Summary Sheet for Result of Evaluation Study After the Project
1. Outline of the ProjectCountry: Malaysia

Project title: Technical Cooperation Programme for
Bornean Biodiversity and Ecosystems Conservation in
Sabah, Malaysia

Issue/Sector: Environment (naturalenvironment)

Cooperation scheme: Technical cooperation project

Division in charge: Forestry and Nature
Conservation Team 1, Global Environment
Department

Total cost (at the time of evaluation): 1.16 billion yen

Period of
Cooperation

Partner Country’s Implementing Organization: Institutefor Tropical Biology and Conservation, Universiti
Malaysia Sabah; Sabah Parks; Sabah Wildlife
Department; Science and Technology Unit of Sabah;
Sabah Forestry Department; Sabah Land and Survey
Department; Sabah Environment Protection
Department; Sabah Foundation; District Offices of
Crocker Range Area etc.

February 1, 2002 – January
31, 2007(Date of conclusion of R/D):
October 19, 2001
(Extension):(F/U):(E/N):

Supporting Organization in Japan: Ministry of theEnvironment, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and
Fisheries
Related Cooperation: Japan Overseas Cooperation
Volunteers (JOCVs)
1-1 Background of the Project
The rich forest ecosystems in Borneo holds an important position as an asset of humankind in terms ofthe conservation of biodiversity and prevention of global warming. However, without a well-establishedstructure to conserve this or sufficient understanding about the ecosystems and natural resources,
disorderly development has been causing deforestation. Under such circumstances, there was a request
for project-type technical cooperation based in the Institute for Tropical Biology and Conservation(ITBC), established in Universiti Malaysia Sabah.
As a result of the basic study in September 2000 and the programme formulation study for which a study
team was dispatched in February 2001 in response to the request, it was found out that the improvementof the situation would require not only research study of biodiversity but also improvement ofadministrative capacities for reserve management, environmental education etc. and comprehensive
approach in collaboration with all these activities. Therefore, agreement was made on a proposal of aframework for a nature conservation programme consisting of 4 components to be carried out by
Universiti Malaysia Sabah and 9 related implementing organizations in Sabah State.
After that, during the first short-term study from July to September 2001, PgDM, PDM and PO weredeveloped, and during the second short-term study in October 2001, R/D was signed on October 19 after
confirmation of the implementation system of the Malaysian side etc. After these processes, the Bornean
Biodiversity and Ecosystems Conservation (BBEC) Programme was carried out during the five year

cooperation period from February 1, 2002, to January 31, 2007. In this programme, mid-term evaluation
was conducted from November to December 2004.
1-2 Project Overview(1) Overall Goal
Biodiversity and ecosystems conservation in Sabah is strengthened.
(2) Programme Purpose
A comprehensive and sustainable approach for nature conservation is established.
(3) Outputs
Output 1:
Integration of monitoring systems among components for comprehensive nature conservation isstrengthened.
Output 2:
Appropriate models for education and research for nature conservation are established.
(Project purpose of the Research and Education Component (REC))
Output 3:
Models and options for effective reserve management are developed.
(Project purpose of the Park Management Component (PMC))
Output 4:
An approach for comprehensive habitat management for important species is established.
(Project purpose of the Habitat Management Component (HMC))
Output 5:
A model to change target people’s attitude toward biodiversity conservation is established.
(Project purpose of the Public Awareness Component (PAC))
Output 6:
A more permanent framework based on comprehensive nature conservation modelled is developed in
the Programme.
Output 7:
Plans, progress and results of the Programme are released to the public.
(4) Inputs (at the time of evaluation)
Japanese side:
Long-term Expert: 19 persons in total (365.0M/M)
Short-term Expert: 31 persons in total (48.7M/M)
Equipment: Approx. 290 million yen
Training of counterparts: 57 persons
Administrative cost: 4 million R.M. in total (approx. 120 million yen)
Malaysian side:
Assignment of counterparts and staff: 117 persons in total
Administration costs for land, buildings and facilities- Research and Education Component: 564,000 RM (approx. 16.92 million yen)
- Park Management Component: 1,094,800 RM (approx. 32 million yen)
- Habitat Management Component: 188,599 RM (approx. 5.66 million yen)- Public Awareness Component: 436,473 RM (approx. 13.09 million yen)
II. Evaluation Team
Members of
Evaluation Team(Specialized field: name, title)(1) Team Leader: Yukihide KATSUTA, Group Director, Group 1, Global
Environment Department, JICA
(2) Environmental Cooperation: Reiji HIGASHIOKA, Senior Research Coordinator,
Planning Office, Planning Department, National Institute for Environmental Studies(3) Nature Conservation: Motohiro HASEGAWA, Senior Expert, JICA
(4) Evaluation Planning: Daigo SASAKI, Forestry and Nature Conservation Team 1,
Group 1, Global Environment Department, JICA
(5) Evaluation Analysis: Yoji MIZUGUCHI, Nippon Koei Co., Ltd.

