for official only report no: 26675 ... - documents & reports

Document of The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: 26675

PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT

ON A

PROPOSED GRANT FROM THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY TRUST FUND

IN THE AMOUNT OF US$6.0 MILLION

TO THE

NIGER BASIN AUTHORITY (NBA)

FOR THE

REVERSING LAND AND WATER DEGRADATION TRENDS IN THE

NIGER RIVER BASIN

April 23,2004

Water and Urban 2 Sector AFC7, AFC11, AFC12, AFC13, AFC1.5 Africa Region

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. I t s contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Acronyms and -Abbreviations -

AfDB

A M C O W ANBO APR AWRMI Bank BNWPP CAS E S m

GEF

HydroNiger

I A I N B O ISDS Iw rW:Leam JALDA L C C

MDG MOM

NPT

NBA

NBAES

NEAP NEPAD N G O NSC

OP OP PDF-A PDF-B PFO PIC

African Development Bank (Banque Afncaine de De'veloppement, B / W ) African Ministerial Conference on Waters African Network o f Basin Organizations Annual Project Review Africa Water Resources Management Initiative The World Bank Group Bank and Netherlands Water Partnership Program Country Assistance Strategy (WB) Environmental and Social Management Framework (Cadre de Gestion Environnementale et Sociale, CGES) Global Environment Facility (Fonds pour 1 'Environnement Mondial-FEM) Inter-State Hydrological Forecasting Center (Centres Inter-Etats de Pre'vision, CIP) Implementing Agency International Network o f Basin Organizations Integrated Safeguards Data Sheet International Waters International Waters Learning Exchange and Resource Network Japan Agricultural Land Development Agency Local Coordination Committees (Conzite's Locaiix de Coordination et de Suivi, CLCS) Millennium Development Goals Microgrant Operational Manual (Manuel de Proce'diires du Programme de Microsubventions, MPMS) National Project Teams (Eqiiipe Nationale de Projets, ENP) Niger Basin Authority (Autoritt du Bassin du Niger, ABN) Niger Basin Authority Executive Secretariat (Secrttaire Exe'ciitif de l 'Autorite du Bassin du Niger, ANBEE) National Environmental Action Plan New Partnership for Africa's Development Non-Governmental Organization National Steering Committee (Coruite' National de Pilotage CNP) Operational Policy (Bank) Operational Program (GEF) Project Preparation and Development Facility Block A (GEF) Project Preparation and Development Facility Block B (GEF) Project Financial Officer World Bank Public Information Center

... 111

PIM PIR PMCU

Project PRSP PSR RSC

SAP SDAP

SGP SOE STAP STS

TDA TRIB UN UNDP USALD WB WEHAB WSSD

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Project Implementation Manual Project Implementation Review Program Management and Coordination Unit (Unite' de Gestion et de Coordination des Programmes, UGCP) Project for Reversing Land and Water Degradation Trends in the Niger River Basin Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper Project Status Report Regional Steering Committee-AfDB-GEF (Comite' Re'gional de Pilotage-BAD-FEM-CRP)) Strategic Action Program Sustainable Development Action Program (Programme d'action pour le De'veloppement Durable du Bassin du Fleuve Niger PADD) UNDP Small Grants Programme Statement of Expenses GEF Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel Scientific and Technical Subcommittee of the Steering Committee (Sous-Comite' Scientifique et Technique, SCST) Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis Transboundary River Basin Initiative project (UNDP) United Nations United Nations Development Programme United States Agency for International Development The Wor ld Bank Group Water, Energy, Health, Agriculture, Biodiversity Wor ld Summit on Sustainable Development

Vice President: Callisto Madavo Country Director: Pedro Alba, A. David. Craig, Mamadou Dia,

Ali Mahmoud Khadr, Mark D. Tomlinson Sector Manager: Inger Andersen

Task Team Leader: Ousmane Dione

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. I t s contents may not be otherwise disclosed

I without W o r l d Bank authorization. ______i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................................................... 111 ...

A . 1 . 2 . 3 .

1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 .

1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 .

1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6. 7 . 8 .

B .

C .

D .

Annex Annex Annex

STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE ................................................................ 2 Country and sector issues ............................................................................................... 2 Rationale for Bank involvement ..................................................................................... 3 Higher-level objectives to which the Project contributes ............................................... 4

Lending instrument ......................................................................................................... 5

Project components ........................................................................................................ 6

Analysis o f alternatives .................................................................................................. 8 IMPLEMENTATION ....................................................................................................... 9

Partnership arrangements ............................................................................................... 9 Institutional and implementation arrangements ............................................................. 9

Sustainability ............................................................................................................... 11 Critical r isks and possible controversial aspects .......................................................... 12 Loadcredit conditions and covenants .......................................................................... 12

APPRAISAL S U M M A R Y .............................................................................................. 12 Economic and financial analyses ................................................................................. 12 Technical ...................................................................................................................... 13 Fiduciary ....................................................................................................................... 14 Social ............................................................................................................................ 14 Environment ................................................................................................................. 15 Safeguard policies ........................................................................................................ 16

Compliance ................................................................................................................... 17

PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................... 5

Project development objectives and key indicators ........................................................ 5

Lessons learned and reflected in the Project design ....................................................... 7

Monitoring and evaluation of outcomeshesults ........................................................... 10

Readiness ...................................................................................................................... 16

1: Country and Sector/Program Background ................................................................... 18 2: Major Related Projects Financed by the Bank and/or Other Projects ......................... 24 3: Results and Monitoring Framework ............................................................................ 25

Annex 4: Detailed Project Description ........................................................................................ 33 Annex 5: Summary of Project Costs ........................................................................................... 44 Annex 6: Implementation Arrangements .................................................................................... 45 Annex 7: Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements ........................................... 51 Annex 8: Procurement ................................................................................................................. 55 Annex 9: Incremental Cost Analysis ........................................................................................... 63 Annex 10: Project Preparation and Supervision ......................................................................... 75

Annex 12: Risks and Mitigation Measures ................................................................................. 78 Annex 13: Niger River Basin At A Glance ................................................................................. 79

Annex 16: STAP Technical Roster Review ................................................................................ 93

Annex 11: Documents in the Project Fi le .................................................................................... 76

Annex 14: Statement o f Loans and Credits ................................................................................. 80 Annex 15: Letters o f Endorsement .............................................................................................. 81

IBRD Map 33021 ...................................................................................................................... 106

11

Reversing Land and Water Degradation Trends in the Niger River Basin GEF Project Document Africa Regional Office

AFTU2

Theme(s): Biodiversity (P), Environmental policies and institu-

Project Financing Data: [ ] Loan [ ] Credit [X ] Grant [I Guarantee [I Other: For Loans/Credits/Others: Total Project Costs (USD m.): 42.64

FY Annual

Cumulative

Financ Source

FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY08 FY 09 1.50 1.50 1.50 1 .oo 0.50 1.50 3.00 4.50 5.50 6.00

Borrower/Recipient (National Governments and NBA in-kind contributions): Others: Global Environment Facility implemented by UNDP Global Environment Facility implemented by World Bank African Development Bank Government o f France Norway: Norwegian Agency for Dev. Coop.

UN Development Programme-TRIB I and I1 Dutch Government (BNWPP)

A W R M I - (NORAD)

kg Plan (USD m) Local

2.07

0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

Foreign 0.00

7.00

6.00

21.87 4.78 0.16

0.17 0.59

40.57 Total 2.07 .~

Borrower/Recipient: Niger Basin Authority Executive Secretariat (NBA/ES) Responsible agency: Niger Basin Authority (NBA) Address: B.P. 729 Niamey, Niger Contact Person: Mohammad Bello Tuga Tel: (227) 72.29.62; Fax: (227) 72.42.08; Email: NBAsec @intnet.ne

United Nations Development Program Address: UNDP-GEF Dakar, Senegal Contact Person: Abdoulaye Ndiaye

Other Agency(ies):

Total 2.07

7.00

6.00

21.87 4.78 0.16

0.17 0.59

42.64

1

A. STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE

1. Country and sector issues

1. The Niger River Basin. Nine countries-Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, C8te d’Ivoire, Guinea, Mali , Niger, and Nigeria-share the Niger River Basin’s hydrological resources. At 4,200 km, i t i s the third longest river in Africa, with an average annual f low o f 180 km3, and a Basin that covers 2.2 mi l l ion km2. The Niger River i s formed b y two branches, which constitute i t s hydrological system. The main branch rises in the Guinean Dorsale and i s reinforced by abundant tributaries coming from the Fouta Djallon Highlands in Guinea. Tributaries coming from C8te d’Ivoire, Burkina Faso and Benin jo in the River before i t enters Nigeria. The Benue, second branch o f the Niger River, rises from Cameroon and Chad and drains the eastern part o f Nigeria before jo in ing the Niger in Lokoja. The Niger River i s so- cioeconomically and environmentally important to the more than 100 mi l l ion people who currently l ive in i t s Basin. The River supports navigation, fisheries, irrigation, hydropower, and municipal and environmental uses. The dependency o f the riparian countries on the River var- ies wi th geographic location. The Basin countries can be divided into three groups: M a l i and Niger comprise large portions of the Basin and rely heavily upon the Niger for water. This applies also to Nigeria even though some abundant national tributaries contribute to the Niger River. Benin, Cameroon and Guinea comprise only 14 percent o f the land area in the Basin but provide more than 80 percent o f the waters; Burkina Faso, Chad and C8te d’Ivoire are the least dependent upon the Niger for water but would benefit from inclusive management o f Basin resources. The Niger River also constitutes an important economic driver for the sur- rounding non-Basin countries, which are connected to the riparian countries by trade and m i - gration routes, and rely upon products f rom the Basin.

2. Development and the fragile environment. The water resource crisis faced by most o f the Basin countries i s a result of water scarcity as wel l as problems with quality and management. Growing demand for water i s leading to increased competition between sector-level users, and between the countries themselves. The Basin contains different topographies and rainfall patterns that lead to a complex and variable f low pattern. Seasonal variability often results in extremes in flow, either as droughts or floods, placing constraints on economic development. Over the past 20 years, the combination o f environmental degradation (due to erosion, siltation, droughts, deforestation, etc.) and increasing water demand has modif ied and reduced average flows. The resulting pressure upon the Basin’s resources cannot be addressed in isolation either by country or by sector. The lack o f an adequate land and water management framework has contributed to significant degradation o f renewable resources, f rom the decreases in fish stock, with the near disappearance o f certain species due to disturbances in the River’s f low regime and over-fishing; to inappropriate agricultural land management practices such as bush clearing, overgrazing, fertility loss, poor drainage systems and utilization o f zones close to the River. Deforestation continues throughout the Basin for domestic, agricultural or commercial purposes.

3. Population and increased poverty. The Basin’s population, most o f whom l ive along the River system, i s expected to double to 200 million by 2020. Poverty, stressed water resources, and environmental degradation threaten rural livelihoods and continue to drive ur-

2

banization. Coupled with a water crisis, a vicious circle has formed that i s hindering the Ba- sin’s development.

4. Competitive unilateral development. T o date, the countries o f the Basin have focused on developing their portion o f the available resources. Fol lowing the devastating droughts o f the 1970s the emphasis has been on controlling the River’s f low and on unilateral planning, which has resulted in uncoordinated development, often in sub-optimal locations, and weak regional institutions .

5. National priorities - PRSP and CAS. Nine Basin countries means nine different assistance strategies to address priority issues. Water resources are central to each country’s policies on economic growth, poverty alleviation, and sustainable livelihoods. All nine Basin countries have developed a national water code/policy, with varying degrees o f success in application and relevance to different water uses and water quality. Most have finalized their Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs), which recognize the importance o f environment for economic development, and are now working to implement these first-generation strategies through multifaceted finance packages. In response to the PRSPs, the Bank’s Country Assistance Strategies (CASs) acknowledge the link between environmental degradation and poverty, in particular the impact o f inadequate water supply. Annex 1 provides further discussion on the sector issues, the countries’ PRSPs and CASs.

6. Basin-wide challenges at the local national and regional levels. Existing national and regional environmental management frameworks and regional, national, and local capacity are inadequate to meet the challenge o f effectively managing the Basin’s land and water resources. Although National Environmental Action Plans (NEAP) have been developed in some countries, the national focus has been short-term and sector-specific. Some countries do not have or have not implemented a land and water resources management policy. Public participation in decision-makmg is low, and environment-centered public education and awareness programs are virtually nonexistent. At the regional level, there i s a lack o f harmonization o f legal and pol icy frameworks and national and regional institutions lack capacity to effectively and equitably manage the shared water resources. Water and environment have not been mainstreamed into economic policies and yet there i s no adequate mechanism in place to foster such an approach. The Basin’s potential for development i s also being hampered by gaps i n regional information exchange. Data collection, management, and dissemination at the regional and national level are uneven, and linkages between national and regional monitoring networks are unclear, limiting effective water quality monitoring and protection programs.

2. Rationale for Bank involvement

7. A Shared Vision. The Niger Basin Authority (Autoriti du Bassin du Niger, NBA), established more than forty years ago b y the nine riparian countries, has an institutional mandate to manage the Niger River resources in a jo int and cooperative manner. The NBA promotes cooperation between the member countries in developing the Basin’s natural resources and harmonizing national development policies. At the NBA’s 7th Heads o f State Summit on Feb- ruary 16, 2002, the riparian countries acknowledged the threats f rom unilateral planning, and committed themselves to pursuing a regional dialogue and seeking support for cooperative, sustainable development o f the Niger River. They agreed upon developing a Shared Vision

3

for the Basin, a “political statement” which defines long-term objectives and a commitment to a program o f action.’ A Sustainable Development Action Program for the Niger River Basin (Programme d’Action de De‘veloppement Durable, SDAP) w i l l provide strategic guidance and support a dialogue on shared interest, through which specific mechanisms and tools are developed to reach the common goals for sustainable management described in the Shared Vi- sion, and identi fy optimal means and processes for sustainable multi-sectoral development and investments.

8. Request for assistance - pursuing a Shared Vision and regional cooperation. The Niger River Basin countries have requested the Bank’s assistance to enable them to coopera- tively manage their Basin resources in line with a shared multi-sectoral vision for the Basin’s development, and thus requiring in-depth sectoral and technical analysis, the strength o f convening power, and access to the international financial markets. In addition, with an extensive portfolio of projects in the region (refer to Annex 2), including the Global Environment Facil- i ty (GEF) international waters project, the Bank can facilitate coordination between these various activities. The GEF Project i s one o f several projects contributing to the SDAP, providing support to strengthen institutional capacities for cooperative land and water management o f the Basin’s resources, and thus contributing to the efforts o f the Shared Vision. T o further support regional cooperation, the NBA has identified possible institutional and project activity synergies between the GEF Project, the African Development Bank’s (AfDB) “Pro- gramme Cadre de Protection contre I’Erosion Hydrique et de Lutte Contre I’Ensablement du Bassin du Fleuve Niger, ” and the project of the Bank and Netherlands Water Partnership (BNWPP), “Preparing the Niger Basin Authority Water Resource Knowledge Base for Effec- tive River Basin Management.” I t i s envisioned that these projects w i l l complement one another to optimize effort and effectiveness. Outcomes from the Project’s Transboundary Diag- nostic Analysis (TDA) and the framework for sustainable development in i t s Strategic Action Program (SAP) w i l l provide further detail on priority environmental and water resource issues, thus contributing to the SDAP. The SAP w i l l pi lot mechanisms through which a broad range o f stakeholders can participate in the decision-mahng process as i t pertains to these i s - sues. Within the NBA ’s institutional restructuring, capacities w i l l be put in place through the GEF Project at the national and regional levels, to manage resources and engage stakeholders in the framework of the Shared Vision and i t s investment portfolio as they unfold.

3. Higher-level objectives to which the Project contributes

9. GZobaZ environmental objectives. The GEF Project falls under GEF Operational Pro- gram 9, “Integrated Land and Water Mult iple Focal Area” which has a long te rm objective to “achieve multiple global environmental benefits through implementation of International Wa- ters (IW) projects which utilize integrated land and water management strategies that help achieve changes in sectoral policies and activities while promoting sustainable development.” The Project’s giobal environmental objective i s to reduce and prevent transboundary water- related environmental degradation; prevent land degradation; and protect globally significant biodiversity, through sustainable, informed, and cooperative integrated management o f the Basin, while ensuring greater public involvement in the Basin’s decision-malung process.

’ BanWABN Aide-Mtmoire, September, 2002

4

10. Meeting the MDGs, NEPAD and WSSD objectives. As outlined above, the Niger River Basin countries are wi l l ing to joint ly access and share the benefits f rom sustainable development o f the Basin’s resources, in l ine with the Shared Vision. The Shared Vision w i l l provide a framework to address some o f the key United Nations Mi l lennium Development Goals (MDGs), and objectives of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) and the Wor ld Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD). MDG No.7 promotes integration of the principles o f sustainable development into country polices to reverse the loss o f environmental resources. Similarly, the NEPAD framework places importance on including the environment, especially water, in plans for sustainable socioeconomic development. The NEPAD objective i s to create a “framework for regional cooperation in integrated sustainable water resources management, harmonization of water polices and regulations.” The WSSD’s goals of Water and Sanitation, Energy, Health, Agriculture, and Biodiversity (WEHAB) promote greater efficiency (quality and quantity) in water use, shared water resource management, protection o f freshwater resources and related ecosystems, and development and promotion o f equitable and sustainable water management strategies at the regional, national and local levels.

B. PROJECT D E S C R I P T I O N

1. Lending instrument

11. GEF grant. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Wor ld Bank jo int ly implement the GEF Project. In line wi th other GEF projects on international waters such as the N i l e River, Senegal and Lake Chad basins, the Project i s a grant to the Basin countries. The NBA, as the regional representative o f the nine Niger River Basin countries, i s designated by its member countries to be the recipient and executing agency o f this grant.

2. Project development objectives and key indicators

12. Project development objectives. The Project development objective i s to provide the nine riparians an opportunity to define a transboundary framework for the sustainable development o f the Niger River Basin, through strengthened capacity and better understanding o f the Basin’s land and water resources. The Bank implemented components aim to strengthen NBA’s regional management capacity and improve data management capacity. With a better understanding o f the land and water transboundary issues gained through the preparation o f the TDA and SAP, the Bank implemented components w i l l also support formalization o f an inclusive decision-malung processes for basin-level transboundary environmental planning to reverse land and water degradation in the Basin.

13. through the three outcome indicators, which are further detailed in Annex 3:

Performance indicators. The development objective’s achievement w i l l be monitored

0 Permanent collaboration and dialogue established between NBA and the nine riparians yield harmonized regulatory policies for good integrated resources management practice for sustainable resource utilization.

5

HydroNiger has established a harmonized system for real time data, knowledge and good practice (collection, compilation, analysis, and dissemination) sharing wi th the nine hydrological inter-state forecasting centers to support appropriate decisions.

The SAP identifies future sustainable development investments in the Basin, as formulated and validated b y the nine riparians and NBA.

