© NBCBN 2010
Applied Methodologies and Guidelines
for Carrying out CBA, RA and SEA for the Nile Basin
Riparian Countries
By
Mohd El Muntasir
Mohamed M Abdel-latif
Margaret Aanyu
Irene Nansubuga
Bennie Mang’eni
Jovah Ndyaberena
Nyende Jacob
Coordinated by
Dr. Zablon Isaboke Oonge
University of Nairobi
Scientific Advisors
Ir. Joop de Schutter
Dr. Lindsay Beevers
UNESCO-IHE
2010
Produced by the
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network
(NBCBN-SEC) office
Disclaimer
The designations employed and presentation of material and findings through the publication don’t imply the expression of any opinion
whatsoever on the part of NBCBN concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city, or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation
of its frontiers or boundaries.
Copies of NBCBN publications can be requested from:
NBCBN-SEC Office
Hydraulics Research Institute
13621, Delta Barrages, Cairo, Egypt
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.nbcbn.com
Images on the cover page are property of the publisher
©NBCBN 2010
Project Title
Knowledge Networks for the Nile Basin
Using the innovative potential of Knowledge Networks and CoP’s in strengthening human and
institutional research capacity in the Nile region.
Implementing Leading Institute
UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education, Delft, The Netherlands (UNESCO-IHE)
Partner Institutes
Ten selected Universities and Ministries of Water Resources from Nile Basin Countries.
Project Secretariat Office
Hydraulics Research Institute – Cairo - Egypt
Beneficiaries
Water Sector Professionals and Institutions in the Nile Basin Countries
Short Description
The idea of establishing a Knowledge Network in the Nile region emerged after encouraging
experiences with the first Regional Training Centre on River Engineering in Cairo since 1996. In
January 2002 more than 50 representatives from all ten Nile basin countries signed the Cairo
Declaration at the end of a kick-off workshop was held in Cairo. This declaration in which the main
principles of the network were laid down marked the official start of the Nile Basin Capacity
Building Network in River Engineering (NBCBN-RE) as an open network of national and regional
capacity building institutions and professional sector organizations.
NBCBN is represented in the Nile basin countries through its nine nodes existing in Egypt, Sudan,
Ethiopia, Tanzania, Uganda, Kenya, Rwanda, Burundi and D. R. Congo. The network includes six
research clusters working on different research themes namely: Hydropower, Environmental
Aspects, GIS and Modelling, River Morphology, flood Management, and River structures.
The remarkable contribution and impact of the network on both local and regional levels in the basin
countries created the opportunity for the network to continue its mission for a second phase. The
second phase was launched in Cairo in 2007 under the initiative of; Knowledge Networks for the
Nile Basin. New capacity building activities including knowledge sharing and dissemination tools
specialised training courses and new collaborative research activities were initiated. The different
new research modalities adopted by the network in its second phase include; (i) regional cluster
research, (ii) integrated research, (iii) local action research and (iv) Multidisciplinary research.
By involving professionals, knowledge institutes and sector organisations from all Nile Basin
countries, the network succeeded to create a solid passage from potential conflict to co-operation
potential and confidence building between riparian states. More than 500 water professionals
representing different disciplines of the water sector and coming from various governmental and
private sector institutions selected to join NBCBN to enhance and build their capacities in order to
be linked to the available career opportunities. In the last ten years the network succeeded to have
both regional and international recognition, and to be the most successful and sustainable capacity
building provider in the Nile Basin.
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 PURPOSE OF STUDY ............................................................................................................................. 2
1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY .............................................................................................................. 2
2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................................................. 3
2.1 THE NILE BASIN .................................................................................................................................. 3
2.1.1 Background Information ................................................................................................................. 3
2.1.2 Vision of the Nile Basin Riparian Countries ................................................................................... 4
2.1.3 Strategic Goal .................................................................................................................................. 4
2.1.4 Legal Framework for the Sustainable Management of the Nile Waters .......................................... 4
2.1.5 NBCs Shared Water Resources Management Issues and Challenges ............................................. 5
2.1.6 Review of the River Basins in the Nile Basin ................................................................................. 6
2.2 RIVER ENGINEERING ......................................................................................................................... 10
2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF RIVER ENGINEERING ........................................................................ 10
2.4 REVIEW OF DONOR INSTITUTIONS‘‘ APPRAISAL METHODS .............................................................. 10
2.5 DEVELOPMENT OF METHODS & GUIDELINES FOR CBA, RA & SEA ................................................ 14
3 STUDY METHODOLOGY AND DATA INTERPRETATION .................................................................. 23
3.1 BACKGROUND TO METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 23
3.2 CASE STUDIES .................................................................................................................................... 23
3.3 SEMI-STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE................................................................................................. 23
3.4 DATA ANALYSIS PLAN ...................................................................................................................... 24
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS .................................................................................................................. 25
4.1 REVIEW OF GOVERNMENT OF KENYA PRACTICE .............................................................................. 25
4.1.1. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 25
4.1.2. SCREENING AND SCOPING ............................................................................................................. 25
4.1.3. LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................................................... 25
4.1.4. STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT AND COMMUNICATION ................................................................ 25
4.1.5. MONITORING AND EVALUATION ................................................................................................... 26
4.1.6. PLANNING TOOLS AND PROCESSES IDENTIFIED ............................................................................ 26
4.1.7. MAJOR MILESTONES IN ESTABLISHING AN SEA FRAMEWORK ..................................................... 28
4.2 CASE STUDY I: SEA ON BECA RESEARCH WORK-ILRI .................................................................... 30
4.3 CASE STUDY II: SEA FOR THE KENYA FORESTS ACT 2005-WORLD BANK .................................. 33
4.4 CASE STUDY III: SSEA FOR BUJJAGALI HYDROPOWER PROJECT IN UGANDA ................................. 37
4.4.1. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 37
4.4.2. SUMMARY OF THE SEA PROCESS .................................................................................................. 37
4.4.3. BUJAGALI HYDROPOWER PROJECT ............................................................................................... 38
4.4.4. THE SEA PROCESS ......................................................................................................................... 38
4.5 CASE STUDY IV: SEA FOR IRRIGATION MODERNIZATION IN EGYPT ................................................ 42
4.6 CASE STUDY V: SEA FOR POWER DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS IN THE NELSAP ................................. 57
4.7 MAIN OUTPUT OF STUDY: MODEL FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERTAKING AN SEA ................................ 59
4.7.1. Definition of variables for the model ........................................................................................ 59
4.7.2. Analysis in an SEA .................................................................................................................... 60
4.7.2.1 Qualitative Analysis .................................................................................................................. 60
4.7.2.2 Quantitative Analysis ................................................................................................................ 60
5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................... 65
5.1 CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................................... 65
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................................................... 66
6 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................... 67
LIST OF RESEARCH GROUP MEMBERS .................................................................................................... 68
APPENDIX
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1: Tools Used in SEA and Related Processes (Policy, Plan and Program Levels) ............................. 29
Figure 4.2: SEA on BecA Research Work done by ILRI .................................................................................. 33
Figure 4.3: Kenya Forests Act (2005) Institution – Centered SEA Process (The WB) .................................... 34
Figure 4.4: The Deduced SEA Framework for Bujjagali ................................................................................. 42
Figure 4.5: Irrigation and Drainage System in Beni Ebid Area in Egypt .......................................................... 44
Figure 4.6: Deduced SSEA Framework of the NELSAP Automatic Downstream Water Level Control ......... 49
Figure 4.7: Low Pressure Pipeline Mesqa ......................................................................................................... 49
Figure 4.8: Deduced SSEA Framework of the NELSAP .................................................................................. 59
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Water Resources availability and utilization in the Nile basin ........................................................... 3
Table 2.2: Water portioning for Lake Victoria .................................................................................................... 5
Table 2.3: Total number of Dams in the World .................................................................................................. 7
Table 2.4: Examples of large dams planned or being built in some of the NBRCs ............................................ 8
Table 2.5: Institutional and Regulatory Frameworks for EA in NBRCs ............................................................. 9
Table 2.6: From SEA to project‘ EIA in the Netherlands tiering approach ...................................................... 19
Table 3.1: The framework thematic analysis ..................................................................................................... 24
Table 4.1: PESTLE Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 27
Table 4.2: SWOT Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 27
Table 4.3: Risks mitigation and management for BecA hosted Research activities ......................................... 32
Table 4.4: Screening criteria for BecA-hosted research projects ...................................................................... 32
Table 5.1: Summary of SEA Framework .......................................................................................................... 63
This report is one of the final outputs of the research activities under the second phase of the Nile Basin Capacity Building Network
(NBCBN). The network was established with a main objective to build and strengthen the capacities of the Nile basin water
professionals in the field of River Engineering. The first phase was officially launched in 2002. After this launch the network has
become one of the most active groupings in generating and disseminating water related knowledge within the Nile region. At the
moment it involves more than 500 water professionals who have teamed up in nine national networks (In-country network nodes)
under the theme of “Knowledge Networks for the Nile Basin”. The main platform for capacity building adopted by NBCBN is
“Collaborative Research” on both regional and local levels. The main aim of collaborative research is to strengthen the individual
research capabilities of water professionals through collaboration at cluster/group level on a well-defined specialized research theme
within the field of River and Hydraulic Engineering.
This research project was developed under the “Cluster Research Modality”. This research modality is activated through
implementation of research proposals and topics under the NBCBN research clusters: Hydropower Development, Environmental
Aspects of River Engineering, GIS and Modelling Applications in River Engineering, River Morphology, flood Management, and
River structures.
This report is considered a joint achievement through collaboration and sincere commitment of all the research teams involved with
participation of water professionals from all the Nile Basin countries, the Research Coordinators and the Scientific Advisors.
Consequently the NBCBN Network Secretariat and Management Team would like to thank all members who contributed to the
implementation of these research projects and the development of these valuable outputs.
Special thanks are due to UNESCO-IHE Project Team and NBCBN-Secretariat office staff for their contribution and effort done in
the follow up and development of the different research projects activities.
ADB Asian Development Bank
ADF African Development Fund
AfDB African Development Bank
AMCOW African Ministers‘ Council on Water
CBA Cost Benefit Analysis
COP Community of Practice
DSS Decision Support System
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EMCA Environmental Management Coordination Act
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EU European Union
FAO Food and Agricultural Organization
GIS Geographic Information Systems
HEP Hydro Electric Power
IGAAD Inter-government Authority on Development
IWRM Integrated Water Resources Management
KNNB Knowledge Networks for the Nile Basin
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
NAAEC North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement
NBCBN Nile Basin Capacity Building Network
NBCBN-RE Nile Basin Capacity Building Network for River Engineering
NBI Nile Basin Initiative
NTF Nigeria Trust Fund
NBRCs Nile Basin Riparian Countries
ODEA Operational Directive on Environmental Assessment
OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
RA Risk Assessment
SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment
UNDP United Nations Development Program
WB World Bank
WMO World Meteorological Organization
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 1
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The Nile River Basin covers a large area of approximately 3.1 million square kilometres, approximately 10%
of the African continent, and contains the longest river in the world (Nile) with a total length of approximately
4,160 miles (6,695 km). The basin is shared among 10 countries and extends from latitude 4° S to 31° N and
from longitude 21° E to 40° E. Because of its size and variety of climates and topographies, it is one of the
most complex major basins in the world. The Nile has three sources; the basin of the Equatorial Lakes
Plateau, the Ethiopian Highland Plateau and the Bahr el Ghazal Basin (UNEP, 2004). Anthropogenic and
other activities continue to exert pressure on the basin‘s environmental resources creating need for
development of checks on degradation to ensure that sustainable development is assured within the basin
boundaries. In this respect, Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) and associated processes in the planning
cycle are important.
Environmental Impact Assessment is a process that seeks to ensure sustainable development through the
evaluation of those impacts arising from a major activity that are likely to significantly affect the natural and
man-made environment. It is anticipatory, participatory and systematic in nature and relies on
multidisciplinary input (Glasson et al, 1994).
EIA was first formally developed as part of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 in the
United States for considering possible impacts prior to a decision being taken on whether or not a proposal
should be given approval to proceed. It consequently now has become a requirement in more than 100
countries. Consultation and participation are integral to this evaluation (Wood, 1995). Environmental impact
assessment (EIA) is defined by the UNECE (1991) as 'an assessment of the impact of a planned activity on the
environment'. In essence, it is a systematic process whereby information about the environmental effects of an
action is collected and evaluated, with the conclusions being used as a tool in decision-making. The EIA
process may involve several stages. It is a process of information gathering and analysis that are undertaken in
support of decision-making, embodied within legal and institutional frameworks, based upon the concepts and
methods of interdisciplinary science, and open to public involvement and input by those who are directly
affected by or interested in proposed developments. Methodologically, EIA is a multi-disciplinary task; it
applies the tools, knowledge and expertise of a range of natural and social sciences (Sadler 1999, as cited in
Lumsden 2001).
Environmental Impacts Assessment (EIA) is carried out as a major step in the early planning of projects that
are likely to affect biological resources and habitats in the surrounding environment. The EIA ensures that the
environmental effects of the project are taken into consideration in the planning and design phases. The EIA is
often based in national legislation, international conventions and agreements. It requires involves
identification of vulnerable resources and areas of conflict based on a thorough evaluation of the area affected
and the expected discharges and technical implementations.
1.2 Problem Statement
The Nile Basin Initiative (NBI), launched in February 1999, is a regional partnership within which the 10
countries of the Nile Basin have united in common pursuit of the long-term development and management of
Nile waters. They formulated a ‗Shared Vision‘ whose aim is to achieve sustainable socio-economic
development through the equitable utilization of, and benefit from, the common Nile Basin water resources.
This in essence calls for recognition of the multisectoral nature of water resources development in the context
of socio-economic development, as well as the multi-interest utilization of water resources for water supply
and sanitation, agriculture, industry, urban development, hydropower generation, inland fisheries,
transportation, recreation, low and flat lands management and other activities.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 2
While the underlying factor here is ―sustainable development‖, the challenge that NBI faces is lack of
strategic frameworks that integrate the three pillars of sustainable development (i.e., social, economic and
environment) into at higher levels of decision making, i.e., policy, plan and programme (PPP). While
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been widely used for assessing environmental and socio-
economic impacts at project level, it has a limited scope since it cannot be applied at PPP levels. The
Business-As-Usual scenario will mean that development continues to suffer since there is less integration of
environmental, social and economic issues at strategic planning and decision making levels.
It is arguable that the achievement of sustainable development requires, inter alia, a fair balance of social,
economic and environmental factors at PPPs providing for what could usefully be referred to as ‗sustainability
equilibrium‘ in this research.
This research thesis engaged in developing a model framework for Strategic Environmental Assessment
(SEA) for River Engineering in Nile Basin. It involved developing frameworks from five (5) case studies of
SEA done in the Nile Basin countries and testing them for sustainability equilibrium using a mathematical
concept known as ‗set theory‘ and therefore developing a best-practice SEA framework for the NBI. It is
anticipated that, this framework will also enhance public awareness since it shall embrace participatory
approaches which will ultimately promote solidarity, co-operation and sustainable use of Nile Basin water
resources. Most importantly, the framework shall provide guidance and influence key decisions.
1.3 Purpose of Study
The main purpose of this research was to develop a model framework methodology and guidelines for
carrying out SEA for River Engineering related Policies, Plans and Programmes for the Nile Basin Countries.
To achieve the main objective the following specific objectives were sought:
1.4 Significance of the Study
The study undertakes to explore the existing methodologies and guidelines in SEA processes and hence help
formulate a framework that could be used in the Nile Basin Countries (NBCs) in addressing development
proposals targeting river water resources. The study is done in line with the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) vision.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 3
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 The Nile Basin
2.1.1 Background Information
River Nile has a basin area of about 3 Million Km2. which is shared by 10 countries (Burundi, Democratic
Republic of Congo, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda) with a total
population of about 300 million people, 160 million of whom live within the basin and rely on the Nile Waters
for their basic socio-economic needs (Uganda National Water Development Report – 2005).
Nile basin is a home to the poorest countries in the world despite its unique positioning with a world-wide
pride of the longest river, River Nile, and the second largest fresh-water Lake, Lake Victoria. The region has
some of the largest dams in the world in relation to reservoir volume, e.g., Owen Falls in Uganda, and Aswan
High Egypt containing 270, and 162 billion cubic meters of storage, respectively (McCartney, M. P. 2007).
Despite the tremendous natural resources in the Nile Basin, most of the riparian countries are among the
poorest in the world (four of which are among the 10 poorest countries in the world). Seven of the 10
countries have a GDP of less than US$ 300. This situation has been compounded by a number of factors
including political instability, rapid population growth, extensive environmental degradation, and increasing
water scarcity in several parts of the basin (Uganda National Water Development Report, 2005).
Table 2.1: Water Resources availability and utilization in the Nile basin
Country Population GDP
(million
USD)
Percentage
of total
basin area
Total
Renewable
Water
(TRW)
Resources
(Km3/year)
Internal
Renewable
Water
Resources
(Km3/year)
% of
Irrigated
Land
Irrigation
Water
Withdraw
as % of
TRW
Burundi 6,356,000 977 0.43 3.6 3.6 7.0 5.0
DR Congo 50,948,000 4,187 0.71 1,283.0 935.0 0.1 0.01
Egypt 67,884,000 81003 9.06 58.3 1.7 100 93.2
Eritrea 3,659,000 6672 0.12 6.3 2.8 4.0 5.0
Ethiopia 62,908,000 7966 11.74 110.0 110.0 2.0 2.0
Kenya 30,669,000 9971 1.68 30.2 20.2 1.0 3.0
Rwanda 7,609,000 2183 0.68 6.3 6.3 0.4 0.4
Sudan 31,095,000 1021.5 63.75 88.5 35.0 12.0 56.0
Tanzania 35,119,000 6812 3.96 89.0 80.0 3.0 2.0
Uganda 23,300,000 8110 7.87 66.0 39.2 0.1 0.2
Source: The United Nations World Water Development Report, 2003.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 4
2.1.2 Vision of the Nile Basin Riparian Countries
In order to use the shared water resources to stimulate socio-economic development within agreeable
environmental framework in the basin, the Nile basin countries have negotiated and agreed on a ―Shared
Vision‖: ―To achieve sustainable socio-economic development through the equitable utilization of, and
benefits from, the Common Nile Basin Water Resources‖ (Uganda National Water Development Report,
2005).
The Shared Vision demonstrates a high level of commitment by the riparian countries towards the Nile basin
cooperation and is based on a legacy of mutual trust and confidence between the Nile basin countries. The
shared vision provides the broad integrating framework within which the countries can jointly undertake ‗win-
win‘ water resources management and development projects and programs in order to meet their development
goals. The shared vision also gives firm political commitment and legitimacy to the cooperation process and
ensures ownership of the process by all the concerned parties. A Strategic Action Program has been launched
to translate the NBI‘s shared vision into action. This consists of two complementary sub-programs, i.e.:
A Shared Vision Program (SVP) – Which is comprises of seven basin-wide projects intended to create an
enabling environment for cooperative development, and;
Subsidiary Action Programs (SAPs) – Which are implemented by smaller groups of Nile riparian states,
comprising physical investment at sub-basin level involving two or more countries.
The SVP and SAPs interpret to developing the NBRCs‘ rivers to reduce their vulnerability to droughts, better
manage floods, to ensure more water, more food, and more electricity, and to do so in a way that respects the
needs of the river system itself so it can continue to nurture generations to come.
2.1.3 Strategic Goal
In order to ensure effective implementation of the Strategic Action Program, the Nile basin countries agreed
on a set of policy guidelines, which emphasize that all intervention measures are to be planned at the lowest
appropriate level. The appropriate planning level needs to involve all those who will be affected. Given the
hydrological conditions of the Nile Basin, action on the ground will mainly be planned and implemented at
sub-basin level. Art. 4(2) (a) of the 1994 United Nations Convention to combat desertification in those
countries experiencing serious drought and /or desertification, particularly in Africa requires states parties to
adopt an integrated approach addressing the physical, biological and socio-economic aspects of the process of
desertification and drought (de Klemm, C, Shine, C., 1998).
2.1.4 Legal Framework for the Sustainable Management of the Nile Waters
Treaties regarding the management of the waters of the Nile Basin date back to 1929 when Great Britain and
Egypt signed an agreement under which no irrigation, power works or other measures were to be constructed
or taken on the Nile and its branches or on lakes from which it flows in the Sudan or in countries under British
administration except with the previous agreement of the Egyptian government. The Agreement was followed
by the 1959 Agreement on the Full Utilization of the Nile Waters, which was signed between Egypt and
Sudan. The 1959 Agreement apportions the waters of the Nile between the two signatory states, i.e., Egypt
and Sudan. Given the new political dispensation in the Nile basin, the NBRCs, in 1995, embarked on the
process of negotiating and developing a new Nile Basin Cooperative Framework Agreement for the
sustainable management and development of the shared Nile water resources. This process is still ongoing and
it is envisaged that once these negotiations are successfully concluded, the resulting agreement will supersede
all the existing Nile water agreements.
River Nile outflow was naturally occurring until the commissioning of the Owen Falls Dam in 1954. The Dam
was built to operate on the ―Agreed Curve5‖ Policy that determines the amount of water to be released by
using the prevailing water levels in order to maintain natural flow. The operation of this policy maintained a
natural pattern up to 2000. During the period 2001-2005, disparities began to occur between lake levels and
Nile outflow. The Nile outflows have increased while lake levels have fallen. This can partly be attributed to
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 5
increasing outflow at Jinja and other climatic factors, e.g. periods of lower rainfall and river discharge into the
lake than has occurred over the historic period. Actually a new development shows that new dams being
developed downstream of Lake Victoria, have led to the reduction in the lake‘s depth.
Table 2.2: Water portioning for Lake Victoria
Average 1950-2000 Flows (m3/s) Percentage (%)
Rain over lake Victoria 3631 82
Basin Discharge 778 18
Evaporation from Lake -330 -76
Victoria Nile -104.6 -24
Source: COWI 2002 as cited in McCartney, M. P. 2007
The flow characteristics for River Nile outflow have shown an increase in average flow out of the lake by
15% to 1057.6 m3/s in the period 2001-2004 as compared with the long term average of 1046 m3/s in the
period 1950-2000 including the per cent of all losses with the remaining loss being evaporation (EAC, 2006).
But this increase in outflow occurred during a period of falling water levels, which is a departure from the
long-term relation between level and outflow. Although the recent record is for a shorter period than the long-
term period, it nevertheless gives a general pointer to the new hydrologic trend that may emerge. The lake
cannot maintain its water level if outflows of the past five years are maintained; unless substantial increases in
rainfall and river discharge are realized.
2.1.5 NBCs Shared Water Resources Management Issues and Challenges
The Uganda National Water Development Report of 2005 cites the following issues and challenges facing the
Nile Basin Riparian Countries:
2.1.5.1 Issues
(a) Hydropower - Overall, hydropower is relatively little developed in Uganda, but power demand is
increasing rapidly and the availability of electricity is limiting development. There is substantial potential for
increased development of reliable, low-cost power, for example through expansion of hydropower production
and through exploring opportunities for regional power trade. There is, therefore, need to promote optimal
development, management, and use of the shared water resources of the equatorial Nile for hydropower
production.
(b) Irrigation - Agriculture, which is of great economic and social importance, is by far the largest potential
water user in the region. Improvements in agricultural practices and water use efficiency are key factors in
ensuring food security in the region. There is, therefore, need to prepare and implement a plan to develop and
use water resources in the region for modernization of agriculture.
(c) Environmental concerns - The major environmental issues related to shared water resources include land
degradation, water quality deterioration, and aquatic weeds infestation, drainage of wetlands, floods and
droughts. There is need for joint collaboration in the protection of the shared water resources from
environmental degradation.
(d) Institutional Capacity - Strong national and regional institutions are an important element in achieving
sustainable management and development of the shared waters and enhanced regional cooperation. There is
need to build capacity in the national and international aspects of water resources planning, management and
development.
(e) Participation and public awareness – Effective stakeholder participation and increased public awareness
is a pre-requisite for sustainable management and development of shared waters. There is, therefore, need for
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 6
putting in place mechanisms for effective stakeholder participation in all water resources management and
development activities and comprehensive communication strategies for sustained public awareness on salient
water resources issues.
2.1.5.2 Challenges
(a) Conflicting interests
One of the greatest challenges in shared water resources management and development is dealing with the
conflicting interests from the different riparian countries. For example, in the Lake Victoria basin, whereas
Kenya and Tanzania are interested in inter-basin water transfers to meet their domestic, industrial and
irrigation water needs in the water scarce parts of their countries, Uganda on the other hand is interested in the
uninterrupted flow of water into Lake Victoria to support its hydropower production at Owen Falls Dam. This,
therefore, calls for joint basin-wide planning and implementation of ―win-win‖ projects.
(b) Mistrust among the riparian countries
High levels of mistrust among the riparian countries have been a big set-back to any development efforts in a
shared basin. There always exists suspicion and ill-feelings among the riparian countries in what the other
riparian countries could be doing with the shared waters! This is reflected in the reluctance by the riparian
countries to share data on the shared water resources and information on planned and existing development
projects in the individual countries.
(c) Fragmented and incompatible national water resources management and development plans
In most cases, each riparian country has its own national water resources management and development plan
which does not take into consideration the broader basin-wide management and development issues. This
often results in implementation of conflicting development projects, duplication of activities and wastage of
resources. There is therefore need for joint basin-wide planning and implementation of ―win-win‖ projects
with more emphasis being put on the ―sharing of benefits‖.
(d) Environmental conservation
It is obvious that poor water resources management practices in the upstream countries can result in serious
environmental issues for the downstream countries too. The challenge is always how downstream countries
can influence the way activities are implemented in the upstream countries and how to ensure that the
upstream countries contribute towards the cost of environmental restoration activities in the downstream
countries.
