:
·
Children:
·
Herders or farmers +
·
Others:
42
9. How did your project get to know about the possibility to apply for funding from
SGP? We got to know from (specify)
·
Radio:
·
Newspaper:
·
Internet, e-mail networks:
·
Word of mouth: +
·
I was invited to submit the proposal:
·
Other:
10. Who helped you to develop project proposal?
·
National SGP manager: +
·
People who have been involved in small projects before:
·
Relatives and friends:
·
Other:
11. What is your opinion on SGP project selection procedure?
Selection is fair on competitive basis: +
Selection is not satisfactory:
Do not know about their selection procedure:
12. Do you think the selection process is fair & equitable?
Yes: +
No:
Please explain if not:
Did you get clear guidance to writing a proposal? Please suggest improvements:
Yes, we did.
13. Have you had any problems to get approval for your project?
Yes:
No: +
If yes, with what did you have difficulties?
SGP Selection Panel:
Local Government:
National SGP manager:
Please explain the nature of our difficulties:
14. Have you had any unexpected difficulties during the project implementation? Yes.
15. Reasons for above-mentioned difficulties?
·
Conditions for project implementation were not foreseen properly +
·
Inappropriate guidelines of SGP
·
Inadequate contact with national SGP manager
16. What is your opinion about your project budget?
·
Just right
·
Too much
·
Too small +
17. How would you evaluate your project implementation?
·
Very good
·
Good +
·
Satisfactory
·
Bad
18. Give a short statement about your project outputs and future objectives for the
project?
43
A) The first tourism camp will be founded by local people in the Khentii province.
We established a ger camp, which has 10 beds, to receive local visitors. In the
future we will develop the capacity of this ger camp and receive foreign visitors.
B) We will create website on natural and cultural resources of Khentii province.
C) We will produce historical and cultural photo albums.
Annex 3 (Table 1)
Itinerary for the period 24 Oct 9Nov, 2001
Date
Time
Activities
Comments
Oct, 23
11.30
Arrive Zhou Ying at Ulaanbaatar and check into BayanGol
Hotel
13.00
Meeting in BayanGol Hotel and discuss itinerary of visit
Khentii province.
Oct, 24
9.30
Travel to Undurkhaan town by jeep
18.00
Check into Business Hotel
Oct 25,
9.30
Meeting with the Mr. Dashnyam, officer of local
Government of Khentii province
10.30
Meeting with recipients of SGP of Dornod and Sukhbaatar
provinces
14.00
Visit to the SGP sites of Khentii Provinces.
19.00
Leave Khentii town to Ulaanbaatar
23.00
Check into Tsenkher Hotel
Oct, 26
13.00
Arrive in Ulaanbaatar
27 28
Preparation of Questions for meeting with staff of SGP in
Oct
Russia, China and Korea.
Oct, 29
10.30
Travel to Harbin through Beijing and check into ...... Hotel
in Harbin
Oct, 30
10:30-
Travel to Vladivostok city by RF 134 Check into
19:30
Vladivostok Hotel
44
Meeting with Mr. V. Karakin, WWF, Russia
Meeting with Galieva Svetlana, the coordinator of the
project " You should know, love and protect the place you
live in"
Meeting with Golosokova Elina, coordinator, of the project
"Development of youth movement on nature protection in
south western primorye"
Oct, 31
09:30
Meeting with Mr. ....deputy Governor of Hasanskii district,
19.45
Travel to the Hasanskii district
Meeting with Saberlyak Tatyana, coordinator of the project
"Environmental education"
Visit to the project site on "Organization of solid wastes
dumping ground" and meeting with Naumov Vitalii,
coordinator of the project.
Meeting Mr. Molchanov, Coordinator of Project on the
"Liquidation of illegal dumping grounds in Khasan districts"
Nov, 1
09:00
Travel to Vladivostok and meeting with Oleg Sheiko and
17:00
Alexander Cheredenko, SAP PU, Russia.
Nov, 2
09:00
Travel of Zhou Ying to Harbin,
17:00
Badarch was stay in Vladivostok for obtaining of Korean
Visa.
Badarch met with Karakin, Ms. Fomenko and exchange
opinions on further implementation of project.
Nov, 3
11: 00
Mr. M. Badarch Travel to Hunchun city by bus and check
into Hunchun Hotel.
Nov, 4
Meeting with Li Yuan Xie, Vice director of environment
protection Burean of Hunchun city.
Meeting with Ms. Jin Songzi, Chief of environment
education center, Yanbian environment protection agent
Visit to the project on protection of rare wetland species in
Tumen Region and Meeting with Mr. Tianlong Shen,
Director of environment protection science of Hunchun city,
Coordinator of the above project.
Visit to the project on the awareness raising of
environmental protection in regional developing and
Meeting with Ms. Wang Qinju, coordinator of the above
project.
Travel to the Yanji city and check into Sung Bo hotel in
Yanji city.
Nov, 5
09:40-
Visit to the project site on exemplary propaganda and
17:00
education among rural masses in tumen Region and meeting
with Mr. Zhuang yujie, villeag leader and Ms. Dong
Xiouzhen, women community leader
Visit to the project site on save mother river Tumen River
action of Green children and meeting with Jin He Zhu,
Secretary general of Green federation of Yanbian Prefecture
and Mr. Jin zheng song, survey leader
45
Visit to the project on prevention and control of soil erosion
of Mopan village and villagers awareness raising of
environmental protection and meeting with Mr. Shi Song
Feng, director of Mopan village Committee
Nov, 6
9:30-
Meeting with Mr. Quan Qing Wu, Geo- institute, Yan Bian
14:30
University, implementer of project of Crane Monitoring
program by locals
Meeting with Mr. Li Guang, director of the Geo institute,
Yan Bian University
Travel to Shen yang by Flight CA and check into Airport
Hotel
Nov, 7
12.00
Travel to Seoul and check into Sejong Hotel
Visit to the Project site of the drawing, photographic contest
and art exhibition of the Tumen river, Korea
Nov, 8
9:30 -
Meeting with Ms. Park Eyunkyung, director of Institute of
17:30.
Environment and Culture, Korea
Meeting with all recipients of the SGPs in Republic of
Korea
Visit to the following project sites:
Crane Monitoring program by locals
Korean Federation for Environmental Movement
The Project on Children 's Green Steps for Tumen
River, Korea
Visit to the Korean Federation for Environmental
Movement
Nov, 9
9:30
Departure to Beijing and Ulaanbaatar
46
Document Outline