3. Project components

14. Introduction. Within the framework o f the Shared Vision, the GEF Project addresses the land and water aspects o f managing the Niger River Basin and focuses primarily on institutional capacity building, data management and stakeholder involvement in tackling land and water degradation. This nine-country, five-year, single-phase, U S D 13 mi l l ion GEF-funded Project, implemented joint ly b y UNDP and the World Bank, wi l l engage stakeholders at the local, national and regional levels to ensure that activities occur at the appropriate levels following the principle of subsidiarity. Notably, the Project works extensively wi th the NBA in order to strengthen i t s ability to better serve the Basin countries, and fulfill NBA’s mandate “to promote cooperation among the member countries and to ensure integrated development in al l fields.” The six Project components, the total costs, and the Implementing Agency (IA) support for the components are summarized below. Annex 4 provides details o f the component activities, and Annex 5 summarizes the Project budget:

Component 1: Institution Building (USD 3.52 million, Bank implementation support): The component activities augment existing regional and national institutional capacity to manage and implement concurrent regional projects. Activities w i l l focus on strengthening the regional and national institutional capacity throughout the duration o f the five-year GEF Project, to promote good management practices and good governance. At the regional level, a Program Management and Coordination Unit (Unite‘ de gestion et de coordination des programmes, PMCU) w i l l be established joint ly with the concurrent AfDB program to optimize human and financial resources. Component 2: Capacity Building and Public Awareness (USD 1.62 million, UNDP implementation support): The component activities are designed to raise environmental awareness in target communities, facilitate consultations, and build capacity on issues relating to environmental management at the local, national and regional levels. The capacity building activities w i l l synergize wi th the AfDB national- and local-level program activities and the national and local capacity building efforts o f Component 5. The component includes a public education and awareness program and focused training. Component 3: Data and Knowledge Management (USD 1.13 million, Bank implementation support): T o complement the ongoing work on water and environment data collection that i s being done in the Basin’s countries, the component w i l l evaluate the status of the Basin’s hydrologic, environmental, and socioeconomic data, and identify the institutional modalities needed for data collection, sharing and dissemination for decision-makers. The component includes developing an Environmental Information System framework. Component 4: Regional Forum (USD 0.38 million, UNDP implementation support): This component w i l l facilitate the exchange o f lessons and good practices f rom other

6

regional projects in Sub-Saharan Africa, expand on IW:Learn, and strengthen the relationship with existing Pan-African and international networks o f Basin organizations, such as the Secretariat o f the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD/Sub-Regional Action Program), the Southern African Development Com- munity (SADC) Water Sector Coordination Unit, etc. With guidance f rom the two implementing agencies and support from the PMCU, the NBA w i l l organize a forum to promote and strengthen these network relationships. Component 5: Demonstration Pilots and Microgrant Program. (USD 5.0 million, UNDP implementation support): This component aims to support two paralleling efforts in all nine Basin countries. The first assists communities in tackling environmental problems, through the implementation o f nine priority demonstration pilots. This w i l l demonstrate good practices in managing land and water resources. In parallel to the demonstration pilots, a series o f community-based, microgrant-supported interventions w i l l be implemented, talung advantage o f lessons emerging f rom the pilots’ demonstrations activities. This component w i l l be managed by the national Project teams with relevant support and supervision f rom local organizations based in the f ie ld experienced in resource management activities, and w i l l lead to immediate action on the ground. Component 6: TDA and SAP Preparation (USD 1.3.5 million, Bank implementation support): The component activities w i l l finalize the preliminary TDA conducted during Project preparation in the main stem countries (Benin, Guinea, Mal i , Niger, and Nigeria) b y extending the diagnostic analysis process to the remaining four riparian countries (Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad and C8te d’Ivoire). Through, and on the basis of, this extended priority identification process, countries w i l l prepare a SAP, coordinated b y NBA. The SAP w i l l focus on the land and water issues and complement the Shared Vision’s multi-sectoral SDAP.

0

0

4. Lessons learned and reflected in the Project design

15. and other non-GEF projects are taken into consideration in this Project’s design:

Lesson learned. The principal lessons learned from other regional GEF IW Projects

0 Ownership and constituency. Fostering the notion that the whole is greater than the sum o f the parts, Project activities w i l l engage vertically the regional, national and local constituency, and horizontally the water and land resource sectors. Convening power and shared vision. The Basin countries have agreed that cooperation could eventually foster regional integration through the optimization o f common investments and jo int ownership o f shared resources. The Project design places emphasis on strengthening the institutional capacities for improving convening powers to achieve a shared vision. Sustainability, inclusivity, and participation. Engaging local communities through access to micro-finance, whether as grants or credit, w i l l stimulate local ownership, contribute to cost-effectiveness and support sustainability b y involving beneficiaries in design, implementation, and evaluation o f Project activities on the ground. Partnerships. Building broad partnerships i s essential for a coordinated process and to support the long-term sustainability o f the shared resource base. A concerted effort

0

0

0

7

was made to identify the institutional and component synergies between the GEF Pro- ject and the AfDB program in order to optimize human and financial resources. Institutional capacity. The challenge i s to bring about effective implementation, to ensure sustainability and to achieve benefits for the most needy. This i s particularly difficult but al l the more necessary when dealing wi th regional-scale issues and a regional organization. The Project includes actions to build capacity on the regional, national, and local level. Project design lessons. Project planning, schedules, and assumptions must be realistic, and take into account beneficiaries’ needs. Local capacity strengthening must form a part o f the Project design process. National activities should take into account the potential impacts on neighbors. Activities such as establishing wildl i fe reserves o f global significance should be carefully designed to ensure that they are adequately understood by the local communities and that there are local as well as global benefits. Monitoring and evaluation. The GEF International Waters conference in 2002 was at- tended by team members and several important lessons were highlighted, among them the importance o f ensuring a stronger and more participatory monitoring and evaluation component, including collection o f baseline data; and the inclusion o f the local scientific, academic and research community in the Project so as to close the “loop” on scientific data underpinning environmental and hydrological decision-malung. Demonstration of good practices for integrated land and water management. Success- ful water resources management depends on good land management practices since a watershed’s elements are inter-related. Actions need to be coordinated basin-wide and in concert with the s l u l l s and culture o f the different peoples l iv ing throughout the Ba- sin. Demonstration o f innovative, locally appropriate and cost-effective best practices i s an effective way to disseminate best practices for community adoption and replication through micro-finance.

0

0

0

0

5. Analysis of alternatives

16. Project rationale. Given the size o f the Niger River Basin, and the state of i t s land and water resources, management actions must be coordinated at the regional level. One o f the f i rst steps i s to improve the capacity o f the institutions involved in managing the resources at all levels, and to enlarge the “team” addressing the problem by engaging the local communities who face these issues daily.

17. considered and rejected:

Project alternatives. The fol lowing alternatives to the present Project’s design were

0 Multi-phase approach to Project design and implementation. The originally conceived multi-phase project, wi th five countries in phase one, and the addition o f another four in phase two, was determined to be inappropriate given expanded opportunities and greater capacities in the Basin. With the implementation o f the GEF Project concur- rently with the SDAP, i t was determined that a single project would be an optimal approach in order to address the paralleling activities and outcomes. Preparation of national programs. T o address environmentally sustainable development of Niger River Basin resources, a transnational approach i s needed. National programs alone would not address the Basin’s transboundary issues or the need for

0

8

coordinated management o f the Basin’s land and water resources. Moreover, preparation o f nine separate national programs would be costly and require significant resources for coordination. A few large-scale demonstration pilot projects. This option was considered but modified, so that the Project w i l l now assist countries in demonstrating available best practices in the priority themes and sites identified through microgrant funding, for adoption and replication by local communities. The reason for such a modified approach i s that i t wi l l allow greater participation and ownership by local stakeholders in land and water management, while benefiting f rom lessons learned. Modality of project administration and management. During earlier phases o f Project preparation, the Project considered and rejected both an external execution agency and a traditional project implementation unit. However, in light o f NBA’s recent institutional audit, and the Project’s objective to strengthen the NBA’s institutional capacity and promote ownership, consultancy/technical assistance w i l l be provided to the NBA-Executive Secretariat ( N B A / E S ) for the administrative and management modal- i t y o f Project administration.

e

e

C. IMPLEMENTATION

1. Partnership arrangements

18. Partnerships. The Bank i s working with several institutions in differing degrees o f collaboration for the Project. The Bank i s joint ly implementing the Project wi th UNDP in order to harness each agency’s comparative advantage for the benefit o f the Basin countries. UNDP complements the Bank b y bringing i t s on-the-ground presence, close partnership with governments, capacity building experience and work wi th community-based organizations. The Project has developed a strong partnership with the AfDB’s program in building synergies at various levels. These include: a common institutional setting where relevant between the two projects; and sharing staff in specific activities and harmonizing rules and procedures on issues pertaining to financial management, procurement and reporting. In addition, synergies with AfDB w i l l be enhanced through joint team supervision missions as wel l as exchange o f lessons and best practice in the implementation phase o f the two projects. Furthermore, the Project w i l l ensure close coordination with other partner program such as the French capacity building project to be implemented by the Agence Frangaise de De‘veloppement (AFD) and the Niger River Basin program currently being defined b y the Canadian Agency for Interna- tional Development (CIDA).

2. Institutional and implementation arrangements

19. NBA ’s institutional restructuring. The newly adopted NBA institutional chart provides an adequate basis for the Project implementation body to fully operate inside NBA. A new technical department within NBA, once ful ly staffed, w i l l serve as an operational basis for the institution to ful ly focus on operations and results delivery.

20. Szipervision and guidance. At the regional level, final responsibility for the Project rests with the NBA’s governing bodies-the NBA/ES, the Council o f Ministers, and subsequently the Heads o f State. However, practical supervision o f the Project i s the responsibility

9

o f two consultative bodies, the Regional Steering Committee (Comite' Re'gional de Pilotage, RSC) and the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee for the GEF Project (Sous-comitb Scien- tifique et Technique, STS). As the primary supervisory, decision-making entity, the RSC w i l l be responsible for providing oversight and guidance to the Project; reviewing annual budgets, quarterly expenditure reports, and procurement short-lists as appropriate; and monitoring Pro- ject progress in meeting key performance results indicators. The STS w i l l act in a technical advisory capacity to support the environmental management themes, through the capacity building, microgrant, and T D N S A P components. The Project's nine National Steering Com- mittees (Comite' National de Pilotage, NSC) w i l l supervise the Project at the national and local level, whi le ensuring linkages with ministries and NBA Focal Points.

21. Project implementation. Both the GEF and AfDB activities are executed joint ly by the PMCU. The P M C U w i l l be housed within the operations unit o f the NBA Technical Depart- ment. The NBA/ES w i l l be responsible for financial management, procurement, and administration, and the P M C U w i l l support the NBA administratively and for technical aspects o f Project execution. In order to augment NBA/ES capacity to facilitate regional projects, the P M C U w i l l assume responsibility for knowledge transfer in financial management and procurement until the N B A E S can meet the Procurement Capacity Assessment thresholds defined during appraisal. I t i s expected that at the end o f the GEF Project, the NBA/ES w i l l be wel l placed to coordinate execution o f an investment. Aside from core staff recruited by the Project, consultants w i l l be hired as needed. At the national level, Project implementation w i l l be executed by National Project Teams (Equipes Nationales de Projet, NPT). Local-level Pro- ject execution w i l l be overseen by the Local Coordination and Fol low-up Committees (Comi- te's Locaux de Coordination et de Suivi, LCC). The beneficiaries o f Component 5, the Demon- stration Pilots and Microgrant Program, w i l l be actively involved in the execution o f activities.

22. Procurement, financial management, and disbursement. As noted above, the P M C U w i l l provide support to NBA specific to the financial management, procurement, and administrative details o f the Project. In addition to NBA's chief accountant and finance off i- cer, the NBA/PMCU w i l l be staffed with a procurement specialist and a Project Financial Officer (PFO). The NPTs w i l l have an administrative/accounting assistant, to support activities at the national level. The preliminary procurement (March 2002) and financial management capacity (January 2002) assessments o f the NBA were updated during appraisal and recommended actions w i l l be completed prior to effectiveness. The financial management and disbursement arrangements are detailed in Annex 7 and the procurement arrangements in Annex 8.

3. Monitoring and evaluation of outcomedresults

23. M&E. The NBA, through the PMCU, i s responsible for ensuring that the Project's implementation complies with i t s development objective and the performance and monitoring indicators outlined in the results framework (see Annex 3). A Monitoring and Evaluation Plan, based on the results and monitoring framework, an annual work plan and annual procurement plan, and reporting requirement details, i s included as part o f the Project Implemen- tation Manual (PIM). The client-prepared Environmental and Social Management Frame- work, (Cadre de Gestion Environnementale et Sociale, ESMF), as an integral part o f the Mi-

10

crogrant Operational Manual (Manuel de Proce‘dures du Programme de Microsubventions, MOM) provides guidance to ensure that the Demonstration Pilots and Microgrant Program activities comply with environmental and social safeguards. During implementation, emphasis w i l l be on development o f process and environmental status indicators for long-term benefits and impacts, and on monitoring o f SAP implementation. At the national level, the NPTs, together wi th the LCCs, w i l l design M&E indicators and collection methods adapted to local conditions, to be included in the country’s M O M . This w i l l enable local and community stakeholders to efficiently monitor and evaluate the microgrant interventions in their own locality. The M&E format wi l l be revised by local and national teams wi th inputs from communities, in the course o f the Project as appropriate. The components’ implementation and any emerging issues w i l l be reviewed regularly, and evaluated annually, by the RSC. The STS w i l l contribute to ensuring the technical quality o f the Project’s implementation and reporting.

4. Sustainability

24. Recipient commitment and ownership. The Niger River Basin countries recognize that they cannot rely upon unilateral approaches to development i f they are to meet the challenge o f providing for a growing population from a reduced resource base. Funding o f the Project and support from bilateral donors w i l l serve a catalytic role to augment cooperation and the range o f donor-supported initiatives for the NBA over the years. The Niger River Ba- s in countries’ commitment i s evident in their long-term participation in the NBA, support o f the Shared Vision and their endorsement o f the GEF Project. Part of this new cooperative approach i s to revitalize the NBA and to seek support as they move towards cooperative management at the regional, national, and local levels. The SAP w i l l provide an environmental management framework and integrated platform with the SDAP for sustainable economic development and future investments in the Basin. The five stem countries participated in Project design, which was broadened to the other four riparian countries, thus allowing basin-wide participation, wi th the organizing o f national and regional workshops, workgroups, and steering committees. Annex 15 w i l l provide the individual letters o f endorsement f rom the riparians’ IBRD governors.

25. Financial Sustainability. The Basin countries’ financial commitment i s largely reflected through their NBA contributions; current national commitments are confirmed at U S D 2.14 million. More importantly, as national water policy reform work i s integrated into a developing regional policy for the Basin’s resources, through the SDAP, i t w i l l further consolidate and ensure the long-term financial sustainability o f GEF Project outcomes. In addition, a number o f donors are actively supporting work in the Niger River Basin either through the riparian countries or in the NBA.

26. Replicability. The demonstration pi lot and microgrant-supported interventions are intended to be replicated throughout the Basin and therefore include the training of local communities in good practices to address priority themes and increase their level o f environmental awareness.

11

5. Critical risks and possible controversial aspects

27. Minimizing development, political, financial, and safeguard risks. The long-term success o f regional scale, multi-country programs depends upon the participating countries’ willingness to joint ly continue practicing the Project’s lessons and approaches beyond the l i fe o f the GEF Project, and the extent to which the local communities are engaged in decision- malung, implementation and M&E o f activities. Because the Project is coordinated wi th other compatible activities in the Basin, and the countries continue to be politically committed to cooperation, i t i s reasonable to expect successful and sustainable implementation. To minimize the business and financial r isks, the Project’s institutional arrangements have been kept simple, as has the f low o f funds, which passes through the NBA and the PMCU, while taking advantage o f the Small Grants Programme (SGP) mechanism as for the microgrant disbursements. As identified in Integrated Safeguards Data Sheet (ISDS), the Bank social and environmental safeguards w i l l be addressed through the ESMF and the Microgrant Program’s MOM to mitigate potential safeguard risks. The NBA/ES has ultimate responsibility to ensure accountability and effective and efficient Project implementation to reduce risks.

28. Risks and risk mitigation measures. The Basin countries have agreed, and are committed, to achieving the Project’s development objectives. They are also committed to sustain- ing i t s activities and implementing the lessons learned after Project completion. Annex 3, the Results and Monitoring Framework, outlines the critical asiumptions to be heeded during Pro- ject implementation to minimize risks; and Annex 12 details the evaluation o f the critical risks as they correspond to the outcome indicators. The risk o f launching an unsustainable project i s rated as moderate (M - moderate).

6. Loadcredit conditions and covenants

29. summarized in Section D.7 below.

Grant conditions. Grant conditions for effectiveness, as agreed to during appraisal, are

D. APPRAISAL S U M M A R Y

1. Economic and financial analyses

30. The Project builds on UNDP, Bank, and other donor-supported national activities in the Basin countries, b y addressing the transboundary increment to these national activities. The Project w i l l only finance component activities, which are co-financed by the countries through in-kind contributions to the NBA. The Project w i l l fund only those increments needed to operationalize Project activities, and not NBA’s operations. Through i t s SAP, the Project w i l l serve as a catalyst for further investments in the Basin. The Project’s funding, including i t s co-financing, both national in-kind contributions and donor-supported parallel funds as relating to the Project’s components, i s summarized below:

12

Project Components Parallel and GEF Total In-kind (USD m) (USD m)

Financing (USD m)

Project Budget Component 1: Institution Building 4.80 3.52 8.32 Component 2: Capacity Building and Public 1.81 1.62 3.43

Awareness Component 3: Data and Knowledge Management 5.05 1.13 6.18 Component 4: Regional Forum 0.00 0.38 0.38 Component 5: Demonstration Pilots and Micro- 17.70 5.00 22.70

Component 6: TDA and SAP 0.58 1.35 1.93 TOTALS 29.64 13.00 42.64 Total Project Financing 29.64 13.00 42.64

grant Program

3 1. Incremental costs. The incremental benefits and subsequent incremental costs needed to overcome transboundary barriers to regional and global benefits have specific capacity building implications and associated costs that l ie beyond the domestic actions o f the Basin countries. Annex 9 provides the incremental assessment and benefits o f the GEF Project and the table below provides a summary o f the Project’s incremental costs:

Financing Baseline Scenario GEF Alternative Project Increment (USD m) (USD m) (USD m)

GEF Contribution imple- 7.00 7.00 mented by UNDP GEF Contribution imple- 6.00 6.00 mented by World Bank Parallel Financing 27.57 27.57 Current Estimated In-kind 2.07 2.07 Contribution

Total 29.64 42.64 13.00

32. Cost effectiveness. The Project’s design and scope i s consistent wi th GEF guidelines, and i t s development objective corresponds to OP#9. The economic, social, and environmental integrity o f the nine Basin countries depends upon the vitality and productivity o f the Niger River. It i s within the objective o f the Project design to invest in the Basin’s regional and national institutions and local stakeholders in order to strengthen their capacity for cooperative and sound decision-malung. The value o f such an investment can only be determined at Pro- ject completion with successful achievement o f the outcome indicators. Regional and national contributions to sustained dialogue, communications, and decision-malung constitute the long-term costs and benefits for sustainable investments in the Basin.

2. Technical

33. Technical issues. Technical issues are discussed in Annex 4, Detailed Project Descrip- tion. Technical implementation details are also contained in the PIM drafted b y the NBA before appraisal and finalized before negotiations. Implementation details for Component 5 are found separately in the MOM.

13

3. Fiduciary

34. Financial management issues. As part o f Project preparation, a Financial Manage- ment Assessment o f the NBA was prepared in January 2002 by a Bank Financial Manage- ment Specialist. The assessment concluded that there was a need to recruit a procurement specialist and PFO to assist the NBA. The Project’s institutional design and terms o f reference explicitly identify the financial management requirements and responsibilities o f the N B N P M C U staff as they pertain to Project financial management during implementation. I t was confirmed during appraisal that the PMCU, housed at NBA, would support the NBA financial management team in reporting on the GEF Project (UNDP and Bank components), the AfDB, and other NBA programs. For financial management issues, the Project w i l l support the Project Coordinator, a procurement specialist, and PFO. All Terms o f Reference have been confirmed during appraisal, with regionally competitive salaries estimated, and a training schedule established.