2.1.6 Review of the River Basins in the Nile Basin
It can be easily noted that from table 3 below, the most developed countries of the world have the highest
number of dams. With South Africa having 2.8% and Zimbabwe 0.85 of the world‘s total number of dams
while United States has 28.0%, with China following with 14.2% and India 14.0%, which is corresponding to
the level of development in these countries. From table 4 it can be seen that there are about 25 dams under
construction or planned for construction in the Nile basin with Uganda alone having 9 dams planned, under
construction or operational along the White Nile. This shows that the Nile Riparian Countries are eyeing the
water resources within the Nile Basin as a solution to their water supply, irrigation and power generation in a
bid to alleviate poverty.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 7
Table 2.3: Total number of Dams in the World
Country Registered no. of dams, 2003 % of total dams
United States 9,265 28.0
China 4,688 14.2
India 4,636 14.0
Spain 1,267 3.8
South Korea 1,205 3.6
Japan 1,121 3.4
South Africa 915 2.8
Canada 793 2.4
Brazil 635 1.9
Turkey 625 1.9
France 597 1.8
Italy 549 1.7
Mexico 536 1.6
United Kingdom 517 1.6
Australia 507 1.5
Norway 335 1.0
Germany 306 0.9
Albania 306 0.9
Zimbabwe 253 0.8
Romania 246 0.7
Others 3,803 11.5
Total 33,105 100.0
Source: ICOLD 2003 as cited in McCartney, M. P. 2007
Notes: + other sources estimate the total number of dams in China, to exceed 22,000
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 8
Table 2.4: Examples of large dams planned or being built in some of the NBRCs
Name Country River Primary purpose Anticipated
completion
Tekeze Ethiopia Tekeze (Nile
tributary)
Hydropower (300 MW) 2009
Karadobi Ethiopia Abay (Blue Nile) Hydropower (1,600 MW) Undetermined
Baro 1 & 2 Ethiopia Baro – Akobo Hydropower (916 MW) Undetermined
Koga Ethiopia Gilgel Abay Irrigation 2007
Tendho Ethiopia Awash Irrigation 2007
Kesem Ethiopia Awash Irrigation 2007
Sondu-Miriu Kenya Sondu Hydropower (60 MW) Undetermined
Ewaso Ngiro Kenya Mara Hydropower Undetermined
Mutonga/Grand
Falls
Kenya Tana Hydropower, irrigation and water supply Undetermined
Imboulou D R of Congo Lefini Hydropower (120 MW) 2009
Sounda Gorge D R of Congo Kouilou Hydropower (1,000 MW) Undetermined
Merowe Sudan Nile Hydropower (2,500 MW) and irrigation 2007-2008
Kajbar Sudan Nile Hydropower (300 MW) Undetermined
Rusumo Falls Tanzania/Rwanda Kagera Hydropower (60 MW) Undetermined
Rumakali Tanzania Rumakali Hydropower (222 MW) 2024
Ruhudji Tanzania Hydropower (36 MW) 2012
Bujagali Uganda White Nile Hydropower (200-250 MW) Undetermined
Karuma (Kamdini) Uganda White Nile Hydropower (300-350 MW) Undetermined
Murchison Uganda White Nile Hydropower (450-550 MW) Undetermined
Nalubaale-
OwenFalls
Uganda White Nile Hydropower (180 MW) Working
Kiira- owen falls
ext
Uganda White Nile Hydropower (200 MW)
Kalagala Uganda White Nile To be developed for tourism (225 MW)
Busowoko Uganda White Nile Hydropower (230 MW)
Ayago (North) Uganda White Nile Hydropower (310-400 MW)
Ayago (South) Uganda White Nile Hydropower (230-250 MW)
Sources: IRN 2006 plus others as cited in McCartney, M. P. et al 2007 and from Wamaniala, V. N., 2002:
The Development and Management of Hydropower Resources in Uganda.
Note: MW = megawatt
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 9
Table 2.5: Institutional and Regulatory Frameworks for EA in NBRCs
EIA Sudan Egypt Congo Tanzania Ethiopia Uganda Kenya Burundi Eritrea Rwanda
Enabling Legislation In draft Yes, 1994 Yes, 1991
Revised, 1997
No Yes, 1995 Yes, 1995 Yes, 1999 No
Specific
Legislation/Regulation
No Yes, 1995 Yes, 1986 No Yes, 2002 Yes, 1998 Yes, 2003 No
General and Specific
Guidelines
Yes, 1995 Under draft In draft Yes, 2000 Yes, 1995 In draft
Formal provision for public
participation
No Yes, through
guidelines
Included in draft
guidelines
Yes, 2002 Yes, 1995
SEA Provision
No No No No Yes No Yes, 2003
Given under
miscellaneous
provisions
No No No
Main administrative body
Higher Council
for
Environment
and natural
resources
Egyptian
Environmental
Affairs
Agency
General
Directorate of the
Environment
under the
Ministry of
Industry, Mining
and the
Environment.
The National
Agency for
Environmental
Protection is
under creation.
National
Environment
Management
Council, 1983
Environmental
Protection
Agency, 1995
National
Environmental
Management
Agency
(NEMA), 1995
National
Environmental
Management
Authority
(NEMA)
Ministry of
National and
Regional
Development
and the
Environment
Rwanda
Environmental
Management
Authority
(REMA)
Information source
Mohamed Ali,
O.M., 2003
CITET-
METAP, 2003
D‘Almeida, K.,
2001
Katima,
J.H.Y.,2003
Kibassa, J.,
2003
IUCN, 2001,
*Tekelemichael,
Y., 2003 EPA,
March 2004
NEMA, 2004 NEMA, 2004 D‘Amelda,
K., 2001
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 10
2.2 River Engineering
River engineering can be defined as, the process of planned human intervention in the course, characteristics
or flow of a river with the intention of producing some defined benefit such as, irrigation, hydroelectric power
generation or water supply (Brooker M.P, 1985). People have intervened in the natural course and behavior of
rivers since before recorded history - to manage the water resources, to protect against flooding or to make
passage along or across rivers easier. From the late 20th century, river engineering has had environmental
concerns broader than immediate human benefit and some river engineering projects have been concerned
exclusively with the restoration or protection of natural characteristics and habitats (Brooker M.P, 1985).
The size of rivers above any tidal limit and their average freshwater discharge are proportionate to the extent
of their basins, and the amount of rain which, falling over these basins, reaches the river channels in the
bottom of the valleys, by which it is conveyed to the final water body.
The basin of a river is the expanse of country, bounded by a watershed over which the rainfall flows down
towards the river traversing the lowest part of the valley; whereas the rain falling on the far slope of the
watershed flows away to another river draining an adjacent basin. River basins vary in extent according to the
configuration of the country, ranging from the insignificant drainage-areas of streams rising on high ground
very near the coast and flowing straight down into the sea, up to immense tracts of great continents, when
rivers, rising on the slopes of mountain ranges far inland, have to traverse vast stretches of valleys and plains
before reaching the ocean. The size of the largest river basin of any country depends on the extent of the
continent in which it is situated, its position in relation to the hilly regions in which rivers generally rise and
the sea into which they flow, and the distance between the source and the outlet into the sea of the river
draining it.
2.3 Environmental Effects of River Engineering
Dams form one of the design methods used to harness water in rivers for irrigation, hydropower generation,
water supply etc. The World Commission on Dams (WCD) was established to assess the development
effectiveness of large dams. In its final report it concluded (as cited in McCartney, M. P. et al 2007):
Dams have made an important and significant contribution to human development and the benefits
derived from them have been considerable.
In too many cases an unacceptable and often unnecessary price has been paid to secure those benefits,
especially in social and environmental terms, by people displaced, by communities downstream, by
taxpayers and by the natural environment.
Lack of equity in the distribution of benefits has called into question the value of many dams in
meeting water and energy development needs when compared with the alternatives.
By bringing to the table all those whose rights are involved and who bear the risks associated with
different options for water and energy resources development, the conditions for a positive resolution
of competing interests and conflicts are created.
Negotiating outcomes will greatly improve the development effectiveness of water and energy
projects by eliminating unfavorable projects at an early stage and by offering as a choice only those
options that represent the best ones to meet the needs in question.
2.4 Review of Donor Institutions’’ Appraisal Methods
2.4.1 World Bank (WB)
Most development projects are associated with disputes which mostly are environment related. In order to
resolve these problems and as a sign of responsible lending the WB has developed policies and procedures
applicable to assessment of projects funded by the bank through its subsidiary WB Groups such as the IDA,
IFC and IBRD. These include the Operational Policy/Bank Procedure 10.04 (Economic Evaluation of
Investment Operations); Operational Procedure 17.50 and 10.00 annex A (World Bank Policy on Disclosure
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 11
of Information); Operational Directive 4.01 (Environmental Assessment); Operational Directive 4.30
(Involuntary Resettlement); and Operational Directive 4.20 (Indigenous Peoples), as mentioned in the World
Bank‘s ―Arun Valley‖ case (Sand P.H., 1997).
During the 1980s, environmental concerns were integrated into all aspects of the World Bank activities and
led to the establishment of an environmental department in all four of the regional divisions of the Bank. This
increased focus on environmental issues culminated in 1989 with the issuance of the Bank‘s Operational
Directive on Environmental Assessment (ODEA) and a subsequent revision of ODEA in 1991. The
environmental assessment covers project-specific and other environmental impacts in the area influenced by
the project. Its purpose is to ensure that the project options under consideration are environmentally sound and
sustainable. All environmental consequences should be recognized early in the project cycle and taken into
account in project selection, planning and design. The environmental assessment should also identify ways of
improving projects, by preventing, minimizing or compensating for adverse environmental impacts.
The Operational Directive distinguishes types of environmental assessment: project-specific, regional, and
sectoral, where similar but significant development activities are planned for a localized area, for sector
investment loans and loans through intermediaries, emergency recovery projects, and larger issues such as
ozone depletion or pollution of international waters. The preparation of the environmental assessment is the
responsibility of the borrower, but the Bank‘s task manager assists and monitors the project and screens it in
order to determine the nature and extent of the environmental work required. The Operational Directive
includes checklists of potential issues for an environmental assessment. It also proposes outlines and models
for the assessment and prescriptions for the assessment and the screening procedures.
Environmental review under ODEA begins with identifying the seriousness of the potential harm. The Bank
screens all new projects and assigns each one of four categories based upon the character, dimension, and
sensitivity of the environmental issue (Operational Directive 4.0 –Annex A- I have this part).
Category A- projects which may have a significant impact on the environment and thus require a complete
environmental assessment, e.g. dams and reservoirs; forestry production; large scale industrial plants and
industrial estates; irrigation, drainage, and flood control; land clearance and leveling; mineral development;
port and harbor development; reclamation and new land development; resettlement and all projects with
potentially major impacts on people; river basin development; thermal and hydropower development; and
manufacture, transportation, and use of pesticides or other hazardous and/or toxic materials
Category B – projects that may only have limited, specific environmental effects which should be
investigated but do not necessarily require an in-depth environmental assessment, e.g. small scale agro-
industries; electrical transmission; aquaculture and marine culture; small-scale irrigation and drainage;
renewable energy; rural electrification; tourism; rural water supply and sanitation; watershed projects; and
small-scale rehabilitation, maintenance, and upgrading projects.
Category C – projects for which an environmental analysis is not normally necessary e.g. education; family
planning; health; nutrition; institutional development; technical assistance; and human resource projects.
Category D – environmental projects which do not require an assessment for the reason that environmental
development is the focus of the project, and it is assumed that any environmental consequences have already
been considered.
The extent to which the borrowing country must conduct an EIA therefore depends on the category in which
the project is placed.
For those projects for which a full EIA is not required, but are in need of some environmental analysis
(category B), an Environmental Mitigation or Environmental Management Plan often will suffice (these are
prepared for category A projects as a part of the full EIA). The Bank‘s requirement for mitigation plans
includes:
a description of all adverse environmental impacts
a description and technical details for each mitigation measure
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 12
the assignment of responsibilities for carrying out the mitigation measures
an implementation schedule for the mitigation measures
monitoring and reporting procedures
and cost estimates
The Bank expects the borrower to ensure coordination among government agencies and to take into account
the views of affected groups and local NGOs. It also requires the borrower to provide relevant information to
affected groups and local NGOs and to hold meaningful consultations with them. The environmental
assessment should form part of the overall feasibility study or project preparation and be submitted to the
Bank which decides on the loan.
An EIA for a major project should take anywhere from six to eighteen months to prepare and review. While
the EIA is being prepared, drafts should be made available, and the final EIA must be available prior to the
final appraisal of the project. The borrower submits the final EIA when it is complete to the Bank prior to the
Bank‘s appraisal. During the appraisal phase, the Bank and the borrower together review the assessment. At
this time any unclear issues are resolved, and the two parties determine whether the recommendations from
the assessment have been incorporated into the project design.
The impact assessment will later provide the framework through which the project is evaluated as it is being
implemented by the borrowing country. The borrowing country must inform the Bank of its compliance with
the environmental conditions, the status and effectiveness of the mitigating measures, and the findings of the
monitoring program. In the final phase of the process, project-completion reports are required to evaluate
environmental effects. The reports are to take a particular notice of whether the original assessment correctly
identified the potential environmental consequences, and determine whether the mitigating measures were
successful.
The revisions to ODEA in 1991 placed a greater emphasis on public participation, mandating the borrowing
governments consider the views of the affected groups and local nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in
designing and implementing projects and in preparing the EAs. More specifically, the revisions require that
consultations with NGOs occur at least during two stages of the EIA process: 1) just after the EIA category is
assigned, and 2) once a draft of the EIA has been prepared.
2.4.2 Asian Development Bank
The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has expressed its commitment to promoting environmentally
sustainable development in its member countries. The Bank‘s Office of Environment categorizes all projects
listed in country operational program papers according to their type, location, sensitivity and the nature and
magnitude of their potential impact and availability of cost-effective mitigation measures. If a significant
impact is expected, an EIA or an initial environmental examination is required for the project, according to the
importance of the impact. When an impact assessment is mandated, the procedure starts with the submission
of a summary environmental assessment by the Projects department to the Board. The full EIA should be
made available to a member of the Board upon request. The Bank requires the borrower to take the views of
affected groups and local NGOs into account in the preparation of environmental assessment reports. The
assessment reports may also be made available to them. Specific rules program loans, sector loans and private
sector operations. Once the project is approved, the Bank undertakes environmental monitoring to ensure that
the planned mitigating measures are implemented, that legal standards for pollutants are not exceeded, and to
provide early warning of environmental damage. After project completion, the actual impacts of project
operations, the accuracy of the predictions, and the effectiveness of the mitigating measures and the
functioning of the established monitoring program are determined and evaluated through auditing.
For all projects that have a potential impact on the environment, the project staff should carry out an initial
environmental examination. On the return of the fact-finding mission, the report will be reviewed and the
terms of reference for the special study or EIA will be prepared with the active assistance of the Office for the
Environment. The loan fact-finding mission analyzes the results of the assessment and identifies probable
additional environmental concerns not addressed in the study or resulting from changes in project scope.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 13
Towards the end of each calendar year a report is published listing all projects requiring specific
environmental treatment during the implementation phase.
A review mission is dispatched periodically to discuss with concerned executing agencies the implementation
of environmental mitigation measures agreed upon by both the borrower and the Bank. It verifies that
environmental safeguards built into the project design are satisfactorily implemented during the construction
and the operation of the project. At the end of the operations a project completion report should include a
general assessment of any significant environmental impact experienced during project implementation.
2.4.3 African Development Bank
The African Development Bank (AfDB) is a development bank established in 1964 with the intention of
promoting economic and social development in Africa. It is a conglomeration of the African Development
Bank (AfDB), the African Development Fund (ADF), and the Nigeria Trust Fund (NTF).
The Board of Directors of the Bank adopted an Environment Policy Paper in 1990, with the overall objective
of ensuring environmental viability of investment projects in the Bank Group‘s Operation Program. In 1991,
the Bank initiated action for the preparation of Environmental Assessment Guidelines and environmental
assessment procedures which were finalized in 1992. The guidelines are based on the principles that
environmental assessment procedures should be linked as much as possible with existing procedures in the
Bank Group and that loan and project officers will identify further action to be taken at the earliest stage.
Environmental screening is carried out during identification of projects that need further attention due to their
impacts on environment. The Environmental Assessment Guidelines compare this initial environmental
examination to an early warning system. It determines whether a project will be assigned to a category
requiring detailed field review and an environmental impact assessment, specific measures or changes in the
project design, or no environmental assessment. It also determines whether the selected project site is located
in an environmentally sensitive area, characterized by ecosystems with high species diversity, by the presence
of endangered or endemic species, or the presence of unique historical or archeological sites. The impact
assessment should envisage, if necessary, mitigating measures and should take into consideration the priorities
and concerns of the local population, by working in close consultation with NGOs and local institutions at all
stages of the project cycle.
The Bank's policy on environmental protection and management is consistent with Member States
environmental policies and generally acceptable environmental management. The Bank will pay attention to
inter-relationship between choice of process or technology design and the potential for residue minimization
or re-use and between project site location and direct environmental impacts. In their appraisal work, the
bank's staff will pay attention to the following principles:
Will try to ensure that the projects affecting renewable natural resources do not exceed the
regenerative capacities of the environment. (For example, fisheries project should seek to prevent over
fishing and agricultural projects should avoid unsustainable rates of soil erosion).
Will not finance projects that could cause severe or irreversible deterioration.
Will not finance projects that unduly compromise the public's health and safety.
Will not finance projects that displace people or without implementing acceptable mitigating
measures.
Will not finance projects that could significantly alter the environment of a neighboring country
without that country's consent.
Will not finance projects that would significantly modify areas designated by national legislation as
national parks, wildlife refuges, or other protected areas.
Endeavors to ensure that projects with unavoidably adverse environmental effects are sited to areas
where the environmental damage is minimized.
2.4.4 European Union (EU)
The economic region with the highest degree of harmonized or even uniform environmental law-making
undoubtedly is the European Community (EC), which evolved to the current European Union (EU).
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 14
Environmental laws and standards are of particular concern to international organizations aiming at
harmonization and integration among countries- for only by reducing the discrepancies between different
national regulatory systems can potential trade distortions be avoided and economic discrimination be
minimized
It is no coincidence, therefore, that the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) as
the largest regional group of industrialized countries also was among the first and most active proponents of
transnational environmental ―soft law‖: numerous OECD Council Recommendations (usually prepared by its
Environmental Committee) have thus addressed topics ranging from the equal right of access and non-
discrimination in relation to trans frontier pollution (C/76/55 of 11 May 1976), to the mutual acceptance of
data and laboratory practices in the assessment of potentially harmful chemicals (C/83/95 of July 1983).
The 1992 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and its related 1993 North American Agreement
on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC) went a step further, by establishing a system of private complaints
against alleged failure to enforce applicable environmental legislation- through investigations and ―factual
reports‖ to be carried out by the Montreal-based NAAEC secretariat.
2.5 Development of Methods & Guidelines for CBA, RA & SEA
2.5.1 Why Environmental Assessment Guidelines
In a world in which the environment, sustainable economic development and human health have become
major policy issues, evaluative techniques such as risk analysis (RA), cost-benefit analysis (CBA), and
strategic environmental assessment (SEA), must increasingly be included as part of the standard toolkit of
government departments and regulatory agencies to back up the traditional EIA process. However, to be
applied, these tools must be understood and can then be used in decision-making. The CBA and RA can be
viewed as subsets of both EIA and SEA. This is because for any proposal at whatever level, the benefits are
analyzed against the costs and for a project to be viable, the benefits should be higher than the costs incurred.
Equally, mitigation measures are set on any resulting negative socio-economic and environmental effects
which emanates from and ad hoc RA. At the strategy level, SEA considers the gains and losses from a policy,
plan or program against the risks that can be accommodated within the country/regional/global development
strategies.
2.5.2 Cost-Benefit Analysis
The purpose of cost benefit analysis (CBA) is to improve (or ensure) a locative efficiency so as to increase
economic (and possibly social) welfare. It is a valuable tool, but by definition it cannot incorporate certain
important aspects into the analysis, e.g. political (non-efficiency) objectives. This is the topic of what is
generally mentioned as integrated assessment.
CBA has been applied in a wide variety of governments‘ decisions: river developments; transportation;
investment in human capital; economic development schemes; capital investment by Crown corporations;
birth control programs; urban renewal; research and development funding; and the evaluation of regulatory
programs. For example, CBA plays a major role in Regulatory Impact Assessments (RIAs) undertaken by the
US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In Canada, applications to the National Energy Board and
various provincial regulatory boards may include CBAs.
Benefit-cost analysis is a method of evaluating the relative merits of alternative public investment projects in
order to achieve efficient allocation of resources. It is a way of identifying, portraying and assessing the
factors that need to be considered in making rational economic choices. It is not a new technique. In principle,
it entails little more than adjusting conventional business profit-and-loss calculations to reflect social instead
of private objectives, criteria, and constraints in evaluating investment projects.
Formal cost-benefit analysis is in principle a rigorous, quantitative, and data-intensive procedure, which
requires;
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 15
Identification of all nontrivial effects
Categorization of these effects as benefits or costs
Quantitative estimation of the extent of each benefit or cost associated with an action
Translation of these into a common metric such as dollars
Discounting of future costs and benefits into the terms of a given year
Summary of all costs and benefits to see which is greater
Comparing these sums across alternatives, a point neglected even by many of its proponents
Early attempts at project assessment were limited to technical feasibility studies and cost benefit analysis
(CBA). CBA attempts to express all impacts in terms of resource costs valued in monetary terms. Projects
such as the Aswan Dam in Egypt and the third London Airport were assessed using CBA techniques, while
the US Army Corps of Engineers used CBA for many years to justify water management projects in the
Tennessee Valley and other parts of the United States. Flaws in the method included the apparent inability to
allocate meaningful dollar values to environmental intangibles, but perhaps more important was the narrow
range of economic impacts traditionally addressed by CBA.
The bottom-line number can be either "net benefits", the "benefit:cost ratio", or the "internal rate of return",
depending on what the analysis is supposed to find out. If the problem is the evaluation of a single project, net
benefits (the excess of benefits over costs) is often used. If the problem is which of a number of investment
options makes the largest contribution to social welfare, the benefit:cost ratio is the preferred measure. If the
problem is to determine how a project compares to all alternative investment opportunities in society, the
internal rate of return should probably be used. Whichever measure is used, the following concepts are
fundamental to CBA:
a) Normative analysis: CBA is a normative instrument of analysis. Its concern is the increase in social welfare
due to projects and policies. It is not an element of positive social science, which attempts to describe and
predict how the world works
b) Comparative static‘s: This is the underlying methodology of CBA. What it means is that successive stages
(or "snapshots") of an economy are examined without giving attention to the process of getting from one stage
to the next (which is the sphere of dynamic analysis).
c) Marginal approach: CBA assumes that individual projects (or programs) are marginal or incremental to the
economy. The basic concern is what will happen to aggregate social welfare if the project in question is added
to the economy.
d) A locative efficiency: This is a key concept. In the literature, it is referred to as Pareto-efficiency or Pareto-
optimality. In perfectly competitive markets (markets in which buyers and sellers are all equally powerful and
completely free to make choices), with all firms being price takers, the general equilibrium position is Pareto-
optimal; that is, one in which it is not possible to make one or more persons better off without making at least
one person worse off. A Pareto improvement is one which makes some members of society better off without
making anyone worse off. A variant of the Pareto-optimum, the Kaldor-Hicks criterion, allows some people to
be worse of, but recognizes that there is still an improvement if the gainers can compensate the losers and still
have something left over.
e) It should be noted that, while CBA does not deal with equity, that is, with the distribution or redistribution
of income, the Kaldor-Hicks criterion, in introducing the notion of compensation, does appear to allow for the
redistribution of income from gainers to losers. Mere transfers of income (taxes, subsidies, monopoly profits)
from one segment of society to another without any overall gain or loss have no place in the analysis,
however.
f) Market failure: CBA is applied to projects which the private market cannot provide, or which the market
can provide only under distorted conditions (monopoly, oligopoly). Values which are assigned to costs and
benefits are those which would apply under perfectly competitive conditions. Because many prices are
distorted by monopolistic pricing practices, taxes, and subsidies, and because some public goods do not enter
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 16
the market and hence have no market price, estimates are made of shadow prices, which are the prices that
would apply under perfectly competitive conditions.
g) Externalities: External costs and benefits are those which arise from a project but which cannot be assigned
to, or captured by, the project proponent. What is external and internal often depends on regulation and
enforcement – e.g. the costs of cleaning up an oil-soaked beach can be assigned to an oil company if the
enforcement mechanism exists.
h) Present value: The perspective of CBA is from the here and now. It assumes that the individuals who
comprise society, exercising "time preference", value projects and programs from their particular point in
history. Future costs and benefits are discounted to their present value most often using the long-term market
rate of interest.
While adequate for many purposes, CBA has some important drawbacks which reflect its origins, particularly
the assumption that only a few factors under analysis can be varied while all others such as prices in general,
the distribution of income and wealth, tastes and preferences, and technology are held constant (the method of
comparative statistics). This assumption may be realistic enough if the project in question is small and
therefore suited to marginal analysis, but it becomes dubious if the project is large in relation to the economic
universe. In such cases, the notion of "marginal" change may lose its meaning. If the proposed change to the
status quo is large enough, all of the factors held constant would necessarily change, and partial equilibrium
techniques would simply not prove capable of providing meaningful answers.
There are also other problems. The US EPA lists three major types of limitations to the technique: those
inherent in economic analysis in general; those caused by gaps in available information; and those that are the
result of errors and omissions in the execution of the analysis. The socio-economic version does take care of a
lot of the drawbacks of the financial CBA.
A case whose project development has pointed on economic benefits is the Busowoko hydropower project in
Uganda which has been said to be economically less viable with the development of neighbouring sites
(Wamaniala, V.N., 2002).
2.5.3 Risk Assessment
Risk assessment (RA) is a careful examination of what could cause harm to people‘s health, damage to
infrastructure or damage to ecosystems so that decisions can be made about what is reasonably practicable to
reduce or prevent harm (Devon County Council, Inclusive Education: Risk Assessment, 2005).
The purpose of environmental risk analysis (ERA) is to provide decision makers with a tool that enables them
to establish and maintain acceptable environmental safety levels for their operations. This ensure, as far as
reasonably practicable implementation of a project which poses the least risk if any to the affected group, and
ensure that there is professional appropriately trained to undertake this assessment An ERA enables
identification of how much each individual activity or component contributes to the total risk to the
environment, so that risk reducing efforts can be focused. ERA involves: identification of environmental
hazards, quantitative estimation of risk for hazardous events, spatial and temporal modeling of emissions and
discharges, evaluation of important ecological components with respect to sensitivity, quantification of risks
for environmental damage and comparison with pre-defined acceptance criteria and identification of
mitigating measures
2.5.3.1 Risk Assessment Procedure
Think of possible hazards. A hazard is anything that has the potential to cause harm.
Decide who might be affected and how.
Evaluate the level of risk and consider preventive measures and decide whether existing precautions
are adequate. Risk is the likelihood of a hazard causing harm.
Discuss with NGOs, the affected and relevant policy people as appropriate
Formulate into a written plan.
Put measure into practice.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 17
Review and revise as necessary.
These guidelines need to be seen against the background of legislation and guidance and the individual
circumstances of each establishment. Plan well a head whenever possible.
2.5.3.2 Risk Ranking
The Health and Safety Executive use the simple equation:
Both the hazard severity and the likelihood of occurrence are categorized, or assessed, on the basis of a three
point scale. For each category outline guidelines are given to define that category. For Hazard Severity, (i.e.
potential for loss), the three categories are:
3: HIGH
2: MEDIUM
1: LOW
In assigning a category one is considering:
The severity of outcome arising from a deficiency/absence of adequate control measures either in
terms of personal health or damage to environment;
Whether this deficiency/absence of adequate measures would give rise to an accident requiring
notification to the Health and Safety Executive; and
Whether the deficiency/absence of adequate control measures would if viewed by an inspector, or by
an internal competent person lead to enforcement action.
2.5.3.3 Role of Risk Analysis in Hydraulic Design
Uncertainties and the consequent related risks in EIA are unavoidable. Hydraulic structures are always subject
to a probability of failure in achieving their intended purposes. For example, a flood control project may not
protect an area from extreme floods. A water distribution system may not deliver water that meets quality
standards although the source of the water does. The rationale for selecting the design and operation
parameters and the design and operation standards are questioned continually. Procedures for the engineering
design and operation of water resources do not involve any required assessment and quantification of
uncertainties and the resultant evaluation of a risk.