Period of
Evaluation

August 14 - September 9, 2006

Type of Evaluation: Terminal

III. Results of Evaluation
3-1 Confirmation of Results(1) Programme Outputs
Output 1: Integration of monitoring systems among components for comprehensive nature
conservation is strengthened.
A monitoring system, which was introduced in April 2003 and corrected in October of the same year,
has been used for progress management of each component and program activities. Through four-level
regular meetings (Programme Steering Committee, Component Heads Meeting, Working Groups ofeach component and Joint-Secretariat Meeting), consideration, preparation and evaluation concerning
communisation activities among components are conducted at the same time as project monitoring.
Output 2: Appropriate models for education and research for nature conservation are established.
(Research and Education Component (REC))
Research based on conservation biology and taxonomy and an educational model based on the
research result have been established. Exhibitions and seminars are regularly held as part of education,and some of the research results were fed back to the biodiversity conservation and management
activities. However, the model needs to be further enhanced so that the research results will contributeto the conservation and management activities.
Output 3: Models and options for effective reserve management are developed.
(Park Management Component (PMC))Management models and options effective in park management such as introduction of Community
Use Zones (CUZ), certification of honorary park wardens and proposal of ecotourism, have beendeveloped in the Crocker Range Park Management Plan. Especially for CUZ, it is planned that
discussion will be held with model rural communities located in the park and a letter of consent withthe residents concerning CUZ management will be created and agreed on within the programme
period.
Output 4: An approach for comprehensive habitat management for important species is established.
(Habitat Management Component (HMC))
Reserve management with resident participation and ecotourism led by residents have been plannedand carried out in a pilot area with the participation of 11 concerned parties including local residents(District Office, Department of Fisheries. NGOs, tour companies, plantation managers etc.). In
addition to integrative activities carried out within the scope of the component, such as obtainment ofapproval of the Sabah State government on a newly applied-for Lower Segama Wildlife Conservation
Arear and establishment of the Borneo Conservation Trust, the above-described conservation activities
with resident participation have also been producing good results.
Output 5: A model to change target people’s attitude toward biodiversity conservation is established.
(Public Awareness Component (PAC))
Support for capacity improvement has been provided and development of teaching materials havebeen carried out for the five target groups (teachers, non-environmental NGOs, journalists, policy
makers and developers) that will be major actors in enlightenment, dissemination and environmental
education in Sabah State so that they could carry out enlightenment, dissemination and environmental
education activities. Moreover, environmental education policy to support activities of each group is
being developed and will be presented to the state government in December 2006.
Output 6: A more permanent framework based on comprehensive nature conservation modelled isdeveloped in the Programme.
A framework to maintain activities of each component is under study. It is planned that environmental
education policy (PAC), proposal for integration of protected areas (PMC and HMC) and proposal for
integration of research, maintenance and management (REC) will be created and presented to the state
government by December 2006. It is also planned that the integration framework for the four
components will be created and presented before the termination of the programme, but the study
among components seems insufficient.
Output 7: Plans, progress and results of the Programme are released to the public.
The programme has been reported and presented by the media over 700 times as of July 2006. The
website of the programme is available in English, Malay and Japanese, and the hit count is over
117,000 as of August 2006.
(2) Programme Purpose
All the programme purposes except the proposal of a permanent framework at the programme level
have been almost achieved. As for the permanent frameworks, draft frameworks at the component
level have been almost completed. These frameworks will be finalized and study will be conductedconcerning the framework at the programme level. And they will be presented to the state government
before the termination of the Programme. Major achievements are as shown below.
(a) Many joint activities (field survey, setting and investigation of permanent study areas, holding ofinternational conferences, enlightenment and dissemination activities, biweekly seminars etc.)
have been carried out.
(b) Organizations that were not BBEC implementing organizations (rural communities, Departmentof Fisheries, tour companies, NGOs etc.) have participated in management of Crocker Range Parkor management of the proposed Lower Segama Wildlife Conservation Area. Personnel of the
Department of Education, teachers, policy makers, developers, journalists and non-environmental
NGOs have participated in environmental education activities.
(c) Each component will prepare policies and proposals concerning the frameworks to maintainactivities after the termination of the Programme and present them to the state government inDecember 2006.
(3) Overall Goals
The overall goals are expected to be achieved to some extent in the next five years for the following
grounds and reasons.
(a) In case environmental education policy is approved by the state government, the government will
support educational activities for biodiversity conservation and environmental education activities
will be carried out with the participation of many organizations.
(b) In case the proposal concerning integration of reserves is approved by the state government,
Integrative Reserve Management Committee (tentative name), consisting of over 10 organizations
including the Wildlife Department and the Sabah Parks, will be established and they will
cooperate in maintaining the reserves in the state.
(c) Borneo Conservation Trust is expected to contribute to the conservation of important wildlife
habitats outside reserves.
(d) Candidate areas identified by HMC may be approved as reserves through the same process as thatfor the proposed Lower Segama Wildlife Conservation Area.
(e) It is expected to be difficult to continue comprehensive conservation activities after thetermination of the Programme unless a comprehensive framework that will integrate four
components is established.
3-2 Summary of Evaluation Results(1) Relevance
It is judged that the “relevance of the Programme is fully secured” for the following reasons.
(a) There is a sufficient level of consistency with policies of the federal government of Malaysia andSabah State government.
(b) There is consistency between the missions and roles of the implementing organizations, which are
the target groups, and activities of each component.
(c) There is consistency with the ODA policies of the Japanese government.
(d) Continuous conservation of world-class biodiversity and ecosystem meets worldwide needs.
(2) EffectivenessThe effectiveness of the Programme is “satisfactory” for the following reasons.
(a) The project purposes except the one for the permanent framework at the programme level havebeen mostly achieved. For the permanent framework at the programme level, further study should
be conducted among components.
(b) All the outputs except Output 1 and Output 7 are directly linked to the achievement of the
programme purpose. Output 1 and Output 7 also contribute to the achievement of the purpose inan effective and efficient manner. Therefore, the logical effectiveness of the whole Programme ishigh.
(c) The external factor of “continuation of policy support from Sabah State” has been satisfactorythroughout the Programme.
(3) Efficiency
The efficiency of the whole programme is judged “satisfactory”. Major reasons are as follows.
(a) All the outputs except Output 6 have been achieved or almost achieved.