35. Procurement issues. A Bank Procurement Analyst conducted a Procurement Capacity Assessment o f the NBA in March 2002 (updated in January 2004) and during appraisal confirmed that the fol lowing would be undertaken: (i) recruiting a procurement specialist to the PMCU; (ii) training NBA staff and nine (national-level) administrative assistants in procurement; (iii) a procurement planning and contract management system integrated in the computerized financial management system to be installed at the PMCU, and (iv) reorganization o f the filing o f procurement-related documents.

36. Bank implemented activities are expected to consist o f consultant services, including workshops and training. Procurement o f goods w i l l fol low the Bank’s “Guidelines for Pro- curement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits” dated January 1995, and revised January and August 1996, September 1997 and January 1999. Procurement o f services wil l fol low the Bank’s “Guidelines for Selection and Employment o f Consultants b y Bank Borrowers” dated January 1997 and revised September 1997, January 1999, and M a y 2002. The Bank’s latest editions o f standard bidding documents and contracts w i l l be used. Annexes 7 and 8 further detail the fiduciary elements o f the Project.

4. Social

37. Community participation. The Project aims to have positive social and economic impacts b y engaging local communities to use sustainable land and water management practices in their localities. I t i s essential that regional development actions endorse the positive aspects o f each riparian’s values, cultures and local environments, as wel l as basin-level societal concerns, while ensuring that the transboundary use o f land and water resources does not result in downstream environmental degradation. Building upon the public involvement and consultations during Project preparation, productive stakeholder participation w i l l continue throughout Project implementation b y engaging a range o f organizations at all appropriate levels, such as community-based organizations, local authorities, the private sector, academic institutions, and NGOs in the Project’s outreach activities and the search for negotiated solutions to environmental degradation.

14

38. Community-based activities. Community-based activities w i l l include capacity building, outreach, and microgrants to support good resource management practices. The Demon- stration Pilots and the Microgrant Program specifically target local communities in the Basin countries through demand-driven micro-interventions and a range o f capacity and awareness building activities. With support from local specialists, the component w i l l largely be implemented b y local stakeholders who w i l l also be actively involved in the evaluation the micro- project outcomes and lessons learned. Frequent workshops at the local, national and regional levels w i l l serve as tools for broad participation o f various stakeholders in the decision- malung process on effective integrated land and water management.

39. The NBA, under the RSC’s supervision, wi l l be responsible for ensuring the Project achieves i t s social development outcomes. As the Project addresses the need for improved management o f the Basin’s resources through increased capacity, social development outcomes are mostly indirect and long-term. The short-term impacts o f the priori ty demonstration pilots and microgrant interventions, however, have specific positive outcome and outputs on the community level, which w i l l be identified as part o f Component 5’s preparation, implementation, and evaluation. Project objectives, outputs and emerging issues wil l be regularly reviewed and evaluated through the monitoring and evaluation process, in the annual report, and by the supervision missions. Specifically, the monitoring and evaluation plan for Compo- nent 5 w i l l contain precise indicators to measure the microgrants’ results and outcomes in communities and w i l l include an impact evaluation. Likewise, the capacity building and pub- l ic communication program in Component 2, w i l l act as a gauge o f the public’s ownership and perception of the Project’s performance and environmental and social impact.

5. Environment

40. Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF). The ESMF provides a logical, understandable overview o f the environmental and social review process in the context o f the Microgrant Program. As part o f the Project preparation process, the preliminary TDA in the f i rs t f ive stem countries provided the basis for ESMF. Key environmental issues were reviewed, symptoms/impacts identified, biodiversity and water resource priorities recognized, and the root causes and extent determined, through the participation o f regional, national and local-level stakeholders in consultative workshops. The ESMF was designed and prepared b y the NBA and local consultants. I t i s consistent wi th the requirements o f OP 4.01, “Environmental Assessment.” Demonstration Pilots w i l l be based on improving local community-based practices that can be replicated in other countries. Based on GEF microgrant procedures, the demonstration pilots w i l l not finance land acquisition or activities that restrict access or assets o f beneficiaries. The MOM and E S M F w i l l be the tools for screening and clearing community-driven microgrant application in compliance with Bank safeguards policies. The MOM’S public information and education campaign on good management practices i s included in the Microgrant Program. Project details were provided to the NBA and to all riparians.

41. Microgrant Operational Manual (MOM). The MOM w i l l provide selection and screening criteria, notification, procedural rules for implementation, and institutional responsibilities for the Microgrant Program. At the same time, the MOM w i l l provide guidance and tools for best practices and social and environmental mitigating measures, and at the regional

level, the MOM wi l l be a reference for the national screening process o f cumulative impacts. Microgrant-supported interventions that do not meet the microgrant objectives and design criteria outlined in the MOM w i l l not be approved. The ESMF and MOM are complementary documents. The M O M w i l l also provide a mechanism to assess both individual and cumulative impacts o f these interventions at the national level. To safeguard against any negative environmental and social impacts from the microgrant-supported interventions, the ESMF w i l l provide guidance within the parameters o f NBA procedures, riparian environmental policies, and Bank safeguard policies.

6. Safeguard policies

42. ZSDS. The ESMF was designed and prepared by the NBA and local consultants. I t i s consistent wi th the requirements o f OP 4.01, “Environmental Assessment” and w i l l ensure appropriate approval conditions and public disclosure. I t i s understood that the Project w i l l not trigger D a m Safety OP 4.37. The Project w i l l not support or trigger the OP for any activities that include pest management (OP 4.09), nor i s i t expected that Project activities would disturb/affect cultural property (OPN 11.03), natural habitats (OP 4.04), or forests (OP 4.36). The Project i s not expected to trigger involuntary resettlement (OP 4.12), according to GEF SGP criteria, nor i t w i l l finance activities related: (i) to land acquisition; or (ii) loss o f assets and resources. The Project w i l l involve the use o f an international waterway, and OP/BP 7.50, Projects on International Waterways, i s triggered; however, the requirement of notification o f riparians does not apply since the nine riparian countries o f the Niger River (Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea, Mali , Niger, Nigeria) are al l members o f the Niger Basin Authority. Each o f these countries has agreed for the Niger Basin Authority to implement the GEF Grant, and institutional arrangements have been made to establish a NPT in each riparian country under NBA’s overall guidance and coordination for Project implementation. Social and environmental safeguard compliance i s summarized in the table below:

7. Readiness:

43. tiveness include:

Does the Project comply with al l applicable Bank policies? Yes, conditions for efsec-

16

(a) The NBA/ES has recruited the GEF Project staff for the P M C U to include Re- gional Project Coordinator, a Project Financial Officer, and a Procurement Specialist, and for the nine National Project Teams, including the National Co- ordinators and national Accountant Assistants; The NBA/ES has adopted a Manual of Procedures and PIM, in form and substance acceptable to the Bank; The NBA/ES has recruited an independent external auditor; The Recipient has made effective and available an administrative and financial management system acceptable to the Bank; The NBA/ES has appointed an internal auditor; and The Council o f Ministers has approved the Project.

(b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

44. Have any pol icy exceptions been approved by management? Not Applicable

8. Compliance:

45. firmed in terms o f

Can the Project’s readiness for implementation b y loankredit effectiveness be con-

(a)

(b)

(c)

The availability o f a satisfactory Project Implementation Plan or Manual or procedures? Draft prepared for negotiations. The institutional arrangements and staff wi th adequate s lu l l s for implementation? Arrangements in place for effectiveness. The completeness and readiness o f tender documents for the f i rs t year’s activities? Documents complete by effectiveness.

17

Annex 1: Country and SectorProgram Background

Hydrologic and socioeconomic context

1. The River. The Niger River i s the third longest river in A f r i c a 4 , 2 0 0 km with an average annual f low o f 180 km3. I t s Basin covers 2.2 mi l l ion km2, spread over nine countries- Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, C8te d’Ivoire, Guinea, Mali , Niger, and Nigeria. The hydrologically active part o f the Basin i s approximately 1.5 mil l ion km2. The Niger River i s formed by two branches, which constitute i t s hydrological system. The main branch rises in the Guinea Dorsale and i s reinforced by abundant tributaries coming from the Fouta Djal lon Highlands in Guinea. Before the River enters the Inner Delta in Mali , i t s average annual f low i s 45 km3. The Benue, second branch o f the Niger River, rises from Cameroon and Chad and drains the eastern part o f Nigeria before joining the Niger in Lokoja. Though the Benue contributes 50 percent o f the Niger’s flow, the hydrological significance across the Basin i s lower as i t only f lows through one country before joining the Niger River. The Project M a p illus- trates the physical characteristics o f the Basin. The Basin encompasses several climatic zones, and can be divided into four distinct hydro-geographic sub-systems:

Upper Niger extends over approximately 140,000 km2 and contains three main tributaries-the Tinkisso, M i l o and Nianadan Rivers. Znner Delta in Ma l i comprises a complex and geographically extensive system of in- fluents, lakes, and floodplains that have undergone significant development. Middle Niger covers 900,000 km2. Upstream o f the Niger Republic, the River receives inflow from tributaries in Burkma Faso, which include the Garouol, Dargol, and Sirba Rivers. Lower Niger has a catchment area o f 450,000 km2 and receives several major tributaries including the Sokoto, Kaduna, and Benue Rivers.

2. Rainfall and drought. Since the severe droughts o f the 1970s, the riparian countries have sought to protect themselves from the negative impacts o f drought. The additional com- plexities o f international boundaries transecting the Basin compound the management of the River’s natural variability. Seasonal variability alone results in frequent extremes in f low, either as droughts or floods. However, for the past three decades the Sahel has been experienc- ing persistent drought, resulting in drastically changed annual mean rainfall patterns and a southward shift o f rainfall zones b y 100 km. Drought and reduced water availability have forced rural communities, such as farmers and cattle herders, to migrate south to more humid conditions, increasing pressure on the remaining floodplains and wetlands. With this migra- tion, traditional resources management has given way to survival needs that are ecologically unsustainable and lead to declining biodiversity and productivity o f natural habitats.

3. Socioeconomic situation. The Basin population is y o u n g 4 4 percent o f inhabitants are younger than 15 and growth rates are just less than 3 percent. L o w l i fe expectancy (ranging from 43 to 49 in the five main stem countries) means that the workforce continually loses members who are at their prime in terms o f experience and productivity. The population i s concentrated along the Niger River and i t s tributaries. The Basin’s rural economy depends heavily upon natural resources. However, the environment i s under severe stress, threatening

18

livelihoods and increasing the rural population’s social and economic vulnerability. Poverty and environmental degradation are leading to increasing urbanization as rural populations migrate in search of employment. In many parts o f the Basin, inland navigation provides essential transport for people and goods and i s important economically. Navigability i s dependent on f low regulation by the dams and i s influenced by the level o f sedimentation as wel l as the presence o f aquatic weeds. Energy production i s primarily derived from two dams, the Kain j i and Jebba. Annex 13 provides a socioeconomic summary o f the Basin.

4. CAS and PRSPs. Most o f the Niger River Basin countries have finalized their PRSPs and are now working to implement these first-generation strategies through multifaceted finance packages. The Project i s consistent wi th the PRSP and CAS general sector goals to increase sustainable management practices, strengthen institutional capacity and reduce poverty. The Project’s development objective i s to strengthen the capacity for sustainable management o f the Basin’s resources, most directly addressing poverty through the capacity building and microgrant components, which involve local communities and environmental priorities identified through the preliminary TDA. The status o f the CAS and PSRP for each country i s detailed below and summarized in Table l.

0 Benin. The CAS identifies environmental degradation and inadequate water supply as one focal area to fight poverty in Benin. Under the Public Expenditure Reform Ad- justment Credit an integrated water resources strategy has commenced, and within the environmental sector, there i s an opportunity to consolidate investments in environmental management and align them with priorities o f the Minister o f Environment. The CAS supports the GEF Project’s objective to improve environmental management capacity. Burkina Faso. The 2000 CAS and CAS Progress Report (2003) support Burluna Faso in implementing its PRSP, wi th emphasis on strengthening institutional capacity. Cameroon. Although Cameroon results-based CAS has not identified this project outcomes as explicit results, i t i s aligned with, which highlights the need for environmental sustainability, and in the short term completion o f the NEAP. Chad. Chad results-based CAS highlights strengthening capacity for natural resource management. This GEF Project would complement activities which the CAS i s supporting in order to improve community-based integrated ecosystem management, to promote environmentally sustainable agricultural techniques, and to build capacity at the central and decentralized levels for national resource management and environmental governance. The focus during the CAS period w i l l be on strengthening local capacity for community-based integrated ecosystem management and providing co- financing for micro-projects wi th positive impact on the global environment. The CAS supports malung optimal use o f international surface and groundwater resources through the participation in the NBA. The NEAP has been prepared and i s awaiting validation from the Government. Cote d’lvoire. The CAS mentions protecting biodiversity o f the country. I t also includes the fol lowing performance benchmarks: (i) enacting water resource management law; and (ii) implementing priority environmental policies based on the NEAP.

0

0

0

19

e

e

e

e

Country

Benin

Burkina Faso

Cameroon

Chad

CBte d’lvoire

Guinea

Mali

Niger

Guinea. The CAS notes that Guinea’s long-term growth w i l l require that major environmental problems be addressed, as the deterioration o f natural resources resulting from soi l erosion, and i s l ikely to dampen long-term growth prospects. Mali. The CAS supports Mali’s PRSP. In particular the CAS provides assistance to the government’s development strategy to implement natural resource management programs and to exploit the country’s irrigation potential. In 1999 the adoption o f the NEAP strengthened the policy on environment with emphasis on strengthening national capacity, restoring degraded areas, and supporting a permanent system o f control and monitoring of the environment. Niger. The CAS supports strengthening institutional and individual capacity within and outside the govemment at the regional and local levels. The CAS also earmarks water as one o f the three pillars of Niger’s development strategy (the other two are human capital development and exploitation of regional growth opportunities). Three Projects - Water Resource Management Review, Water Supply, and Private Irrigation Promotion - were recently launched and are in line with the objectives o f the GEF Project . Nigeria. The Interim Country Strategy Note identifies, as one o f the three pillars o f the Country Strategy, the need for empowering local communities to play an active role in their own development, noting that agriculture and the environment are areas in which to rebuild analytical knowledge for future Project lending.

Table 1: Summary of CAS and PRSP Country Documents

CAS Doc. Nc

26054- BEN

25458- BUR

2655-Cl

26938- CD

241 68

25925

25663. MLI

25203

Type

CAS

CAS

CAS

CAS

Interim CAS

CAS

CAS

CAS

Date of Lat- est Publica-

tion July 16, 2003 ‘This Interim CAS identifies environmental degrada-

tion and inadeauate water SUUDIV as focal areas to

CAS: Summary of Sector Issues

. . , Afight poverty in‘Benin. Supports Burkina Faso in implementing its strategy March 12,

2003 in the PRSP Recognizes necessity for sustainable management of natural resources for combating rural poverty Also promotes increasing productivity of rural assets through water, conservation and renewal of natural resources, health, and education Highlights need for environmental sustainability, through completion of National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP).

Jovember 12, ’Supports strengthening national and local capacity for natural resource management, in the context of the continued preparation of the NEAP to promote optimal use of international surface and groundwater resources, and of oil exploitation to promote economic development, a comprehensive framework for environmental management

May 9, 2002 ‘Highlights sustainable growth with a focus on renewable natural resources and environmental protection. This CAS notes that for long-term growth Guinea must address major environmental problems, deterioration of natural resources resulting from soil erosion is likely to dampen long-term growth pros-

August 14, 2003

2003

June I O , 2003

pects

the PRSP, of which one is promoting institutional development

July 7, 2003 -The Mali CAS has 3 principal themes in support of

January 21, .Earmarks water as one of the three pillars of Ni-

Document Number/

Type 25475

24809

26243

2691 2

23835

24431

25462

23483

Date of Latest PRSP

February 2,2003

June, 2000

July 8, 2003

October 7,2003

March 13,2002

July 1, 2002

February 13,2003

January

20

NIR

Nigeria 23633- (Interim UNI country

Strategy Up-

2003 ger’s’ development strategy and recognizes that efforts are needed to reverse environmental degradation.

February 13, -Identifies empowering local communities to play an active role in their own development, as one of the three pillars in the Interim Strategy.

2002

16,2002

5. Key sector issues. The main sector issues in the Basin include:

a Inadequate land and water management policy framework and institutional capacity. Currently national institutions have a short-term and sector-specific focus, and in some cases have yet to develop or implement a policy on land and water resources management. An integrated regionally-based land and water management pol icy framework i s needed, together with the institutional capacity to work in an integrated fashion at the regional, national, and local levels. Public participation in decision-making i s low, and environment-centered public education and awareness programs are infrequent. Legal and pol icy frameworks need to be harmonized at the regional level and information f lows established so that the potential for development in the Basin can be realized. Degradation of renewable resources. The lack o f an adequate land and water management policy framework has contributed to significant degradation o f renewable resources, from the decreases in fish stock-with the near disappearance o f certain species, due to disturbances in the River’s f low regime and over-fishing-to inappropriate agricultural land management practices such as bush clearing, overgrazing, fertility loss, poor drainage systems and utilization o f zones close to the River, which have led to extensive land and water degradation. Though there i s insufficient data on timber exploitation in the upper Basin, in the Sahelian countries deforestation continues due to the demand for wood for domestic purposes, and in the lower Basin, extensive woodlands have been cleared for farming. Energy issues. Firewood and charcoal meet approximately 80 percent o f the Basin’s energy requirements. Together wi th demands for commercial logging, this has resulted in extensive deforestation and erosion in the Basin, particularly in the more arid zones in M a l i and Niger. Though the Niger River Basin has a high hydroelectricity potential, and some infrastructure i s already in place to tap this potential, most notably in Nige- r ia where hydroelectricity generated. by Kainj i and Jebba dams comprises 22 percent o f the national electricity supply, this potential is not fu l ly realized. In the Lower Ni- ger Delta in Nigeria, o i l exploration i s threatening mangroves. Alternative sources o f energy in general have received insufficient attention in the Basin.

0

6. Sector issues to be addressed. The key sector issues contribute to escalating and negative consequences on land and water resources. At present, several major barriers need to be removed in the participating countries if the NBA i s to make progress in i t s attempts to secure a sustainable future for the Niger River Basin ecosystem. The NBA member countries recognize that future development w i l l require more effective cooperation and coordination. T o begin to address the key sector issues, the Project design for the Bank implemented components includes a series o f integrated activities to establish an operational baseline for improved management o f the land and water resources. These include:

21

0 Enhancing existing capacity regionally, nationally, and locally. Strengthened regional, national, and local capacity to address the key sector issues and sustainable resource management w i l l reinforce the principle o f subsidiarity. Zmproving data management and understanding of the Basin’s resources. I t i s essential for the data from all these basin-wide activities to be harmonized and consolidated, so that data collected nationally and regionally has a common “language.” A coordinated, harmonized effort i s necessary in terms o f collection at the national level and dissemination to end-users to ensure informed decision-making. Finalizing the TDA and preparing the SAP. The preliminary TDA identified the priority transboundary environmental issues. The TDA w i l l be finalized to include the remaining four countries not originally provided for within the PDF-B analyses and regional workshop: Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, and C8te d’Ivoire. A plan o f strategic actions, the SAP, pertaining to legal, policy and institutional reforms and investments for sustainable land and water management w i l l be developed; in coordination with the SDAP, it w i l l provide a framework for integrated sustainable development o f the entire Basin.