In hydraulic design Risk is defined as the probability of failure, and failure is defined as an event that causes a
system to fail to meet the desired objectives. Reliability is defined as the complement of risk: i.e., the
probability of no failure. Failures can be grouped into either structural failures or performance failures. Water
distribution systems are a good example. A structural failure, such as broken pipe or a failed pump, can result
in unmet demand. In addition, an operational aspect of a water distribution system, such as the inability to
meet demands at required pressure heads, is a failure despite the lack of a structural failure in any component
in the system. Uncertainty can be defined as the occurrence of events that are beyond one‘s control. The
uncertainty of a hydraulic structure is an in deterministic characteristic and is beyond rigid controls. In the
design and operation of these systems, decisions must be made under various kinds of uncertainty namely
natural uncertainties, model structure uncertainties, model parameter uncertainties, data uncertainties, and
operational uncertainties.
Natural uncertainties are associated with the random temporal and spatial fluctuations that are inherent in
natural processes. Model structural uncertainties reflect the inability of a simulation model or design
procedure to represent the system‘s true physical behaviour or process precisely. Model parameter
uncertainties reflect variability in the determination of the parameters to be used in the model or design. Data
uncertainties include inaccuracies and errors in measurements, inadequacy of the data gauging network, and
errors in data handling and transcription. Operational uncertainties are associated with human factors, such as
construction, manufacture, deterioration, and maintenance that are not accounted for in the modeling or design
procedure. Uncertainties fall into four major categories: hydrologic uncertainty, hydraulic uncertainty,
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 18
structural uncertainty, and economic uncertainty. Each category has various component uncertainties.
Hydrologic uncertainty can be classified into three types: inherent, parameter, and model uncertainties.
Various hydrologic events, such as stream flow or rainfall, are considered to be stochastic processes because
of their observable natural, (inherent) randomness. Because perfect hydrologic information about these
processes is lacking, informational uncertainties about the processes exist. These uncertainties are referred to
as parameter uncertainties and model uncertainties. In many cases, model uncertainties result from the lack of
adequate data and knowledge necessary to select the appropriate probability model or from the use of an
oversimplified model, such as the rational method for the design of a storm sewer. Hydraulic uncertainty
concerns the design of hydraulic structures and the analysis of their performance. It arises mainly from three
basic sources: the model, the construction and materials, and the operational conditions of flow. Model
uncertainty results from the use of a simplified or an idealized hydraulic model to describe flow conditions,
which in turn contributes to uncertainty when determining the design capacity of hydraulic structures. Because
simplified relationships, such as Manning‘s equation, are typically used to model complex flow processes that
cannot be described adequately, resulting in model errors. Structural uncertainty refers to failure caused by
structural weakness. Physical failures of hydraulic structures can be caused by saturation and instability of
soil, failures caused by erosion or hydraulic soil, wave action, hydraulic overloading, structural collapse,
material failure, and so forth. An example is the structural failure of a levee system either in the levee or in the
adjacent soil; the failure could be caused by saturation and instability of soil. A flood wave can cause
increased saturation of the levee through slumping. Levees also can fail because of hydraulic soil failures and
wave action. Economic uncertainty can arise from uncertainties regarding construction costs, damage costs,
projected revenue, operation and maintenance costs, inflation, project life, and other intangible cost and
benefit items. Construction, damage, and operation or maintenance costs are all subject to uncertainties
because of fluctuations in the rate at which construction materials, labor costs, transportation costs, and
economic losses, increase and the rate at which costs increase in different geographic regions. Many other
economic and social uncertainties are related to inconvenience losses: for example, the failure of a highway
crossing caused by flooding, which results in traffic related losses. The objective when analyzing uncertainties
is to incorporate the uncertainties systematically into the evaluation of loading and resistance. The most
commonly used method is the first-order analysis of uncertainties. This method is used to determine the
statistics of the random variables loading and resistance, which are typically defined through the use of
deterministic models but have uncertain parameter inputs.
2.5.3.4 Selection of Case Studies
A case study is under review of Risk analysis; the cooling process of heated effluents from thermal power
plant discharging into surface water bodies in Egypt. As an example, Nubaria Thermal Power Plant on the
delta region discharges heated water into the Nubaria Canal and El-Kureimat Thermal Power Plant
discharging into the River Nile directly.
2.5.4 Strategic Environmental Assessment
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is the application of environmental and socio-economic
assessment to policies, plans and programs. It seeks to address, as early as possible, and on a par with social
and economic impacts, what environmental impacts may occur, and what measures should be taken to avoid
or ameliorate these impacts. However, there is no internationally agreed definition of SEA, but the most
widely quoted is the interpretation offered by the three definitions below:
1. ―SEA is a systematic process for evaluating the environmental consequences of proposed policy, plan or
program initiatives in order to ensure they are fully included and appropriately addressed at the earliest
appropriate stage of decision-making on par with economic and social considerations‖ (Sadler and Verheem
(1996) as cited in ECA, 2005).
2. The formalized, systematic and comprehensive process of evaluating the environmental impacts of a policy,
plan or program and its alternatives, the preparation of a written report on the findings, and the use of the
findings in publicly-accountable decision-making (Theriel, et al. 1992 in Goodland et al. 1996).
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 19
3. A formal process of systematic analysis of the environmental effects of development policies, plans,
programs and other proposed strategic actions. This process extends the aims and principles of EIA upstream
in the decision-making process, beyond the project level and when major alternatives are still opens (UNEP,
2002).
4. A process of integrating the environmental and social concerns in the process of developing policies, plans
or programs.( World Bank, 2002)
5. Is the process of subjecting public policy, programs and plans to tests for compliance with sound
environmental management (Kenya‘s Environmental (Impact Assessment and Audit) Regulations, 2003).
SEA is a systematic process for evaluating the environmental and socio-economic consequences of proposed
policies, plans or programs to ensure environmental issues are fully integrated and addressed at the earliest
appropriate stage of decision making.
It is from here clear that SEA is a hierarchical process whose application depends on what level a
development proposal of a state or region is.
Table 2.6: From SEA to project‘ EIA in the Netherlands tiering approach
Hierarchy from up-down Setting Strategies Confinements and Resources
Policy level Why do something? Need
Objectives
Principles
Plan level What to do? Methods
Capacities
Program level Where to do it? Location
Project level How to do it? Design
Minimization
Compensation
It involves reviewing policy, plan and program proposals to incorporate environmental considerations into the
development of public policies.
The process of SEA is relevant at all levels of public decision making which precede the project level. As
such the costs are generally borne by the public sector, in contrast to project EIA where the promoter or
proponent (usually a private developer) is responsible for funding the assessment
2.5.4.1 Benefits of SEA
The principal benefits identified by respondents to the study, included:
Providing a systematic review of relevant environmental and socio-economic issues in the planning
process;
Improving and refining the basic strategic concepts involved in the policy, plan or program;
Achieving a clearer understanding of the potential environmental effects;
Leve
l of h
ierarch
y from
SEA to
Pro
ject EIA
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 20
Enhancing the policy, plan or programs' contribution to the overall goals of environmental and socio-
economic sustainability;
Creating a better balance between environmental, social and economic factors (thus aiding the
decision-making process);
Simplifying the process of environmental investigations at the individual project level, and thereby
reducing or possibly avoiding the need for Project EIA while also accelerating the process of decision
making.
Enhancing the transparency of the plan making process, and winning public support for preferred
options or strategies.;
Providing guidance on the development of mitigation proposals;
Helping to define environmental targets for monitoring purposes;
.SEA introduces environmental considerations into decision making early, before projects locations
and scale decisions have been made.
SEA provides a mechanism for incorporating into decision-making considerations related to
sustainable development; i.e. development that meets the needs of the present without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. SEA can draw attention to potential
environmental problems early so that decisions makers can filter out environmentally damaging
projects that might otherwise be the source of costly and protracted delays and controversy.
2.5.4.2 Steps in the SEA Process
SEA processes, currently in use, have a number of features in common:
Screening: A screening exercise is undertaken to answer the following threshold question: Should an SEA be
conducted for the subject proposal (i.e., a particular policy, plan or program)?
Scoping: A scoping exercise is conducted to ensure that all high priority issues relevant to the decision being
made are addressed in the SEA. There is wide agreement that both direct and indirect (or ‗secondary‖) effects
of a proposal should be examined and that cumulative impacts should be included in an SEA.
Indicators: Sometimes the description and evaluation of effects is given in terms of ―sustainability
indicators‖ (i.e., measures used to gauge whether the proposal will contribute to sustainable development).
Stakeholders: All ―stakeholders‖ - i.e., parties potentially affected by (or otherwise interested in) the proposal
- should be given an opportunity to participate in the scoping exercise. While consultation with stakeholders
takes place at various points in proposal development, it is particularly important during scoping.
Identification, Prediction and Evaluation of Effects: SEA is concerned with the both direct and indirect
impacts. The impacts of policies, Plans, and programs on the environmental components are normally
indirect. That is, the Policy, Plans or Programs, are designed to bring about changes in social and economic
behavior. These social and economic changes may in turn lead to potential direct and indirect impacts on the
environment. The process of forecasting and evaluating environmental effects in an SEA can employ some of
the same methods and procedures used in project- level EIA. It is at this level where EIA and SEA compare
since in the two processes a CBA and RA is done to help sight the economic gains and risks involved.
Integration: Integration of environmental, social and economic effects must be part of the impact prediction
and evaluation process. This joint consideration of environmental social and economic effects is essential
because some proposals will yield direct economic (or social) impacts that will then lead to indirect (or
―higher order‘) environmental effects. While most countries emphasize environmental effects in SEAs, some
are beginning to experiment with appraisals that integrate environmental, social and economic effects in a
balanced way.
Mitigation: An SEA should include measures that eliminate, reduce or offset adverse environmental effects.
The term ―mitigation‖ refers to the ―elimination, reduction or control of the adverse effects of the policy, plan
or program, and includes restitution for any damage to the environment caused by such effects through
replacement, restoration, compensation or any other means‖
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 21
Monitoring: An SEA should include a plan for monitoring environmental effects so that mitigation measures
can be implemented if unforeseen effects occur. In addition an SEA should include a plan for ensuring that
agreed upon mitigation measures are actually carried out.
Independent Review: An independent review of an SEA provides a check on the quality of the assessment.
Results from the review should be considered in preparing the final SEA and in making final decisions.
Researchers have developed criteria for reviewing and evaluating SEAs, and examples are given in Table 1.
Influence on Decisions: The SEA (including results of the independent review) should be made available to
decision makers at a time when those results can inform debate on the proposal and alternatives to the
proposal.
A Good Quality SEA Reporting Criterion should:
1. Contain a description of the project and the affected environment extending beyond the physical
boundaries of the project, focusing on key assets, sensitive areas and threats;
2. Review environmental and sustainability objectives of the plan and propose a set of criteria, targets or
indicators for evaluating the effects of the plans policies and their alternatives;
3. Contain a systematic identification, prediction and evaluation of potential impacts, including indirect
and cumulative ones, with a level of detail appropriate for appraising the plan and the information
needs of decision-makers;
4. Include recommendations on preferred alternatives and a description of suggested monitoring and
mitigation measures;
5. Include recommendations for tiring its results to environmental assessments at lower levels of the
planning hierarchy;
6. Clearly delineate and explain the methodology by which its findings have been obtained and report on
findings from public consultation;
7. Facilitate sustainability appraisal by
(a) Evaluating environmental sustainability;
(b) Presenting its findings in a way which will facilitate an integrated sustainability analysis
(including proposing sustainability criteria).
2.5.4.3 Determining whether or not SEA is appropriate
Screening questions for determining whether SEA is the appropriate tool for environmental assessment of a
program loan or sector loan are presented below;
1. Which policy area or sector is targeted in the proposal?
Is it known to have or likely to cause environmental effects?
Are there components that are likely to generate cumulative or long-term environmental
consequences?
2. What environmental considerations are raised by the proposal?
Does the proposal appear to initiate actions that will have direct or evident environmental impact?
Are there any policy, regulatory, or institutional weaknesses relative to environmental management in
the sector?
3. What is the state of the country‘s institutional context?
Do property rights on resources such as land tenure security not being recognized by the existing law?
Does the institutional framework for managing resources severely limit the role of civil
society/communities?
4 What is the state of the country‘s socio-economic context?
Is there high dependency on local resources?
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 22
That level of pressure on natural resources?
What is the rate of urbanization?
5. What is the state of the country‘s ecological context?
Are ecosystems fragile or robust?
What is the overall level of ecosystem degradation?
2.5.4.4 Examples of SEA Studies
Poverty Reduction Strategies, Ghana: Development of a national poverty reduction strategy for Ghana
applied at both the national and district level including recommendations on the sustainability level of district
development plans.
Transport policy, Mozambique: SEA for the development of a strategic alternative for alterations to a
coastal railway line using a national perspective.
Rehabilitation of Lake Tai, China: Development and comparison of alternative solutions to tackle water
pollution problems in order to rehabilitate basic functions of the lake.
Netherlands National Planning Decision “Room for Rivers‖: Development of a plan to secure a safe
increase of river discharges and improve the quality of the river bed in combination with related spatial
planning measures.
River Canalization in South America: Use of SEA for an evaluation of the ―hydrovia‖ Paraguay-Parana
waterway dredging project in the perspective of its consequences for nature, especially the quality of the Pant
anal Wetlands (now under implementation).
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 23
3 STUDY METHODOLOGY AND DATA INTERPRETATION
3.1 Background to Methodology
This study is aimed at getting the opinion of the people in selected countries of the Nile Basin and their
awareness level. A questionnaire (Appendix 1) was been prepared to help in carrying out a review of different
programs, policies, plans and projects. The idea was to find out which methodologies and guidelines were
used during the planning and decision making stages.
This report outlines the two phases (the desk study and the key informant questionnaire) findings. The
proposed research methodology to define and test such a hypothesis followed the task flow as summarized
below.
Carry out review of NBCs and the level of application of Environmental Assessment Methods and
Guidelines
Review of EA appraisal methods of two donor institutions, that is, the WB, and the AfDB.
Review river engineering developments in the NBCs
Study the existing methods of SEA
Questionnaire administration
Development of a model framework of Methods and Guidelines for SEA for RE
3.2 Case Studies
The sources of data shall be desk studies, and interviews by use of semi-structured questionnaires as one of
the methods. This research study covered the review of SEA related methods and guidelines used by the
Government of Kenya; review of specific case studies of SEA undertaken within the NBCs. This included:
Case I was the SEA done for International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) branch called Biosciences
Eastern and Central Africa (BecA); case II, was an SEA for the Kenya Forests Act 2005 done by the World
Bank‘s Agriculture and Rural Development Department; case III was a Social/Strategic and Environmental
Assessment Process for Bujagali Hydropower Project in Uganda; case IV was Strategic Environmental
Analysis for Irrigation Modernization in Egypt; and case V was a Strategic/Sectoral, Social and
Environmental Assessment of Power Development Options in the Nile Equatorial Lakes Region.
3.3 Semi-structured Questionnaire
This was aimed at getting the opinion of key informants in various government ministries, private companies,
Non-Governmental Organization and relevant institutions. A semi-structured questionnaire was developed to
aid in carrying out a review of different policies, plans, programs, and projects. The idea was to find out
whether they are aware of SEA tools, whether they have used them and or not, and how SEA compares with
CBA, RA. The questionnaire was then be used to engage the respondents in finding a solution to the best
framework process that shall comprise of the methods and guidelines of SEA specifically on River
Engineering. The structured interview questionnaire was, in addition to gathering information of SEA,
expanded to include background information on typical strategic frameworks, SEA procedures and practice,
and the purpose, resources and value of SEA on RE.
The second purpose of the interview was to solicit industry/company input on current practices, and to seek
out example formats and techniques, as well as to allow input from interview participants to suggest
improvements.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 24
3.4 Data Analysis Plan
By the very nature of the study, qualitative analysis featured more that quantitative data analysis following the
structure of data reduction, data display, conclusion and drawing verification. A framework thematic analysis
was used through five (5) key steps as detailed in the table below. This data analysis plan was used for both
the questionnaire administered in Kenya and the case reviews from the other NBCs. It would be worth noting
here that, the design of the question had assumed that people were aware of the SEA methodology and could
therefore respond to the questions. This was not the case; instead, the research team collected and analysed
case studies of SEAs that had been undertaken in their respective countries which were analysed as detailed
below and results presented as flow charts. This was done through five (5) key steps as in the table below:
Table 3.1: The framework thematic analysis
Step Process within the step
Familiarization process This involved whole or partial description and reading of data.
Identifying thematic
framework
This was the initial coding framework which was developed both
from issues before the questionnaire administration and from
emerging issues at the familiarization stage.
Indexing This was the process of applying the thematic framework to the data,
using numerical or textual codes to identify specific pieces of data
which correspond to differing themes.
Charting Headings from the thematic framework were used to create charts of
data so that it could be easily read across the whole data set. Charts
were thematic from each theme across all respondents.
Mapping & interpretation This involved searching for patterns, associations, concepts, and
explanation in the data by visual displays and plots.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 25
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 Review of Government of Kenya Practice
4.1.1. Background
The research established that the main decision making stages in the government, that is, Policy, Plan and
Program (or PPP), use SEA related processes. These decision making processes can all be referred to as
‗planning processes‘. This section focused on finding out the way government institutions apply
environmental assessment tools during their PPPs but also got insights on good practice by Institutions like
Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs), financial institutions and research institutes. One major finding
from both the literature review and case study findings is that, one cannot isolate the quantitative methods of
CBA and RA from both EIA and SEA exercises. If anything, the two methods are the key environmental
assessments tools bringing out the costs, benefits and inherent risks involved if a development proposal is
undertaken. While SEA tries to answer the questions why, what and where; EIA tries to answer the question
how. Therefore the review of existing alternatives can only be possible through undertaking CBA and RA of
the development proposal from policy level down to project level making the two methods very much part of
both EIA and SEA.
4.1.2. Screening and Scoping
The study found out that, a number of reasons lead to formulation of new plans. For instance the initiative in
formulating a policy might be due to integration or due to existing biases or government/stakeholder priorities
or due to weaknesses of existing policies. Policies also may follow any of these: the domestic issues such as
the Kenya‘s ERS 2003-2007, the Poverty Reduction Strategic Papers (PRSPs) and the Vision 2030; regional
issues like the East African Community (EAC), and the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI); or global regimes say the
Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) or the
Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA), etc. To formulate a new policy one has to internalize the fact that
there is or there will be a gap as far as implementation of activities is concerned.
Ministries draw on their senior staff particularly the Permanent Secretary, the departmental heads, deputy
heads, policy analysts, and department of policy for their policy formulation. The process starts with
constituting a multi-sectoral committee who draw up Terms of Reference (TOR). The consultant constitutes a
team of experts who form a task force. The task force team then agrees on targets, activities, indicators,
outputs and type of resources to be utilized and roles. This triggers the proponents to look at their capability
through analyses such as Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (or SWOT) and the Political-
Economic-Social-Technological-Legal-Environmental (or PESTLE) analysis. During policy formulation,
identification of the key objectives would open avenue to policy alternatives.
4.1.3. Literature Review
When formulating PPPs a number of sources of information include secondary data from websites, books,
reports, and records as well as primary data from research and stakeholder interviews. Other sources include
data bases from partners, staff consultation, audit findings and recommendations from reports.
4.1.4. Stakeholder Involvement and Communication
Stakeholder Analysis and Consultation
The study found out that there is a clear provision for stakeholder participation in especially policy
formulation process in Kenya that involves a combination of the line ministry, other relevant ministries,
government departments, the general public, lobby groups, the private sector, non-governmental
organisations, partners, line experts, and the interested and affected (I&A) persons as the case may require.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 26
The stakeholders should be involved as early as possible because during scoping, SEA requires that priority
issues be identified to help save money and time. The scoping should be publicly available for transparency
and to help build confidence of stakeholders.
The stakeholder consultation process has two key stages: stakeholder analysis which involves identification
and categorization; and; public consultation through public meetings, workshops, Focused Group Discussions
(FGDs) and interviews. The views of the stakeholders are categorized into thematic sections, discussed with
the stakeholders and a conclusion on how to deal with each issue agreed on. This resolution forms the plan
action matrix with indicators ready for implementation. It is also used to indentify capacity building needs.
Communication
Proper communication about a PPP is likely to lead to its successful implementation by reducing conflict. The
communication framework should be able to spell out at least the roles of each party or stakeholder group, the
legal binding under which the parties are working and the objectives of the PPP.
The study revealed that the role of the government is to create data bases through mapping which are then
accessed by stakeholders and investors in any sector through established communication channels.
Communication should be a continuous exercise and can be enhanced by establishing a secretariat.
4.1.5. Monitoring and Evaluation
M&E is important as a mechanism for crosschecking the performance of PPPs, therefore making it part and
parcel of the SEA process. During planning, objectives should be Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant
and Time-bound (S.M.A.R.T). This makes it easier to measure progress during implementation, and success
level based on objectives. Indicators are developed at all levels from policy down to project stage. The process
of developing indicators might use proxies to be able to tell what is happening in the environment. At policy
level the indicators are more global hence taking more qualitative character while at project level the
indicators are more specific taking more quantitative character.
The main output of an M&E is to measure how far the objective or goals have been achieved and therefore the
direction implementation is taking. This means the results can be used to redesign the PPP incorporating new
strategies. The M&E should also be dynamic since scenarios may change and therefore the timing for
evaluation.
4.1.6. Planning Tools and Processes Identified
1. PESTLE Analysis
An analysis of Political, Economic, Social, Technological advancement, Legal and Environmental (or
PESTLE analysis) is done during strategic planning. This identifies issues in each category against negative
effects, as illustrated in table 4.1. At strategic level, the PESTLE analysis, and particularly for environmental
issues, captures the aspect of uncertainty due to natural calamities and the related effects. During the strategic
planning stage, a PESTLE analysis could identify the risks and uncertainties and then put in place relevant
measures to mitigate them.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 27
Table 4.1: PESTLE Analysis
CATEGORY ISSUES EFFECTS
Political
Economic
Social
Technological
advancement
Legal
Environment
2. SWOT Analysis
It is an analysis of Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-and Threats (or SWOT). The SWOT analysis keys in
strengths and weaknesses as internal to an organization while opportunities and threats as external factors that
may influence how the organisation strategies to survive. This analysis is more of institution-based used at
strategic planning stage, project design stage and evaluation level.
Table 4.2: SWOT Analysis
OPPORTUNITIES THREATS
STRENGTHS
WEAKNESSES
3. LOGFRAME
From the PESTLE to the Log Frame Analysis, further details on key assumptions in achieving specific goals
through a number of activities is captured. The Logframe appears at plan, program and project levels where
objectives have been set giving desired results and how to measure these results through objectively verifiable
indicators (OVIs). The source of information from within or without is specified. Indicators are the Means of
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 28
Verification (MOV). More often than not, the Logframe is applied at project level than at higher levels of
planning.
4.1.7. Major Milestones in establishing an SEA Framework
Kenya has come up with guidelines provided in the Environmental Impact Assessment and Audit Regulations
(2003). On a regional context, the ministry of water and irrigation is developing a transboundary water policy
(TWP) whose objective is to ensure that Kenya‘s national water policy adequately addresses the
transboundary water management issues. A desk has been established at the MWI that deals with the TW
issues. This study established that once the TWP is done, then the Water Act shall be amended to cater for
opinions in the new policy.
General SEA attributes
Social viability: Share the initiative proposal with the local communities living within the region. Discuss
with them and let them give their views. The views should help in ascertaining acceptability to the local
people, and change in demography. Then address the fears and concerns of the inhabitants of all countries in
the region and reduction of riparian conflicts.
Economic viability: The question about how is one going to benefit from the vision such as good will for
upstream countries given by downstream countries. There should be a benefit of sacrifice. A good example is
the development of Sondu- Miriu HEP where the local community does not benefit from the power generated.
This requires performance of a CBA. It is good to see if lifestyles will be changed. The type of economy
prevailing in the affected area is very important.
Environmental issue: An analysis of the capacity of environment to accommodate a development proposed is
necessary- detailing the level of utilization of the natural resources. This should be done alongside the best
and available technology (BAT). Where required, projects go through an EIA as required by NEMA.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 29
Figure 4.1: Tools Used in SEA and Related Processes (Policy, Plan and Program Levels)
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 30
4.2 Case Study I: Sea on BecA Research Work-ILRI
Summary of the SEA
This SEA was done to complement the EIA that was used to assess the decommissioning, construction, and
operation of the BecA hub facilities. The SEA was done as part of donor requirement, Canadian International
Development Agency (CIDA) following the Canadian Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of
Policy, Plan and Program Proposals of 2004.
The SEA established the current state of the research environment at a strategic level, assessed the regional
and national regulations on bioscience research, examined Biosafety levels of existing and proposed new
facilities; and determines the direct, cumulative and synergistic impacts of BecA hosted research.
Canadian SEA guidelines
The SEA report on BecA program seeks to address nine key questions, which were drawn from CIDA
guidelines on SEAs. These are:
1. What is the existing situation in the particular sector and region?
2. What are the goals and objectives of the program?
3. Do these support relevant CIDA and Government of Canada policies, particularly those related to
environment and sustainable development?
4. What are the different feasible options for delivering the program?
5. What is the best feasible program for BecA?
6. What are the most pronounced environmental issues (negative or positive)?
7. How significant are these environmental effects?
8. What can be done to avoid or lessen negative effects and enhance positive effects?
9. How does BecA measure, monitor and report on the environmental effects?
Stakeholder SEA consultative process
The stakeholder consultative process was done in two stages: First involved in analysis where stakeholders
were identified and categorized in relation to the levels of required communication; and second stage involved
in public consultation through a series of workshops, public meetings, interviews and stakeholders and
representatives of the key stakeholder organisations, institutions and agencies.
Stakeholder Analysis
From the foregoing, different stakeholders make up the population affected by a policy, plan or program in
any sector. There may be many stakeholders but more importantly, the way the PPP affects them might be
different. Therefore within each of the affected stakeholders, there can be significant diversity of views and
conflicts of interest. To ease the stakeholder analysis and their participation, it is relevant to classify them into
three major groups as below:
Primary stakeholders: They have high influence over implementation of the policy and who will be
major beneficiaries.
Secondary stakeholders: these are stakeholder groups that may either influence or benefit from the
reforms but not both.
External stakeholders: these are the stakeholders representing international donor, or aid agencies.
Scoping-stakeholder findings
Findings were classified under potential risks to: environment, communities‘ livelihoods, gender, health,
political, legal and economic situations. The SEA basically looked at the processes, the products and the
policies governing research including legal and regulatory frameworks in the area affected. The main output
of the SEA was a strategic baseline study, a risk assessment and a risk management strategy.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 31
SEA’s influence on design and implementation of BECA’s works
After identification of possible types of risks emanating from different scenarios as highlighted above
(environment, communities‘ livelihoods, gender, health, political, legal and economic situations), risks were
then classified as high, medium and low.