(b) The inputs from the Japanese and Malaysian sides have been mostly appropriate in terms oftiming, quality and quantity.
(c) The monitoring system introduced in 2003 has promoted sharing and communisation among
implementing organizations concerned as well as having enabled efficient programmemanagement.
(4) Impact
The positive impacts that have been generated by this time or are expected to be generated are as
follows.
(a) Cross-organizational cooperation, which was rarely seen before the implementation of theProgramme, has been promoted and strengthened.
(b) The five target groups concerning enlightenment and dissemination, which had no relevance toeach other, have started exchange views and opinions concerning the ecosystems conservationand environmental education in Sabah State.
(c) As a result of the management activities with residents’ participation, residents in and aroundreserves have become cooperative in ecosystem conservation activities.
(d) Organizations and agencies other than BBEC related organizations have participated in ecosystemconservation activities and become aware of the importance of the activities.
(e) Some ministers and politicians have become interested in the conservation of biodiversity andecosystem.
The negative impacts that may be generated are as follows.
(f) In case the rural communities that have concluded the agreement concerning the use of CUZ in
the Crocker Range Park do not get enough support for livelihood improvement and land use
management, CUZ may not be appropriately used.
(g) In case a large number of tourists visit Dagat Village (a village where ecotourism is carried out at
the initiative of the residents) in the proposed Lower Segama Wildlife Conservation Area andthere is not enough support for the improvement of organizational and financial management
capacities of the village, discord may arise in the village.
(5) Sustainability
The sustainability of the whole programme is evaluated as “moderate to satisfactory”. The grounds are
as stated below.
(a) As biodiversity and ecosystem conservation, the major task of the programme, is consistent withthe policies of the federal and state governments, policy support is expected to continue.
(b) The frameworks to continue component activities are being considered and prepared at thecomponent level and a proposal will be presented to the state government by December 2006.
(c) Although it is planned that the framework at the programme level will be prepared before thetermination of the Programme, it seems that it is still in the study phase and ideas are not fully
shared among components. Further consideration will have to be made among components.
(d) The state and federal governments are expected to continue to allocate their budget to eachcomponent.
(e) Each component has enough technical capacities to continue the ongoing activities, and notechnical difficulties are seen in programme management. However, they still do not possess
sufficient capacities in new technical areas or for activities that require a high level of technicalskills.
3-3 Factors that Promoted Realization of Effects(1) Factors Concerning to Planning(a) Comprehensive activities for biodiversity conservation were carried out with the participation ofmany implementing organizations.
(b) A monitoring system was introduced in an early stage of the Programme.
(c) The purposes of the components were adjusted to the needs of the implementing organizations.
(2) Factors Concerning to the Implementation Process(a) The implementing organizations were aware of the important of the Programme and eachcomponent and exercised a high level of ownership.
(b) Awareness of biodiversity conservation among high-level state government officials and powerfulpoliticians has been raised.
3-4 Factors that Impeded Realization of Effects(1) Factors Concerning to Planning(a) Understanding of the “permanent frameworks”, which was one of the outputs, was not fully
shared among the persons concerned in the Programme.
(b) Understanding of the necessity of data sharing through MUSEBASE differed in ITBC, the Sabah
Forestry Department (Forest Research Institute) and Sabah Parks.
(2) Factors Concerning to the Implementation Process(a) Change of experts caused a lack of understanding of some activities and led to a delay.
(b) Due to delay in delivery of GPS devices from a vendor and failure of GPS devices, installation of
GPS devices on elephants is delayed.
3-5 Conclusion(1) It is judged that each of the four components that make up the Programme (Research and Education,
Park Management, Habitat Management, and Public Awareness) has achieved or is expected toachieve its project purpose.
(2) All the components are preparing a permanent framework within the scope of its activities, and theactivities of each component are expected to continue after the termination of the Programme.
(3) As for the whole Programme, the establishment of an organizational framework is being finalized sothat the Programme purpose will be achieved. However, further discussion needs to be carried out
among the components.
3-6 Recommendations (Specific Measures, Suggestions and Advice Related to the Programme)(1) As for the whole Programme, the document showing an “organizational framework for integration”
that is now being prepared will have to be actually created by the termination of the Programme. The
organizational framework to integrate the four components will have to be established andmaintained after the termination of the Programme. Moreover, it is hoped that the cooperation modelobtained through the implementation of BBEC that many organizations achieve a single purpose
through cooperation and coordination will be utilized in other states of Malaysia.
(2) Research and Education Component (REC) will have to assign technicians to maintain and manage