0

0

7. Project origins. The origin o f the GEF Project was a request to UNDP and the Bank from the Niger River Basin countries, through the NBA, to provide assistance in preparing, wi th GEF support, an integrated framework for the Basin’s land and water resources. The NBA’s request for this Project builds on a number o f donor-supported projects and initiatives, which have often occurred in isolation o f each other, and without recognition o f the value o f cumulative benefits. Project preparation provided an opportunity to begin identifying the root causes o f resource degradation as well as coordination mechanisms for future development in the Basin. Init ial consultations began at the regional, national, and local level in the f ive stem countries (Benin, Guinea, Mal i , Niger and Nigeria). Initially, these f ive countries were selected with a two-phased Full Sized Project in mind-to include the f ive main stem countries in the f i rst FSP o f four years, and then add the remaining four off-stem countries (Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, and C8te d’Ivoire) in a second Full Sized Project. As the Strategic Vision/SDAP has included al l nine countries in a parallel process o f preparing the Basin for future economic development planning at the Basin level, the PDF-B process decided to enlarge the scale and funding envelope o f the f i rst FSP to include al l nine countries, and to eliminate the second proposed Full Sized Project.

8. Project preparation. Project preparation and design has been based on a series o f se- quential activities, a series o f diagnostic studies, and the PDF-A and PDF-B-supported activities. Initially, outcomes f rom a set o f diagnostic studies that have been undertaken in the last 5 years b y the NBA include:

0 Five country diagnostic assessments compiled b y ten independent national consultants during 2001 in l ine wi th common terms of reference to ensure systematic identification of key transboundary environmental issues.

0 Five national workshops held in 2001 to discuss findings o f national consultants and issues raised b y stakeholders dependent on resources of the Niger River Basin. These workshops also tabled ideas for demonstration pilot activities.

22

0 Two regional meetings to discuss transboundary issues and the TDA and proposed Pro-

Numerous studies compiled over the last two decades (e.g., studies by JALDA, USAID, ject Brief.

ORSTOM, and SOGREAH, etc).

9. The GEF Project has been designed to collaborate with other initiatives within and outside the Niger River Basin, and w i l l focus on the environmental aspects o f transboundary management o f the Basin’s resources, through strengthened capacity building on land and water issues. The Project w i l l complement the broader international waters work the nine Basin countries are undertakmg assisted by the Bank, with special attention to the Afr ica Integrated Land and Water Initiative (ALWMI) and other GEF international waters projects in the region in the Lake Chad, and Volta, Senegal and Ni le River Basins.

10. Public involvement. The current Project proposal w i l l build on the public involvement that began during the preparatory process under the PDF-A and PDF-B. Through the PDF-B, Basin stakeholders-including the NBA, national governments, local communities, NGOs, and international agencies-contributed towards finalizing the Project Brief. During preparation, provision o f facilities for e-mail exchange, national and regional workshops, meetings, and interviews during visits to all the Basin states by the NBA’s Chief Technical Advisor, the GEF Focal Point, and NBA representation were all part o f stakeholder participation. This included a broad array o f stakeholders f rom local communities, local and sub-national governments and institutions, and the N G O community. The participation effort was met wi th varying degrees of success in the five main stem countries. In some, it was difficult to involve local communities at workshops; however, many of the communities were visited during the interviews carried out b y the national consultants.

23

Annex 2: M a j o r Related Projects Financed by the Bank and/or Other Projects

Sector Issue

Bank-financed

1: Regional: Afr ica Region Afr ica Region

Afr ica Region

2: Rural Water Supply Benin Burkina Faso

M a l i Guinea

3: Water Resources Strategy Niger

Nigeria

M a l i

4: Water Supply Nigeria

Niger Burkina Faso 5: Agriculture and Rural Devel- opment

Burkina Faso

Chad

M a l i

Niger

Nigeria

6: Other development agencies UNEPKJNDP UNDP/UNEP

Project

Lake Chad Basin GEF Project Senegal River Basin GEF Project Regional Environmental and Informa- tion Management Program (2)

Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Private Irrigation Project

PNIR Third Water Supply and Supplemental

Water Resource Management Sector Strategy

Water Resource Management Strategy National Water Resource Strategy Preparation

Urban Water Sector Reform Project I Water Sector Project Ouagadougou Water Supply Project

Agricultural Services Project (2) Community Based Rural Project Agricultural Services and Producer Or- ganizations Project

Agricultural and Producer Organizations Project

Community Action Program

Fadama Agricultural and Rural Development

Niger-Nigeria Shared Watersheds

Lake Vol ta GEF

‘Latest Supervision (PSR) Ratings2

(Bank-financed projects only) Implementation Development

Progress (Ip) Objective (DO)

S S TBD TBD TBD TBD

S S S S S S S S

S S

S S TBD TBD

TBD TBD S S S S

S S S S

TBD TBD

S S

S S

S S

TBD TBD NA NA

“S” Satisfactory PSR Rating 24

Annex 3: Results and Monitoring Framework

A. Results Framework Use of Results Informa tion Results Indicators Project Development

Objective GEF Global Environmental Objective: Reduce and prevent transboundary water-related and environmental degradation, prevent land degradation,

ment o f the Basin, while Project Development Objective Provide the nine riparians an opportunity to define a transboundary framework for the sustainable development o f the Niger River Basin, through strengthened capacity and better understanding o f the Ba- sin’s land and water resources.

Intermediate Results One per Component

Component 1 (WB managed) 1. An institutional and management system established and operational for the Project.

Component 2 (UNDP managed) 2. Enhanced local, national capacity and increased awareness o f the challenges and issues i n the Basin.

I

- suring the public’s greater involvement in the Basin’s de (a) Permanent collaboration and dialogue established

between NBA and the 9 riparians yield harmonized regulatory policies for good integrated resources management practice for sustainable resource utilization.

(b) HydroNiger has an established harmonized system for real time data, knowledge and good practice (collection, compilation, analysis, and dissemination) sharing with the 9 national HydroNiger centers to support appropriate decisions.

(c) The SAP identifies future sustainable development investments in the Basin, i s formulated and validated by the 9 riparians and NBA.

Results Indicators for Each Component

la) Implementation institutions operating, in line with the Administrative and Financial Manual of Proce- dures, by PYI : 1 regional (PMCU), 9 national (NPTs), and consultation structures: 1 Regional Steering Committee (RSC and STS), 9 National Steering Committees (NSCs) and at least 9 Local Coordination Committees (LCCs) (corresponds to Activities 1 .l-1.2).

PY1; and NBA’s regional and national staff increased capacities through Project management and financial training (1.3).

2a) Diversified information sources available (radio, print material, school programs, workshops, etc.); stakeholders (notably youth) aware o f Basin soil and water resources and how to engage in local and national decision-making (2.1).

2b) Increased number o f national and local stakeholders promote community participation in Microgrant Pro- gram; and actively participate in the SAP development process through workshops to share data and lessons learned (2.2).

Ib) A launch workshop successfully completed by

ion-making process T o what extent do riparians participate? (level, quality) in dialogue and coordination? Are decisions action-oriented? Are data shared in real time and i s coordination system viable and appropriate? What else i s needed to make i t effective? How to structure the SAP to serve as the most effective tool for investment mo- bilization in the Ba- sin? Use of Outcome

Monitoring . I s more staff train-

ing needed? . Are the correct in-

centives in place for riparians/NBA to work through PMCU and NPTs?

- Are training and messages effective and internalized by target groups?

- Are delivery mechanisms and communication channels to be realigned?

- What type of incentives can be used to encourage national

25

I

Component 3 (WB managed) 3. Improved regional, national, local data and information manage men t ; increased dialogue and exchange within and between riparians.

Component 4 (UNDP managed) 4. Regional linkages and networks established and operational.

Component 5 (UNDP managed) 5. Demonstration pilot projects applied, Validated and packaged for scaling-up and microgrant program executed and documented.

Component 6 (WB managed) 6. Transboundary Diagnos- tic Analysis (TDA) and Strategic Action Plan (SAP) completed and disseminated.

I

3a) A national-level framework for land and water data and Basin degradation indicators assessed by NBA and riparians; a network for a communication and information protocol established (3.1-3.2).

specialists participating in Environmental Informa- tion System through data exchange and coordinated basin-wide decision-making (3.3-3 3.

proposed SDAP economic model (3.6).

completed with a report disseminated to all stakeholders and riparian representatives; and select NBA staff members’ have completed a study tour to strengthen linkages and have identified potential coordinated action strategies to benefit the Niger River Basin (4.1-4.2).

4b) Exchanges promoted between Basin SGP and the Project’s Microgrant Program (4.1).

4c) Effective regional linkages between existing international waters programs and the Project established at a 1-week regional forum; findings shared, lessons learned and action strategies regarding land and water degradation across regional Basin communities determined among participants (4.3).

5a) Experiences, models, and lessons learned on good practice for land and water degradation reversal from the 9 demonstration pilots documented and shared (5.1-5.4).

5b) Appropriate administrative and financial mechanism as of PY2 for microgrants disbursement in place (SGPKJNOPS and UNDPKJNOPS) (5.3).

5c) Community groups have received microgrants, executed priority actions and adopted new practice on the basis of lessons learned from implementing microgrants (and other local projects) (5.3,5.4).

5d) Increased awareness of Basin environmental challenges in local community groups and stakeholders (5.5).

6a) 9 country TDA are completed, validated and find- ing are disseminated (6.1).

6b) SAP, based on TDA, i s developed, disseminated, and discussed by stakeholders and validated (6.2- 6.3).

6c) Donors make commitments to support (fund) SAP (6.4).

3b) Increased number o f local, national, and regional

3c) Basin-wide land and water data generated for the

4a) Assessment of lessons learned and good practice

and local cadres to actively engage local-level outreach?

- I s there wi l l to stan- dardize data protocol?

- What are the possible obstacles to sharing across barri - ers? I s adjustment possible now?

- To what extent does the forum create any sustainable lessons learned for land and water management practices?

- What type of follow-up and support should be considered?

- D o the demonstrations provide outcomes, modalities for scaling up?

- D o community groups have the proper incentive to adopt new resource management practice?

- How should the outcomes from Demon- stration Pilots and TDA be incorporated in the SAP process?

- Do stakeholders have the proper incentive to adopt and support SAP and associated investments in the lone run?

26

e .. c i .. E C e

F C - i d

I i

L d

C I

c I

-?

e

I

27

3 Cd

6 2 o z n v l

- m

0 E - g ., * 9 ,

28

I m B cc $" t

P Q

t-

I

I

I

29

B *

I -

I

0 .C 5

2 c .C

E

i c c

E e! b

G 5 (1 c

! 2 S b

c c1

?

32

Annex 4: Detailed Project Description

1. Introduction. The GEF Project i s designed to address transboundary issues, improve land and water resources management, and strengthen capacity. The GEF Project w i l l collaborate wi th other initiatives internal and external to the Niger River Basin, complementing the broader international waters work currently being undertaken b y the nine Basin countries with the assistance f rom the Bank. T o this end, the GEF Project focuses on improving environmental resource management in the Basin. The Project i s anticipated to be a five-year, single phase Project o f U S D 13 mi l l ion (GEF funding) spread over six components. The World Bank w i l l provide implementation support for Components 1, 3, and 6 (USD 6 million), and UNDP w i l l provide implementation support for Components 2, 4 and 5 (USD 7.0 million). Comple- mentary activities and donor support detailed within the component descriptions.

2. Donor coordination and basin-wide synergies. The GEF Project secured substantial donor support primarily f rom the French Government and the AfDB to complement the component activities. This new cooperative approach with the donors i s to revitalize the NBA, as a river basin organization, to move towards cooperative management at the regional, national, and local levels. The GEF Project activities are also complemented by the broader ‘Shared Vision’ a long-term development and investment program in the Basin. The synergy between the GEF Project and the Shared Vision program i s timely, in that they both capture the compatibility o f issues, and identify solutions and opportunities to address sustainable development in the Basin. The upcoming Heads o f State Summit3, hosted by President Jacques Chirac, w i l l lay out the Shared Vision for the Niger Basin in a similar way to the N i l e ICCON meeting (July, 2001). President Chirac w i l l chair the summit wi th attendance o f the nine Heads o f State, senior officials, and all donors engaged in the Basin. The Paris Declaration wil l : a) reaffirm the Shared Vision for sound environmental management and sustainable development, b) support continued strengthened framework o f cooperation for coordinated do- nor engagement in the basin, and c) validate out the methodological approach for the Shared Vision. The inter-relationship o f the GEF components reinforces the integrated and interde- pendent approach to the project design, coupled with donor support and cooperation optimizes the opportunities for sustainable management and development of the Basin’s resources.

3. Component 1: Institution Building (USD 3.52 million, WB implementation support). Within the context o f the restructuring o f the Niger Basin Authority4, through the course o f the five-year Project, the component’s activities w i l l augment and strengthen the regional and national institutional capacities o f the NBA and affect the broader inter-ministerial network engaged in the decision making process to enable sustainable management and development o f the Basin. Specific to the GEF Project, with support f rom the AfDB the core personnel o f the P M C U and personnel f rom existing institutions at the regional and national levels w i l l receive training on project management, including but not l imi ted to procurement, disbursement, project cycles, implementation process and decision-malung process, and monitoring and evaluation. A core group o f specialists w i l l be built within regional and national institutions that already have some experience in managing regional environmental projects. This

April 26-27,2004 Paris France NBA Institutional Audit, approved by Heads of State January 2004.

33

level o f effort wi l l not only strengthen the NBAs capacity to function as regional river basin organization, but provide opportunities for inter-ministerial collaboration and cooperation on transboundary issues.

4. Component funding and donor support. Originally, the component activities focused just on project management, however i t was important to take into account the institutional changes discussed above, and the need to strengthen regional and national capacities. The NBA determined that the GEF budget component was init ial ly under estimated for the level o f effort that is needed and the funds were increased from U S D 1.50 mi l l ion to U S D 3.52 million. T o complement the GEF Project the AfDB’s Component B (USD$ 4.17 mil l ion) w i l l in part support some o f the personnel for the PMCU, but also support national level capacity building by providing training and technical assistance in workshops and exchange programs for good management practices to fight against erosion and coordinate wi th GEF project on monitoring and evaluation. T o support strengthening technical capacity within the NBA the French Government contribution i s U S D 0.25 million.

5. Institutional structure. The P M C U w i l l be established within the NBA to strengthen the NBA’s Project management capacity. The PMCU w i l l hire a select staff w i th key environmental and water resource management, financial management and procurement skills, wi th specific inputs from specialists as needed. At the national level, the GEF project supports the National Project Teams, strengthening the national level capacity. Annex 6 details the institutional structure and implementation arrangements.

6. GEF Project Component 1 activities and tasks include:

e Activi ty 1.1: Establish and Operate the Project Implementation Structure at Regional Level - -

Activi ty 1.2: Establish and Operate the Project Implementation Structure at the Na- tional Level - - - Activi ty 1.3: Project Management Training - -

Task 1 - Establish and operate the P M C U Task 2 - Develop and approve the regional Annual Work Plans

e

Task 1 - Organize the NSC Task 2 - Establish and operate the NPT in all nine countries Task 3 - National-level meetings in all nine countries to approve work plans

Task 1 - Implement launch workshop Task 2 - Project regional and national management training program

7. Component 2: Capacity Building and Public Awareness (USD 1.62 million, UNDP implementation support). The component’s objective is to increase stakeholders’ capacity to address the Basin’s environmental problems and their ownership o f Project interventions, thus achieving the desired long-term change in resource management practice and sector decision- malung. Consultation, exchange, inclusive decision-making, and coordination at the local, national and regional levels w i l l be enabled through the strengthening o f capacity and information channels, providing communication tools for dialogue and exchange o f good practices. The component w i l l notably be essential for the successful formulation and implementation of the T D M S A P for the Basin. The GEF Project w i l l augment current capacity building in two ways: a) by focusing primarily on the environmental aspects o f Basin management; and b) b y

34

including local organizations in the capacity building program. I t i s anticipated that these local organizations w i l l also be involved in the TDA/SAP process. The public education and awareness campaign w i l l focus on the need for shared natural resource management. I t w i l l be delivered in target communities eligible for the Microgrant Program through appropriate local-level channels o f communication. The campaign w i l l include messages and information on integrated Basin water and land management principles, policy and governance; assessment o f ongoing natural resources management activities; dialogue building among the different actors through platforms and local networks; and the conditions o f access to, and opportunities offered by, the Microgrant Program for community development. Youth, who comprise over 40 percent o f the Basin’s inhabitants, w i l l be specifically targeted b y the Component.

8. Component funding and donor support. Recognizing the importance o f public awareness, information, and stakeholder engagement, GEF funds were slight increased from the initial funds o f U S D 1.5 million. Additional donor support f rom the UNDP-TRIB funds are intended to promote dialogue for capacity building in the Basin.


0 Activi ty 2.1: Public Education and Awareness Programs for All Relevant Stakeholders - Task 1 - Prepare and implement a regional-level public awareness program - Task 2 - Prepare and implement a National-level public education and awareness

program Task 3 - Prepare a local-level public education and awareness program

Task 1 - Prepare and implement a regional training program Task 2 - Prepare and implement a national training program Task 3 - Prepare and implement local training program.

- Activi ty 2.2: Develop and Implement Regional, National and Local Training Program - - -

0

10. Component 3: Data and Knowledge Management (USD 1.13 million, Bank implementation support). This component’s objective i s to enable the riparians to build a robust partnership to manage land and water data at the Basin level. The component activities w i l l draw on the work being done by the GEF Project in the Senegal Basin, to establish an information system framework for improved data collection, exchange, and monitoring and evaluation mechanisms in all nine countries. Though good management practices require knowledge o f existing water and environmental conditions, collecting raw data b y itself i s insufficient to solve the Basin’s problems. I t i s essential to use the data for evaluation and information purposes for decision-making.

11. Basin-wide effort. Given the complexity of the task involved, the division o f labor suggests that the riparian countries collect and process the data within the national jurisdiction and the NBA provides the basin-wide analysis and aggregation. Therefore, i t i s important to define and establish procedures and protocols that ensure data compatibility, processing, and dissemination and promote a mutual understanding between the riparian countries, and among decision-makers. To improve dissemination across the Basin, the NBA w i l l work together with the riparian countries to augment existing data-sharing mechanisms. Training and workshops wi l l be conducted to strengthen existing communication between the technical and PO-

35

l itical communities at the national and regional levels. Technical information, knowledge and expertise w i l l be effectively utilized in the preparation o f the TDNSAP.

12. Component funding and donor support. The GEF funding for this effort was slightly reduced due to the substantial support from the French Govemment (USD 4.417 million), three activities wi l l contribute to the Component first, half o f the funds (USD 2.24 million) w i l l support the first-phase o f the Niger-HYCOS program, the procurement o f data collection and treatment equipment. The second activity, preparation o f a river basin model (US$ 1.177 million) w i l l support a Needs Assessment for the Niger River Mathematical Model for the analysis o f hydrological data and subsequent implementation o f the model, this level o f effort w i l l substantially contribute to Component 6 T D N S A P process; the model wi l l be key for analyzing and addressing transboundary water management issues. The third activity (USD 1 .O mil l ion ) wi l l support a feasibility study on establishing the Environmental Observatory, and funds w i l l establish the laboratories within the observatory.