Mitigation measures were recommended, and a risk management strategy was proposed the main elements of
which consist of the development and implementation of operational policies, projects screening criteria to
assess risks on a case by case basis for certain research, standard operating procedures (SOPs), training,
preventive maintenance, integrated confinement system, improved public relations and communications, and
compliance to be assured through regular audits and reviews.
The proposed risk management strategy is used to guide BecA in implementing and monitoring mitigation and
management system. As a result of SEA and EIA processes, ILRI has already embarked on preparing a
number of SOPs, training activities for its personnel in Biosafety and safety procedures in preparation to host
the BECA hub facility.
In conclusion, the SEA process through extensive consultation and technical review has identified and
examined the potential risks due to BecA‘s activities and operations. These risks are now predictable and are
judged to be mitigable. Other risks such as those related to political tensions and regional conflicts may be
predictable.
Provided the mitigation and management recommended in the report are properly adopted and enforced by
both BecA and ILRI, the major environmental and social risks of the BecA program can be acceptable, and
key benefits to the environment, livelihood, health and gender can be obtained.
Communication Framework
Throughout the SEA process, the risks of poor communication and the potential negative impacts this could
have on BecA was debated and highlighted by various stakeholders. The following arose from the
communication framework:
BecA is legal status to be clearly defined and made known to target researchers and institutions;
BecA‘s contractual agreement with National Agricultural Research Institutes (NARIs) and researchers
to be in place;
BecA‘s objective should clearly indicate its intention that benefits of research products developed at
its facilities are fair in terms of social and equity;
BecA‘s objective must ensure protection of commercialization of indigenous and TK systems;
BecA must appoint a public relations/communications expert on their staff;
Recommendations made in the framework strategy for public engagement and BecA‘s
communication strategy must be implemented.
Risk Analysis
The methodology of analysis of impacts and RA included a detailed analysis of the effects under the following
risk categories: Environment, livelihoods, health and gender. The risk level of each of the effects was
determined on the basis that the significance of a risk is a function of the likelihood of it occurring and the
consequence it will have with respect to severity, cumulative or synergistic effects, reversibility, public
perceptions, legal implications and mitigability (able to be managed).
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 32
Table 4.3: Risks mitigation and management for BecA hosted Research activities
Risk due to Risk level
H, M, L
Risk
mitigation
actions
Policies,
procedures
and training
required
Monitoring
means/
timelines
Current
status at
ILRI
Xxx xxx Xxx xxx xxx xxx
Risk management involves in the implementation of a number of components that enable or facilitate
mitigation of negative developments, as well as the monitoring of mitigation measures and management
systems. For each of the risk categories, mitigation included one or more of the following:
1. Policies
2. Project selection criteria for BecA-hosted research activities
3. Standard operating procedures (SOPs)
4. Maintenance programs
5. Training
6. Integrated confinement systems (ICS)
7. Public relations and communication strategy
8. Audits and reviews (as a means of M&E)
Public relations and communication strategy
BecA‘s Business Plan of April 2005, puts forward a communication‘s approach in three key goals:
1. integration of communications into all aspects of BecA‘s program and activities
2. Building a communication program to enhance relationships with stakeholders; and other partners,
thereby, building confidence among partners and stakeholders;
3. Ensuring development of interactive communication pathways with dissemination and feedback
mechanisms.
It also recognizes the need for strategic alliances for communication activities, as well as the need for
dissemination of information.
Table 4.4: Screening criteria for BecA-hosted research projects
Screening
question
Additional
criteria/remarks
Criticality of
question/issue
Scale 1-3
Ranking of
proposed
project
Scale 1-5
Weighted response
Criticality x
ranking
Xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 33
Figure 4.2: SEA on BecA Research Work done by ILRI
4.3 CASE STUDY II: SEA for the Kenya Forests Act 2005-World Bank
Background
This followed an institutions-centered Strategic Environmental Assessment methodology following the World
Bank toolkit approach. It is also an approach considered in the recently published ―Guidance on Applying
Strategic Environmental Assessment‖ by the Development Assistance Committee of the Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development. It has responded to local circumstances in the light of progress and
timing of the forest reform process and the need to clarify baseline conditions through a rapid appraisal of the
political economy and other situation assessments. A number of the steps were carried out in parallel with
each other. The main sequence of activities included four phases that entailed screening and scoping, situation
assessment, setting environmental priorities, and development of alternative courses of action as shown in
Figure 4.1 below. This was seen as appropriate for this institutions-centered SEA.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 34
Figure 4.3: Kenya Forests Act (2005) Institution – Centered SEA Process (The WB)
Important characteristics of the SEA in Kenya have included the following:
Reliance on rapid assessment of the political economy and analysis of existing publications to
establish the background to implementation of the Forests Act.
Strong emphasis on the role of stakeholder groups to help identify priority areas of concern and key
intersectoral environmental and social linkages. The opinions of all stakeholders have been sought
through both open dialogue in workshops and one-to-one discussions in person or by telephone
between individuals and members of the SEA team.
Use of a case study and other site-specific information to help identify potential winners and losers
arising from implementation of the new act and the extent to which the benefits of good forest
management are likely to be shared throughout society.
Development of a policy action matrix that incorporates an accountability and transparency
framework. Its purpose is to help the government chart out (beyond the road map) how to effectively
implement the Forests Act according to the prioritized issues.
The institution-based approach involved sector assessment in baseline studies, experts workshop, stakeholders
workshops, legal review of EMCA and related Acts, international study tours and political lobbying.
PHASE 1: SCREENING AND SCOPING
This initial phase shall entail rapid assessment of the political economy relating to the local government and
urban development. It also shall involve determining who shall be approached as stakeholders and identify the
environmental and social-economic considerations that would need to be taken into account in later phases of
the SEA study. This phase shall include three subsections, the political economy, stakeholder analysis and
literature review.
Rapid Assessment of the Political Economy
A clear understanding of the political economy is essential in any SEA for two reasons; first, it affects the
conduct of the assessment itself, and second, it plays a key role in determining the practical options for
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 35
delivering long-term reforms. One of the main consequences of the Forests Act will be the devolution of
centralized state control of forest management to local partnerships involving communities and the private
sector. It is therefore important to know what the dynamics are likely to be among the various stakeholders to
help assess who may be winners, who may be losers, and how to ensure that the relevant voices are heard.
Methods: An initial appraisal was based on personal meetings with key players, the well-informed insights of
Kenyan members of the SEA team through previous engagement in the reform process, and literature reviews.
A more systematic review of the role of different players was undertaken as part of the situation assessments.
Identifying stakeholders
A thorough understanding of stakeholders—who they are, what their concerns may be what interests they
have — is required in any SEA process. In this SEA the objective was to carry out a stakeholder analysis to
complement the analysis of the political economy. Through this analysis the SEA aimed to identify all
relevant stakeholder groups to be included in consultation.
Methods: The process of identifying stakeholders entailed reviewing the databases of key organizations
including the Kenya Forests Working Group and the Forest Department and identifying and listing
stakeholders who will be affected by the new act as well as those with an interest in the new act. The list in
appendix 2 of those consulted was presented to both the Ministry of Environment and the Forest Department
and confirmed to be fully representative of the wider stakeholder interests. The preliminary assessment of the
political economy generated critical information on the role of key stakeholders. This output was used to
select invitees to the first of the three planned workshops. It also helped identify environmental, social, and
economic issues that had been raised by disadvantaged groups, including communities living in and adjacent
to forests, and the private sector.
Literature Review
The literature review was to build a preliminary picture of principal concerns about the forest sector and
validate comments from individual stakeholders.
Methods: Relevant publications were identified through personal knowledge of team members, discussions
with informed stakeholders including the forestry profession and international community, and a keyword
search of the Internet.
PHASE 2—SITUATION ASSESSMENTS
The aim in preparing situation assessment reports was to provide a baseline description of the governance and
institutional, economic, financial, social, and environmental factors that need to be taken into account in
implementing the Forests Act. The assessments provide the evidence on which the findings and
recommendations of the SEA are based.
Governance and Institutional Assessment
This analysis considers the role of different institutions and organizations (identified through stakeholder
analysis; see Social Analysis) in relation to forest management at the national and local levels. It draws out
institutional issues in terms of both formal and informal practices and the way in which these are likely to
support or hinder the introduction of changes envisaged in the Forests Act.
Methods: The analysis included literature reviews that provided documented evidence of the roles and
attitudes of different public bodies, and of historical failures of transparency, accountability, and corruption.
These reviews were supported by interviews and discussions with key stakeholders.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 36
Financial and Economic Assessment
This appraisal has an important function in examining reasons for previous poor performance of the forest
sector with regard to forest management, timber valuation, and revenue collection, and exploring the scope for
improvements under each of these headings once the KFS is established. It also considers the role of the
international community in providing aid to forest services in Kenya.
Methods: Original data was collected and analysed to produce financial models of historic and projected
performance. In addition to data on actual performance, estimates were made of the future expenditure and
revenue streams for the KFS. The national analysis also drew on findings from the Hombe Forest case study.
Environmental Assessment
The environmental analysis focused on the nature of forest resources in Kenya, the aim being to establish
whether policies, rules, and regulations could be applied universally across the country, or would need to be
adapted to local conditions. It was also important to establish the nature and extent of forest cover to gauge the
types of environmental impacts to be considered.
Methods: Given the short time scale for the initial appraisal, the environmental assessment concentrated on
mapped information and published sources based principally on the literature review. Information contained
in the environmental analysis was combined with the findings from other assessments, including primarily the
social analysis to which it is closely allied given the overlaps between environmental resources, livelihoods,
and human welfare.
Social Assessment
This analysis was designed to assess the social context in which the new Forests Act is to be implemented,
and to explore community attitudes toward forest management issues. It also included a stakeholder analysis
to inform the way in which the views of different interest groups have been assessed.
Methods: The various interests of these groups, both overt and hidden, were examined in relation to the
problems being addressed by the new law under the headings of Environment, Social, Economic, and
Governance and Institutions. A separate exercise involved assessing the likely impact of the new Forests Act
on each of these interests (positive +, negative -, or unknown?), and indicating the relative priority that
implementation of the act should give to each stakeholder interest on a scale from 1 (high priority) to 4 (low
priority). The social analysis helped to inform other areas of study, including the institutional and governance
reviews, the selection of stakeholders, and the development of the case study methodology. Box 3.1 describes
the characteristics of the SEA stakeholders.
Hombe Case Study and Rumuruti Forest Site Visit
From the outset of the SEA, it has been considered important to verify broad conclusions drawn at a national
level by reference to conditions on the ground. A case study of Hombe Forest on the slopes of Mount Kenya
was used as a window into the local situation, primary areas of interest of the SEA, and determining the
practicalities of addressing priority areas. In addition, a site visit was made to Rumuruti Forest to understand
the varying context.
Methods: On location interviews were conducted with local representatives of the community and the
existing forest department, and collecting both quantitative and qualitative data. The SEA also held a
community-based workshop on the implications of the new Forests Act. A separate site visit to Rumuruti
Forest focused on the views of a local nongovernmental organization (Tree is Life) and the Rumuruti
Community Forest Association.
PHASE 3: SETTING ENVIRONMENTAL PRIORITIES AND DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES
A standard feature of SEAs is their focus on exploring alternative approaches to policies, plans, or programs.
In the case of the Kenya forest reforms, the content of the new Forests Act has largely defined the shape of the
new administration, but great flexibility remains in terms of the ways in which specific clauses of the act are
put into effect. It is in relation to practical implementation that the SEA is able to explore different ways of
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 37
achieving the overall aims. Findings from the stakeholder workshops, together with the outputs from the case
study in Hombe Forest and the brief visit to Rumuruti Forest have played a key role in shaping the SEA
recommendations. It should be noted that from the outset of the SEA process an effort was made to avoid
drawing conclusions prematurely, before hearing the views of those consulted and other stakeholders.
Workshops
A series of three workshops were planned to encourage dialogue between stakeholders on the key issues in the
first session, to bring together findings from the various assessments in the second workshop, and agree on
priorities for action and to invite stakeholders to make commitments to delivering specific elements of the
policy matrix in the third and final workshop.
Methods: A combination of presentations, exercises, working group sessions, and plenary discussions were
used to gather the views of workshop participants. The first two workshops helped identify priority concerns
and the policy action matrix contained in this report. The first workshop (held in May 2006) recorded the
broad concerns of stakeholders were explored in relation to the main themes of the SEA. The second SEA
workshop (held in June 2006) considered a range of questions based on the analysis of strengths and
weaknesses of the Forests Act. Participants were divided into four groups, each of which independently
examined a list of 40 questions and prioritized these in terms of the 10 most important topics that should be
addressed in the short term to strengthen delivery of the act‘s objectives. The findings from these exercises are
reported in chapter 3 and 4. At the second workshop, the situation assessment reports were presented together
with the findings of the Hombe Forest case study and an analysis of key questions arising from the May
workshop and subsequent analysis associated with the SEA.
Policy Action Matrix
The final stage of the SEA involved the preparation of a policy action matrix that captured findings and
recommendations from stakeholders. It sets these out with clear responsibilities for action. A time scale for
completion of activities needs to be completed by the government of Kenya. These actions were discussed and
agreed to at the third workshop.
4.4 Case Study III: SSEA for Bujjagali Hydropower Project in Uganda
4.4.1. Background
The third schedule of Uganda‘s National Environmental Management Act specifies that any development that
involves dams, rivers and water resources (including storage dams, barrages and weirs) or electrical
infrastructure (including electricity generation stations, electrical transmission lines and electrical substations)
require an EIA. The National Environmental Management Agency (NEMA) is Government of Uganda (GoU)
agency with primary responsibly for environmental impact assessment of projects in Uganda.
4.4.2. Summary of the SEA Process
The Social/Strategic and Environmental Assessment /SEA was done in compliance with the requirements of
the GoU and the policies and guidelines of the various International Financial Institutions (IFIs) that were
expected to finance the project. The purpose of the SEA was to ensure that the project was designed and
developed in a manner that minimizes negative social and environmental effects while maximizing project
benefits. Bujagali Energy Limited (BEL) conducted the SEA according to Terms of Reference (ToR) that
were approved by GoU (NEMA) and were made available to IFI representatives, Project Affected People
(PAP), NGOs and the general public for their review.
The main SEA work commenced in early 2006 with ecological fieldwork, social surveys and consultations
with relevant review agencies and potentially affected people and NGOs. Consultations on the draft findings
of the SEA were carried out in September and October of 2006. The SEA established the current state of the
regulations and standards of the GoU, and the safeguard policies and guidelines of the International Financial
Institutions (IFIs) that were expected to be involved in the project. An assessment of potential environmental
and social effects was one of the key policy requirements for all the IFIs involved in the project.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 38
Analysis was done to show how the standards, guidelines and policy requirements of the GoU and the IFIs
applicable to the project were identified. Where GoU and IFIs requirements overlapped, as for example in the
case for wastewater discharge where the GoU has effluent quality regulations and the World Bank has effluent
quality guidelines, then the more stringent of the overlapping requirements were adopted as the project
applicable requirements.
4.4.3. Bujagali Hydropower Project
The Bujagali Hydropower Project (or HPP) was a proposed 250 MW hydropower facility on the Victoria Nile
in the Republic of Uganda. The hydropower facility will consist of a 28 m high earth-filled dam and spillway
works, and associated power station housing up to five 50 MW turbines. It is to be located at Dumbbell Island,
approximately 8 km downstream (i.e. north) of the Town of Jinja. The dam is to impound a reservoir that
extends upstream to the tailrace area of the Nalubaale and Kiira facilities, inundating Bujagali Falls. The
reservoir will be 388 ha in surface area, comprising of the existing 308 ha surface of the Victoria Nile, and 80
ha of newly inundated land. The amount of newly inundated land is expected to be small, as the reservoir
waters will be contained within the steeply incised banks of the river. In total the project will require a land-
take of 125 ha for newly inundated land and permanent facilities. An additional 113 ha of land will be needed
temporarily for the construction of the facility.
4.4.4. The SEA Process
Baseline Data
Ecological fieldwork,
Social surveys
Consultations with relevant review agencies; potentially affected people; NGOs.
Result: An inventory of flora, fauna, landscape and the existing political economy
Screening and Scoping: The scoping exercise included underking:
Rapid assessment of the political economy relating to the development
Stakeholders identification
definition of objectives of
Environmental and socio-economic considerations to be taken into account in later phases of the SEA
study.
Political Economy: The political economy looked at the livelihood, industries, agriculture, cultural practice,
population distribution (85% of Ugandan stay in rural areas), environment, social life (HIV/AIDS), tourism,
and poverty levels.
Stakeholder Identification: The stakeholders involved were the national public, government agencies,
NGOs, local communities, project affected persons, vulnerable groups, business operators, tourists, visitors
and Indigenous Peoples.
Public Consultations: During the public consultations BEL retained the services of a witness NGO (InterAid
Africa) in August 2006 to provide independent monitoring of the consultation activities, and to provide a
mechanism for stakeholders to file grievances with the SEA processes. The program was implemented, in a
manner to ensure participation from women. Overall, the consultation activities and disclosure program were
designed to maximize:
Community awareness of the proposed project and SEA study and report
Opportunities for community input and involvement
The consultation program was designed in six phases:
1. Initial Stakeholder
2. SEA/ToR
3. SEA Summary Report
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 39
4. SEA Report and Action Plan
5. CDAP Consultation Planning and Project
6. Consultation.
Stakeholder Consultation: The stakeholder consultation process was quite comprehensive. It included the
following process and tools:
National Public Project notices in national newspapers;
web site;
Making documentation available to all interested parties;
Meetings were held with various government agencies and SEA documentation was circulated
through NEMA and NGOs (national and local);
Local Communities Contact was made with District and Sub-County level governments to inform
them of the project.
Sub-County Consultation committees, which included women and representatives from vulnerable
groups, were established to assist in consultation activities with local villages.
Public meetings were held in the affected communities to advise people of the project and to receive
their comments and concerns.
Socio-economic audit surveys were undertaken with the Project Affected Persons, (PAPs), including
women, as part of the consultation process and an action plan was prepared to deal with remaining
issues.
Additional surveys were also undertaken with the ―fishermen‖ community in the project area.
Vulnerable group representatives, including women, were included on the Sub-county Consultation
Committees. A separate tourism impact study was undertaken to cater for key affected businesses by
holding individual interviews.
Subsequent discussions between the tourist operators and BEL regarding mitigation/compensation
due to the flooding of Bujagali Falls were held.
Discussions with the employees of the tourism industry were held and actions to deal with potential
loss of income (either temporary or permanent) were proposed. The interests of tourists were
identified in the above mentioned tourism impact study.
The Kingdoms of Buganda and Busoga were directly consulted through meetings and the submission
of project documentation.
A comprehensive listing of the issues identified included:
Resettlement activities
Community development activities
Cultural activities
Construction workforce impacts
Local community access to electricity
Employment/training opportunities
Need for community consultations
Potential for job loss in tourism industry
Safety issues arising from construction traffic
Local community benefits from the project
Loss of access to the river
Low water levels in Lake Victoria being exacerbated
Safety issues in Nalubaale facility
Communication and Disclosure Program: BEL disclosed the following documents:
• SEA ToR and the draft PCDP;
• Consultation Summary of the draft findings of the SEA;
• HPP SEA Report, which includes APRAP, CDAP, and PCDP
In the Bujagali project the SEA TOR and draft PCDP were distributed in July 2006 to the National
government (NEMA) and local government stakeholders (sub-county level). The Consultation Summary
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 40
Report was released in late September 2006. The final SEA Report was released in December 2006. The SEA
Report and Action Plans were available to the other identified stakeholders and the public at large at publicly
accessible locations and on the BEL web site: www.Bujagali-energy.com. The only problem is the brief time
period in which it was done and that the local community do not ordinarily access such media because of the
cost and the prevalent low literacy levels. Hence communication and disclosure would be highly ineffective to
this group of stakeholders.
Impact Identification and Management:
a. Strategic Impacts
This SEA adopted a project life cycle assessment format. It focused on the development of specific
management initiatives for all phases of the project to ensure the following strategic impacts:
i) The people closest to the project receive the projected benefits;
ii) Potentially negative environmental and socio-economic impacts are minimized;
iii) Potentially negative health and safety impacts are kept to a minimum.
To optimise the life cycle assessment, linkages between potential impacts (i.e., key environmental issues),
mitigation measures (i.e. management actions), net effects (i.e. residual effects), and monitoring programs (i.e.
management decision tools) were explicitly made.
b. Cumulative Impacts
The potential cumulative effects of the Bujagali hydroelectric project were evaluated in the context of other
existing and proposed hydroelectric projects on the mainstream Victoria Nile in Uganda. The timeframe was
on the order of 20 years, though conceptually, the timeframe extends to the end of the operational life of the
projects under review, more on the order of 50 years, at least.
Positive cumulative impacts: Overall, the significant and positive cumulative effects of Bujagali included:
Developmental benefits at the local, regional and national levels, including economic benefits.
Increased supply of electricity, including poverty alleviation benefits
Compensation to people economically affected or physically relocated by the project
Employment and small business opportunities for Ugandans in the short, medium and long terms.
Negative cumulative impacts: Project cumulative impacts of a negative nature were considered to be of
minor significance. These included:
Relocation of people with compensation to accommodate the construction facilities and operations;
Aesthetic impacts from the presence of another dam with the potential for knockon tourism impacts;
Some disruption of the natural flow regime over the ~8-km reach of River Nile downstream of and as
a result of Nalubaale and Kiira facilities with associated impacts on aquatic organisms and
communities and river users;
Losses of wildlife populations and habitats, as well as agricultural lands, due to inundation of
terrestrial habitats;
Disruption of fish migrations in the river Nile in the vicinity of the project;
Insignificant changes in the levels of Lake Kyoga and in flows downstream of it;
Reduced operational need to increase flows through Nalubaale and Kiira due to efficiencies from
Bujagali HPP.
With respect to cumulative effects with other non-hydroelectric projects in the Ugandan energy sector, there
could be a reduced need to dispatch thermal and emergency sources of electricity to the Ugandan grid and by
individual consumers (generators) with cost savings, air emissions reductions, and likely human health
benefits. Another such effect could be some reduced demand for other fuels (including firewood) where
access to electricity is available and cost-competitive. There are no changes (including cumulative effects)
anticipated in the ‗Agreed Curve‘ hydrological regime for the river Nile.
BEL was to consult with key stakeholders in Uganda and elsewhere, as appropriate, on the preliminary
conclusions reached in the cumulative effects analysis and report on the results and any associated mitigation
or monitoring implications, as appropriate, in the SEAP update documentation to be released on a regular
basis. In addition, the final version of the Strategic/Sectoral, Social and Environmental Assessment of Power
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 41
Development Options in the Nile Equatorial Lakes Region commissioned by the Nile Basin Initiative is
expected to become available after the disclosure of this SEA report. The update of this cumulative effects
analysis of preliminary conclusions will include any implications for this analysis from the final version of
that report, as well as modifications resulting from consultations with key stakeholders.
c. The Management Plan
The impacts would be achieved through the SEAP with the following constituent management plans whose
details are given in the original document (attached) and included:
Sponsor‘s Action Plan
Contractor‘s Action Plan
Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan (PCDP)
Assessment of Past Resettlement Activities and Action Plan (APRAP)
Community Development Action Plan (CDAP)
Environmental Mitigation & Monitoring Plan (EMMP)
Labour Force Management Plan (LFMP)
Traffic Management Plan (TMP)
Waste Management Plan (WMP)
Labour Force Management Plan (LFMP)
Regulatory & Management Framework: Legislation/Policies, Environmental Review,
Change Management Health & Safety Management Plan (HSMP)
Pollutant Spill Contingency Plan (PSCP)
Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan (EPRP)
Hazardous Materials Management Programme (HMMP)
A field team comprising of field inspectors, supported by drivers and labourers would maintain a permanent
presence onsite, carrying out routine checks of operating procedures and environmental monitoring. BEL was
committed to the creation and implementation of programs to reduce the probability of occurrence of
deleterious environmental incidents. Contingency plans were developed for dealing with such adverse
incidents, if they occurred. BEL expected the same level of environmental performance from its agents,
suppliers, and sub-contractors and would stipulate this in any legally binding agreements it entered with these
parties.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 42
Figure 4.4: The Deduced SEA Framework for Bujjagali
4.5 Case Study IV: SEA for Irrigation Modernization in Egypt
1- Introduction
The Nile River in Egypt represents the main source of water. Rainfall is rare and the desert covers most of
Egypt, except for a narrow strip of cultivated land and urban areas along the Nile river course. The Nile Delta
occupies an area of about 6 million feddans (1 feddan = 4,200 m2) and the Nile valley occupies an area of
about 2.5 million feddans. The Delta region is characterized with large tracts of rich fertile agricultural land,
overpopulation, unique and delicate environmental conditions caused by the mixing of drainage and fresh
water, unique flora and fauna, and problems associated with low lying areas such as sea water intrusion.
Management of these natural resource areas has become more critical as ecological balance in these areas
becomes threatened due to an increase in water exploitation to support population growth and resource
development.
2- Survey on Irrigation Modernisation in Egypt
Like other water-scarce countries, Egypt is facing fast growing demands versus limited water resources.
Therefore, Egypt is entitled to do more with less water. This fact was early recognized by the government and
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 43
considered in country's plans and mitigation measures. One of the key measures is the rehabilitation and
modernization of the irrigation system. During the period 1977-84, EWUP was instrumental in introducing a
system for irrigation improvement and irrigation participatory. The activities of the EWUP included problem
identification, evaluation of alternative solutions for technical and socio-economic feasibility, and
demonstration solutions to improve the social and economic livelihood of Egyptian farmers through improved
irrigation water use and management and related agroeconomic practices. In 1985 the government of Egypt
began a national program to improve the existing irrigation system in the old lands. A project called Regional
Irrigation Improvement Program (RIIP) was established within the MWRI according to the ministerial decree
issued in 1984 based on EWUP recommendations. The basic goal was to improve the agricultural productivity
and reduce water use in the old land through implementing the recommendations of the EWUP in pilot areas
with significant problems such as Beni Ebeid in El-Menya Governorate.
The goals of the IIP as a modernized process included the following:
Strengthen the institutional capacity of the MWRI so that it has equipment, organization, staffing,
managerial and administrative skills, and operational policies and procedures to continue NIIP.
Develop a rational interdisciplinary approach for planning, designing, and implementing the
renovation of specific commands identified in the ministry plans.
Develop and put in place an irrigation advisory service to provide for the transfer of water
management technical information and technical assistance.
Organize operational water users associations in all IIP areas to provide farmer input during the
renovation process, scheduling of water on Mesqas, perform maintenance, and resolve local disputes
Establish policies and procedures for the recovery of a reasonable portion of the operation and
maintenance costs of the irrigation system and the full cost of Mesqa and on-farm improvements.
