Project Success: Different Perspectives, Different Measurements

Abstract

Within Southeast Asia, the government of the Philippines has been a leader in decentralising management of natural resources to the local level. Between 1984 and 1994 more than 100 community-based resource management (CBRM) projects were undertaken. According to Pomeroy et al. (1996), the time, funds, and collective effort put into these projects have allowed implementers and participants to accumulate valuable knowledge in the area of CBRM. An overall evaluation by Pomeroy and Carlos (1997) revealed, however, that fewer than 20 per cent of these projects were identified as being successful. The criteria used to evaluate success were that the community organisation still existed and that at least a single project intervention was maintained after the project terminated. It may have been that the project components (alternative livelihood programmes, the installation of a protected area, or technology for increased fish production) were implemented at a time when the people were not ready for them, or that for the people the project components were not relevant, but why the majority of projects failed, is not clear. It is, however, not the scope of this chapter to discuss project failure, but to discuss how to measure failure, or, in that respect, project success. Indeed, a more in-depth study by Pomeroy et al. (1996) showed that while projects could be unsuccessful in the eyes of the implementers, the project participants did not necessarily perceive the projects as failures at all.