Activi ty 3.1: Strategic Assessment for Data and Information Management - Task 1 - Evaluate findings o f Strategic Assessment o f hydrologic, environmental,

and socioeconomic data Task 2 - Validate findings, identify core problems and priorities

Task 1 - Identify the range o f available data and information, and the human resources at the national level to supplement the Strategic Assessment Task 2 - Prepare a report on status and format o f national data and information, in order to identify gaps, determine priority basin-wide indicators for land and water degradation

- Task 3 - Identify means and support to meet harmonized national data and information needs

Activi ty 3.3: Identify a Framework for a Basin-wide Environmental Information Sys- tem -

-

Activi ty 3.2: Assess Existing National Data and Data Quality -

-

Task 1 -From the outcomes o f Activities 3.1 and 3.2, define environmental and socioeconomic information and data needs to reverse land and water degradation and for regional decision-making Task 2 - Analyze the existing and possible modalities for environmental and socioeconomic data and information collection, management, sharing, and dissemination

- Task 3 - Define a framework for a basin-wide Environmental Information System Activity 3.4: Conduct Local, National and Regional Information Exchange and Train- ing -

-

0

Task 1 - Using partners and ongoing Basin initiatives, collect environmental and social information through an agreed upon participatory method Task 2 - At the national level, provide training on standardized procedures, data analysis, and data sharing Task 3 - At the regional level, provide training on data synthesis for data sharing and dissemination, and decision-malung

-

-

36

-

Activi ty 3.5: Facilitate Dialogue for Basin-wide Environmental Management -

Task 4 - Identify sustainable modalities for local, national, and regional integra- t ion o f data collection, data dissemination, and data sharing

Task 1 -Within the basin-wide Environmental Information System framework, facilitate a dialogue between member states on sharing technical information, data collection, and data management

Activi ty 3.6: Supplement a Basin-Wide Economic Model with an Environmental Di- mension - Task 1 - Review the proposed SDAP economic model and define the appropriate

parameters to integrate an environmental dimension Task 2 - Train/hire staff to program the environmental dimension and integrate accompanying data within the economic model Task 3 - Run model Task 4 - Evaluate model outcomes to optimize benefits for basin-level planning and informed decision-making (cross reference with Component 2).

-

- -

14. Component 4: Regional Forum (USD 0.38 million, UNDP implementation support). The component objective i s to facilitate the exchange o f lessons and good practices f rom other regional projects in Sub-Saharan Africa. Component activities w i l l expand on lW:Learn, and strengthen the relationship with the Pan-African and international network o f Basin organizations (ANBO, INBO, AMCOW). T o facilitate the exchange o f lessons and expand on these networks, a study tour in the region w i l l take place. A Worlung Group w i l l draw lessons from the GEF Projects in the Senegal, N i l e and Vol ta River basins, Okavango Delta and Lake Chad, Lake Tanganyika, Lake Victoria, and Lake Malawi. With guidance f rom the two i m - plementing agencies and support from the PMCU, the NBA w i l l organize a forum to promote and strengthen these network relationships and interactions so that they become viable effective and substantial organizations that benefit and support their members and clients. The Re- gional Forum i s entirely supported by the GEF.

15. GEF Project Component activities and tasks include:

Activi ty 4.1: Lessons Learned and Linkages - Task 1 Compile experiences and lessons learned regarding impact on the ground

o f other regional GEF IW projects; stimulate coordination among Basin national SGP and GEF Coordinators Task 2 Identify lessons learned, comparable networks such as IW: Learn and the International Network o f Basin Organizations, which tackle land and water degradation in the Basin community Task 3 Identify NBA’s lessons learned f rom Project management Task 4 Prepare an assessment o f lessons leamed and the tools and mechanisms to strengthen the relevant Basin networks; coordinate and support SGP/GEF implementation when no SGP/FEM exists at national level

Task 1 Strengthen communications and relationship wi th the Pan-African and international networks Task 2 Conduct study tour and compile lessons learned

-

- -

Activi ty 4.2: Expand Networks and Study Tour -

-

Activi ty 4.3: Regional Forum

37

- -

Task 1 Prepare Regional Forum Task 2 Conduct and evaluate Regional Forum.

a , ? I B p c 0 7 u s x x 0

X

x

16. Component 5: Demonstration Pilots and Microgrant Program. (USD 5.0 million, UNDP implementation support): The component’s objective i s to provide a mechanism to support community-driven interventions and improve livelihoods at the local level, while also providing opportunities to exchange, through training? the lessons learned f rom good management practices at the national and local levels. Component activities draw on the issues and actions identified through the Project preparation and T D N S A P process, and w i l l respond to communities’ priorities identified through participatory diagnostic exercises, while linlung with potential existing activities, thus providing communities with opportunities to assume control and authority over decisions and resources while promoting the ownership and care o f local assets and resources. Most importantly, component activities w i l l provide a local-level platform for lessons learned on good management practices in the Basin.

= 2 g z p z

x x x x x

X X x x

X O X X o x

o x 0

17. Sector themes and demonstration pilots. The initial TDA identified a range o f transboundary sector issues through a collaborative process with the f ive main stem countries. The sector themes identified in Table 1, for Demonstration Pilots, were developed b y member countries and NBA during the April 2002 Regional Workshop in Niamey. The workshop outcomes, proposed by the countries, included seven thematic priorities for the demonstration activities. The hod lead country and the participating countries have already stated an interest in replicating similar interventions, which w i l l subsequently extend throughout all nine Basin countries. Interventions that are transboundary in nature are eligible for GEF funding. Those interventions that are ineligible for GEF funding w i l l be addressed in other ways, including the broader international waters work being facilitated b y the Bank or other appropriate donors. In addition to the seven thematic priorities that can be supported by the GEF, countries have identified three other themes. The Demonstration Pilots w i l l complement the training and capacity building conducted under Component 2. Capacity building efforts w i l l include development o f models and approaches for each o f the priority themes, and engage the relevant public authorities at the national and local levels, along with relevant NGOs and other c iv i l organizations. With assistance from the PMCU, the national NSC and NPT, and the LCC, a demonstration pi lot for each selected theme w i l l be executed at a target site, and w i l l complement the AfDB program. The lessons learned from these Demonstration Pilots on good management practices w i l l be shared with the broader Basin and national community, providing the basis for the Microgrant Program.

Table 1: List o f Microgrant-Supported Themes with Host

Priority Themes Lead/host country

X Participating country

1) Reduce dependence on wood (and charcoal) for domestic energy 2) Improve farming techniques and practices in rain-fed agriculture 3) Improve farming techniques and practices in irrigated lands 4) Reverse degradation of soils, pastures and animal health in livestock sector 5) Promote sustainable fishing practices 6) Support eco-tourism and environmental protection 7) Improve water quality by combating industrial, urban and mining pollution

~

X X .

0

0 0

x x x

38

18. Microgrant-supported interventions. In an effort to engage the basin-wide community, the Microgrant Program w i l l build on lessons learned from the demonstration pilots, and extend to the local communities, the beneficiaries. Table 2 below identifies the seven priori ty themes and indicative community-based interventions and sites in the various countries. Sup- port w i l l not be limited to these; i t w i l l also be considered for gender-based efforts to broaden women’s capacity in managing resources. Drawing on the success and lessons learned f rom a number o f regional, national and local NGOs, community-driven development programs; and the SGP in the Basin, this component w i l l optimize the use o f existing community institutions to lead to immediate action on the ground to assist in replicating good management practices. In coordination with Component 2, the Microgrant Program provides- for a broad range o f public education and awareness on the issues in the Basin, including lessons learned f rom the Demonstration Pilots, and information on participation in the Program. The M O M details the process, and the ESMF ensures compliance with environmental and social safeguards. The monitoring and evaluation o f the progress and success o f the microgrant-supported interventions w i l l be the responsibility o f the Project’s local, national and regional institutions, wi th the engagement o f the local communities implementing these activities.

19. Outcomes. The anticipated outcomes and benefits o f the Demonstration Pilots and Microgrant Program w i l l be: (i) the accumulated benefits o f the nine Demonstration Pilots together with the microgrant-supported interventions in addressing the Basin countries’ prior- i t y themes; (ii) community involvement and participation in decision-makmg for managing change in the Basin b y improving local stakeholders’ practice; improving local socioeconomic conditions; improving local ski l ls ; and promoting ownership and care o f local resources; (iii) closer linkages and collaborative work between government entities and c iv i l society and networks; and (iv) immediate action and social and environmental benefits on the ground.

20. Component funding and donor support. GEF funding for this component remains as initially proposed, wi th over two thirds o f the GEF funds supporting the Microgrant Program. The AfDB program, complements the GEF project in that i t promotes sustainable management practices o f basin resources by implementing measures against desertification and soil erosion. Substantial support from the AfDB (USD 17.7 mil l ion) w i l l primarily focus on national and local level capacity building and implementing sustainable interventions. The AfDB level o f effort w i l l focus on three central countries o f the Sahel’, for which funding w i l l support a) strengthening national and local capacities and institutional support, b) conducting feasibility studies, and training; c) purchasing equipment and plants and implementing sustainable interventions, to include but not l imited to dune fixation, riverbank restoration, erosion and gulley correction, and agro-sylvo-pastoral land recuperation; and d) monitoring and evaluation follow-up activities. An additional estimated o f U S D 1.4 mi l l ion w i l l fund the preparation o f a basin-wide Environmental Master Plan focusing on specific aspects such as siltation, erosion, and sedimentation across the basin identifying strategic actions to be addressed, contributing significantly to the priority issues within the TDA/SAP component.

Estimated USD funding includes Mal i USD 7.0 million; Niger USD 5.1 million; and Burkina Faso USD 4.2 million.

39


0 Act iv i ty 5.1: Establish National and Local Institutional Structures (institutional link with Component 1) - - - Activi ty 5.2: Establish Demonstration Pilots -

Task 1 - Evaluate national/local institutional structure Task 2 - Identify the L C C structure at the local level - Task 3 - Operationalize L C C

Task 1 - Identify activities and responsibilities in compliance wi th environmental and social safeguards Task 2 - Establish a baseline for Demonstration Pilots Task 3 - Prepare monitoring/evaluation plan and criteria for drawing lessons (link with Component 6)

Task 1 - P M C U prepares and delivers public information and education plan related to demonstration pi lot Task 2 - L C C and NPT conduct necessary training for demonstration pi lot implementation Task 3 - NPT management training on demonstration pi lot and Microgrant Pro- gram Task 4 - L C C - local-level program implementation training Task 5 - Implement demonstration pi lot activities

Task 1 - Evaluate Demonstration Pilots through national workshops in 9 countries Task 2 - Regional workshop to draw on lessons learned for al l Demonstration Pi- lots Task 3 - Disseminate lessons through a public information and education campaign (link with Component 2) in local languages Task 4 - Update MOM as needed and adapt MOM to local conditions

Task 1 - Public information campaign Task 2 - Review and select microgrant community applications Task 3 - Advertise results o f application process Task 4 - Implement microgrant-supported interventions Task 5 - Report on program outcomes and successes to national and regional insti-

0

- -

Activi ty 5.3: Implement Demonstration Pilots -

0

-

-

- - Activi ty 5.4: Assess and share lessons - -

-

-

Activi ty 5.5: Formulate, Implement, Monitor, and Evaluate - - - - -

tutions (link with Component 6).

0

Tablt Preliminary Priority Themes

1. Reducina DeDendence on Wood (andCharcoal) for Do- mestic Energy

2 Improving Farming Tech- niques and Practices in Rain- fed Agriculture

! Priority Themes and Indicative Inter Indicative interventions

- Afforestation of dearaded drvland forests - Promotion of alternative andior renewable energies such as solar, wind, biogas, gas

-Awareness raising and education - Participatory, community approach - Awareness raising, education and enforcement of

- Promotion of environmentally appropriate tech-

- Rehabilitation of degraded fallow land and soil and

- Protection and rehabilitation of riverbanks

laws concerning bush fires

niques for intensive agriculture

water conservation

entions List of Sites

- Peri-urban areas around Niamey and Ndjamena

- Site in CBte d'lvoire

40

Preliminary Priority Themes 3: lmprovinq Farminq Tech- niques andPractices in Irri- gated Agriculture

4. Reversing Degradation of Soils, Pastures and Animal Health in the Livestock Sector

5. Promoting Sustainable Fish- ing Practices

6: Supporting Eco-tourism and Environmental Protection

7: Improving Water Quality by Combating Industrial, Urban and Mining Pollution

indicative interventions - Baseline surveys and analysis - Improved irrigation techniques -Association of fish culture to irrigation - Rehabilitation of infrastructure and control of pollu-

- Development of modern abattoirs - Identification and improvement of transport to mar-

- Community savings and loans to assist in marketing

- Improvement of animal health - Development of pasture corridors and access for

- Provisions of options for pastoralists

tion and salination

kets

and insurance

pastoralists

- Awareness raising - Cost and benefit analvsis of svstem - Cooperative commercial prodbction of fish - Awareness raising on appropriate fishing practices - Cooperatives for marketing, purchase of inputs, etc. -Community participation in control of aquatic inva- sive species

- Infrastructure investments for tourism - Promotion of ecotourism and private sector in-

- Promotional materials on Wonders of the Niger

- Baseline analysis - Recycling of industrial waste -Water purification stations - Abattoir waste recycling - Education and awareness raising

volvement

River

List of Sites - Site in Cameroon

- Transboundary site for corridor establishment between Niger, Burkina Faso and Benin, near Park W, for example

- Several villages in Inner Delta, in Mali

- Sites near existing national parks Niger

- Guinean highlands (Mines) - Nigerian Delta (oillindustries

pollution)

22. Component 6: TDA and SAP Preparation (USD 1.35 million, Bank implementation ;upport). The T D N S A P process i s the foundation o f the international waters program, and the process i s critical in understanding and addressing the transboundary issues o f the Basin. This component, while closely worlung with the donor supported activities of the AfDB and French Government, w i l l also work in complement to the broader international waters effort currently being developed as a basin-wide Shared Vision/SDAP for the Niger River Basin through in-depth consultations that w i l l lead to large multi-sector investments. T o complement the SDAP which w i l l address the key development sectors in the Basin', the SAP, being developed under the GEF Project, w i l l take into consideration the environmental aspects o f land and water issues as they pertain to these sectors. These issues w i l l consider and include existing conditions, sources o f problems and issues, current polices and proposed polices, and the institutional framework these sectors operate in and the inter-sectoral coordination needed to sustainably manage the resources.

23. TDA. Both the TDA and SAP w i l l serve as critical documents to improve environmental management in the Basin; introduce relevant environmental protection policies; provide opportunities for innovative community-based microgrant funded investments; and inform the public on the issues in the Basin. A preliminary TDA has been prepared in f ive o f the nine countries in the Niger Basin (Benin, Guinea, Mal i , Niger and Nigeria) with the PDFB funds managed b y UNDP and, included as part o f the Project Brief. This preliminary effort provides a strategic basis o f information, which needs to be updated and complement wi th the

Sectors w i l l include but not be l imited to agriculture, energy, transport, environment, water resources, fisheries, forestry tourism and gender issues.

41

remaining four riparian countries - Burkma Faso, Cameroon, Chad and C8te d’Ivoire. The preliminary TDA w i l l be updated and completed current existing conditions and develop a comprehensive understanding o f the priority transboundary issues, threats to the Basin, and root causes, which then w i l l be the basis for preparing the SAP.

24. TDA process. The component w i l l specifically support the facilitation o f a series o f technical national and local level consultations to engage national counterparts and technical experts, and the final draft o f the TDA w i l l be approved in a regional workshop wi th national level participation. The diagnostic analysis w i l l include an in-depth identification and analysis o f environmental problems and issues throughout the Basin and their linkages with transboundary dynamics w i l l be assessed. The sources o f the problems, their impacts on the natural and human environments as well as their root causes w i l l be assessed and prioritized in order to highlight the most affected areas in the Basin and the transboundary priorities which need to be addressed as a result.

25. SAP. The final SAP i s a strategic document for decision-makers for future actions and sustainable development and investments in the Basin. Local and national counterparts preparing the SAP w i l l be required to identify, for the proposed priority activities, the possible environmental and social impacts, and any future investments and actions that may be required to comply wi th the riparian’s environmental policies and any future regional policies established in the Basin. The SAP w i l l have full support and endorsement f rom the inter- ministerial review and regional review. Actions w i l l be taken in conjunction wi th the Shared Vi s i on/SD AP.

26. SAP process. The component w i l l specifically support the facilitation o f a series o f technical national and regional level consultations to engage and promote an inter-ministerial dialogue and cooperation, and the final draft o f the SAP wil l be approved in a regional workshop with regional and national level participation. Then the final SAP document w i l l be approved, with inter-ministerial support, in each o f the nine riparian countries, conforming to GEF requirements w i l l include: (i) a clear definition o f national and transboundary priorities based on the TDA outcomes; (ii) a concise summary o f the identified threats and their root causes; (iii) a description of public perceptions o f environmental threats and development actions at the basin-wide level, and the related transboundary management issues; (iv) identification, definition and ranking o f priority national and transboundary actions according to the findings o f the SAP process; (v) identification o f responsible parties; (vi) identification o f the tools and mechanisms for good management practices t o reverse land and water degradation in the Niger River; and (vii) identification o f additional capacity building necessary to facilitate SAP implementation. Linkages o f the SAP process to other components and aspects o f the Project as i t unfolds wi l l be identified. Also, the sector studies on institutional scope and reforms in the Basin would provide further opportunities for identifying institutional linkages at different levels-local, national and regional-and suggest modalities for institutional en- hancement.

27. Component funding and donor support. Both the TDA and SAP serve as critical documents for sustainable management o f the Basin, despite the small reductions in the Com- ponent 6 budget, the T D N S A P component objective w i l l be met. Strengthened institutional capacity o f the NBA, through the increased efforts o f Component 1, w i l l ensure a more effec-

42

tive and comprehensive product. The paralleling efforts of the Shared Vision process and do- nor-supported activities w i l l provide input to the TDNSAP process. As noted in the Compo- nent 5 discussion, the AfDB w i l l prepare a basin wide environmental Master Plan focusing on specific aspects such as siltation, erosion and sedimentation across the basin with strategic actions to be planned, this i s a signification contribution to the T D N S A P process. The support from the French Government, for Component 3, w i l l provide funds for a mathematical model for the Niger River and i t s main tributaries, contributing to increased knowledge on the basin water availability and allocation across sectors and borders.

GEF Project Component 6 activities and tasks include: 0 Activi ty 6.1: Finalize and Update the TDA to Include the Remaining Riparian Coun-

tries - - - - - Activi ty 6.2: Develop the SAP based upon the TDA - - -

Task 1 - Confirm results f rom preliminary TDA Task 2 - Extend TDA process in remaining four countries Task 3 - Conduct, national- and local-level consultations Task 4 - H o l d regional workshop to confirm TDA findings Task 5 - H o l d regional workshop to validate completed TDA

Task 1 - Take inventory o f range o f options for priority issues Task 2 - Evaluate the options for site-specific issues Task 3 - Undertake f ield visits and consultations confirming that options are appropriate Task 4 - Prepare results and recommendations from f ield consultations

Task 1 - Draft final SAP Task 2 - Conduct workshop to confirm SAP findings at national level Task 3 - Conduct workshop to confirm SAP findings at local level Task 4 - H o l d regional consultations to confirm SAP findings Task 5 - Conduct regional workshop to validate SAP

Task 1 - Ho ld donor meeting to present findings from the SAP and identify potential donor investments Task 2 - Follow up on donor meeting outcomes and define appropriate milestones.