This modernized process included two main components; physical changes and organization changes. The
physical changes included; continuous flow in branch canals, physical rebuilding of existing Mesqas, and
replacement of individual pumps by collective pumping. The organization changes included establishment of
Water Users Associations (WUAs) and creation of an Irrigation Advisory Service. IIP started in 1989 and
established a number of private WUAs on Mesqa level as well as the institutional structure for the IAS. The
main goal of IIP is to increase the irrigation efficiency and agricultural productivity. Implementation of IIP
covered an area of 147,000 hectares (350,000 feddans) in 11 pilot areas in Egypt for the period 1989-1996. In
1995, the World Bank IIP project was initiated to include improvements of additional 104,160 hectares
(248000 feddans) in Lower Egypt. This study highlights briefly on the modernization package that is
i m p l e m e n t e d i n B e n i E b e i d a r e a i n E g y p t d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d 1 9 8 8 – 1 9 9 6 .
3-Baseline Data of Modernized Irrigation System in Beni Ebeid in Egypt
This section provides a brief description of modernized irrigation system in Beni Ebeid area in Egypt. Table
(1) summarizes the main information of the process.
3-1 Location
Beni Ebeid area is located in the western part of Menya Governorate in Middle Egypt. Beni Ebeid comprises
two main villages; Greis and Beni Ebeid in Abo Korkas District.
3-2 Command Area
The total gross area is 2100 hectares (5000 feddans)1 and the net irrigated area is about 1871 hectares (4455
feddans). The boundary of the command area is defined by the Greis drain on the west and Mohit drain in the
east side as shown in figure (4.5).
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 44
Figure 4.5: Irrigation and Drainage System in Beni Ebid Area in Egypt
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 45
3-3 Land Tenure Structure
The size of farms in Beni Ebeid Area ranges from 0.042 to 5.04 hectares (0.1 to 12 feddans) with an average
of about 1.05 hectares (2.5 Feddans). 56% of farmers who are working in this area own their land while the
remainders are renting the land. The farmer and family members provide most of the labour required for
farming and irrigation.
3-4 Date of Modernization
A feasibility study for Beni Ebeid area has been completed in the early of 1991. After then, the MWRI,
through USAID funded project on improvement of irrigation in Egypt (IIP), started implementation of the
recommended alternatives in the previous studies and approved policies. By the end of 1994, the
implementation of the modernization has been completed. It should be noted that, the construction of the
automated downstream control gates of Beni Ebeid branch canal was carried out in 1988-89.
3-5 Water Sources
The main source of water supply to the area is the Nile River that provides more than 97% of the total water
demand of the command area (The total crop water consumptive use was estimated at 25 million cubic meters
per year). Nile waters are delivered to the area through a major canal called Serry canal which off-takes from
Ibrahimai canal that takes, in turn, from the Nile River upstream Assuit Barrage. Private groundwater
tubewells (about 20 tubewells) cover the rest of the water requirements. Studies showed that groundwater is a
reliable source, in terms of quantities and quality, and could be practiced in this area.
3-6 Energy Source
Diesel fuel constitutes the main energy source to operate the pumps that are installed at the head of Mesqa to
divert water from branch canal to Mesqa. Water is then made available to farmer fields, through openings
along the Mesqa, which flows by gravity to fields. Water flows from main canals to branch canals (primary,
secondary and distributary canals), before and after the project, by gravity. Before the project, water was
flowing from branch canal to the Mesqa by gravity, while farmers used to lift irrigation water to their fields
using their own (or rented) small mobile pumps. After the project, water is lifted to the new Mesqa, but the
irrigation water is distributed to the farms by gravity.
3-7 System Type
The modernization system of irrigation in Beni Ebeid areas involved improving the hydraulic conditions of
water distribution at tertiary level. The system provided two types of tertiary canal (private canal operated by
farmers that is called Mesqa) instead of the old one that was earthen canal and was found not efficient to
deliver water to farm gate. The first type was to replace the old Mesqa with a new Mesqa that is lined and
elevated. Water is pumped from the distributary canal to the Mesqa head while water discharges by gravity to
farms. The other type included replacing the old Mesqa with a pipeline with low pressure and water is
delivered to farms through Alf2-Alfa valves along the pipeline. Modernization included also rehabilitation of
the distributary canal and constructing automatic downstream control gates instead of the old gates.
3-8 Water Rights
Water rights system is not existing in Egypt. Farmers, however, are allowed to take water from canals or
Mesqas to irrigate their land. Scheduling of irrigation is made among farmers associations, known as Water
Users Associations, WUAs, with the assistance of an innovated governmental entity called Irrigation Advisory
Service, IAS. Water allocated to farmers is mainly based on the cropping pattern. However, in case of water
deficit in Mesqa discharge, this deficit is proportionally distributed among farmers according to the decision
taken by the WUAs. The irrigation schedule shows the turn of each farmer to irrigate and the number of hours
to open the gate or the valve on the Mesqa. This schedule is implemented by the leader of the Mesqa and the
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 46
leaders of the gate or the valve along the Mesqa. Although the irrigation interval of the system before
modernization was fixed to 15 days, farmers particularly those at Mesqa tail, used to complain from lack of
irrigation water or were deprived from irrigation during the on-period of the canal. The modernized system
grantees the time of irrigation and the flow for each farmer as expressed in operating hours of gate or the
valve. The determined number of hours for irrigation has encouraged farmers to implement land levelling to
reduce irrigation hours to minimum and to increase land productivity as well ). Frequency of irrigation after
modernization became also more flexible. It depends on the crop type. Sensitive crops may need shorter
irrigation interval. This was achieved through introducing the continuous flow. Irrigation interval and duration
is determined by the WUA. Farmers became very keen with their water application, as they are paying for the
cost of operation and maintenance. They do their best to minimize the operating hours and consequently
optimise the use of water. The MWRI used to release an average of about 13000 cubic meters of water per
hectare per year ( 5500 m3/feddan/year) for Beni Ebeid at the head of the command area. The problem was
that this quota was unevenly distributed among farmers before the modernization process.
3-9 Main Crops
The main grown crops in summer include Cotton and Maize, which cover about 82% of the cultivated area,
while the main crops in winter include Wheat and Berseem (Clover) that occupy about 89%. Permanent crops,
such as sugar cane and fruit trees, occupy about 2.3% of the cultivated land. The cropping pattern is used to
determine the water requirements and deliveries to the command area based on the standards crop
consumptive water uses set by the MWRI. Water allocated to farmers is then determined by the WUAs based
on cropping pattern and also based on the conditions of water allocated to each Mesqa. Water deficit is
proportionally redistributed among farmers. The irrigation schedule as set by WUAs defines the time of
irrigation for each farmer or group of farmers at the gate or valve. It defines also the allowed water delivery to
fields in terms of operating hours for each farmer.
3-10 Soil
Like most of Nile Valley and Delta region, soil in Beni Ebeid area is mainly fluvial deposits derived from Nile
silts without significant influence of desert Aeolian deposits. This type of soil is mainly classified as vertisol
that is characterized by deep cracks during the off-period of irrigation. The problem of these cracks becomes
severe when the off-period gets longer. Studies and investigations in this area showed that this type of soil
restrict 80% of the plant root to the upper 40 cm layer of the soil. This affects the type of crops grown in the
area where citrus and other deep-root plants are not grown. Soil salinity in the area was found to be mostly
non-saline soils. Very limited area, that is not exceeding 3% of the command area, is classified as moderately
saline soils. Water table in most of the area is 150 cm or more below the ground surface.
3-11 Irrigation/drainage Infrastructure
Beni Ebeid Canal is a third order canal of 12.68 km length. It branches from Serry Canal at km 12.0
downstream Serry intake. The canal has three water structures that regulate the flow and to create the suitable
head for off-takes (branch canals) along it. These regulators were replaced through constructing new
regulators along the canal. The new regulators are provided with radial gates to provide automatic
downstream water level control under continuous flow process. The gate type is AVIO 110/200 at the canal
head, AVIS 920/170 at km 4.375, and AVIO 90/125 at km 9.53. Beni Ebeid canal has also 4 bridges crossing
the canal.
There are also four branch canals, of fourth order, take from Beni Ebeid canal. Branch canal length varies
from 1.7 to 3.5 km. Two branch canals, of fifth order, take from Elnahal canal as shown in figure (4.5). The
total canal length of Beni Ebeid branches is about 14 km. Branch canals are also provided with 7 bridges.
Farmers usually get their water from Mesqas. Mesqa is a private canal that takes from the branch canal and it
is maintained and operated by farmers on their own while the government is responsible for operation and
maintenance of the public canal system which comprises main and branch canals, i.e. except Mesqa. In Beni
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 47
Ebeid area, Mesqas irrigate 55% of the total command area while the remainder area, 45%, is irrigated from
direct outlets along Beni Ebeid canal. The total number of Mesqas in the area was 111 Mesqa and off-takes.
The modernization process included grouping most of scattered off-takes onto a new Mesqa. Therefore, the
number of the improved mesqa is currently 65. Improved Mesqa facilities include a pump station at Mesqa
head in addition to a reservoir to provide low head for pipeline Mesqa. The number of pipeline Mesqas is 27
while the open elevated Mesqas are 38.
The command area has adequate facilities of drainage system where water table problems or salinity problems
are not recorded. The whole area is provided with subsurface drainage system installed at 1.0 m below the
ground surface and has a space of 75 meters between laterals. This system of drainage collects field drainage
and discharges it to an open drainage system such as Garis and Mohit drains.
3-12 Discharge
The estimated peak water duty in July is 87.89 cubic meters per hectares per day (36.9 cubic meters per
feddan per day). This means that the designed discharge is 1.9 cubic meters per second for the command area
(MWRI, 1993). Studies are now being conducted by National Water Research Center to evaluate this process
of modernization. It aims also at measuring the actual flow runs through the system at the head of the
command area.
3-13 Operation and maintenance
The activities of operation involve purchase of diesel and lubricants. A schedule of operation of the pump is
decided by the WUAs council with the assistance of the IAS. Collection of fees is also the responsibility of
the council. Collection of fees is determined on operating hours basis or seasonal basis. The latter is the most
recommended alternative. Maintenance of Mesqa such as regular cleaning is the responsibility of the WUAs.
Some cleaning activities or repairs can be conducted by users themselves. In some cases, labour is hired to
conduct some maintenance works for the WUAs. The average annual cost of operation and maintenance in
Beni Ebeid area is about L.E. 135 per feddan, i.e., about US$ 71.4 per hectare (Allam, 1995). A member of
the WUAs called treasurer is responsible for collecting O&M fees from farmers on annual basis and
depositing into the bank account. The operation and maintenance fees are determined by WUAs without any
governmental interference. In Beni Ebeid Area, members of the WUA mentioned that they determined the
O&M fees based on crop type and irrigation application. Three categories were developed for payment
starting from US$ 3.5 and up to US$ 5.0 per hectare per application. Fees are used for covering the following
cost items:
Salary of the pump operator, which is determined at US$ 0.20 per hectare per year, i.e. about US$ 400
per year for the whole command area.
Cost of the pump fuel and lubricant
Cost of repair and spare parts, and periodical cleaning of the Mesqa
The rest of the fees is deposited into the bank account of the WUA to be used in the future for
replacement of pumps or for major rehabilitation works.
3-14 Irrigation methods
Like most of old lands in Egypt, Beni Ebeid areas is characterized by surface (flood) irrigation method. Basin
or Furrow irrigation is practiced in this area based on the crop type. Micro irrigation system such as sprinkler
or drip irrigation is not practiced in this area. Transfer to drip irrigation is a new policy applicable only for the
trees' farms, and still not in implementation
4- Baseline Data Analysis Modernized Irrigation System in Beni Ebeid in Egypt
4-1 Causes that led to modernization
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 48
The IIP is carried out with the main objectives of:
Facilitating a more equitable distribution of water between upstream and downstream users.
Ensuring long term sustainability through active participation of water users.
Augmenting agricultural production and incomes through improvements of the basic infrastructure,
providing continuous water flow, and improved field irrigation systems.
4-2 Steps of modernization process
The improvement package includes interventions at two levels of the irrigation system: the branch canal and
the tertiary canals (Mesqa) from where farmers abstract water to their fields . The largest part of IIP, however,
is improvements of the tertiary system. The package of the IIP can be listed as follows:
Renovation and improvement of branch canal and distributary canals
This involved improvement of the main delivery system in Beni Ebeid area included seven branch canals as
mentioned before. Improvement plan included the following:
Rehabilitation of the water structures along these canals such as intakes, cross regulators and tail
escapes to prevent water losses from canal end to drains.
Replacement of the old structures with new ones of radial gates to provide automatic control for the
downstream water levels to cope with the farmers demand and abstraction.
Remodelling the canal cross section to improve the canal characteristics and conveyance efficiencies.
This means bringing the cross section up to standards of the original design. The remodelled cross
section was made to allow for water storage during the non-irrigation times; particularly during night
time.
Turn-outs and offtakes are also planned to be installed along the branch canals such as facilities at the
head of each Mesqa; pumps, pump stands and pump sumps. Energy dissipation basins are also
constructed at the head of each Mesqa.
Utilization of other water resources
Utilization of other water resource (non-conventional waters) includes groundwater and agricultural drainage,
to augment the branch canal flow. The plan included two options. The first is to construct four deep tube
wells, each of 400 m3/hour. The second is to construct twenty-five shallow wells, each of 100 m3/hour.
Drainage water reuse was not considered in this process, given the ability of groundwater with better quality.
In fact none of these options have been implemented till now. The use of these water resources aims at
compensating the canal flow so that water rights will be met at its pre-determined quantities. This option will
be essential in future particularly if the canal flow is reduced due to increases in national water demands.
Downstream water level control
The self-regulating gates (float –operated radial) are provided to branch canals to respond to water level
fluctuations in the downstream. These gates open to bypass more flow when farmers abstraction increases in
the downstream and close when water withdrawal is stopped. The gates close completely when water levels
rise to approximately 10 cm above the crest level of the tail escape. Two types of downstream control gates
were suggested; AVIO and AVIS as shown in figure (4.6). The first was recommended for relatively higher
upstream water levels while AVIS is for smaller upstream levels.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 49
Figure 4.6: Deduced SSEA Framework of the NELSAP Automatic Downstream Water Level Control
Mesqa Improvement
Improvement of Mesqa constitutes the major part of the modernization process. It includes replacement of the
existing Mesqa, which is earthen low level ditch with non-organized water withdrawal through multiple
pumping/lifting points along its length. Two types was recommended for modernization, open elevated Mesqa
and buried low-pressure pipe. Elevated Mesqa is an open ditch, but lined and elevated. Normal water level in
the elevated Mesqa was set to permit gravity flow to fields at 15 cm above the field level. Alternatives for
elevated Mesqa include a rectangular concrete cast-in place section and pre-cast concrete ―J‖ section. Low-
pressure PVC pipeline Mesqa is another option for replacing the old Mesqa. It is set at approximately one
meter below grade and provided with risers at spacing of about 100 meters. Flow from each riser is controlled
by an alfalfa valve. Such types of these Mesqas, elevated or pipe line, are intended to reduce the seepage of
water to minimum. The end of the Mesqa is closed to prevent water losses to drains. Figure (4.7) shows a
schematic for pipeline Mesqa. The pipe Mesqa is recommended when land acquisition for constructing open
Mesqa is difficult and expensive. In addition, Pipe Mesqa is recommended when Mesqa runs through villages
and subject to pollution and blocking by villagers garbage. The cost of construction of the open elevated and
pipe Mesqa is US $ 457 per hectare (L.E. 867 per feddan) and US$ 853 per hectare (L.E. 1612 per feddan)
respectively (Allam, 1995). However in other areas particularly in Lower Egypt, the difference in prices
between the open and pipe Mesqa is less than that in Beni Ebeid area. Farmers (i.e., WUAs) have the decision
to select the type of Mesqa based on their conditions.
Figure 4.7: Low Pressure Pipeline Mesqa
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 50
Conversion from Rotational flow to continuous flow
Continuous flow in branch canals was viewed as an important part of the process of modernization. Farmers
can have greater flexibility in timing of irrigation applications to meet crop water requirements as compared to
the rigid rotation schedules of the traditional system. Irrigation schedule will then be among farmers
themselves without government intervention. The water supply to the command area before the modernization
process was about 4.0 cubic meters per second during the on-period. After implementing the modernization
process, water supply reduced to 1.9 cubic meters per second but on continuous basis. The irrigation schedule
among farmers was not set before modernization where farmers used to wait on the canal or Mesqa until they
find the water to irrigate their fields. The modernized process enabled farmers to know their time of irrigation
and number of irrigation hours instead of waiting along the canal or Mesqa. This process prevented the over
irrigation usually made by the head farmers that affected the water availability for tail farmers. Regarding the
change of irrigation methods, the MWRI is currently conducting some studies to introduce drip irrigation
system for trees and orchards.
Formation of Water Users Associations
Farmers along the improved Mesqa are organized in WUAs to build, operate, and maintain their Mesqa on
their own initiative. A board of 6 members is to be elected by the water users. The board consists of head,
treasurer, and other four members. The board will be responsible for collecting operation and maintenance
cost from farmers. Usually, a bank account is made for WUAs to control the financial issues of the O&M of
improved Mesqa.
Establishment of Irrigation Advisory Service
The irrigation advisory service (IAS) is a newly established governmental entity to provide technical
assistance to farmers such as operation and maintenance of the modernized irrigation system. IAS also helped
farmers establish water users associations, scheduling of irrigation among farmers and on-farm activities such
as land leveling.
4-3 Organizations/Institutions involved
Under the modernization process, three organizations became involved in irrigation management and
decision-making:
MWRI-Irrigation Directorate, at the Governorate level, became responsible for water management at
the main canal system such as Serry canal; the main feeder of Beni Ebeid branch canal. Water flow in
Beni Ebeid branch canal is then regulated automatically through automatic downstream water level
control gates that are operated under the on-demand system.
Water Users Associations (WUAs) is a new organization established through the modernization
process. WUA is a non-governmental organization which incorporates representatives of farmers that
benefit from the Mesqa. For each Mesqa, WUA council is formed, through election, to include 3 to 10
members; head of WUAs, treasurer, operator, and other members. WUA is responsible for Mesqa
improvement (such as selection of Mesqa type, locating the new Mesqa, locating Mesqa turnouts),
operating and maintaining the single point lift pump, scheduling turns among water users, resolving
disputes, and Mesqa maintenance.
Irrigation Advisory Service (IAS) is a newly initiated governmental agency. The primary mission of
the IAS is to facilitate and assist formation of WUAs. It also assist in providing technical assistance to
water users for Mesqa improvements, operation, maintenance, and irrigation scheduling among
farmers.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 51
4-4 Implementation of the modernization process
The process of implementation of the IIP in Beni Ebeid included five main components as follows:
Feasibility studies and Design for the delivery and Mesqa systems
Bidding and contracting process
Construction
IAS and WUAs activities
Land and water management activities.
4-5 Actual Modernization that took place
4-5-1 Main Delivery System
The canal cross section for the all branch canals in Beni Ebeid command area have been remodeled to cope
with continuous flow
• Three radial gates for automatic downstream water control have been constructed. The AVIS gate at
canal intake, AVIO gate at km 4.75, and AVIO gate at km 9.53 on the canal.
• AVIO gate has been installed at each branch canal intake.
• Canal tail escapes for all branch canals haven been rehabilitated to prevent water losses from canal
end.
4-5-2 Mesqa System
The number of improved Mesqas in Beni Ebeid is 65 Mesqsa that covers the total command area of Beni
Ebeid. Twenty-seven out of 65 Mesqas are pipeline and the remainder are raised Mesqas. All Mesqas are
currently fully operated since they are equipped with the designed facilities such as pumps.
4-5-3 Formation of Water Users Associations
There are, 65 WUAs were formed to cover the whole command area. They are currently involved in operation
and maintenance of the improved Mesqas.
4-5-4 Establishment of IAS
IAS office in Beni Ebeid has been established since 1991. It comprises agricultural technicians . They are
responsible for WUAs formation, farmers training and providing technical assistance to them.
4-5-6 Training
Training was provided to both the government staff and water users associations on the operation and
maintenance of the new system.
4-5-7 Introducing continuous flow policy
Continuous flow is introduced to all branch canals of the area.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 52
4-6 Training
A new program, as revolutionary as the IIP, requires specific training and capacity building programs to
ensure success and sustainability. Different training courses were given to both water users and IAS staff
during the implementation of the process. These courses included:
A. Training courses for WUAs:
• Introduction to pump and Mesqa operation
• WUAs financial management and record keeping
• Mesqa maintenance planning
• Water management demonstrations
• Special tours
• Canal WUAs conference
B. II. Training course for IAS staff:
• Basic IAS introductory course
• Managing, monitoring and evaluating WUAs and Mesqas improvement
• IAS orientation training for new IAS staff
• Mesqa planning and design with water users involvement
• Operation and maintenance of improved Mesqa
• On-farm water management, monitoring, and evaluation
4-7. Financing of the process
The IIP package in Beni Ebeid command area was financed by a USAID grant. A project called IMS was
established under this grant in 1987. IIP pilot program was one of the IMS components which included
improvement of the irrigation system of Beni Ebeid.
4-8 Estimated cost of the process
The average cost of the IIP package as implemented under IMS/UASID program is approximately LE 1200
per feddan (US$ 635/ha) for Mesqa improvement. The cost of other components such as rehabilitation of main
system and constructing radial gates represents about 40% of the Mesqa cost (MWRI, 1998).
4-9. Was system performance evaluation done prior to modernization?
A feasibility report for Beni Ebeid command area was prepared as part of the RIIP (Regional Irrigation
Improvement Program) activities to establish procedures for rehabilitation of these areas. Four reports dealing
specifically with Beni Ebeid areas have been prepared:
• Feasibility Report of the Beni Ebeid, December 1988.
• Socio-economic Baseline Survey of the Beni Ebeid Unit Command Area, Serry Canal Command,
October 1988.
• Comparative Study of Mesqa Size, Maintenance, and Improving the Beni Ebeid area, December 1988.
The objective of the study was mainly ―Problem Identification and solutions‖. Further, the study sought to
quantify, where possible, priority irrigation and related problems in Beni Ebeid to examine feasibility of
alternative solutions to these problems. Problems that have been identified through this study were mainly
water distribution and on-farm water management problems. The study included also determination of water
requirements, irrigation system efficiencies, night storage, land leveling, and Mesqa system definition.
Reports included also soil maps and survey. The socio-economic field study examined problems of water
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 53
control, crop yields, net farmer income, maintenance problems, and costs. The third study included design of
different Mesqa alternatives and operation procedures.
5 Impact of Modernization Modernized Irrigation System in Beni Ebeid in Egypt
5-1 Governance
Governance, which basically determines the allocation of power and authority, explains who is responsible for
what function of irrigated agricultural and within what bounds. Application of continuous flow policy has
contributed to change the governance in irrigated agriculture in Beni Ebeid. Before system modernization,
water allocation to farmers was controlled by the central departments of the MWRI through rotational flow
that is usually affected by the water budget of the main canal system. Under modernization, power and
responsibilities of operation of the irrigation system is shared between different agencies; irrigation
directorate, IAS, and WUAs. For the branch canal level and lower canal system, the government is no longer
interfering in water distribution. Water is controlled through an on-demand system under the automated
downstream control gates.
5-2 Water rights and water allocation
The modernized system in Beni Ebeid guarantees water availability on time for each framer wherever his
location are; canal or Mesqa, head or tail. The problem of inadequate water at canal and/or Mesqa tails has
been solved due to implementation of continuous flow. Improved Mesqa and involvement of water users in
operation and maintenance has contributed to equitable and timely water allocation among farmers. Openings
along Mesqa are designed according to the quota of each farmer or group of farmers. Better water distribution
among farmers is the main advantage of the modernized process where water is made available to them at a
specified time. This was achieved through improving the water distribution efficiency among the canal
network and also among the Mesqas. Water allocation to farmers is made around to about 13000 cubic meters
of water per hectare per year. Water delivery is not significantly different than before modernization.
Modernization process helped mainly improve the water allocation and ensure an even water distribution
among farmers.
5-3 Water service provider
The government used to maintain and operate the main delivery system while Mesqa operation and
maintenance were the responsibility of farmers. Due to un-organized water users, Mesqa has been deteriorated
with low efficiency of water distribution. The same problem was reported for branch canals. Under
modernized system, water will be available in the branch canal on continuous basis instead of the old
rotational system. Water distribution burdens are relieved on the MWRI (the water service provider) due to
introducing of continuous flow policy and involvement of water users. The government is also planning for
transferring the management of branch canals to water users federation that represents all Mesqas WUAs. In
this case, the role of government, as water service provider, will be reduced to be for management of the main
conveyance system.
5-4 Water Distribution method
As mentioned before, water distribution method has changed from rotational flow to continuous flow in the
branch canal. However, water allocation among farmers is kept under rotational basis through a well-
established irrigation schedule set by IAS in consultation with WUAs.
5-5 Water service fee structure
The cost of the modernization process includes two portions:
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 54
• Improvement of the distributary canal
• Constructing new Mesqa and installing pumps
Farmers are responsible to pay the capital cost of Mesqa construction and the pump. Cost of the pump was
planned to be recovered over three years while capital cost of Mesqa is recovered over 20 years with equal
annual payments at no interest and with five-year grace period. The ministry of finance, through its team who
collects land tax and tile drainage cost, will be responsible for collecting the capital cost of the Mesqa. On the
other hand, the capital improvement cost of the distributary canals is fully covered by the MWRI.
Farmers paying fees to the WUAs for the operation and maintenance cost of improved Mesqa. The head of the
WUA council, treasurer and pump operator, in consultation with other WUAs members, decide on the
methods of fees collection from Mesqa beneficiaries. Two ways of fees calculation and collection; per feddan
or per hour of pump operation. The first is most common, particularly in Beni Ebeid area. Fees concerning
O&M are collected per feddan on seasonal basis mainly after harvesting of crops. On the average, the
collected irrigation fee is approximately US$ 70 per hectare per year. This fee was found to be 50% less than
what farmers used to pay before the modernization process (Allam, 1995). The reduction in the O&M cost is
due to several reasons including:
• The physical improvement of the irrigation system.
• Changing the water delivery to one single point lift at the head of the Mesqa instead of multiple lifting
points.
5-6 System performance
5-6-1 Agricultural and water productivity
The modernization process resulted in two main agricultural benefits that both led to enhancement of farmer's
income. The first benefit is land saving due to construction of improved Mesqa as compared to areas occupied
by old Mesqas. There is about 2% of the total command area that has been saved and made available for
agriculture. The second benefit is the increase in crop yield due to the better condition of water availability.
The process guarantees the fresh water allocated to farmers through continuous flow and new irrigation
schedule. Increase in crop yield ranges from 5% to 30% according to crop type.
5-6-2 Equity and efficiency of water distribution
The evaluation reports showed that the equity of water distribution has been achieved in Beni Ebeid command
area. The conveyance efficiency in the Mesqa has improved to reach about 98% instead of about 70% before
IIP. The conveyance efficiency reflects the ratio of the farm turnout water deliveries to the amount of water
entering the Mesqa. Measurements of this efficiency were made by the IIP team through installing water level
automatic recorders along the Mesqa and using the flow meters to quantify the flow running along the Mesqa
and deliveries to farms. This has been done to sample of Mesqa (improved and control Mesqa).
