How the ACB, through the Small Grants Programme, capacitated the local communities in the buffer zone of Meinmahla Kyun Wildlife Sanctuary (MKWS) in restoring the mangrove forest and develop livelihood activities that will support the restoration efforts.
Since the project started, mangrove trees have become a new source of business for nearby villages in MKWS. Increased awareness and involvement in the mangrove restoration show promising success in providing alternative, more sustainable livelihoods for locals, helping them shift away from illegal activities.
Apart from purchasing seedlings from local communities’ nurseries, MERN formed “Cash for Work” activities, where villagers got compensated for various types of jobs such as land clearing in mixed plantation areas and digging up water ways for ecological mangrove restoration.
What distinguishes the MKWS from other mangrove restoration projects was the creation of a revolving fund scheme in 12 villages to support their livelihood while contributing to mangrove restoration.
MERN trained 32 representatives from the 12 villages on the importance of mangroves and the revolving fund.
Together with MERN, the 12 villages then held a series of consultation meetings to discuss the purpose and objective of the revolving fund and whether it is relevant to their needs. The 12 village revolving fund committees were established under the livelihood component of the project to supervise the activities in the post-project period.
A central revolving fund committee was also formed to supervise the project, determine the responsibilities and obligations of the members, and ensure the implementation of the activities and the systematic operation of the revolving fund. The committee members also jointly select the beneficiaries according to the criteria that they have set.
“To qualify, an applicant must be a permanent resident of the village, must be a participant in the mangrove establishment activities of the project, must be capable of implementing his or her proposed income-generating activities which is supported by five guarantors. If not involved in the project activities, the applicant must be extremely poor,” explained Thein Lwin, Chairperson of the central revolving fund management committee.
According to Tun Tun Zaw, Project Officer of MERN, included in the category of “extremely poor” are individuals who do not have stable jobs or financial security. These are casual workers or those without consistent employment. Members whose proposals will be approved for loans from the revolving fund would invest their money in livelihood activities and pay back the money with a low interest rate of between 1.5 to 3 per cent monthly. “To give back to the community members who participated in the mangrove restoration activities, and further encourage others to follow suit, their proposals are prioritised for approval,” Thein Lwin said.
The revolving fund process begins with the signing of a contract between MERN and the central revolving fund committee. Next, another contract is signed between the central revolving fund committee and village revolving fund committee. Finally, a contract is signed between the village revolving fund committee and the selected beneficiaries.
Funds are distributed monthly to village beneficiaries who utilise the funds for any income- generating activity they choose. Separate bank accounts have been opened for the relevant village revolving fund committees. Therevolving funds must be repaid within the year, and at the specified time. Before the next rotation, the centralcommittee would assess the status of the activity implemented by the current beneficiary. Only after considering the merits of the activity will they approve the beneficiary to qualify for the next rotation. Revolving funds will be re-disbursed after considering the merits. In the last month of the specified period, all funds issued must be returned to the bank. The returns or profits from the village development activities supported by the revolving fund are used proportionately for the conservation of MKWS.
To ensure the success of this livelihood component, beneficiaries received capacity building that were conducted on the revolving fund concept and management, livestock raising particularly pigs and ducks, as well as crab fattening.
Beneficiaries were also trained to operate the revolving fund, to develop their organisational skills, and to practise collective decision-making.
One criticism levelled against the selection mechanism for beneficiaries is its limitation to those who took part in the mangrove nursery and, therefore, was not inclusive of everyone in the community. The rationale behind these criteria, according to MERN, is to foster a sense of responsibility among community members and shift away from the dole-out system. More members of the community will eventually be involved after the initial rounds if the revolving funds perform well.
Overall, the communities remain enthusiastic about the project and are looking for ways to further improve its implementation. One recommendation to ensure its sustainability is to increase the participation ofyouth and women in the village revolving fund committee.
For the communities surrounding MKWS, turning the tide on mangrove loss has changed their lives for the better, offering them a spark of hope for improved biodiversity and economic empowerment in the years to come.