-

Activi ty 6.3: Draft and Validate SAP at National and Regional Level - - - - -

Activi ty 6.4: Engage Donors to Implement the SA -

0

-

43

World Bank Components

"nponent 1 - Institution Building

bmponent 3 - Data and Knowledge fanagement

:omponent 6 - TDA and SAP

Total (USD m:

Percent Distributior

Annex 5: Summary of Project Costs

Summary of Project Budget (USD m) by World Bank Categories

Consult- ing

Services

0.20

0.47

0.65

1.32

22.0

Operating costs

1.86

0.00

0.00

1.86

31.0

1 I I Training/

Workshops 1 1 1 Goods Contingency Total

44

Annex 6: Implementation Arrangements

1. History and structure ofthe NBA. The NBA i s one o f the oldest intergovernmental organizations in West Africa. I t s creation dates back to 1964 when it was called the River Niger Commission. After seventeen years in existence, the results achieved by the Commission were deemed insufficient and its member states decided to replace i t wi th a new organization, the NBA, which became heir to all the assets, liabilities, and programs o f the River Niger Commis- sion. The long term goal o f the NBA i s to “promote cooperation among the member countries and to ensure integrated development in al l fields through development o f i t s resources, notably in the fields o f energy, water resources, agriculture, forestry, transport and communication and industry.” Specifically the aim and objectives o f the NBA are to:

0

0

0

2.

0

0

0

3.

0

0

4.

Harmonize and coordinate national policies for development o f the resources in the Ba- sin; Plan the development o f the Basin by preparing and executing an “Integrated Develop- ment Plan o f the Basin;” and Design, realize, exploit, and maintain common works and projects.

The present structure o f the NBA is based on three institutions:

The Summit o f Heads o f State and Government; The Council o f Ministers including the Technical Committee o f Experts; and The N B A E S .

Based on the newly adopted institutional chart the NBA/ES has two departments:

The Technical Directorate; The Administrative and Financial Directorate.

The NBA i s supported by i t s member states. Each year a balanced income and expenditure budget i s prepared based on a sharing formula determined by the member states. Foreign assistance to the NBA i s received from external donors. In 1998, the NBA launched a new effort at the 17th Ordinary Session o f the Council o f Ministers. The real dangers threatening the Niger River were acknowledged, together with the importance o f member states paying their contributions to the NBA. Total annual contributions o f all nine member states for the year 2003 have been set at CFA 400,000 000 (USD 717,231) with the fol lowing shares: Benin (5%), Burkina (4%), Cameroon (7%), Chad ( l%), C8te d’Ivoire (5%), Guinea (lo%), M a l i (20%), Niger (18%) and Nigeria (30%). Arrears are s t i l l high relative to the annual total but decisions were taken at the YaoundC Council o f Ministers to resolve this issue. Furthermore, countries are committed, through their participation in the NBA, to involve the appropriate ministries, government agencies and NGOs to fulfill the mandate o f the NBA and successfully implement the proposed GEF Project .

45

Project facilitator

5. Niger Basin Authority. Given the NBA’s mandate “to promote cooperation among the member countries and to ensure integrated development in all fields,” i t w i l l undertake a facilita- tive role as a coordination and executing agency during the full Project. The N B A B S w i l l be the lead counterpart agency on behalf o f the member states that w i l l host the implementation o f this Project. The respective UNDP, Bank, and Executing Agency task team leaders w i l l be in direct and ongoing contact to facilitate the work o f the Project and to ensure maximum levels o f cooperation to bring about Project success.

6. The NBA identified possible institutional and Project activity synergies between the GEF and AfDB projects to optimize effort and effectiveness. This has been an important part o f the collaboration and cooperation process for both the NBA and the implementing agencies.

Regional and national guidance and supervision

7 . NBA Council of Ministers. The NBA Council o f Ministers w i l l provide guidance for issues related to the Basin, approve strategic actions b y supporting the RSC, and discuss when needed specific issues pertaining to Basin management. The NBA Council of Ministers’ members are representatives f rom the water resources and related ministries. The NBA Council o f Ministers reports to the Head o f State in each country.

8. Regional Steering Committee (RSC). In assisting in facilitation o f Project implementation, the RSC w i l l be the primary decision-malung body and serve in a technical and institutional advisory capacity during implementation and review o f Project activities. K e y members w i l l meet at minimum three times a year to review Project implementation progress, for activity- specific guidance and review, and wil l : (i) coordinate wi th the AfDB project steering committee and align the Project wi th other basin-wide initiatives; (ii) monitor Project progress and take timely actions to resolve implementation constraints; (iii) liaise with different National Focal Points and National Project Teams within the riparian countries to ensure that the national units and the P M C U act in harmony; (iv) receive and review annual substantive and financial reports on Project activities; (v) review and approve Annual Work Plans; and (vi) ensure monitoring and evaluation o f Project activities. Proposed RSC members would include the N B m S as the Chair, and high-level NBA member state representatives. The Bank w i l l participate in an observer status. Upper-level PMCU staff would report to RSC meetings as needed, but would otherwise not serve.

9. Scientific and Technical Subcommittee (STS). Within the RSC, a technical subcommittee, STS, w i l l act in a technical advisory capacity to support each environmental management theme. Composed o f technical specialists, institutional specialists, and other relevant experts related to environmental management, i t w i l l contribute to the scientific quality o f Project implementation. The STS w i l l advise on technical matters during Project implementation, i.e., capacity building as i t pertains to Components 2, 3, 5, and 6, microgrant-supported activity design and implementation, and the T D N S A P development process. The STS w i l l review and critique progress reports and interview relevant Project participants, distilling and conveying lessons learned on good management practices in the Basin, which w i l l then be disseminated back at the national and local levels.

46

10. National Steering Committee (NSC). National- and local-level Project implementation w i l l be advised by the NSC. The NSC, chaired b y the national NBA Focal Point and participants from the relevant Ministr ies and civ i l society, w i l l provide quality assurance for the national- level activities, worlung directly with the P M C U and the NPT. The NSC wil l have a special role in selecting the microgrant proposals f rom communities. I t w i l l support the NPT in developing a format o f the MOM, which would be accessible to communities and grassroots organizations seeking grant funding. In this task, the NSC w i l l work closely with the UNDP SGP’s program coordinator and the SGP national steering committee in the countries where the SGP exists (Burkina Faso, C6te d’Ivoire, Ma l i and Niger) and elsewhere, with the new national steering committees to be created by SGP/UNDP under the Project in the five non-SGP countries.

Regional, national and local implementation

11. Program Management and Coordination Unit (PMCU). The P M C U wil l support the NBA in Project management; financial, procurement, and administrative responsibilities; and supervision and management o f the technical components o f Project implementation. The PMCU w i l l work together with the NBA/ES in implementing the Project. Co-located at the NBA, the P M C U w i l l work closely with the regional institutions, the RSC, the STS, and the NPTs to ensure timely Project implementation and effective capacity building. The P M C U wil l be primarily responsible for reporting to the RSC, the NBA and the implementing agencies-through harmonized reporting procedures-on Project progress, financial management, procurement and disbursement, identification o f implementation gaps and bottlenecks, and Project accounts and budget. Administrative, accounting, financial and auditing arrangements were finalized during appraisal and included: (i) assessment o f the financial management system with timetable for any improvements required; (ii) agreement on Project financial and accounting standards; (iii) audit arrangements, to ensure independent audits w i l l be undertaken on an annual basis according to standard IA requirements; (iv) procurement plan based on I A requirements; (v) al l administrative reporting, monitoring and evaluation requirements and procedures as required by the IAs; and (vi) supervision and management o f Project implementation. The P M C U wil l also serve as the program management unit o f the AfDB project.

12. National Project Teams (NPT). Building on appropriate existing institutions or establishing new ones, as needed, NPTs w i l l be based in each NBA Focal Point office. The NPTs wil l be responsible for managing, coordinating, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating the Project at the national level, primarily as i t pertains to the Demonstration Pilots, the Microgrant Program and capacity building. They w i l l work at the national and local levels, notably wi th decentralized services and locally-based organizations, but also closely with the NSC and PMCU. One o f the NPTs’ key roles w i l l be the pre-selection and transmission o f community microgrant proposals to the NSC for approval and the establishment of a national microgrant strategy together wi th the SGP, the SGP Steering Committee and/or UNDP partners depending on the country. The NPTs’ other key responsibilities include: (i) implementation o f the communication campaign at the local level; (ii) organization and supervision o f al l training and workshops to promote the Micro- grant Program at the local level, and i t s execution in compliance with the M O M and the ESMF; (iii) development o f tools and materials to enable grassroots organizations to access microgrants; and (iv) supervision o f consultants and f i r m s for the implementation o f activities.

47

Local-level implementation

13. Local Coordination Committees (LCC). The collaborative effort of local institutions (both public and civil) i s vital for program success. I t w i l l provide opportunities for communities to communicate amongst themselves and with local government, and be responsible for assisting in the implementation and monitoring and evaluation o f the demonstration programs. At the local level, worlung closely with the NPT for administrative support, the LCCs, as community-based implementation units, w i l l be key in educating the local community on the specifics o f local- level component activities, the demonstration pilots and the Microgrant Program (e.g., through local language materials; updating o f the MOM). They w i l l work wi th local authorities and communities in developing, regularly monitoring, and evaluating the site-specific demonstration activities. Other key responsibilities w i l l be to: (i) assist communities in the formulation o f the microgrant proposals, including the application o f the environmental and social assessment; and transmit communities’ proposals to the NPT according to an agreed timetable; (ii) develop simple M&E systems for community projects; (iii) identify and respond to community training and technical assistance needs in collaboration wi th the AfDB program teams based locally; (iv) organize and implement beneficiaries’ workshops on lessons leamed from microgrant activities; (v) identify local partners (e.g., private sector), facilitate contracting and equipment purchase, and supervise works in community sites; (vi) encourage linkages and synergy wi th local and national networks and other related local programs, especially wi th AfDB activities and resources; (vii) provide information on f ield activities through reports, and contribute to preparation o f the SAP through data collection; and (viii) manage a small petty cash for day-to-day related expenses.

14. Beneficiaries. Community groups (women’s groups, agricultural groups, resource management groups, etc.) w i l l work closely wi th the local authorities, the LCCs and the NPTs. They wi l l : (i) identify site-specific micro-projects; (ii) assess environmental and social impacts; (iii) submit proposals to the L C C for micro-projects to be funded; (iv) sensitize and involve their local communities on the specifics of the Microgrant Program and capacity building activities; (v) monitor and evaluate pilot and micro-projects using locally adapted M&E systems; (vii) establish or train existing management committees directly responsible for Project monitoring and evaluation; and (viii) identify and articulate priority issues and solutions in their locality as they affect the Basin’s sustainable management.

Implementing Agencies

15. Implementing Agencies. UNDP and the Bank are the co-implementing agencies for this Project. The UNDP role w i l l be to contribute its on-the-ground strength and the resulting trust i t has built with national govemments; directly facilitate workshops and the convening of key stakeholders consistent with i t s comparative advantage in capacity building; work to secure national country-based financial resources to complement Project activities; and provide important links to other UN Agencies. Bank participation w i l l have a leveraging effect, and the Bank w i l l continue to play a key role for realization o f the MDGs.

48

Monitor ing and evaluation

Report Requirements

16. The NBA is responsible for ensuring that all GEF funded activities are carried out in compliance wi th the Project’s design, and the performance and monitoring indicators outlined in the results and monitoring framework (see Annex 3). The Project w i l l comply with M&E procedures based upon the IAs’ institutional guidelines and w i l l ensure compliance with social and environmental safeguards. UNDP and the Bank w i l l evaluate and review Project progress according to their institutional requirements. As part o f the PIM, which w i l l detail all the reporting requirements, an M&E Plan wil l be prepared to evaluate Project progress; this w i l l be supple- mented with the ESMF, which w i l l provide a framework for ensuring compliance with environmental and social safeguards.

NBA Responsibility

17. In conducting Project reviews, emphasis w i l l be given to emerging GEF policies regarding monitoring and evaluation o f GEF international waters projects, particularly the development o f process, stress reduction, and environmental status indicators for long-term impact monitoring o f SAP implementation. The P M C U w i l l be responsible for Project reporting according to institutional procedures. The components and emerging issues wil l be reviewed regularly, and evaluated annually by the RSC, as noted above. Reporting requirements that are part o f the monitoring and evaluation and supervision process are listed in Table 1 below.

Reports Informal

Period

Monthly sum- Monthly

I

Quarterly

Annual Program Re- view (APR) Annual Project Im- plementation Review (GEF-PIR)

Mid-Term Review

Semi- Annual (Supervision)

To be issued on time by the PFO and to be audited on time Annual Work and Pro- curement Plan APR GEF PIR MTR

Annual

Mid- Te rm Review Final

World Bank I AfDB Reports

K;;hly sum- ~ mary

Financial Moni- Financial Moni- toring Manage- toring Manage- ment Reports ment reports (FMR) Supervision Mission and Pro- ject Status Re- port (PSR) Annual Finan- cial Statements on sources and uses of funds

(FMR) - Supervision Mis- sion

Annual Financial Statement on sources and uses o f funds

view (MTR)

summary ports

FMRs to be issued by the PMCU (PFO/Procurement Specialist/Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist) I

Final Evaluation Re- PO* ~ ICR

Final Evaluation Report

I

49

NBA Organization Regional b t i o n a l

., .

LOCAL

50

Annex 7: Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements

Categories

Disbursement

% of Expenditures to be Financed

Amount of the GEF Trust Fund Grant Allocated (USD million)

1. Allocations of grant proceeds. The proposed allocation o f grant proceeds i s shown in Table 1. Disbursements o f GEF funds w i l l finance 100 percent o f al l expenditures in foreign and local currency: (i) 100 percent o f local and international consultant services including personnel; (ii) 100 percent o f training/workshop; (iii) 100 percent o f equipment and; (iv) 100 percent o f operating costs. The NBA has International Organization status in Niger and therefore i s exempt f rom the Standard Disbursement Percentage (SDP) requirement. NBA has provided documentation on tax-exemption. This exemption w i l l be documented in Section I o f the Grant Agreement: “Compliance with Bank Policies.” All withdrawal applications must be ful ly documented, except for expenses claimed against contracts not subject to prior review by the Bank. For the rest o f the contracts, disbursements w i l l be made against Statements o f Expenses (SOEs) certified by the PFO at the PMCU.

1. Goods (including vehicles) 2. Consulting services 3. Training 4. Operating Costs 5. Unallocated/Contingencies T O T A L

0.37 100% 1.32 100% 2.06 100% 1.86 100% 0.39 6.00

2. Use of statements of expenditures (SOEs). Requests for funds withdrawals w i l l be properly documented for al l expenditures to be paid out o f the GEF Grant, except for the following contracts for which disbursements w i l l be made against SOEs certified b y both the P M C U Regional Project Coordinator and the National Project Coordinator: (i) contracts for goods with a unitary value below U S D 250,000 equivalent; (ii) contracts wi th consulting f i r m s with a unitary value below U S D 100,000 equivalent and with individual consultants for an amount below U S D 50,000 equivalent; (iii) additional operating expenses; and (iv) training. Documentation o f such SOEs w i l l be retained by the P M C U and made available for review, on request, to procurement and financial auditors and to WB/GEF supervision missions.

3. Special Account. In order to facilitate Project implementation and reduce the volume o f withdrawal applications, the NBA w i l l open a Special Account in U S D Dollars in a commercial bank on terms and conditions acceptable to WB/GEF. The authorized allocation w i l l be currency U S Dollars and w i l l cover about four months o f eligible expenditures. Upon Pro- ject effectiveness, WB/GEF w i l l deposit the amount in U S Dollars representing 50 percent of the authorized allocation into the Special Account. The remaining balance w i l l be made available when the aggregate amount o f withdrawals from the GEF Grant account, plus the total amount o f all outstanding special commitments entered into by the WB/GEF, shall be approximately or exceed the equivalent o f U S D 1,000,000. The Special Account should be re- plenished each month. T o facilitate the management of the Project at a national level a 90-day

5 1

Advance Account procedure wi l l be used. The 90-day Advance Account procedure, designed for decentralized accounts, would be used to facilitate the operation o f P M C U and to ensure prompt payment o f consultants and suppliers. Fol lowing the procedures o f IBRD, the Project would advance funds covering no more than 90 days estimated expenditures (in local currency) to NPTs. Each national NPT w i l l submit quarterly expenditure reports indicating sources and uses o f funds, and accompanied b y reconciled bank statements. The P M C U would then aggregate this data, prepare a reconciliation statement for the NBA Special Ac- count, and prepare replenishment applications accompanied b y the bank statement for the Special Account. All expenditures under the 90-day Advance Accounts w i l l need to be supported by an SOE or regular summary sheets, depending on the prior review contract thresholds.

4. FZow of funds. Project flow o f funds and flow o f information i s illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Funds and Information Flow Mechanism

Council of Ministers . : Steering Committee

+ NBAffMCU I

I I

Wor ld Bank /IDA Special Account 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I / I 1 I I

I

I + f I NPT

Advance Account 1Y ill

sub-account

& Beneficiaries

Suppliers, Consultants, al l other contractors o f the beneficiaries

- - - + Flow o f information A Flow o f funds

52

Financial management - staffing and implementation arrangements

5. A financial management assessment o f NBA was carried out b y the Wor ld Bank. The objective o f the assessment was to determine whether the Project has in place an adequate financial management system as required under Bank guidelines and to recommend financial management arrangements for the mitigation o f the fiduciary r i s k components identified. The assessment resulted in an action plan and a schedule o f the financial management arrangements and confirmed the need to establish the P M C U at the NBA.

6. Implementation arrangements. A financial management o f NBA was carried out b y the Wor ld Bank. The objectives o f the assessment was to determine whether the project has in place an adequate financial management system as required under Bank guidelines and to recommend FM arrangements for the mitigation o f the fiduciary risk components identified. The conclusion o f the assessment brought to the action plan disclosing the schedule o f FM arrangements installment and confirmed the need to establish the P M C U at NBA.

The financial management o f this Project i s the responsibility o f the PMCU. The related duties o f the P M C U cover budget and cash managements, accounting, internal control, financial reporting and external audit preparation. The system, acceptable to IDA, to carry out these duties w i l l be fully in place prior to Project effectiveness based on the action plan drawn below. The P M C U w i l l be housed at NBA offices and w i l l be, under the supervision o f NBA, in charge o f all aspects o f financial management o f the Project. The P M C U w i l l thus benefit from NBA experience in term o f managing funds. The main recommendations below related to the staff, to the information system and to the organization should be implemented before: (b) negotiations and (a and c) the effectiveness o f the Project.

0 (a) At a regional level, P M C U w i l l have, among other staff, a Regional Project Coor- dinator, a Project Financial Officer (PFO), and a procurement specialist.

0 (b) Upon NBA’s financial management assessment, NBA w i l l second to the Project an accountant, a financial controller and an internal auditor.

0 (c) At a national level, the Project w i l l be managed by an NPT. The NPT w i l l recruit a National Project Coordinator, a microgrant specialist and an accountant/support staff.

7. Accounting policies and procedures. NBA has been applying satisfactory procedures since i t was set up. However, these procedures have not been formalized in a reference document such as a manual and they w i l l probably differ from the procedures o f the current Project. A draft a Manual o f Procedures must be developed and finalized b y the Project before effectiveness. This Manual must include accounting policies and procedures; clear definition o f respective duties; budgeting system; all relevant administrative, accounting and financial procedures; relation between the components o f the Project, and reporting mechanisms at each level (regional, national and local). The terms o f reference fo r preparation of the Manual should be submitted for the Bank’s approval. Relevant staff involved in the Pro- ject must be trained in accounting and procurement procedures.