The modernization process has also contributed to the improvement of water allocation between the head and
tail of the Mesqa. Before the modernization, most of tail end farmers complained from inadequate water. The
water use index (WUI) was used to test the uniformity of allocation between tail and head of the Mesqa.
WUI is the ratio of water delivered to the water required. Water required was calculated based on the actual
cropping pattern.
Examination of WUI between head and tail of the Mesqa during the period of high water demand (June to
September) shows low water application efficiency in September. However in other months, application
efficiency seem better. Improvement of efficiency was also due to reducing the time of irrigation as noted in
Beni Ebeid Area. It is reported that over-irrigation is recorded when WUI exceeds the value of 1.5 where
water losses through deep percolation or surface runoff would be the reasons behind this increase (MWRI,
1998). This is clear during September where crop needs are minimum, since crops are being planted in this
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 55
month, and farmers still flood their lands. However, it is reported also that before IIP the WUI ranged from 2
to 5. However, the value of the WUI is used in testing the uniformity of water allocation among water users,
i.e., between head and tail-end users. It should also be kept in mind that this process is still pilot. Certainly,
more improvements are needed to rationalize the water allocation. The process, anyhow, gave the foundation
for further improvements and water conservation. Reduction of irrigation time ranged from 50 to 60% of that
was before IIP (4). Reduction in irrigation time was due to implementing land leveling and setting a suitable
water head at the farm inlet. Time of irrigation was also reduced because of the continuous flow, which made
water available all the time in the Mesqa. Better scheduling of irrigation and higher flow rate at the field level
have also contributed to reduced the irrigation time.
5-6-3 Economic indicators
The feasibility study showed that the benefit-cost ratio (B/C) is more than unity and the IRR4 was higher than
the discount rate (MWRI, 1993). However, monitoring and evaluation should be conducted to test these
indicators due to change in farmer's practices in agriculture and also due to changes in cost of operation and
maintenance. A study on the economic impact of IIP showed that average cost of one irrigation application
has reduced from $8.4 to $4.0 per hectare, i.e 51 % reduction for winter crops, while this reduction was 57%
for summer crops (Elshinawi & Elgohary, 1996). The cost of irrigation includes different items such as
renting a pump, labour and cost of waiting time until water is made available at the head of the field. After
modernization, these costs have been reduced thanks to the single point lift and better irrigation schedule that
minimizes the waiting time. Collected water fees cover the O&M cost and Water fees.
4 IRR is the internal Rate of Return. The IRR is defined as the discount rate at which the net present value of
incremental benefits equal to zero. The project will be economically feasible if IRR is higher than the discount
rate
5-6-4 Impact on Environment
The modernized system had positive impacts on the public health particularly for the tail-end users. This
system has contributed to the availability of fresh water at canal end. Therefore, tail-enders are no longer
pumping polluted drainage water and consequently, farmer exposure to pathogens is reduced.
Buried pipeline Mesqas do not provide the favourable living conditions for snail hosts. Availability of fresh
water contributed also to less water requirements for leaching.
The modernized system had its impact on the drainage water quality. Reducing the field run-off, due to
lowering irrigation time, will reduce the level of nutrients received by drains. Groundwater quality will be
expected to improve as a result of minimizing the utilization of drainage water.
5-6-5 Administrative and Financial consideration and farmers satisfaction
The main goal of the IIP is to move towards the devolution of irrigation water management and maintenance
to water users. Then, establishing WUAs and IAS is the key element to achieve such goal. In Beni Ebeid area,
WUAs have reached the final phase of full responsibility of operation and maintenance. Such new entities
(WUAs and IAS) have facilitated the communication with MWRI and MALR officials that lead to improve
agricultural production. Recent studies showed that IIP provides attractive financial and social incentives.
These incentives indicate strong satisfaction of water users with forming and participating in their own private
WUAs ( MWRI, 1998). These incentives are:
• Improved trust, communication and cooperation among water
• Uniform allocation and distribution of water due to to continuous flow reliability
• Saving time, labor, operation and maintenance costs and land
• Improved problem solving between WUAs and irrigation department
• Better feeling of ownership and leadership among the members of WUAs
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 56
• Water saving and hence water reliability
• Better scheduling and timing of irrigation
• Improved yields and quality of crops
4-7. Have other systems in the country followed the same process?
Under the IMS project, this modernized process has been replicated in 11 pilot areas in Egypt, including Beni
Ebeid area, over the period 1989-1996, with a total net area of 147,000 hectares. In 1994, the MWRI has got a
loan from the World Bank to implement this process in another area of about 104,160 hectares in Lower
Egypt. The government strategy is to replicate this improvement irrigation package allover the country.
6. Consultant's own conclusion
6-1 What is your appreciation of the modernized process that took place?
It can be concluded that the modernization process in Beni Ebeid area is sustainable. All WUAs have
registered and opened a bank account. Farmers are paying the irrigation fees, and operation and maintenance
activities are being successfully carried out. No severe problems or degradation of the infrastructure are
reported up to date. Farmers are encouraged to pay the irrigation fees because they are paying less than before,
and the modernization process contributed to increased crop production by about 30% particularly for maize
and wheat. The modernized process, through implementing the full package of the IIP, can be considered as
revolutionary changes in the irrigation system in Egypt. This process can achieve many benefits to the nation
as well as individuals. The process could pave the road towards the transfer of the water management aspects
to water users and thus towards privatisation of water services.
6-2 Do you perceive any major gaps in the process that took place?
The process seems to be fully successful and meets the required goals. However one gap could be mentioned
here that is related to the timing of the improvement of the main delivery system. This improvement should be
implemented in-line with the other to ensure providing the continuous flow conditions in the branch canal. In
some areas, apart from Beni Ebeid, this problem was clear. Use of non-traditional water resources should also
be implemented, as a component of modernization process, in parallel with physical improvement.
6-3 Can the process be replicated elsewhere?
This process provided a full package to be replicated elsewhere particularly in Egypt. The government is
currently undertaking a program for implementing this process nation-wide.
6-4 What lessons can be learned from the modernization process that took place?
Lessons could be listed as follows according to the evaluation studies conducted on the IIP command areas in
Egypt (MWRI, 1998):
• Rate of implementation should be faster than that was conducted in the process. This could be
achieved through establishing WUAs and conducting training prior to implementation.
• Cost of improvements is still high and needs to be reduced. This could be achieved through
developing private sector expertise to conduct design and construction.
• Continuous training is needed so as to maintain a certain level of educated staff, particularly for IAS,
to support the process operation.
• Establishing canal federation to participate in the branch canal operation.
• Establish specific monitoring programs for water quantities, quality, and crop production before the
implementation of the process. This baseline data could be very useful in assessing project impacts
after implementation.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 57
• Improvement of main system should start prior to improvement of tertiary level to ensure
implementing the continuous flow.
4.6 Case Study V: SEA for Power Development Options in the NELSAP
Background
A Strategic Social and Environmental Assessment (SSEA) of Power Development options in the Nile
Equatorial Lakes Region was recently prepared using a highly participatory approach. The Study was
undertaken in two phases: Phase I covered Rwanda, Burundi, and Western Tanzania and Phase II covered the
six NEL countries (DRC, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania). The output is a comprehensive
assessment of regional power development options and transmission interconnections, including a strategic
assessment of their economic and engineering feasibility, and a strategic/sectoral social and environmental
assessment including an analysis of cumulative impacts. An Indicative NELSAP Power Master Plan up to
2020 has been prepared based on different development scenarios.
The indicative power master plan is a strategic tool aimed at assisting the NELSAP countries in their selection
of supply options (including interconnections) by contributing to informed and transparent decision-making.
The plan will also assist potential financiers in the assessment of power generation and trade options to
support regional economic development in the context of the Nile Basin Initiative.
After a careful review of the final report by the World Bank management, it was recommended to: revise the
presentation of the document to deepen the cumulative impacts assessment, and to undertake an analysis of
climate change issues. The latter issue was not part of the original Terms of Reference for the SSEA but is to
be included in the final report. The report needs also to be edited to more effectively present to decision
makers and others a strategic environmental and social assessment of regional power development options and
transmission interconnections, substantiated by a thorough assessment of their economic and engineering
feasibility.
Approach and Analytic Process
The SSEA was conducted over a three-year period in two stages from 2003 to 2006 within the framework of
the NBI/NELSAP, figure (4.8). Stage 1 included Burundi, Rwanda and Western Tanzania. Stage 2 added the
eastern part of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Kenya, the whole of Tanzania, and Uganda to the
assessment.
The boundaries for the analyses included all of Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda, and the
eastern part of the DRC, consisting of North Kivu Province, South Kivu Province, the eastern districts of
Haut-Uélé and Iluri in Oriental Province, the eastern districts of Tanganyika and Haut Katanga in Katanga
Province and the district of Kabambare in Maniema Province.
The key elements of the process included:
A period of analysis of about 15 years, up to 2020
The solicitation of stakeholder viewpoints in each step of the SSEA SSEA III – Final Report S-2
017334-001-00
The use of primarily existing data as well as the paradigms provided by the East African Community
Power Master Plan and national power master plans
Consideration of the legal and regulatory framework of each of the countries as well as relevant
international agreements and conventions
Assessment of expected (calculated/forecasted) changes in temperature and runoff due to climate
change
Consideration of power development options limited to those that could be of regional benefit
Ranking of power development options according to their desirability with respect to cost,
environmental, social and risk factors
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 58
Preparation of example portfolios of investments to satisfy alternate development strategies and load
growth scenarios
Preparation of a NELSAP Indicative Power Development Strategy to guide future investment
planning
Contents and coverage
The SSEA covered the following areas:
o Legal, Policy and Administrative Context
o Current Environmental and Social Context
o Regional Energy Needs Assessment
o Identification and Screening of New Power Development Options
o Power Options Retained for Comparative Analysis
o Options Set Aside
o Comparison of Options
o Potential Impact of Climate Change on Runoff
o Cumulative Impacts-environmental and socio-economic
o Institutional Issues
Overall Strategic Conclusions for the Nile Equatorial Lakes Region
This strategic/sectoral and environmental and social assessment of regional power development options in the
NEL Region leads to the following conclusions:
In order for the countries to be able to cooperate regionally in the development of their power sectors,
a backbone of transmission facilities needs to be built as soon as practicable.
By the end of the period of analysis (2020), three-quarters of the identified power development
options will have been required to meet the medium load growth scenario.
Under the base forecast scenario, electricity use would increase by less than 10% over current levels
of about 95 kWh/capita. Under the medium load growth scenario, consumption would increase to 141
kWh/capita, an increase of 53% over current levels, but not even half of the current average for all of
Africa (even excluding the wealthier countries) of 320 kWh/capita. For the high growth scenario,
consumption would reach 181 kWh/capita, an increase to almost double the current level in the
region, but still well under the current average for all of Africa (even excluding the wealthier
countries).
It is only under the transformation scenario that consumption would reach the current average for all
of Africa excluding the wealthier countries. This is still only about one-third of the level reached by
the developing countries of the world, even when the wealthier of them are excluded from the
comparison.
The transformation load growth scenario would provide more than 60kWh per household per month.
This should be compared with about 500 KWh/capita/year, SSEA III – Final Report S-20 017334-
001-00 which is regarded as a minimum quality of life (based on 75 million households and about 190
million people by 2020).
The cumulative impacts were considered using the development of the region with no regional
integration as a reference case. This would include continued suppressed electricity demand and the
installation of smaller and less attractive power development options than regional integration would
foster.
Even the most hydro-intensive portfolio assessed (the one representing the strategy that maximises the
use of the best-evaluated options) would not have any significant cumulative impact on the Albert
Nile leading to Sudan and the Sudd Marshes, whether in terms of flow regime, volume lost due to
evaporation or sediment load.
The cumulative impacts on the environment from multiple hydro projects in a river basin or several
thermal plants compared at the global level are relatively minor; the most significant would be
emissions from thermal plants and potential impacts on wetlands in the Kagera River and the Rufiji
River.
The runoff in the northern part of the region is expected to increase due to climate changes. On the
other hand, the runoff in Southern Tanzania is expected to remain at current levels or to decrease
slightly.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 59
The overall impact of climate change on the power output of the NELSAP Indicative Power
Development Portfolio is expected to be positive over the period of the assessment.
To meet the medium load growth scenario for all three regional cooperation strategies, the total
capital investment required over the period 2005 to 2020 is very similar at just under US$6 billion
(includes US$0.7 billion up to 2009 inclusive).
The high load growth scenario would require over 50% more investment – US$8.25 billion to meet an
additional demand of 1300 MW.
The transformation scenario would require over three times more investment – US$16 billion.
Imports from Inga in the DRC, or from other sources, would be attractive if power can be delivered
into the region for under approximately US$0.03/kWh.
Figure 4.8: Deduced SSEA Framework of the NELSAP
4.7 Main output of Study: Model Framework for Undertaking an SEA
4.7.1. Definition of variables for the model
Key processes identified in the SEA methodology include 10 processes that, if they have to meet the
definition of sustainable development, must identify social, economic and environment factors at each level.
On the basis of the questionnaire administered and the frameworks from the case reviews, the following
definitions have been used to come up with the model framework:
Social effect: A social effect can be described as that which has a direct or indirect effect on the
attitude, orientation or behaviour which takes the interests or needs of the people (stakeholders) into
account.
Economic Effect: An economic effect can be described as that which affects the well-being of people.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 60
Environment Effect: An environment effect can be described as that which affects the immediate
surrounding both living and non-living, which supports life socially or economically.
4.7.2. Analysis in an SEA
4.7.2.1 Qualitative Analysis
During the qualitative assessment stage, evaluators identify plans and programs that are likely to have
significant environmental effects and therefore should be subject to environmental assessment. At this stage,
expert opinion and stakeholder consultation are used to identify potential objectives, alternatives, and impacts.
Broadly, the qualitative analysis considers the identification of objectives (i.e., those established by legislation
and those established by stakeholder consultation), the identification of a set of alternatives, and assessment of
alternatives in light of the objectives.
4.7.2.2 Quantitative Analysis
Evaluators may or may not proceed with quantitative analysis depending on the results of the qualitative
assessment. However, quantitative analysis may be used to provide rigorous support for the qualitative
assessment, which is based primarily on expert opinion and consultation with stakeholders and the
community. At this stage, specific data requirements and methods must be identified. Typical data
requirements for an SEA include the costs, benefits and risks involved in a proposal. This brings the concept
of a CBA and RA at the quantitative analysis stage of SEA. For RE developments, the data required include
the quality, quantity, access to water and quality of human life. This information allows evaluators to address
concerns about potential impacts of the proposed development and their alternatives.
Therefore in addressing alternatives, CBA and RA could give precise and concrete conclusions if well
applied. Indicators should be developed to aid the effective application of CBA and RA. Since CBA and RA
are very global at policy level, there are no specific models applicable apart from looking at the general
implications of the plan. The role of CBA and RA at all levels is to take account of both tangible and
intangible environmental services such as river resources, ecological dynamics and the macro and micro costs
and benefits.
1. Risk Analysis
Risk analysis is done at all levels and it involves considering all the dynamics in governance, economy, and
technology, legal and environmental (PESTLE) aspects. The risks are evaluated in both qualitative and
quantitative methods.
At strategic level risks are low because risks are nested within actions which come at lower levels of planning.
The government plays the role of undertaking mitigation for the stakeholders so that they get value at program
level. The risks at policy level will be change in government systems such happens in countries with
economies in transition or Least Developed Countries (LDCs) whose economy is a ―political economy‖. If RA
is not taken into board when formulating policies, plans and programs or even projects, then it becomes a
crisis. The level of detail for RA varies downwards from policy down to project level with more details
required at lower levels-project. The process of undertaking RA is very rigorous especially at policy level.
The RA is done depending on the activities. Therefore, during SEA, the most pronounced positive and
negative environmental issues that may arise are highlighted. Most of the main perceived risks fall on the
environment, communities‘ livelihoods, and health among others. If the RA is from a general observation it
takes qualitative indicators. However, sometimes there is need for tangible scientific evidence in which case
quantitative analysis is sought. The RA is concerned with project outputs and hence it is more applicable at
project level. One needs to have alternatives to deal with risks.
More detailed RA is undertaken at project level where they undertake feasibility studies or baselines that
focus on socio-economic and ecological aspects. RA undertaking depends on donor-requirements where for
instance USAID requires umbrella EIAs at project design level and EU requires EIAs at project level. In the
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 61
USAID case, assumptions with the option for program re-design are allowed during RA, while in EU
contingency is allowed.
Risk Ranking: The quantitative risk assessment literature consistently emphasizes the need to rank the
magnitude of the consequences (E.g. using simple rating scales to rank risks from negligible to severe) and the
probability (E.g. using simple rating scales to rank risks from ‗rare‘ to ‗most certain‘) of those consequences
within a given time frame. Risk can therefore be viewed as the triplet (sj, pj, xj) where sj is the risk scenario,
with each sj having a probability (pj) of occurring and a consequence (xj) if it occurs. SEA is then the process
of identifying the risk scenarios, their probabilities, and consequences, and then investigating the effect of
uncertainty on the probability and consequence estimates. We ask the following questions:
What can happen (sj)?
How likely is it to happen (pj)?
What are the consequences should the risk scenario (sj) occur (xj)?
How confident are we in our estimates of pj and xj?
The model equation in Risk Ranking is as given below:
Both the hazard severity and the likelihood of occurrence are categorized, or assessed, on the basis of a three
point scale. In assigning a category one is considering the following outline guidelines:
The severity of outcome arising from a deficiency/absence of adequate control measures either in
terms of personal health or damage to environment;
Whether this deficiency/absence of adequate measures would give rise to an accident requiring
notification to the responsible manager; and
Whether the deficiency/absence of adequate control measures would if viewed by an inspector, or by
an internal competent person lead to enforcement action.
For Hazard Severity, (i.e. potential for loss), the three categories are:
3: HIGH [H]
2: MEDIUM [M]
1: LOW [L] Output Reference
[Based on activity]
Risk Scenario Likelihood
[L,M,H]
Consequence
[L,M,H]
Risk Management
Approach
Risk management: Risk management involves a process of identifying, analyzing and monitoring risks
drawing and implementing monitoring strategies (related to prevention, mitigation or acceptance) and based
on possible influence of the risk to the program and project.
High Risk Low Risk
High Probability Stop Monitor
Low Probability Monitor Go
The Role of Uncertainty: Typically, decisions are made with incomplete information or intrinsic variability,
which leads to uncertainty. This uncertainty needs to be incorporated into the analysis in order to assess its
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 62
impact on a decision. There are a number of ways of incorporating uncertainty about parameter values and
assumptions into models to help characterize risk.
Implementation of the plan is done in line with the set objectives (which are supposed to be S.M.A.R.T-
Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound). However, some objectives might fall in a grey
area during the planning process in which case there are unknown outcomes either negative or positive. This
is very common at policy level where environmental effects and opportunities are likely to be significant but
can hardly be defined ex-ante due to uncertainty on the concrete processes that a specific plan will set on
motion. Uncertainties have been identified to arise in two levels; planners or expert uncertainties which arise
during planning stage, and stakeholders‘ uncertainties which arise during stakeholder consultation process.
Some of the causes of uncertainties are lack of technical know-how, lack of information or communication,
lack of capacity within the country.
2. Stakeholder Uncertainty Analysis
The community is exposed to uncertainty in most cases because information is not shared with them. It is
important to note that consumers are the strategic stakeholders and that communication barrier as a source of
uncertainty can be overcome by use of Focused Group Discussions (FGDs), public meetings, etc during
planning processes. Other tools available here include participatory planning tools like Participatory Rural
Appraisal (PRA) and Participatory Learning Appraisal (PLA). Stakeholders can be asked about their level of
confidence in something taking place. This is because stakeholders have a traditional way of managing
outcomes which is kind of coping mechanism and therefore need to appraise their approach. Also that, past
experience is important while undertaking SEA, because it offers evidence on what outcome are expected in
implementing a certain proposal.
Technical Uncertainty Analysis: Uncertainties appear at thematic levels when planners are trying to project
outcomes. These projections are meant to take care of the future since plans might run to the long future. To
reduce uncertainties, professionalism should be influenced in all projects.
The planners have a number of tools used to take care of uncertainties. They map uncertainties and develop
critical assumptions. Looking for remedies, they add contingencies in terms of money and time especially at
project level. They also seek for alternatives. The Precautionary Principle is applied in some instances.
However some remarked that the role of Precautionary Principle is subjective, depending on people‘s
knowledge in development of good environmental plans. Some take uncertainties as form of risks and the way
forward is to look for mitigation. Departments come up with strategies to mitigate risks in their strategic plans.
Through disaster preparedness and response and working with partners that may provide raw information
which is then digested and used as proxy indicators. Example is information on seasonal rain patterns and
droughts as an indicator of malnutrition and food security. They also work with development partners from
developed countries who offer Technical Assistance (TA).
There are three common tools which can be used to analyze the level of uncertainty. One useful approach is
scenario development (i.e., what-if). Two is the sensitivity analysis that assesses the effect of uncertainty
simply by altering the parameter values and repeating the calculation-iterative. The third one is a prediction
method which sets limits and confidence levels. Example is saying that the effect of climate change will lead
to temperature increase of between 10-15% which will lead to rising of sea levels. This can have an effect on
hydraulic design of dams. Therefore rise in sea levels is an indicator of the climate change. This can be
monitored with indicators and evaluated after some time to form an early warning system.
Risk taking is involved based on developing critical assumptions. For instance, in starting a water supply
project the assumption is that water will always be there or at least within the design period. What happens
when a river used for a water supply project changes course? This is pure uncertainty!
Proposed developments can be classified with regards to their level of uncertainty, say in a range say 1-5. This
therefore means that uncertainty can be analyzed against proposed alternatives in which case a less uncertain
option may be taken against an option with higher uncertainty. The link between uncertainty and M&E is that
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 63
uncertainties can be documented during M&E as lessons learnt and hence used for future planning processes
or redesigning plans.
3. Cost Benefit Analysis
Since policies are very strategic anchors for the government roadmap, the undertakings are also very broad
and thinking is very global. CBA comes in at implementation stage. This therefore means that at policy level
CBA uses more qualitative indicators and the level of detail increases as you go down from policy to plan to
program and finally to project level where CBA takes more quantitative indicators.
To get the value of intangible environmental resources, a social analysis will show the value attached for
example to water for animals than water for electricity. Another case can be the value of land and the effect of
an improved transport system is more or less a CBA process for the Urban Transport Policy. Therefore
satisfaction and wellbeing of the stakeholders, comfort levels, social amenities value the non-tangible benefits
and costs. Accordingly, questions like willingness to pay or accept should feature. This is a more qualitative
approach.
Simulation models are applicable to test project viability. For example, Kenya Power and Lighting Company
(KPLC) uses for simulation models to distribute transmission lines.
Table 5.1: Summary of SEA Framework
EXERCISE METHODS OUTPUT
Screening Literature Review
Baseline Survey
Records Review
Environmental indicators
Baseline Environmental conditions
Prediction and Evaluation of impacts and comparisons of alternatives
Identification of mitigation measures and preparation of a draft environmental
management plan
Baseline data that can be used as a basis prior project initiation.
Scoping Consultations
Identify key environmental issues associated with the proposals which may
influence decision making.
Decide scale of the SEA based on the Nature of the proposals and the type of
data available such as local, regional and global scale impacts.
Define spatial and temporal boundaries of SEA
Identify agencies to be consulted be including various decision-making
authorities covered by spatial boundaries.
Situation assessment
(both desk studies
and stakeholder
contribution)
CBA
RA/Uncertainty
analysis
Social-Economic
analysis
PESLTE Analysis
Environmental situation-indicators developed here
Financial economic situation and projections
Social status and effects of new plan
Political, institutional and governance state and capacities
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 64
Setting of SEA
priorities and
development of
alternatives
Reporting Report on the feedback of stakeholder consultation from situation assessment
Draft plan action matrix
Final plan action matrix
Final SEA document Reporting A report detailing the complete findings
Final plan action matrix-Management tool
A monitoring framework-Management tool
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 65
5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusion
From the study findings it is evident that an SEA does not have a specific approach it rather depends on the
main objective question of, ―why an SEA? This question helps the SEA team in setting priorities and then the
main output expected at the end of an SEA exercise. At a glance one might be interested in CBA, RA or both.
A good example is that in a nuclear energy planning the ministry is more interested in the risks but not the
costs and benefits which are obvious since the country does not have scientific capability.
The study also found out that many or all government bodies in Kenya use SEA related processes that can be
adopted in developing a basin-wide framework. Again, most of the countries in the Nile basin have
formulated EIA frameworks that are used for assessment of projects against their environmental impacts.
Since the study finds out that EIA is widely accepted by many countries, the study points out on key
similarities between the two processes. The study also reveals that universally, SEA process involves
qualitative and quantitative assessment methodologies integrated with communication, stakeholder
participation, and management of projected outcomes either positive or negative. This section therefore
discusses the SEA framework highlighting the methods and the key stages of what an SEA should comprise
of.
This study concludes that it is difficult to undertake SEA in isolation of CBA and RA and that the two process
shall be developed within the bigger framework of SEA methods and guidelines. This conclusion is based on
the fact that during planning, sustainable development is measured through this two processes-costs and
benefits against risks. Therefore to balance the three pillars of sustainable development-social, economic and
environmental factors have to converge into a balanced consensus.
The study faced two main challenges which featured in the design methodology and therefore expressed
themselves in the results. One, that from the questionnaire administered in Kenya, it was evident that there are
very few SEA studies done in Kenya and these have been done by experts from outside using methods and
regulations that are not documented in Kenya;
Even though government institutions use SEA processes, there are no clear methodologies used. For
instance RA and CBA are used for many proposals but documents showing how they were applied
are not available;
There is little if any awareness of the government of this study going on which therefore means little
support in terms of suggestions of what needs to be done in developing these methodologies. Even
the Transboundary Water Desk established at the MWI in Kenya was not aware of this development.
The findings of this study (which shall be this report) shall be shared with all the NBCs through the
environmental competent bodies like the National Environmental Authorities or agencies as per the
respective countries.
There are two broad approaches to SEA, the institution-based and the impact-based;
Government Institutions might not be aware of SEA but they use SEA related methods and
guidelines in their Planning.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 66
5.2 Recommendations
From the identified bottlenecks, the following recommendations are necessary to see to it that the study
proceeds in the right direction.
The research team to also review case studies from developed countries that have successfully
undertaken SEA studies and therefore have functional SEA model frameworks.
To actively involve the government of the NBCs (and especially the environmental competent
authorities) since they hold key information and have access to environmental records necessary for
such a study.
The threshold for sustainable utilization of the Nile water resources can be investigated and be inbuilt
within the model. This can be done by application of conditional probability to establish the risks
posed by the present activities on the future.