biodiversity information database (MUSEBASE) before the termination of the Programme. For
activities after the Programme termination, research, education, application to actual management
and better linkage will be required.
(3) Park Management Component (PMC) and Public Awareness Component (PAC) have to obtainapproval from the Sabah State government on the Crocker Range Park Management Plan and theenvironmental education policy by the termination of the Programme. After the completion of theProgramme, they will have to be steadily carried out and monitored.
(4) Common requirements for all the components including ecotourism of Habitat Management
Component (HMC) are technical improvement of the counterparts, staff assignment etc.
3-7 Lessons Learned (Cases from this projects that may be a reference for the discovery, formulation,
implementation, and operation for other similar projects)(1) Comparative advantages of a comprehensive approach:
The fact that many government organizations and relevant parties took a comprehensive and sustained
approach to the common goal of biodiversity and ecosystem conservation in Sabah State shows asynergy effect that could not have been obtained if each sector had taken a separate approach.
(2) Notes and difficulties in an integrative approach:
It is hard not to feel that the involvement of many organizations, relevant parties, experts etc. in the
Programme made it difficult to coordinate activities etc. Although it is considered important that
activity-level integration of a programme produces a synergy effect, it requires strong leadership andsupport and understanding of high-level government officials, and for this, long-term activities are
required.
(3) Importance of a monitoring system:
With a well-developed internal monitoring system, BBEC summarizes the results of monitoring
concerning the achievement of inputs, activities, outputs etc. into a progress report every six months
and obtains approval from the Joint Coordination Committee. This monitoring system contributed tothe steady implementation of the Programme.
(4) Effect of cooperation with various parties concerned:
In cooperation with district offices, Sabah Parks introduced Community Use Zone (CUZ) as a system
to resolve land issues with the residents living in the parks. The existence of the local government unit
contributed to the establishment of a relationship with local residents. Sabah Wildlife Department
cooperates with district offices, NGOs etc. in the implementation of ecotourism led by local residents.
Cooperation between community-based organizations and other organizations concerned is an
important factor in resource management in a local community.
3-8 Follow-up status
A document showing “organizational frameworks for integration” will be created around November 2006
to achieve the purpose of the Program Phase I. At the same time, opinions about Phase II will be collectedfrom persons concerned on the Malaysian side. Support will also be provided to issue analysis andobjective analysis workshops as needed.