53

8. Reporting and monitoring. The P M C U w i l l prepare quarterly Financial Management Reports (FMR) based on an Annual Work Plan. The format o f the FMR wi l l be discussed and agreed before effectiveness. The quarterly reports w i l l cover financial management, procurement, and physical progress monitoring, and w i l l take into consideration al l activities financed under the Project regardless o f the source o f funding. No major problem i s expected with the financial and procurement reports. An area of concern i s wi th the physical progress monitoring report, where P M C U lacks experience; this would require additional effort. The physical progress reports w i l l be based on the outcome indicators.

Tasks

PMCU’s accountant officiallv amointment bv NBA

9. Financial management information system. A computerized financial management system must be installed for the PMCU. The chart o f accounts (expenses categories and activities) o f the Project and the report formats must be customized prior to effectiveness in order to ease the production o f the FMR and the annual financial statements.

Target Comple- Responsibility

Februarv 15.2004 NB A tion Date

10. Audit arrangements. The Project’s accounts w i l l be subject to annual external audit by a reputable auditing firm based on terms o f reference appropriate for the Project’s scope, to be approved by the Bank. These terms o f reference w i l l cover the Project’s accounts and internal control framework. The selection o f the auditor for the Project wi l l be a condition of effectiveness. The annual audit reports w i l l be submitted to the Bank within six months o f the end o f each fiscal year (Le., June 30th).

NBA agrees to second a financial controller and an internal auditor to the Project Recruitment o f (i) the Regional Project Coordinator; (ii) PFO; (iii) procurement specialist; (iv) National Project Coordinator and accounting as-

11. Conditions for effectiveness and negotiations. The conditions for effectiveness are detailed in the GEF Project Document, Section D.7. As part o f the financial management assessment, Table 2 reflects the action plan that was agreed on wi th NBA and that was part o f the negotiation package, and financial management assessment.

February 15,2004 NBA

June, 15,2004 NBA

5 selected consulting firm Draft manual submitted for Bank comments Final manual including Bank comments and acquisition o f the required software Recruitment o f the external auditor Installation of the computerized financial management system (preparation o f the yearly budget 2004, special account opened, adequate parameters set up for the computerized system training o f the Project staff) Final check up for compliance and clearance o f the financial management

6 7

June 15,2004 NBA June 15,2004 NBA/Bank

June 15,2004 NBA June 20,2004 NBA

June 25,2004 FMSIBank.

8 9

10

sistant for each NPT NPT established and (i) national coordinator; (ii) microgrant specialist and 1 June 15,2004 I NBNCountries

-

- (iii) financial assistant recruited Development o f the administrative, financial and accounting system by the 1 June 15,2004 I NBA

54

Annex 8: Procurement

Guidelines

1. The Bank w i l l finance goods, consultancies, training, and other local activities necessary to implement the Project. The procurement o f goods, works, and services w i l l be done in accordance with the Bank’s Guidelines on Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits (January 1995, Revised January and August 1996, September 1997, and January 1999) and the Guidelines on Selection and Employment of Consultants by Bank Borrowers (January 1997, revised September 1997, January 1999 and M a y 2002). The Bank’s standard bidding documents for goods and the standard forms o f contract and request for proposals for consulting services w i l l be used under the Project. Any goods or services not financed by the Bank w i l l be procured in accordance with the public procurement regulations o f the riparian countries or the co-financing institution’s procurement regulations.

Advertising of procurement opportunities

2. GPN. A General Procurement Notice (GPN) has been prepared and issued in the UN Development Business (UNDB), immediately after negotiations to advertise for any I C B for goods and for major consulting assignments. Sufficient time w i l l be allowed (minimum o f 30 days) before preparing the short l i s t .

3. SPN. Specific Procurement Notices (SPN) for goods to be procured under I C B and Expressions o f Interest for Consultants’ Services estimated to cost the equivalent o f U S D 200,000 and above w i l l also be published in Development Business (UNDB on-line) as well as in the national press o f the Niger River Basin riparian countries. Assignments estimated to cost less than U S D 200,000 may be advertised regionally in riparian countries; the shortlist for assignments estimated to cost the equivalent amount of USD 100,000 or less may be made up entirely o f consultants from the Niger River Basin riparian countries, provided that no more than two qualified f i r m s f rom any one o f the Niger River Basin riparian countries are on the shortlist, and foreign consultants who wish to participate are not excluded from consideration.

Procurement capacity assessment

4. A procurement capacity assessment o f the NBA was carried out as part o f the institutional analysis in March 2002. During appraisal, an action plan was agreed to address areas where the existing structures s t i l l need to be strengthened to meet performance criteria. The action plan includes:

(i) (ii) (iii)

(iv) (v) (vi)

The recruiting o f a procurement specialist for the P M C U at the regional level; The training o f counterpart staff of NBA; The installation of a procurement planning and contract management system integrated in the computerized financial management system at the PMCU; The reorganization o f the filing o f procurement-related documents; The supplying o f NBA with filing material (filing cabinets and folders); and The preparation o f a procurement plan.

55

The P M C U w i l l be installed within the NBA and the procurement capacity o f the P M C U w i l l be assessed later when all i t s members have been recruited.

Required Action Manual of procedures Recruitment of a procurement specialist First year procurement plans Training of the NBA procurement staff

SuDervision missions Procurement performance assessment

Schedule Responsible Agency Before effectiveness NBA Before effectiveness NBA During appraisal NBA 12-30 April 2004 CESAG (Dakar) At mid time WB Everv six months WB and other donors

Procurement planning

5 . Procurement Plans. Draft procurement plans for the Project’s first year o f implementation were prepared during appraisal. These plans w i l l be finalized by effectiveness and w i l l be included in the PIM. The plans are based on the init ial needs o f the Project and the work plans submitted by the NBA. The proposed procurement plans w i l l be updated every 6 months and furnished to the Bank for review and approval. The exact m i x of procurement wi l l be determined on an annual basis during the annual jo int reviews between NBA, the Bank and other partners, when procurement plans for the fol lowing financial year w i l l be presented and agreed upon. The plans w i l l include relevant information on goods and consulting services under the Project, indicating the procurement method as well as the timing o f each milestone in the procurement process.

6. Procurement Arrangements. The Niger River Basin Project i s a stand-alone GEF Project. The Bank financed portion w i l l be executed on behalf o f the Niger River Basin riparian countries by the NBA and i s funded from one single source: the GEF Trust Fund in the amount o f USD 6.0 mi l l ion equivalent. This Annex outlines procurement arrangements for GEF funded activities.

7. The NBNSE w i l l be responsible for Project management, including financial management and procurement. The P M C U w i l l work closely with the NBA/SE and with the regional institutions and NPTs to ensure timely Project implementation. The P M C U w i l l also be primarily responsible for reporting on Project progress, financial management and procurement and disbursement, identifying implementation gaps and bottlenecks, and managing Project accounts and budget.

8. The P M C U w i l l recruit a procurement specialist (regional-level) who w i l l be responsible for handling procurement activities. The procurement specialist w i l l be expected to: (i) prepare bidding documents; (ii) help ensure quality; (iii) focus on specific procurement problems and issues; (iv) make a significant contribution to ensuring that procurement takes place as rapidly and effectively as possible; and (v) coordinate wi th the PFO to ensure overall inte- c/ gration of procurement plans and financial reports; work closely and coach the NBA counterpart.

9. Manual of Procedures. The Manual o f Procedures, a financial and administrative manual, w i l l be prepared. I t w i l l serve as a practical guide describing procedures agreed upon in negotiations. I t w i l l include: (i) procedures for calling for bids, selecting consultants, and

56

awarding contracts; (ii) internal organization for supervision and control, including operational guidelines defining the role o f the executing agency and reporting requirements; and (iii) disbursement procedures. A draft Manual o f Procedures w i l l be sent to the Bank for review and clearance before effectiveness.

10. Procurement package preparation. All procurement packages w i l l be prepared either by NBA directly or by the procurement specialist at the PMCU. All procurement w i l l be carried out in accordance with the procurement plan and as agreed with the Bank. The PMCU/NBA w i l l forward the procurement packages to the Bank for prior review and no objection, as required.

Procurement methods

11. Procurement methods. The Project elements by disbursement category, their estimated costs, and procurement methods are summarized in Table A below. Thresholds for procurement methods and prior review are summarized in Table B.

(a) Goods and equipment (USD 0.37 million)

Goods financed under the Project would include light vehicles, computers, and miscellaneous equipment. The total value of goods i s estimated at about U S D 0.37 mi l l ion equivalent for the Project.

Technical equipment and other goods costing U S D 250,000 and more per contract w i l l be subject to International Competitive Bidding (ICB) requirements. Goods estimated to cost less than USD 250,000 or equivalent may be awarded on the ba- s is o f National Competitive Bidding (NCB). I t should be noted that for this Pro- ject, N C B includes all o f the participating riparian countries and bidding opportunities w i l l therefore be published in all riparian countries for NCB.

For goods, contracts below USD 50,000 w i l l be procured through prudent Shop- Ping in accordance with provisions o f paragraph 3.5 o f the Guidelines and the Bank’s guidance procurement note on handling procurement under shopping method (June 8, 2000). Solicitations w i l l be issued in writ ing to at least three reputable suppliers (preferably more) in order to receive at least three competitive quotations. Solicitations w i l l give specifications, and if not immediately available, the delivery time. Written quotations w i l l be opened at the same time for evaluation and records o f award decisions w i l l be kept for Bank supervision missions and audits.

Direct contracting may be exceptionally used with the prior no-objection of the Bank for the procurement o f spare parts, operating expenditures, minor off-the- shelf items, and other specialized equipment and proprietary items costing less than U S D 20,000 equivalent per contract up to an aggregate o f the equivalent value o f U S D 200,000.

57

(b) Consultants’ services (USD 1.32 million)

0 As the majority o f work undertaken in this Project i s capacity building and technical assistance to the Niger River Basin riparian countries, a large percentage o f the expenditures w i l l be for Consultants’ Services, much o f which w i l l be based in the Niger River Basin. Following agreed upon criteria, the P M C U w i l l maintain and update a l i s t o f consultants that w i l l be used to establish shortlists. The shortlists wi l l be established based on expressions o f interests received through GPNs and Specific Advertisements placed in the UNDB and/or regional newspapers, depending upon the estimated value o f such assignments. Consultant f i r m s financed under the Project w i l l be selected in accordance with Bank Consultant Guidelines. The fol lowing selection procedures w i l l be used for Consultants’ Services:

(i) Oualitv-and-Cost-based (QCBS): All consulting service contracts for firms valued at more than U S D 100,000 equivalent would be awarded through the Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS) method. To ensure that priority i s given to the identification o f suitable and qualified national consulting firms, shortlists for QCBS contracts estimated at or less than U S D 100,000 equivalent may be comprised entirely o f national consultants f rom the Niger River Basin riparian countries, with-no more than two f i r m s on the shortlist from any one riparian country, (in accordance with the provisions o f paragraph 2.7 o f the Consultant Guidelines), provided that a sufficient number o f qualified f i r m s (at least three) are available. However, i f foreign f i r m s have expressed interest, they would not be excluded from consideration.

(ii) Selection based on Consultant’s Qualification (CQ) may be used for consulting service contracts below an estimated contract amount of U S D 100,000 equivalent, for research and targeted interventions for which organizations wi th specialized expertise, strong capacities to work wi th multinational groups and proven track records would be recruited. CQ may also be used for the selection o f training institutions for contracts to provide training services that are estimated to cost up to USD 100,000 equivalent per contract.

(iii) For financial audits, the Least Cost Selection (LCS) method w i l l be the most appropriate method.

(iv) Single Source Selection (SSS) may be used exceptionally for training, for specific tasks in a case where only one firm has specific qualified experience, and for consulting assignments costing less than U S D 50,000 per contract up to an aggregate amount o f the equivalent value o f U S D 300,000.

(v) Selection o f Individual Consultants Services (IC): Consultants for services meeting the requirements o f Section V o f the Consultant Guidelines w i l l be selected under the provisions for the Selection of Individual Consultants method. Individual Consultants (IC) w i l l be selected through comparison o f curriculum vitae o f those expressing interest in the assignment against j o b description requirements, or o f those having been identified directly b y the

58

PMCU. C iv i l servants f rom the riparian countries cannot be hired as consultants under the Project.

(c) Training, workshop and conferences (USD 2.06 million)

Training, workshops, conference attendance and study tours w i l l be carried out on the basis o f approved annual programs that w i l l identify the general framework o f training and similar activities for the year, including the nature o f training’study tours/workshops, the number o f participants, and cost estimates. For national training and workshops, preference w i l l be given to consultants f rom the country in which the training i s being organized, provided that a sufficient number o f qualified individuals or f i r m s (at least three) are available. For regional training, preference w i l l be given to consultants from the Niger River Basin riparian countries, provided that n o more than two consultants from any one riparian are short- listed and a sufficient number o f qualified individuals or f i r m s (at least three) i s available.

(d) Operational expenses (USD 1.86 million)

The NBA w i l l establish and staff the P M C U office at the N B A B S in Niamey, Ni- ger. The P M C U w i l l assist the NBA in Project management and implementation. Project staff employed under the Bank funded portion o f the Project w i l l be hired in accordance with Section V o f the Bank’s Consultant Guidelines. Other operational costs, such as utilities, printing, translation, office supplies, w i l l be procured through Shopping. All the above positions w i l l be advertised.

12. lowing procurement documentation:

Prior Review Thresholds (Table B). The Bank w i l l conduct a prior review of the fol-

Goods: All contracts estimated to cost the equivalent value of U S D 250,000 or more w i l l be submitted for prior review.

Consultants’ services: All contracts with firms estimated to cost the equivalent value o f U S D 100,000 or more, w i l l be submitted for prior review as per paragraph 2, Appendix I o f the Guidelines. Individual consultant contracts above U S D 50,000 w i l l all be subject to prior review. Other procurement subject to Bank review would include: annual training plans for local and overseas training and workshops, including terms o f reference and estimated budgets. All out o f country training w i l l be subject to Bank approval.

Operational expenses: All individual long-term contracts (greater than six months) for Project staff w i l l be subject to prior review.

Single source selection: All single source selection, regardless o f value, for assignments of a critical nature (as determined by the Bank) w i l l be subject to Bank prior review.

59

13. ment implementation support be provided to this Project once every four months in the f i rs t year and twice a year for the remaining period, including focus on post-review/audits as speci- fied above. I t i s also suggested that this procurement implementation support be given to PMCU/NBA headquarters in Niamey.

Frequency of procurement support missions proposed. I t i s suggested that procure-

14. to ensure that procurement phases do not exceed the following target time periods:

NBA w i l l also give assurance at negotiations that i t w i l l take the necessary measures

Procurement Phases Preparation o f bidding documents Preparation o f bids by bidders Bid evaluation Signature o f Contracts Payments

Maximum number o f weeks 4 (6 for large contracts) 4 (6-10 for ICB) 2 (4 for large contracts) 2 3

15. particular attention should be paid during recruitment o f the consultant to be in charge of these aspects o f Project execution.

Overall procurement risk assessment. The risk identified in procurement i s medium;

60

Expenditure Category

1. Goods

2. Services

3. Training and seminars

4. Operating Costs

Procurement Method 1 3

Other2 N.B*F* Total Cost ICB NCB

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0.24) (0.08) (0.09) (0.00) (0.41) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

(0.00) (0.00) (1.36) (0.00) (1.36) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

(0.00) (0.00) (2.21) (0 00) (2.21) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

(0.00) (0.00) (2.00) (0.00) (2.00)

(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

. -~

I/ -

2/

Figures in parentheses are the amounts to be financed by the GEF Grant. All costs include contingencies. Includes goods to be procured through national shopping, consulting services, services o f contracted staff of the Project management office, training, technical assistance services, and incremental operating costs related to (i) managing the Project, and (ii) re-lending Project funds to local government units.

3/ Total costs incorporate unallocated/contingencies

5. Total

61

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (0.24) (0.08) (5.66) (0.00) 6.00

Consultant Services Expenditure Category

A. Firms

B. Individuals

Total

Table B: Thresholds for Procurement Methods and Prior Review]

Selection Method QCBS QBS SFB LCS CQ Other N.B.F. Total

Cost1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.06) (0.40) (2.11) (0.00) (2.21) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (1.36) (0.00) (1.36) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.06) (0.40) (3.47) (0.00) (3.57)

Expenditure Category

1. Goods

2. Services Firms

Individual

Contract Value Threshold

(USD thousands) Above 250,000 Below 250,000

Less than 50,000 Less than 20.000

Above 100,000 Less than 100,000

Above USD 50,000

Equal to USD 50,000 or < USD 50,000

Procurement Method

ICB NCB

Shopping Direct Contracting

QCBS CQLC

Section V of Consultants Guidelines

Section V of Consultants Guidelines

Total value of contracts subiect to Drior review: 30 Dercent of total costs

Contracts Subject to Review

(USD millions) Prior review Post review Post review Prior review

Prior review Post review

Prior review

Post review

.." .......... - . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

62

Annex 9: Incremental Cost Analysis

Introduction

1. The riparian countries share a common concern to address the Basin issues beyond the boundaries o f specific national interests and recognize that to address these transboundary issues would include additional cost, the incremental cost. This cost i s the measure o f the economic burden that would be placed on the Niger River Basin countries for undertalung the sustainable development o f the Basin, beyond their current national baseline and capacity.

2. Under the broader international waters work being carried out in the Niger River Basin, there is significant emphasis on enhancing existing capacity at the national and regional level. The Niger River Basin countries are developing a SDAP for the Niger River Basin with the support o f the Bank. Whereas the GEF Project’s SAP w i l l focus on managing the Basin’s environment, the SDAP w i l l deal with the broader issues o f multi-sector sustainable development in the Basin. The SAP and the SDAP can be managed as complementary processes, wi th the SAP as a natural precursor. The GEF T D N S A P i s identifying, characterizing, and prioritizing water- related, environmental issues and sectors across the Niger River Basin member states, as wel l developing a framework for environmental management and development in the Basin. The SDAP w i l l envelope all possible sectors, both those with environmental externalities, as wel l as those not before captured by the SAP process, and w i l l build on the environmental management framework developed for the SAP. The GEF Project w i l l support strengthened regional, national, and local decision-malung capacity, providing a better understanding of the sector issues, which contribute to land and water degradation, and mechanisms to manage these transboundary issues in a more inclusive participatory decision-making process.

Global environmental objective

3. The Project’s global environmental objectives are to reduce and prevent transboundary water-related environmental degradation, prevent land degradation, and protect globally significant biodiversity, through sustainable and cooperative integrated management of the Basin.

4. The significance o f the Basin has been highlighted by the international interest in i t s ecological elements. If the transboundary issues are not addressed, the direct and indirect threats to this international waterbody w i l l result in the progressive breakdown of the hydrological and ecological integrity o f the Niger River Basin system. This w i l l cause the global community to forfeit sizeable global conservation benefits; this includes direct and indirect use values, and existence and option values from the Basin.

Development objective

5. To achieve the global environmental objectives, the Project’s development objective i s to provide the nine riparians an opportunity to define a transboundary framework for the sustainable development o f the Niger River Basin, through strengthened capacity and better understanding of the Basin’s land and water resources.

63

6. The development objective supports the nine riparian countries (Benin, Burkma Faso, Cameroon, Chad, C8te d’Ivoire, Guinea, Mali , Niger, and Nigeria) o f the Niger River Basin in their efforts to work together to assure the sustainable development and management o f the Ba- sin’s land and water resources, including protection o f i t s unique drylands environment and associated biodiversity. These requirements are transboundary in nature, clearly transcending national capacities and priorities, and requiring financial and technical resources significantly beyond those that can be mobilized by each riparian state singly or in combination.