The model can be applied on related PPPs as in the case of BecA and the Forest Act 2005 in the
samples analysed in this study.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 67
6
REFERENCES
1. Asian Development Bank (ADB, 1988). Environmental Planning and Management and the Project
Cycle, Environmental Impact Assessment for Developing Countries, Paper No. 1, May 1988, Manila
2. Brooker, M.P. (1985). The Ecological Effects of Channelization (The Impact of River
Channelization). The Geographical Journal, 1985, 151, 1, 63-69, The Royal Geographical Society
(with the Institute of British Geographers)
3. De Klemm, C. & Shine, C., (1998). Introduction to Biological Diversity in International
Environmental Law: Biological Diversity, UNITAR, Geneva, Switzerland, pp 1-30
4. Devon County Council, Inclusive Education: Risk Assessment, (2005).
5. East African Community (2006). Lake Victoria Basin Commission Special report on the declining of
water levels of Lake Victoria, EAC Secretariat, Arusha, Tanzania, April 2006
6. ECA/SDD/05/13, (2005). Review of the Application of Environmental Impact Assessment in Selected
African Countries, Economic Commission for Africa.
7. Gennet Yirga-Hall, Principal Evaluation Officer (AfDB): Financing Rural Water Supply Projects: The
AfDB Group Experience, OPEV
8. McCartney, M. P. (2007). Decision Support Systems for Large Dam Planning and Operation in
Africa. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute. 47 p. (IWMI Working Paper
119)
9. Sand P.H. (1997). Continental environmental regions Structures-The Role of International
Organizations in the Evolution of Environmental Law, UNITAR, Geneva, Switzerland,45-46 pp.)
10. Shelton, D. (2004, 2nd Revised Edition). Environmental Impact Assessment. Techniques and
Procedures in International Environmental Law, UNITAR, Geneva, Switzerland, 29-54 pp
11. Uganda National Water Development Report (2005). Chapter Ten, Shared Water Resources
12. Wamaniala, V.N., (2002). The Development and Management of Hydropower Resources in Uganda,
Trodheim, Norway.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) 68
List of Research Group Members
Name Country Organization E-mail
Prof. Mohd El Muntasir Sudan NBI-ENTRO office [email protected]
Dr. Mohamed M Abdel-latif Egypt Hydrualics Research Institute [email protected]
Mrs. Margaret Aanyu Uganda [email protected]
Mrs. Irene Nansubuga Uganda Kyambogo University [email protected]
Mr. Bennie Mang’eni Uganda Makerere University [email protected]
Eng. Jovah Ndyaberena Uganda Norplan Consulting
Engineers and Planners [email protected]
Eng. Nyende Jacob Uganda Kyambogo University [email protected]
Dr. Zablon Isaboke Oonge Kenya University of Nairobi [email protected]
Scientific Advisors
Ir. Joop de Schutter
Vice Rector
UNESCO-IHE, the Netherlands
Dr. Lindsey Beevers
Lecturer in Water Management
UNESCO-IHE, the Netherlands
Full Profiles of Research Group Members are available on: The Nile Basin Knowledge Map
http://www.NileBasin-Knowledgemap.com
APPENDICES
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A- 1
APPENDIX 1: SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR CBA, RA AND SEA
I am ------------------------------------------ from ------------------------------------. Nile Basin Capacity Building
Net Work (NBCBN) is in the process of developing methodologies and Guidelines for Strategic
Environmental Assessments (SEA), Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) and Risk Assessment (RA) for the Nile
Basin Region. We are therefore carrying out a review of different Policies, Plans, Programs, and Projects in
relation to the above processes through questionnaires as one of the methods.
LOCATION
1. Country: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Town/City: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Name of Company /Company --------------------------------------------------------------
4. Type of Work: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Physical Address------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Name of Respondent: ------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Position in Company / Company: ----------------------------------------------------------
PART I: SEA IN POLICY, PLAN OR PROGRAM FRAMEWORK
1. (a). Do you have a company policy?
Yes 1
No 2
(b). What are your policy objectives?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________
2. (a). During the formulation of the above policy, did you have any other policy alternatives?
Yes 1
No 2
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A- 2
(b). How did you assess and come up with your best policy framework?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
3. What is your company‘s strategic plan? How is your strategic plan linked to your company policy?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
4. Do you have any programs arising from your strategic plan or company policy?
Yes 1
No 2
Please list them.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
5. Who participates in policy, plan and program formulation in your company?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
6. In your geographical area of operation how do you factor in the effect of your activities on the use of
natural resources, the environment, the socio-cultural set up and economic needs.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
7. (a). Do you work within an existing legal framework?
Yes 1
No 2
(b). How does the legal framework affect the formulation of the policy, plan or programs of your
company?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
8. (a). Do you use any environmental assessment process in your activities?
Yes 1
No 2
(b). Which method do you use and at what level is this applied? ____________________
Policy 1
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A- 3
Plan 2
Program 3
Project level 4
9. (a). Are you aware of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)?
Yes 1
No 2
(b). How can you rate the necessity of EIA in its application on development activities?
Very important 1
Important 2
Not important 3
Do not know 4
10. Are you aware of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)? Have you or your company ever used
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) during the planning process and decision making for
your policies, plans and programs? Yes or No? (If yes answer question 15 and 16 and if no jump to
question 14 below).
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
11. In which policies/plans/programs have you applied an SEA in your Company / Company?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
12. (a). Which method did you use to undertake SEA?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
(b). Which guidelines did you follow? [Please list them].
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
13. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is a process of analyzing the effect of socio-economic
and environmental factors on development. Given this background, how will you want an SEA to be
conducted? [Please list the key steps].
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A- 4
_____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
14. (a). In undertaking your company activities, at what level do you undertake cost-benefit analysis and
risk analysis? (Tick as necessary).
Policy 1
Plan 2
Program 3
Project level 4
(b). Which one comes first, the cost-benefit analysis or risk analysis? Explain.
____________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
15. (a). If you have a monitoring and evaluation process in place. When do you develop indicators you
use to measure progress? [Explain]
____________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
(b). What do you monitor?
Policies 1
Plans 2
Programs 3
Projects 4
All levels 5 5
16. During strategic planning process, how do you deal with uncertainties?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
PART II: RISK ANALYSIS
Process/Procedure Information
17. Does your Company have a risk analysis or a risk management process in place? Does the process
evaluate at the business decision level (i.e., at policy, plan or program), and/or at the project level?
[Please describe the scope of the risk analysis].
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
18. Would you be willing to share your process with us-confidentially? [write the process here]
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A- 5
_____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
19. If a process exists, is there a company policy that requires its use? If so, how was this process
developed and have the results been documented? How long has the process been used?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
20. Does the process evaluate risks in a qualitative, quantitative manner or both?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
21. How do you translate risks into the project evaluation process? Do you add money, time, or both as
contingencies?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
22. Are economic and financial risks such as inflation currency control considered?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
23. What sources of information, research, and data have you used to assess risks before undertaking a
project?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
PART III: COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
24. Does your Company have a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) process in place? Does the process evaluate
at the business decision level (i.e., at policy, plan or program), and/or at the project level? Please
describe the scope of the CBA.
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
25. Would you be willing to share your process with us-confidentially?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A- 6
____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
26. If a process exists, is there a company policy that requires its use? If so, how was this process
developed and have the results been documented? How long has the process been used?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
27. Is the CBA process done in a qualitative, quantitative manner or both?
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A- 7
PART IV: RESEARCH CONTENT AND REGIONAL CONTEXT
[In this section, note that you do not have to be an expert in River Engineering, you only give your opinion]
28. At regional level, and within the framework of Nile Basin Initiative (NBI), the Nile Basin Countries
(NBCs) have formulated a Shared Vision, ―to achieve sustainable socio-economic development
through the equitable utilization of, and benefit from, the common Nile Basin water resources‖. How
would you go about knowing if this Shared Vision is socially, economically and environmentally
viable? [Please list the major steps].
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
29. Most of the NBCs have formulated Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRSPs) to meet the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) which directly or indirectly target river resources to derive food
security, energy, safe water etc. Do you think these strategic plans should be shared amongst all the
NBCs? [Explain].
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
30. River engineering can be defined as, the process of planned human intervention in the course,
characteristics or flow of a river with the intention of producing some defined benefit such as,
irrigation, hydroelectric power generation or water supply. Who should be involved in policy
formulation, planning and programming of development strategies targeting river resources?
[Explain].
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_________
31. (a). How will you undertake cost/benefit analysis to ensure sustainable development for a river
engineering development?
Qualitatively 1
Quantitatively 2
Both 3
Explain:______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
(b). At what level would you apply CBA?
Policy 1
Plan 2
Program 3
Project level 4
All levels 5
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A- 8
Explain:______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
32. (a). How will you undertake a risk analysis for River Engineering Development?
Qualitatively 1
Quantitatively 2
Both 3
Explain:______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
(b).At what level would you apply RA?
Policy 1
Plan 2
Program 3
Project level 4
All levels 5
Explain:_________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Interviewer Name: ------------------------------------------------------------
Signature: -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of interview: -------------------------------------------------------------
THANK YOU, GOD BLESS YOU
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-9
Time Schedule ACTIVITIES AND TIME SCHEDULE
YEAR 1 YEAR 2
REF: ACTIVITY 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Methods
1 Carry out review of NBCs
2 Review of donor institutions (WB, ADB and EU) appraisal methods
3 Review river basins in the region
4 Study the existing methods of CBA, RA and SEA
5 Selection of case studies: hydropower, irrigation and water supply; select (2 No) for field regional visits
6 Questionnaire administration
Guidelines
7 Carry out review of NBCs
8 Review of donor institutions (WB, ADB and EU) appraisal methods
9 Review river basins in the region
10 Study the existing methods of CBA, RA and SEA
11 Selection of case studies: hydropower, irrigation and water supply; select (2 No) for field regional visits
12 Questionnaire administration
13 Development of Methods and Guidelines for CBA, RA and SEA and reporting
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-10
Appendix III: Policy Action Matrix for the Forest Act 2005
Table 6.1: Policy Action Matrix for the SEA of the Kenya’s Forest Act 2005
Policies and actions Milestones
(including time-
based milestones)
Indicative list of
stakeholders to
be involved
Expected
outcomes
Status
PRIORITY AREA 1: STRATEGIC PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT OF FORETS IN KENYA
A. GOVERNANCE
1. Independence of the KFS, the Board, and its Director 1.1 An open and transparent system for appointment of
members of the Board, (including both departmental and
minister-nominated members) should be developed (with
reference to section 6 of the Forest Act).
1.1.1 Approved
system for
appointments in place
by February 2007
Forest Reform
Sector Committee
(FRSC)
Transparent and
open recruitment
process
Appointments were made based on gender (at
least 30% women), professionalism and
regional balance
1.2 It is recommended that the interim period between
formation of the Board and appointment (by the Board) of a
Director should be no more than one year.
1.2.1 Process of
appointment of a
Director to begin by
July 2007
KFS
1.3 It is recommended that the Board should appoint a
Director to the KFS following national advertisement of the
post and selection of the successful candidate by the full
Board. The Board should consider retaining a reputable
management consulting firm (for example
PricewaterhouseCoopers, KPMG, or Deloitte) to conduct
the preliminary assessment of candidates, manage the
interview process, and advise the Board on the candidates‘
strengths and weaknesses.
1.3.1 National
advertisement for the
post of Director of
KFS by June 2007
Ministry of
Environment and
Natural Resources
(MENR) and KFS
Board
Transparent and
open recruitment
process
Position of the Director and other six senior
staff advertised in local daily newspapers in
June 2007.
The Board is relying on change transaction
advisor in the selection and not a consulting
firm.
1.3.2 Appointment by
the Board of Director
to KFS by July 2007
KFS Board Credibility of KFS
Director by
stakeholders
Interviews planned for July 2007.
1.3.3 KFS launched
by May 2007
MENR Stakeholder
confidence
established in the
new organization
for forest
management
The KFS was launched on 10th May 2007
2. Cooperation with key agencies and departments needs to be strengthened
2.1 Existing arrangements for inter-institutional debate and
cooperation should be strengthened to resolve conflicts in
administration that currently prevent best use of forests that
are gazetted under more than one area of legislation. It is
recommended that this be achieved by strengthening the
2.1.1 Environmental
Council to be given
expanded mandate
and increased
capacity by (date to
KFS, KWS,
Ministry of Water
and Irrigation,
Ministry of Lands,
Ministry of Local
Harmonized
management of
forest resources
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-11
Policies and actions Milestones
(including time-
based milestones)
Indicative list of
stakeholders to
be involved
Expected
outcomes
Status
role of National Planning processes and specifically
Provincial and District Environmental Committees.
be agreed)
Government,
Ministry of
Planning and
National
Development,
Ministry of
Agriculture,
Ministry of Finance,
MENR, and NEMA.
B. ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY
3. A strategic plan for the KFS
3.1 The draft strategic plan be prepared by the Forest
Department (FD) should be reviewed and finalized by the
KFS at the earliest opportunity. This plan should make
provision for each of the forest development programs. The
strategic plan should include KFS‘ aim, vision, mission and
organizational structure. Each result area should include a
goal, rationale, strategies and actions associated with each
goal, the outputs associated with each strategy or action, and
some key performance indicators (for accountability). An
associated business plan should capture staff requirements
and detail the core assets of the service and the projected
receipts and expenditures associated with any service and
product that KFS will be providing.
3.1.1 A five-year
strategic plan to be
revised and adopted
by the KFS by June
2007 and revised
every two-and-a-half
years
KFS, private sector,
civil society
organizations
An operational KFS
strategic plan
The draft five-year currently being used will go
through a peer review by September 2007
3.2 The KFS Strategic Plan should take account of, and give
effect to, the Kenya Forest Master Plan (KFMP), which is
being updated with assistance from the donor community
(possibly Embassy of Finland).
3.2.1 KFS Strategic
Plan incorporates
findings of KFMP (as
soon as KFMP is
updated)
KFS, Embassy of
Finland, Kenya
Forestry Research
Institute (KEFRI)
Improved Strategic
Plan
It is anticipated that the KFMP will have been
updated by 2010
4. Clear articulation of the role of plantations
4.1 The Strategic Plan should clearly state the role of
plantations and far forestry in terms of the sustainable use of
the forest resources.
4.1.1 Strategic plan
has section on role of
plantation forestry
plantations and farm
forestry
KFS, farmers,
private sector
Stakeholders
understand the role
of plantations and
farm forestry in
achieving
sustainable use of
forest resources.
5. Provide accountability to stakeholders through annual reports of the KFS
5.1 The Director should be mandated to prepare a business 5.1.1 Annual report, Director, KFS KFS annual The first annual report and business plan to be
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-12
Policies and actions Milestones
(including time-
based milestones)
Indicative list of
stakeholders to
be involved
Expected
outcomes
Status
plan (link with a strategic plan) and annual reports on behalf
of the Board. The annual reports should confirm the
program, for the next five years and describing performance
by the service against previous year‘s service respectively.
This internal report should be considered by the Board and
amended as appropriate. The approved report, including the
business plan, should be printed, presented to a
parliamentary committee, and publicized in the media.
including business
plan to be ready by
end of each calendar
year (to link with the
budgetary planning).
The business plan
should be revised on
a periodic basis
(possibly every five
years) and subject to
annual audit.
progress reports and
five-year business
plans in place.
Parliamentary
committee endorses
the plan
ready by June 2008
6. Engaging stakeholders in preparing template and contents of the new Forest Management Plans
6.1 The KFS should convene a series of workshops and a
national conference to discuss the draft template and
required content of new forest management plans for each
state, local authority, and provincial forest and agree on the
procedures for drawing up and consulting on such plans.
Following this development phase, a manual and guidelines
should be prepared to illustrate the process.
6.1.1 Forest
management manual
and guidelines
published by
December 2007
KFS, Local
Conservancy
Committees, and
nongovernmental
organizations
(NGOs)
Transparent forest
management plans
in place.
Draft manual and guidelines in place
C. FINANCES
7. Funding for the KFS needs to be clarified
7.1 Specific financial support for the forest sector should be
made in the government‘s annual budget for the next five
years based on the projected gap between expenditure and
revenue. This needs to be built into the budget of various
sectors including Agriculture, based on the economic
recovery strategy for Kenya.
7.1.1 The
government of Kenya
commits to funding
KFS by June 2007
Government of
Kenya
KFS support for the
next five years
guaranteed
First annual funding provided for 2007/2008 as
1.6 Billion Kenya Shillings.
7.2 Budgetary provision to be made for the preparation of
Strategic Plan
7.2.1 Funding source
for the first Strategic
Plan and Business
Plan to be confirmed
Government of
Kenya, donors
Model, Strategic
Plan, and Business
Plan achieved
7.2.2 Hold a
stakeholders
workshop to review
implementation of
the strategic plan by
December 2007
KFS Funding of KFS
confirmed and an
implementation plan
strategy in place
7.3 Donor Organizations need to coordinate and make clear
which funding gaps are prepared to support.
7.3.1 Donors commit
to funding KFS by
Key donors Donor support for
the next five years
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-13
Policies and actions Milestones
(including time-
based milestones)
Indicative list of
stakeholders to
be involved
Expected
outcomes
Status
December 2007 guaranteed
D. STAFFING and HUNAN RESOURCES
8. Staff morale to be maintained
8.1 Arrangements for recruiting staff to the KFS should be
published well in advance and clear job descriptions should
be prepared indicating the skills and qualifications required
to meet the service‘s new remit. Use of management
consultants for recruitment should be considered to aid
transparency.
8.1.1 Clear job
descriptions
published for senior
KFS staff by
December 2007
KFS Board of
Directors
Staff morale
improved
First advertisement for some senior staff
positions was issued on June 2007.s
9. FD staff who are made redundant need assistance
9.1 An advice and vocational skills training program should
be established to assist FD staff not transferring to the KFS
to find new employment.
9.1.1 Skills training
program set up by
January 2009
FD, forestry private
sector, donors
Redundant FD staff
assisted in finding
new employment.
10. Creating a new group of professionals with new skills
10.1 Training programs should be initiated to reequip
existing staff of FD to fill new posts where appropriate,
recognizing that entirely new skills will be called for in
some areas, including commercial marketing and strategic
management planning. (This requirement should reinforce
other equally important change management decisions.)
10.1.1 Training needs
assessment
conducted by
December 2007
KFS, Public service,
Directorate of
personnel
management in the
Office of the
President
KFS staff have
increased capacity
to handle
requirements of new
act.
10.1.2 Training
programs started for
KFS staff by January
2009
11. Developing specific skills and awareness in managing community liaison, joint partnerships, and benefit sharing
11.1 A national training program should be set up to prepare
headquarters and field staff of the KFS to respond to the
new role of communities in forest management. These
approaches will be distinct from those for moist forests.
11.1.1 Identify
training needs by
July 2007
KFS and NGO Capacity improved Training needs assessed and draft training
modules for KFS staff in place.
11.1.2 Commission
training to develop
and run a ―trainer of
trainees‖ course by
December 2008
KFS and NGO KFS capacity on
participatory forest
management
enhanced
Training on-going
11.1.3 A cadre of 10-
20 individuals
established who can
be employed to train
existing staff of the
KFS and NGO KFS capacity on
participatory forest
management
enhanced
About 5 KFS staff have already been trained in
PFM training of trainers at MSTCDC (Arusha)
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-14
Policies and actions Milestones
(including time-
based milestones)
Indicative list of
stakeholders to
be involved
Expected
outcomes
Status
FD and all new staff
by December 2007
11.2 All prospective KFS staff should receive a minimum of
three days training in the role of communities before taking
up his or her post
11.2.1 All KFS
operational staff
given initial training
by December 2008
KFS and NGO KFS capacity on
participatory forest
management
enhanced
12. Developing skills in dry land forest management
12.1 A practical training program should be set up for staff
working within dry land forest areas to introduce the new
approaches required for preparation of forest management
plans in these areas, which will differ radically from those
traditionally used in moist forests.
12.1.1 Identify
appropriate training
needs to provide
hands-on practical
advice by December
2007
KEFRI, NGOs,
universities, Kenya
Forestry College
(Londiani), KFS
Increased capacity
in dry land forest
management
E. INFORMATION AND DATA
13. Need for national tree resources information system (TRIS)
13.1 As part of the process of surveying all forests,
including revising harvesting plans for plantations, a Tree
Resources Information System should be created in the form
of a data bank to monitor all forest operations and provide
base information for management plans. TRIS should be
publicly accessible on a dedicated Web site.
13.1.1 Creation of a
TRIS by December
2008
KFS, Local
authorities, National
Museums of Kenya,
KWS, Ministry of
Lands, KEFRI,
other research
organizations.
A TRIS in place
14. Pilot studies on guidelines for forest management and partnership
14.1 Pilot studies, modelled on the Hombe Forest case
study, should be undertaken to improve the guidance offered
on formation of community associations, joint partnerships,
and management plans in the following forest types:
industrial plantations, montane forests, farm forestry, dry
land forestry, river corridor forests, and coastal forests.
These studies should examine how management and
partnerships area affected by extrasectoral activities
14.1.1 Pilot studies in
applicable forest
areas by December
2008
KFS, NGOs,
communities.
Improved forest
management
guidelines and
guidelines for
partnership.
F. LEGAL FRAMEWORK
15. National forest policy
15.1 The updated Forestry Policy should be approved by
Parliament as soon as possible and kept under review.
(Sessional Paper No 4 of 2006 is due to be republished, and
retabled in early 2007).
15.1.1 Forestry
Policy given a new
Sessional paper
number and approved
by Parliament by
MENR, FD Updated Forestry
Policy in place
New Sessional paper number given (Paper No 1
of 2007). Policy waiting to be published
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-15
Policies and actions Milestones
(including time-
based milestones)
Indicative list of
stakeholders to
be involved
Expected
outcomes
Status
December 2007
16. Harmonization of legal framework
16.1 The KFS should establish an internal working group to
ensure that a program for complying with international
standards is introduced. This is important for improving
compliance and other initiatives (for example, carbon
sequestration; avoidance of invasive species in dry lands;
regional, and international levels.)
16.1.1 An internal
KFS working group
established by June
2008
KFS, private sector,
NGOs, universities.
National forest
management
standards in
conformity with
international
standards.
G. ENFORCEMENT
17. Improving enforcement
17.1 Develop a strategy and guidelines on how enforcement
will be addressed in the new KFS.
17.1.1 A strategy on
improving
enforcement in place
by December 2007
KFS in discussion
with community
representatives
Stakeholders have
genuine respect for
the new Forest Act
PRIORITY AREA 2: ENABLING COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION AND COST AND BENEFIT SHARING
A. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
18. Increasing public participation in forestry issues
18.1 Guidelines should be prepared on the establishment of
community forest associations (CFAs) and the rules that
should apply to formation and registration of associations.
These guidelines should be developed and tested jointly by
FD and the KFS and include active involvement of CFA
representatives. Associations should be encouraged to form
umbrella organizations.
18.1.1 Guidelines to
be provided and
piloted ready for
implementation by
December 2007
Communities,
NGOs, KFS
Empowered
communities that
understand the role
and opportunities
open to them
through forest
associations.
19. Existing participation processes in communities should be built upon
19.1 An inventory of existing community participation
processes in Kenya should be undertaken. Best practice
should be identified as well as barriers to participation.
Recommendations on how these can be incorporated and
improved in the Forests Act implementation should be
made.
19.1.1 Inventory and
best practice study
complete by
December 2007
NGOs, civil society,
community
associations.
Best practice in
community
participation is built
into forest
management.
20. Increase emphasis on forest, bamboo, and cane that the poor depend on- arid and nonmoist forests
20.1 Undertake a study to review how arid and nonmoist
forests can contribute to poverty reduction. The study
should identify what scope there is for exploitation of non-
timber forest products.
20.1.1 Study to be
completed by
December 2008
KFS, NGOs Improved
understanding of
how forests can
contribute to
poverty reduction
21. Encourage the participation of women and excluded group
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-16
Policies and actions Milestones
(including time-
based milestones)
Indicative list of
stakeholders to
be involved
Expected
outcomes
Status
21.1 Develop a policy on how women and excluded groups
should be engaged in CFAs and the resulting benefits from
these groups. The measure is to assist in ensuring
appropriate levels of representation on the conservancy
committees
21.1.1 Policy on
inclusion and
widespread
dissemination of its
purpose developed by
December 2007
CFAs, women,
excluded groups and
networks,
community
representatives,
NGOs
Women and
excluded groups
benefit from the
new act
B. REPRESENTATION OF COMMUNITY FOREST ASSOCIATIONS
22. Developing partnerships with registered community forest associations (CFAs)
22.1 To avoid disenfranchising some areas and associations,
consideration should be given to the introduction of rules to
ensure fair election and representation of CFAs on area
conservation committees. It would also be helpful to set up
regular meetings between CFAs within each conservancy
area.
22.1.1 Formation of
umbrella forums for
conservancies by
June 2008
NGOs, all CFAs
and Forest
Conservancy
Committee (FCC),
universities
CFAs well
coordinated and
fairly represented at
FCC
22.2 Undertake a capacity needs assessment to establish
what skills and funds are needed to run CFAs and what the
current gaps are. Study should make recommendations on
how this skill gap can be reduced.
22.2.1 Capacity
needs assessment and
recommendations
completed by June
2008
CFAs, universities,
Forest Action
Network, KFS,
KEFRI, KFWG
Understanding of
the skill gap of
CFAs better
understood by the
KFS
C. BENEFIT SHARING
23. Identify the full range of potential community benefits and costs and how these will be shared
23.1 Undertake studies within each Forest Conservancy
Area to identify the specific community benefits that can be
promoted in these areas.
23.1.1 Pilot studies of
community benefit
undertaken by June
2008
KFS, NGOs, CFAs,
universities, local
communities
23.2 To ensure that CFAs are accountable to the local
inhabitants, clear and transparent accounts should be
prepared showing the annual income and expenditure of
individual forest areas, and the income attributed to each
CFA. Preparation and publication of these accounts should
be the responsibility of the CFA, working with the treasures
of each CFA.
23.2.1 Procedures for
accountability and
transparency
prepared by CFAs
ready by June 2008
KFS, CFAs Accountable and
transparent CFAs in
place.
23.3 Develop forest-specific guidance notes for the KFS,
CFAs, and the private sector on the aesthetic and religious
value of forests; the organization and administration of
ecotourism; livestock grazing; fruits, roots, and medicinal
plant gathering; and the promotion of small scale timber and
non-timber product marketing to achieve true benefit
sharing
23.3.1 Guidance
notes (in local
dialect) on
community benefit
sharing of different
activities developed
and published by
Area conservancy
committees
Transparent process
for benefits sharing
established.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-17
Policies and actions Milestones
(including time-
based milestones)
Indicative list of
stakeholders to
be involved
Expected
outcomes
Status
June 2008
23.4 Clarify whether community council and trust land in
arid and semi-arid areas will be classified as forest and
access for grazing livestock will be restricted under a
―conventional‖ approach to management plans.
23.4.1 Guidelines for
forest classification
and registration
published by
December 2008
KFS, Ministry of
Local Government,
Ministry of Lands
Transparent process
for benefits sharing
established.
24. Arrange payments for environmental services and valuation of ecosystem services
24.1 Undertake a study to quantify the nature and value of
environmental services, establish what is practical to be
achieved, and approve a design and best practice
methodology.
24.1.1 Case study to
be completed by
December 2009
KFS, NEMA,
Ministry of Finance,
Ministry of Water,
local and municipal
authorities, research
organizations,
private sector,
Bureau of Statistics
Environmental
services costed
24.2 Set up pilot study to build on existing experiences and
establish appropriate scales of charges. Decide who should
pay the costs and how the revenue is to be collected and
shared.
24.2.1 Undertake
pilot study on
valuation, revenue
collection, and
benefit sharing
KFS, NEMA,
Ministry of Finance,
Ministry of Water,
local and municipal
authorities, research
organizations,
private sector,
Bureau of Statistics
Pilot study
completed and
findings
disseminated
25. Joint management of plantation forests
25.1 A number of pilot studies of different types of
partnership for management of plantation forests should be
prepared, involving both community and private sector
interest and these examples should be used to develop
specific guidelines to cover joint management agreements.
Existing studies (such as the International Institute for
Environmental and Development work) should be
considered alongside these pilot studies.
25. 1.1 At least four
pilot studies of
different partnerships
for management of
plantations be carried
out by December
2009
KFS, private sector,
communities, Kenya
Forestry College,
universities and
tertiary learning
institutions.
Clear guidelines on
the implementation
of the partnerships.
PRIORITY AREA 3: ENHANCING INVESTMENT IN THE FOREST SECTOR
A. BUSINESS PLANS
26. Developing investment plans
26.1 Each of the forest management plans should include an
investment strategy. The investment strategy should indicate
what contribution will be made by each organization toward
realization of the aims and also what returns will be due to
26.1.1 Develop a
number of business
plans for different
forest sites to be
KFS, CFAs, private
sector.
Investment plan
linked to forest
management plans.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-18
Policies and actions Milestones
(including time-
based milestones)
Indicative list of
stakeholders to
be involved
Expected
outcomes
Status
those organizations. Investment strategies should be referred
for consideration to the planned forest investment center.
ready by June 2008
B. TRAINING
27. Training in forestry and related industries
27.1 The KFS should undertake a review of training
programs with a view to introducing and supporting
programs that are directed at manufacturing and marketing
of timber and non-timber forest products. New training
programs should relate directly to the strategic and business
plans cited in Recommendation 3.1
Training needs
studies carried out
January 2008
KFS, private sector Training needs
document
27.2 Support training in all sectors of the forest industry
through the levy or royalties on concessions.
27.2.1 KFS to
develop training
packages for funding
through the
Directority of
Industry Training by
January 2008
KFS, private sector Cofinancing for
industrial training
secured
27.2.2 Develop
modalities for forest
industry contribution
to the conservation
fund by January 2008
KFS, private sector Cofinancing for
industrial training
secured
C. ROYALTIES, LICENCES, AND CONCESSIONS
28. Model contracts and concession agreements
28.1 The KFS Board should prepare model concession
contracts and agreements and make these available for
parties (communities and private sector) interested in
commercial activities in plantations or natural forests. Draft
agreements should show the types of safeguards that can be
build in to protect the interest of parties in the agreements
and all parties (especially communities) that may be
affected by the agreement as well as environmental services.
Model guidelines should also include consideration of
dispute resolution and ongoing management
28.1.1 Preparation of
model agreements
laying out rights and
responsibilities of
different parties and
products covered by
December 2007
FRC, KFS Transparent
contracting
28.2 Pilot should be undertaken to test the effectiveness of
model contracts and concessions but without delaying the
reactivation of sustainable timber production.
28.2.1 Pilot contracts
for concessions to be
tested by December
2008
KFS Maximum
effectiveness of
concessions ensured
28.3 The KFS Board should ensure that the principles 28.3.1 Preparation of FRC, KFS, public Maintenance of
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-19
Policies and actions Milestones
(including time-
based milestones)
Indicative list of
stakeholders to
be involved
Expected
outcomes
Status
incorporated in model concession contracts and agreements
are also applied to the KFS‘s own management state forests.
guidelines on
sustainable forest
management by
December 2008
participation internal high
standards of forest
management.
28.4 Information on standard agreements for contracts and
concessions should be publicly available and awareness
should be raised (among forest dependent communities and
private sector) regarding these.
28.4.1 Raise public
awareness of and
access to model
agreements through
demonstration slide
shows, leaflets, and
other training aids
disseminated widely
as part of the general
program for raising
community and
private sector
awareness about the
forest sector reform
by December 2009
KFS, NGOs, CFAs CFAs and private
sector aware of
contracting
opportunities.
29. Increase accountability and transparency associated with investments
29.1 All contracts, concessions, royalty agreements, and
other licences and leases should be made publicly available
once the terms have been agreed to. Establishing clear and
transparent terms for licenses, royalties, stumpage payments
and other methods of measuring and valuing standing
timber will ensure that all parties can see the value of the
resource and will help to ensure that all parties can see the
value of the resource and will help to ensure that
silvicultural operations are being carried out sustainably.
29.1.1 System for
access to agreed
terms and conditions
of approved licenses
and leases by
December 2007
KFS, NGOs, private
sector
Transparent terms
and conditions for
licenses and leases
and easy access to
published
information on the
same. This will
create a level
playing field for
investors.
D. INCENTIVES
30. Minimizing number of stakeholders who are potential losers due to the act
30.1 A framework for the provision of incentives (especially
for potential losers under the new act, such as small-scale
saw millers, using environmentally responsibly equipment,
tree planting, and so on) needs to be developed. Before
these incentives are confirmed, it is strongly recommended
that indicative business plans be developed to illustrate the
levels of return that might be achieved on different types of
30.1.1 A framework
for providing
incentives developed
by December 2008
KFS, private and
communities,
Ministry of Finance.
Clear and
transparent
incentive
framework for
investing in
forestry.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-20
Policies and actions Milestones
(including time-
based milestones)
Indicative list of
stakeholders to
be involved
Expected
outcomes
Status
forests by private or community interests and that the levels
of risk should be assessed.
31. Ensuring private forest owners do not impose social, environmental, or economic costs on local communities and local authorities
31.1 Guidelines are required to ensure that incentives to
private forest owners are only provided where it is clear that
there will be no adverse consequences on the environment
or social or local economic conditions enjoyed by local
communities and authorities. It is essential that safeguards
are built into the registration process and its subsequent
monitoring to ensure that private forests are managed
sustainably.
31.1.1 Clear
guidelines for
management of
private forests by
December 2007
KFS, other
stakeholders
including Physical
Planning
Department in
Ministry of Lands
and communities.
Rules and
regulations for
management of
private forests.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER REGULATIONS
32. Environmental and other regulations
32.1 The KFS should apply regulatory framework including
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and other
evaluation tools that are fit for purpose and do not impose
an unacceptable burden on industry.
32.1.1 Clear
applications of EIA
regulations and
environmental audit
rules for the sector
during
implementation of
the Forests Act 2005
KFS, NEMA EIA regulations and
environmental audit
rules for forest
sector.
EIA regulations already prepared by NEMA
32.2 Criteria, standards, and guidelines should be developed
to indicate what conditions will constitute inadequate
management of all forest types.
32.2.1 Criteria and
standards confirming
the circumstances
under which forests
will be taken under
KFS management to
be adopted by
December 2008
KFS in consultation
with all stakeholders
Standards and
criteria established
F. Technical assistance and sustainable forest resource use
33. Revitalization of forest industry
33.1 Urgent steps are required to promote restricting of the
forestry industry and raise overall standards. It is
recommended that a Forest Industry Forum be established to
promote best practice.
33.1.1 Set up a Forest
Industry Forum by
December 2008
KFS in consultation
with all
stakeholders.
Forest Industry
Forum established
in Kenya.
34. Managing charcoal production and transportation
34.1 A full analysis should be undertaken to determine
where charcoal production can be permitted, and rules and
regulations should be developed for authorizing and
34.1.1 A charcoal
regulatory framework
with specific
KFS, private sector,
Energy for
Sustainable
Charcoal rules and
regulation and
certification
Draft charcoal rules have been prepared,
development of national standards on
certification has been initiated.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-21
Policies and actions Milestones
(including time-
based milestones)
Indicative list of
stakeholders to
be involved
Expected
outcomes
Status
monitoring charcoal production. standards prepared
and gazetted and a
certification process
initiated by June
2008
Development
Africa, World
Agroforestry
Center,
communities, traffic
police, Ministry of
Planning, Local
Authorities, and
others (wide
spectrum of
stakeholders)
standards in place.
35. Expansion of farm forestry
35.1 Develop a clear policy brief on the role of both
plantation forestry and farm forestry (both different
locations and scales) in the new Forests Act and how each
can contribute to the sustainable use of forest resources.
This will need to have a clear position on the development
of technical support (extension) to support farm forestry.
35.1.1 Policy brief
prepared by
December 2007
KFS and other
stakeholders
Stakeholders
understand the role
of farm forestry in
achieving
sustainable use of
forest resources.
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-22
Appendix IV: Summary of Risks, Mitigation and Management for BecA Hosted Research Activities (ILRI)
Risk due to Risk
Level
Risk Mitigation Actions Policies, Procedures and Training
Required
Monitoring Means/Timelines
ENVIRONMENT
Solid and liquid wastes
Hazardous biological and
chemical wastes
H Hazardous waste should be handled and disposed of according to
international best practice and as recommended by MSDS and
NFPA 704 ratings.
SOP for handling/disposal of hazardous
chemical wastes.
Training in handling or disposal of
hazardous chemical wastes
Monthly inspections, biannual audits.
Audit report for external facilities/contractors used
for waste disposal.
Disposal of consumables
(e.g. Plastics and sharps)
and non-hazardous
reagents; disposal of
radioactive waste
M All biohazardous waste must be decontaminated by autoclaving
and then incinerated.
Waste water will be treated via an on-site wastewater treatment
system.
Disposal of computer
equipment
L Identify options for reuse/recycle/donate computer parts to schools
and other institutions.
Air pollution:
Incinerator emissions,
fumes, emissions from
autoclaves, standby
generator
M Maintenance of incinerator, pipes, ventilation systems, equipment
and laboratory buildings.
Preventive maintenance system.
Emergency response procedures
Training in emergency preparedness
Maintenance records.
Assessment of preventive maintenance program.
Training records.
As per preventive maintenance schedule.
Training on induction, and then at least annually. Gas leaks H
Transportation, storage and handling of hazardous materials:
Accidental release,
leakage, spillage
H Implement international standards (e.g. as specified in CBD and
Cartagena Protocol) and guidelines based on MSDS and NFPA
704 ratings.
Minimize need for transportation of hazardous materials within
Kenya, or across borders.
SOPs for transportation, storage and
handling.
Documentation for transportation
Training in storage, handling and
transportation of hazardous materials.
Emergency response procedures.
Training in emergency preparedness.
Cradle-to-grave analysis of one reagent every 3
months.
Evaluation of maintenance program of high risk
equipment
Records of accidents, leakage, spillage of materials
during transportation across east and central Africa
country boundaries
Training records
Vaccine development:
Persistent virulence of
shedded live vaccines from
target animals
M Employ ―Precautionary Principle‖, and assess on a case by case
basis.
Project selection criteria may require conduct of risk assessment,
depending on category risk target animal pathogen or parasite.
Biocontainement levels should be appropriate for facilities where
vaccines are being developed
.
SOPs for disposal of biological wastes,
and Biosafety compliance.
Training in Biosafety compliance.
Monitor disposal areas
Risk assessment for each product
Studies to monitor impacts resulting from application
of technology. Genetic recombination in
animals arising from use of
new generation vaccines.
M
GM plant research:
Horizontal gene transfer,
development of antibiotic
resistance, multiple species
crossing, species
M Employ ―Precautionary Principle‖, and assess on a case by case
basis.
In dealing with GM crops, risk mitigation measures need to be
developed on a case-by-case basis, for the particular crop/trait
SOPs for disposal of biological wastes,
standard greenhouse practices, and
Biosafety compliance.
Training in use of growth chambers,
Monitor ICS
Monitor disposal areas
Risk assessment for each crop/trait under study.
Studies to monitor impacts resulting from application
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-23
Risk due to Risk
Level
Risk Mitigation Actions Policies, Procedures and Training
Required
Monitoring Means/Timelines
takeover/blight, animal
toxicity, gene pollution,
genetic stability, increased
weediness after release.
combinations under study-project selection criteria may require
conduct of risk assessment.
Implementation of Integrated Confinement System: appropriate
(physical and biological) bio-containment for plant research,
relative to the level of risk of the research process involved (e.g.
tissue culture, marker-assisted selection in plant breeding, and/or
transformation technologies).
Alternative technological methods, such as marker-assisted
breeding, can be adopted to mitigate risks associated with plant
GMO research.
greenhouses, Biosafety compliance. of technology.
Biosafety issues:
Sabotage M The establishment of an ILRI Biosafety Committee.
Incorporate security conditions into the design of the facilities.
Implement security protocols.
SOPs and checklists for Biosafety
compliance.
Security protocols.
SOPs for emergency preparedness.
Training and awareness in first aid,
general safety and Biosafety compliance,
good microbiological techniques and
bio-containment.
Training in emergency response.
BecA and ILRI should comply with
current (and new) Kenya Biosafety
guidelines and regulatory requirements.
BecA and ILRI should adopt standards
of Biosafety and good laboratory practice
that are consistent with international best
practices (such as those established by
Health Canada, CFIA, US NIH and
WHO, for relevant areas of BecA hosted
research activities).
Assessment of BecA biosafety compliance and
emergency preparedness strategy to be done before
BecA start and during operations. Differing Biosafety
standards among BecA
participating countries
H
Ability of governments of
participating BecA
countries to control and
react to Biosafety issues.
H
LIVELIHOODS
Effects of BecA products and wastes generated
Accidental transfer of
genes; exposure to new
pathogens; generation of
alien and invasive species;
genetic contamination;
exposure to hazardous
waste; reinforced herbicide
tolerance liability arising
from products and wastes
generated through BecA
operations.
M Implement Integrated Confinement System:
possible accidental release, gene transfer, loss of indigenous
species through cross fertilisation can be avoided through various
containment measures. Hazardous waste handling and disposal
measures according to internationally best practice.
Implementation of PR/Public Engagement Strategy: build capacity
of local communities to deal with eventualities, and to assist with
monitoring.
Project selection criteria will include risk assessment of any
research on GM plants. Any proposals involving on field trials
with GM plants will be subject to scrutiny to ensure that national
regulations and international best practices can be met by the
project proponents and that these be monitored and enforced.
BecA AND ILRI will also require a
response plan, including a
communications strategy to deal with
any accidental release of pathogens,
GMO plants, or the spillage or leakage of
hazardous waste.
Communication strategy will require
greater interaction with local
communities.
Monitor ICS.
Monitor the meetings and record keeping with the
neighbouring communities at regular intervals with
community but primarily during BecA operations.
Loss of indigenous
species; poor farmers
lacking capacity to deal
H
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-24
Risk due to Risk
Level
Risk Mitigation Actions Policies, Procedures and Training
Required
Monitoring Means/Timelines
with a risk/event
Access to seed and technologies by local communities:
Neglect of local varieties;
threat to food security;
differentiated access by
different actors, increasing
vulnerability of weaker
actors (farmers).
M Preferential treatment for resource poor farmers in access to seed
technologies.
Project selection criteria requiring case by case analysis for any
proposed use of technologies such as GURTs that may limit
access to seed and technologies.
BecA‘s IP policy as described in the
Establishment Agreement proposes that
individual members or participants in the
BecA network may hold IP protection on
their inventions, developed as part of
BecA‘s activities, but where they do so,
they must give a royalty-fee, non-
exclusive licence to all other members
and participants in the BecA network, so
as to ensure access to seed and
technologies by resource poor farmers.
Monitor a group of farmers who are supposed to have
had access to seed and technology developed at BecA
Randomly select a number of rural areas in eastern
and central Africa countries and determine level of
awareness and access (throughout BecA operation
e.g. after 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 years).
GURTs limiting farmers‘
use of seeds; restriction of
farmers‘ choice of crops;
dependency on seeds and
chemicals; threats to
extinction of genetic stock.
M
Indigenous / Traditional Knowledge:
ITK being adulterated /
obliterated due to emphasis
on state / individual rights
L Agreements should be in place for transfer and use of materials,
designating source of materials used in the research and signifying
prior informed consent on the part of source / knowledge owners.
BecA‘s ITK policy should require the
disclosure of source of materials upon
which research will be based.
Evaluate BecA ITK policy 1 year after start-up for
content and level of implementation
To be done during BecA start-up but mainly during
BecA operation ITK being excluded from
the purview of intellectual
property; restricted or
denied access to medicine
and food by local
communities; monopoly
IPR rights conflicting with
established local farming
systems; BecA becoming a
conduit for appropriation
of ITK by researchers.
M
Intellectual property:
BecA‘s IP policy
discouraging potential
innovators; IPP taking
precedence over availing
technologies to African
farmers.
L Project selection criteria to ensure projects have freedom to
operate, and IP not a constraint to availing technologies to
farmers.
BecA‘s IP policy is set out in
Establishment Agreement and Project
Agreements.
In addition IP policy should include:
G. Broad areas for IPP grant;
H. Whether the Consortium will
own IP & on what conditions;
I. Who owns IP different
scenarios (independent
researcher; researcher from
NARI; researcher employed
in BecA hub etc);
J. How to deal with third party
IP within BecA;
K. Criteria for delineating BecA
research as public good, or
Monitor who owns IP in different scenarios
(independent researcher; researcher from NARI;
researcher employed in BecA hub etc)
Should be initiated prior to BecA start-up but
evaluation best during BecA operation.
Private actors obtaining
IPRs for appropriated
communal knowledge;
conflict between private
good versus public good in
BecA hosted research
activities; private
proprietary technology
being availed freely to the
public; differing IPP
M
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-25
Risk due to Risk
Level
Risk Mitigation Actions Policies, Procedures and Training
Required
Monitoring Means/Timelines
policies in BecA
participating countries, e.g.
on patenting life forms;
absence of plant variety
protection regime; lack of
capacity in eastern and
central African countries to
implement IPP; benefits
from innovations not
shared fairly and equitably;
proprietary knowledge
being passed through
natural processes, e.g.
where refugia exist; loss of
digitally stored scientific
information and
intellectual property
through theft or electronic
failure.
private good;
L. Use of materials transfer
agreements designating
source of materials used in
research and signifying prior
informed consent on the part
of source;
M. Ensure that IPRs promote
rather than hamper the
realisation of the objectives of
BecA.
BecA‘s use of ILRI‘s IT system will be
governed by ILRI‘s IT policy. However,
appropriate off site database back
systems, security practices and
procedures should be put in place.
Biopiracy:
Indigenous knowledge
developed and
commercialised, without
consent or recognition or
reward to the communities
holding that knowledge.
M Agreements should be in place for transfer and use of materials,
designating source of materials used in the research and signifying
prior informed consent on the part of source / knowledge.
BecA ITK policy as above will also
assist to prevent bio-piracy.
Evaluate relevant BecA policies 1 year after start-up
for content and level of implementation.
To be done during BecA start-up but mainly during
BecA operation.
HEALTH
Bioanalytical methods:
DNA sequencing, PCR
methods, SNP marker
technology, genotyping,
proteomics and imaging;
preparation of
reagents/mediums, SSR
gel electrophoresis,
transformation technology,
plant phenotyping and
immunology.
L Hazardous waste handling, storing and disposal measures
according to internationally best practice and as recommended by
MSDS and NFPA 704 RATINGS.
Mitigation measures to prevent negative impacts on health due to
Bioanalytical methods include proper use of PPE, incorporation of
safety procedures for biological, chemical and radiation hazards,
and containment.
SOP for use of PPE,
handling/storing/disposal of hazardous
chemical wastes
Training in use of PPE,
handling/storing/disposal of chemical
and reagents
Preventative maintenance program
Evaluation of maintenance program of high risk
equipment
Monitoring health of research personnel at regular
intervals during BecA operation.
Vaccine development:
Adverse reactions to
vaccine
M Implementation of Integrated Confinement System.
Employ ―Precautionary Principle‖
Project selection criteria may require case by case risk assessment.
Implementing appropriate biosafety practices and procedures.
Mitigation of adverse reactions varies; some effects can be
avoided through microbiological techniques during the handling
of vaccine related reagents; other reactions are more complex and
SOPs for handling and disposal of
biological wastes, and biosafety
compliance.
Training in biosafety compliance
Monitor ICS
Monitor disposal areas
Risk assessment for each product
Studies to monitor impacts resulting from
applications of technology.
Exposure to disease
pathogens under study and
vaccine reagents
H
Contamination of food
supply
M
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-26
Risk due to Risk
Level
Risk Mitigation Actions Policies, Procedures and Training
Required
Monitoring Means/Timelines
depend on the characterisation of the type of vaccine.
GM plant research:
Increased exposure of
researchers to hazardous
materials
L Employ ―Precautionary Principle‖ with case by case risk
assessment.
Project selection criteria may require risk assessment taking into
account crop and trait combination.
Compliance with governmental regulatory requirements will
address issues of potential toxicity and allergencity, by ensuring
that any transformed plants with potential for allergencity or
toxicity are eliminated in the regulatory process.
Alteration of nutritional content of transgenic plants can be
addressed by characterising the transgene and establishing the
composition of the transgenic crop through biochemical and
chemical assays.
Implementation of Integrated Confinement System to control
contamination of food.
SOPs for disposal of biological wastes,
standard lab and greenhouse practices,
and biosafety compliance
Training in use of growth chambers,
greenhouses, biosafety compliance.
Monitor ICS
Monitor disposal areas
Risk assessment for each product
Studies to monitor impacts resulting from application
of technology. Unintentional alteration of
nutrient content;
allerginicity; toxicity;
development of antibiotic
resistance in consumers.
M
Contamination of food
supply.
H
GENDER
Roles of women:
BecA‘s research products
hampering, rather than
assisting, women in
conducting, their chores.
M Project selection criteria to consider impacts on women: a case-
by-case assessment on the effects of proposed BecA-hosted
research is undertaken.
Women should be consulted in setting the agenda for BecA hosted
research projects.
Studies to assess impacts of BecA hosted research on
women‘s roles for each product during and after field
trails.
BecA research
technologies
reducing/replacing
women‘s roles
M
Gender equity:
Replication and
perpetuation of gender
imbalances (e.g. control of
income by men);
M Recognition of the special needs of young women scientists (e.g.
accommodation and child care), in order to encourage their greater
participation in science in Africa.
Gender equity can be assured through an
effective gender policy that mainstreams
gender into all aspects of BecA‘s
activities and operations.
BecA‘s approach to gender equity as
proposed in the Business Plan (April
2005) includes ex ante assessment of the
possible effects of new products
technologies on women; it also provides
for 30% of the members of the BecA
Steering Committee and the Science
Advisory Committee to be women; and
for the 30% of the fellowships to be
awarded to women.
Evaluate BecA policy on gender;
Monitor the number of female research scientists and
managers over time. To be done at start-up and
subsequently at least once during BecA operation.
Adoption of gender neutral
stance, e.g. in the context
of women as holders of
traditional knowledge;
M
―tokenism‖ M
Over-emphasis of private /
individual rights
M
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-27
Benefits and Risks of BecA hosted Research Activities The benefits and risks from BecA hosted research stem from:
Research process used to generate new products and technologies;
Products of research, as they are disseminated into environments of eastern and central Africa;
Policies that govern the conduct of the research and the dissemination of its outputs, including the legal
and regulatory framework in the countries of eastern and central Africa.
Table 1 summarises the most pronounced positive and negative environmental issues that may arise
from the BecA program.
BENEFITS RISKS
ENVIRONMENT
New plant varieties
Improved crop yield
Pest and disease resistance
Tolerance to biotic stress (drought)
Reduced use of pesticides and herbicides
Reduction of soil erosion due to decreased tilling
of herbicide resistant crops
Genetic characterisation of indigenous flora and fauna
Improved conservation and management of
African genetic resources, including wildlife
Livestock vaccines and diagnostics
Reduction in chemical use to control animal
diseases
Livestock breeds
Reduction in chemical use to control livestock
diseases
Higher yielding plant varieties
Loss of plant genetic and species diversity.
GM crops
Possible deleterious effect on non-target organisms
from insect resistant crops
Development of resistance in pests to anti-pest
characteristics in transgenic crops
Weediness of transgenic plants (multiple species
crossings)
Other genetically modified organisms (GMOs)
Genetic contamination of wild flora and fauna
Possibility for GMOs to hybridise with and
takeover indigenous native species, leading to
reduction in diversity
Livestock breeds
Loss of animal genetic and species diversity
Research processes
Generation of hazardous waste
LIVELIHOOD
New varieties of staple food crops
Increased yields, resulting in increased
consumption, therefore improved health status
Surplus available for sale resulting in increased
income
Reduced costs to growers/consumers
Reduced vulnerability to drought
Longer storage/improved marketing flexibility
Increased food security
Improved animal nutrition
Improved forage leading to healthier livestock
Livestock vaccines and diagnostics
Increased incomes from healthier livestock (e.g.
dairy cattle, chickens).
New varieties of staple food crops
Increased difficulty of preserving and using
traditional varieties
Inaccessibility of new technology to poorest
farmers
Competition between small and large producers
Genetically modified crops
Dependence on commercially available GMO
seeds and related inputs, possibly from monopoly
suppliers
Inequitable sharing of IPR benefits
Trade restrictions from importers that ban GMOs
HEALTH
New varieties of staple food crops
Increased access to food
Genetically modified crops
Increased access to food
Availability of crops resistant to environmental
stress and pests
Reduced farmer and consumer exposure to
pesticides/herbicides
New varieties of staple food crops
Unintended effects altering nutritional content
Genetically modified crops
Unintentional alteration of nutrient content
Allergenicity
Toxicity
Contamination of food supply
Environmental Aspects of River Engineering Research Cluster 2010
Nile Basin Capacity Building Network ( NBCBN ) A-28
BENEFITS RISKS
Enhanced nutritional content of food
Cheaper drugs (from pharmaceutical crops)
Plant-based pharmaceuticals targeting orphan
diseases
Livestock vaccines and diagnostics
Diminished livestock mortality
Reduced reservoirs of infection for diseases
affecting people and livestock, such as avian flu
and typanosomiasis
Livestock vaccines and diagnostics
Increased exposure of researchers to pathogens
Research process
Increased exposure of researchers to hazardous
materials
GENDER
New varieties of staple food crops
Improved food security
Increased access to food
Increased income from sale of surplus produce
Genetically modified crops
Reduced time required for, weeding (HT crops)
Improved nutritional value of crops
Increased income from sale of surplus produce
Livestock vaccines and diagnostics
Increased milk production by livestock
Improved health for small stock
Higher income from sale of livestock products
(e.g. milk and eggs)
New varieties of staple food crops
Reduced income from sale of surplus produce as
men takeover cultivation of crops previously
grown by women (e.g. banana)
Increased time required for harvesting, weeding
Any detrimental impacts on environment affects
women as custodians of the environment
Erosion of indigenous and traditional knowledge
customarily safeguarded by women
Women do not often benefit from increased
income guaranteed by the sale of high value crops.