7. The long-term goal o f the GEF Project i s to achieve global benefits, as identified above, through broad, basin-wide participation in the development and implementation o f measures that ensure that the integrity o f the Niger River system i s protected b y integrated management o f the Basin’s resources. This requires orchestration o f both national and regional activities through efficient Basin governance. Measures are targeted to mitigate the causes and effects o f desertification in the region and building o f capacity at regional, national, and local levels to create enhanced adaptive capacities.

Barriers to better land and water management

8. The NBA has been involved in a number o f diagnostic studies, which formed the basis for the Project’s preparation. During Project preparation it became evident that there are a number o f issues which impact the Basin. These issues are part o f a greater concern about the multi- sectoral contribution to escalating negative impacts on land and water resources. The main issues in the Basin include:

0

0

0

Inadequately coordinated land and water management frameworks; Continued degradation o f land, water, and renewable resources; Insufficient and inadequate information and data for good management practices and to support the decision-making process; and Cumulative degradation f rom the hydropower sector.

Removing the barriers

9. There are a number o f initiatives in the Basin to develop appropriate linkages and coordinate efforts to benefit from lessons learned, so that scarce financial resources can be used more efficiently to improve national and basin-wide water resources management. In a shared river basin, interests may conflict wi th each other, especially as national interests are often based upon immediate needs rather than their long-term impact. Given the environmental degradation in the Basin, resulting from cumulative impacts from the issues discussed above, i t i s becoming in- creasingly apparent that to tackle the causes w i l l require a coordinated multi-country effort across the Basin, with action takmg place at the appropriate level (i.e., subsidiarity). At present, several major barriers need to be removed if NBA is to make progress in i t s attempts to secure a sustainable future for the Niger River Basin ecosystem. Efforts to remove these barriers would include:

0

Introducing effective land and water management, to mitigate desertification and sedimentation problems; Establishing reliable water resources monitoring and data exchange;

64

Coordinating management o f the Basin’s infrastructure; and Promoting good management practices for biodiversity protection and conservation.

10. In the longer term, through this Project and integration wi th the SDAP, the removal o f barriers to sustainable use of the Basin’s resources w i l l widen the menu of development options available at the regional, national, and local level. However, in the short term, the program to address transboundary issues w i l l result in mainly non-pecuniary benefits. Fo r the riparian countries, tangible costs exceed tangible benefits in the intermediate term, providing little incentive to undertake this initiative without external assistance.

Baseline scenario

11. The Niger River Basin resources have an intrinsic value to the riparian countries’ future development potential, and therefore almost all investments in the national development arena have direct implications for the Basin’s land and water resources. Currently, there i s an extensive l i s t o f projects and programs taking place and proposed in the nine Basin countries, wi th each contributing to improvement in national concerns. As part o f the in i t ia l phase o f Project preparation, a range o f ~ u r r e n t , ~ past and proposed8 Bank projects in the Basin were inventoried and evaluated, as they pertained to agriculture, forestry, environment or water sectors. Similar effort was conducted for the current and future UNDP9 country projects, as well as donor projects. With the knowledge that each relevant project in the Basin contributes to the fundamental baseline o f Basin development, i t i s necessary to make note o f the range o f activities in the Ba- sin.

12. However, for the sake o f clarity, to define the true value of the incremental benefit from this Project, in i t s transboundary context, the baseline was defined by a specific parameter to include just those activities which directly contribute to and support the Project’s development objective. Therefore, the baseline assessment considered the relevant donor-supported co- financindparallel efforts proposed in the Basin, which directly contribute to and complement the Project component activities. These funds, together with the in-k ind national contributions, defined the baseline amount as USD 29.64 million. The NBA and national governments in-kind

’ Bank projects: Africa Regional Environmental and Information Management Program (2); Benin Rural Water Supply and Sani- tation; Burkina Faso Community-Based Rural Project; Mali PNIR; Guinea Third Water Supply and Supplemental; Niger Water Resource Management Sector Strategy; Nigeria Water Resource Management Strategy; Mali National Water Resource Strategy Preparation; Nigeria Urban Water Sector Reform Project I; Niger Water Sector Project; Burkina Faso Ouagadougou Water Sup- ply Project; Chad Agricultural Services and Producer Organizations Project; Niger Community Action Program; and Nigeria Fadama Agricultural and Rural Development

Benin: PCD Management of Forests and Adjacent Lands; PCD National CDD Project; PAD Forests and Adjacent Lands Man- agement; Burkina Faso: PAD Partnership for Natural Ecosystem Mgt.; PAD Community-Based Rural Development; PCD Sahel Integrated Lowland Ecosystem Mgt.; PCD Urban Environment Supplemental; PAD Ouagadougou Water Supply Project; Cam- eroon: PCD ForestryIEnviron; Chad: PAD Agric. Services and Producer Org. Project; PAD Local Development Project; Chad Urban Development Project; Cbte d’lvoire: PAD National Protected Area Management Program; PCD Cap/Basic Infr/Urban and Env); Guinea: Village Comm. Sup. 11; Third Water Supply (Supplemental); Mal i : PCD Community-based Rural Development Project Rural; PAD Arid Land Biodiversity; PAD Rural Infrastructure (WRM); Niger: PAD Private Irrigation Promotion; PAD Community Action Program; Water Sector Project; Nigeria: PCD Nigeria Fadama 11; PAD Local Empowerment and Environ- mental Management; PAD Small Towns Water; PCD Lagos Water Sector Restructuring Project; PAD Urban Water Sector Re- form Project.

The three regional intemational waters projects include: (i) Industrial water pollution control in the Gulf o f Guinea Large Ma- rine Ecosystem, within Benin, Cameroon, CBte d’Ivoire, Ghana and Nigeria; (ii) Integrated Management of the Lake Chad Basin, Chad, Cameroon, Mali, and Nigeria; and (iii) Control of exotic aquatic weeds in rivers and coastal lagoons to enhance/restore biodiversity in CBte d’Ivoire.

65

contributions total USD 2.07 million, this includes a contribution o f U S D 0.38 from NBA for regional-level activities related to Component 1 ; and U S D 1.69 mil l ion f rom the national NBA counterparts as i t relates to national-level efforts for Component 2. The additional co-financing figure (USD 27.57 million) i s indicative o f the anticipated participation of ongoing projects related to activities in the GEF Project and i s reflected as parallel funding, or the baseline. Sum- marized in Table 1, this includes financing from: (i) AfDB (USD 21.87 mil l ion) which complements GEF Component 1, regional institution building and the Component 5 theme targeting sedimentation problems and river degradation; (ii) Government of France support (USD 4.78 million) for Bank components for institution building (Component l), data and knowledge management (Component 3) and technical studies (Component 6); (iii) Government o f the Nether- lands (USD 0.59 million) support, as part o f the Bank Netherlands Water Partnership, parallels activities to Component 3; (iv) Government o f Norway (USD 0.160 million) support to fund sector reports in the Basin for Component 6; and (v) the UNDP-TRIB (USD 0.17 million), which supports technical capacity in Component 3 and institutional capacity for Component 2.

Component DonorIInstitution Donor t Institution

seline t Parallel Funding

& Increment 0.380 NBA In-kind (NBA Contribution)

“Programme for the Framework for Erosion Control and

Component 1 Institution Building

Subtotal

4.170 AfDB

French Govt.

Protection in the Niger River Basin” supports NBA regional institution building

Supports NBA regional institution building 0.250

3.520 GEF GEF Increment 8.32 1.687 Component 2

Capacity Building and 0.124

1.620 Public Awareness

NBA In-kind (National Contribution) UNDP- TRIB-I managed)

Promotes dialogue for capacity building (Bank-

GEF GEF Increment Su btota 1

Component 3 Data and Knowledge

66

3.43

0.587 Trust Fund “Preparing the Niger Basin Authority Tech- nologically for Effective River Basin Management” (Bank-managed) supports HydroNiger

Promotes dialogue for data sharing (Bank-managed)

Govt. of

0.050 Management

Su btota 1

I L.Lu-L

French Govt. environmental observatory

Supports technical capacity building and supports the 4.417

1.130 GEF GEF Increment 6.18

Component 4 Regional Forum

Component 5 Demonstration Pilots and Microgrant Program

Component 6 TDA/SAP

Siibtotal

Subtotal

0.00 0.380 GEF GEF Increment 0.38

”Programme for the Framework for Erosion Control and

tivities supporting good management practices 17.695 BAD Protection in the Niger River Basin” national-level ac-

5.000 GEF GEF Increment 22.70

Trust Fund to promote dialogue to support environ- AWRM1 menuwater sector reports (Bank-managed) 0.160

Component Donornnstitution Activities & Increment

Donornnstitution Activities VI1 I I

Subtotal

GEF Alternative

French Govt. Support preparation of environment/water sector reports 0.1 17

1.350 GEF Increment 1.63

13. GEF Alternative. The GEF Alternative regional program, together with the SDAP and other initiatives in the Basin, w i l l support actions that are compatible wi th the economic and social interests o f each country, while generating benefits to the Basin for the overall environment. I t would create new opportunities for regional development b y enabling al l players within the Basin to be responsible for identifying priorities in the Basin and to engage in the decision- making process.

FINANCING

GEF Contribution Co-financing:

14. The GEF Project w i l l provide support for improving management and protection o f the Basin resources. I t w i l l also be a vital instrument, through the development o f the SAP, for mobilizing, catalyzing, and generating sustainable national development projects which consider the environment as an essential element for future development. Reciprocally, these national development programs concerned with water and environment, and coordinated within a comprehensive strategic approach basin-wide (i.e. within the context o f the SAP) w i l l be decisive in upgrad- ing the capabilities that need to be mobilized collectively, throughout the region, to improve the Niger River Basin ecosystem. Given the size and scope o f the work that has to be organized and carried out, no other project or initiative in the short or medium term can provide the assistance needed to address the environmental problems o f the Niger River Basin.

Baseline Scenario GEF Alternative Project (USD million) (USD million) Increment

13.00 13.00 27.57 27.57

15. T o avoid the overall environmental risks identified above, in-kind support being provided by the member states for regular NBA operations needs to be further extended and complemented. Existing support i s insufficient to cope with the magnitude o f the problems at hand. The gap in support w i l l be financed under the proposed Project. In this regard, other priority regional programs would benefit f rom being co-financed with other donors in order to generate more wide-ranging actions and thus have a more rapid impact on the human and physical environments. At the national level, the components financed by the GEF would also help to support existing and future programs to become integrated into national sustainable development programs and into the SAP for the entire Basin.

Current Estimated NBNCountries In-kind 2.07 2.07

67

Project financing and incremental cost matrix

16. The GEF Altemutive increment. Total Project costs are estimated to be USD 42.64millio1-1, with a total GEF contribution and costs o f U S D 13 million. The remaining amount o f U S D 29.64 mi l l ion wi l l come from various co-financing sources such as: national government in-kind contributions, and active donors in the Basin (USD 2.07 mi l l ion from current in-kmd, U S D 27.57 mi l l ion from donors), summarized in Table 2.

17. The incremental cost matrix (Table 3) shows the costs to achieve the stated domestic and global benefits, the global environmental objectives, and the benefits associated with the GEF Alternative. The increment i s differentiated from the baseline for the component activities.

Domestic and global benefits from Project increment

18. Overall domestic benefits From incremental costs:

Countries are able to strengthen water and environment management without losing development funds for other critical short-term priorities and without losing competitive position. Interventions are more targeted at removing the root causes o f threats, thus improving the efficacy and cost-effectiveness o f management endeavors. National capacities to implement a holistic resources management method at all levels are strengthened. C iv i l society i s more responsive to environmental protection measures. Ecological sustainability o f activities in the Basin w i l l be better assured, for each country.

19. The global environmental objectives w i l l be achieved through broad basin-wide participation in and implementation o f cooperative decision-making and best practices, and sustainable management o f the Basin’s land and water resources. The long-term global environmental bene- f i ts that would accrue from the successful completion o f the Project activities and future implementation o f the SAP include:

0 Strengthened regional, national, and local institutional capacity in all nine-Basin countries w i l l support effective execution capacity for future regional project implementation. Strengthened regional, national, and local institutional capacity for sustainable land and water resource management in the Niger River Basin with an inclusive framework for regional cooperation w i l l be supported through agreements on policy/institutional and legal adjustments at regional and national levels. Harmonized and coherent basin-wide national data collection, and effective data disseminated w i l l be a valuable capacity for national and regional decision-makers. Forums with other regional initiatives provide a mechanism to better collaborate and communicate the exchange o f good practices and better management o f Basin resources. Public participation in management o f local resources increases ownership o f c iv i l society through microgrant-supported community-based activities that w i l l enable communities to understand the cause and effect o f environmental and land degradation, and tackle priority issues in the Basin directly.

68

0 A completed transboundary diagnostic analysis o f the transboundary water-related environmental issues and root causes across the Basin w i l l be better understood and an action program o f legal, policy and institutional reforms and investments can help address the transboundary land and water issues. A SAP provides a regional framework for sustainable management o f the Basin’s land and water resources.

0

69

Development Objective

The nine riparians establish a transboundary land and water framework for the sustainable development of the Niger River Basin

The Bank implemented components aim to strengthen NBA’s Project execution and data management capacity as well as formalize consultative processes for Basin- level environmental planning to contnbute to the reversal of land and water degradation in the Ba- sin

cost Category

Baseline

With GEF Alternative

Total USD

Million 29 64

42 64

Table 3: Incremental Cost Matrix Overall Domestic and Global Benefits

Overall Domestic Baseline Benefits: Countries only taking unilateral action to reverse degradation trends, and bilateral assistance reluc- tant to fund water projects without any clear knowledge, or agreement, on sustainability of riparian land and water uses, upstream and downstream. National efforts are continued but are insufficient to mitigate threats to river systems; though effort i s made under the SDAP, i t lacks a comprehensive approach to integrate the environmental issues for which there continues to be minimal coordination between countries on environmental management policies, strategies, and laws, or between programs within countries. National capacities in pursuing effective and integrated l and water resources management commence but there i s insufficient regional support for an integrated management framework. National and local players sensitized to environmental concems but mechanisms do not exist for exchanging lessons leamed and cooperative decision-making on Basin and resources management. Opportunities for the exchange of lessons learnt are made available to a range of stakeholders in West African basins. Countries face growing environmental, social, and economic costs and a decrease in available natural resources from degradation o f the Niger River Basin system, and are unable to formulate a strategic program for sustainable Basin management.

Overall Domestic GEF Alternative Benefits: National policies and standards for water and environmental management wil l be harmonized in line with a common strategy (SDAP) at the Basin level, with information and support o f donors. Institutional capacity i s strengthened and management efforts among the riparian countries are better coordinated using international cooperation mechanisms, National institutional and technical capacities in river basin planning and integrated land and water resources management are strengthened. A wide range o f intervention measures are implemented to address the root causes of water resources and environmental degradation. Resource conservation and protection practices and interventions are successful, and well-targeted public advocacy and awareness campaigns contribute to improvements in the Niger River Basin.

Overall Global Baselrne Benefits Under the baseline scenano, there are insufficient financial resources to address the regional transboundary issues that contribute to global benefits If the Project i s not implemented i t i s not contnbuting to any significant global base- l ine benefits National efforts continue under the baseline scenano

Overall Global GEF Alternative Benefits: Strengthening o f policy, institutions and incentives for regional cooperation, involving all players, in which institutional bamers are removed, make the international waters effort a catalyst for regional cooperation. Institutional mechanisms guide and coordinate national plans and actions within a common regional vision and framework for action. Mechanisms for engendering public participation in sound development planning and management at Basin-ecosystem level are developed and funded. Forums for lessons learned, training on regional transboundary issues are made available. Strengthened environment leads to a dynamic regional instrument able to aid decisions for maximization o f economic and social impacts, and minimization of environmental impacts. A set of horizontal activities i s launched across sectors and borders in order to stimulate cooperation and capacity building in land and water resources management. A strategic framework for sustainable land and water management i s prepared for the Basin.

70

Objective Category I I Incre-

mental cost

Component Activities

Component 1 Institution Buill Activity 1 1: Operational- ize the Project Implemen- tation Structure at Regional Level Activity 1.2: Operational- ize the Project hplemen- tation Structure at the Na- tional Level Activity 1.3: Project Man- agement Training

Total USD

Million 13 00

Overall Domestic and Global Benefits

Ovetall Domertit Intiemental Cost Benefits Countries wil l be able to strengthen water and environment management without losing development funds for other critical short-term priorities and without losing competitive position. Interventions wil l be more targeted at removing the root causes of threats, thus improving the eff i - cacy and cost-effectiveness of management endeavors. National capacities to implement a holistic resources management method at all levels wi l l be strengthened for improved sustainable management o f the Basin’s resources. Civi l society more responsive to environmental protection measures. Ecological sustainability o f activities in the Basin wil l be better assured, for each country.

Overall Global Incremental Co,t Benefrth Strengthened regional, national, and local institutional capacity in all nine-Basin countries wil l support effective execution capacity for future regional project implementation. Strengthened regional, national, and local institutional capacity for sustainable land and water resource management in the Niger River Basin with an inclusive framework for regional cooperation wi l l be supported through agreements on policy /institutional and legal adjustments at regional and national levels. Harmonized and coherent basin-wide national data collection, and effective data disseminated wil l be valuable capacity for the national and regional decision-makers. Forums with other regional initiatives provide a mechanism to better collaborate and communicate the exchange of good practices and better management o f Basin resources. Public participation in management o f local resources increases ownership by c iv i l society; microgrant-supported community-based activities wil l enable communities to understand the cause and effect o f environmental and land degradation, and tackle priority issues in the Basin directly. A completed transboundary diagnostic analysis of the transboundary water-related environmental issues and root causes across the Basin wi l l be better understood and an action program of legal, policy and institutional reforms and investments wi l l help to address the transboundary land and water issues. A SAP provides a regional framework for sustainable management o f the Basin’s land and water resources.

Costs USD Domestic and Global Benefits Category Mil-

Incre- mental

Cost I temative

~

National-level contributions to the N B A are maintained. Regional capability within N B A and countries in executing and coordinating regional projects within a transboundary context is not put in place. Human resources, operational and technical capacity exist mostly within the N B A for leading, implementing and monitoring transboundary water and environmental projects. Guidelines, expertise and training capacities for transboundary environmental management and facilities exist within NBA. Recruitment of highly qualified consultants and experts to support the ful l program implementation during 4 years by providing guidance and technical assistance. Creation of operational national and local teams in all 9 N B A countries. Guidelines for appropriate training are prepared and training executed for NBA, regional and national experts. Appropriate human capacities developed to promote and support participatory practices. at a l l levels, and to ensure a permanent evaluation and follow-up o f transboundary activities. Appropriate national and local units wi l l be established, equipped and organized in order to e f f i - ciently deliver Project components, give technical assistance and manage program activities. Application o f standardized guidelines for design, coordinated implementation and monitoring of GEF Project activities and strengthened capabilities harmonized and coordinated. Regional, sub-regional, national and local institutions wil l be able to coordinate strategic actions to adequately address degradation o f land and water resources o f the Basin. Training o f staff, and national- and local-level institutions made available and consistent with the overall objective o f the Project.

71

Component 2: Capacity Building B Activity 2 1 Public Educa- 1 Baseline

Baseline

Incre- mental cost

tion and Awareness Pro- I

0.00

0.38

Basin managers do not have a comprehensive understanding of best practices and lessons learned from other intemational waters projects. A forum is held for sharing lessons learned to develop knowledge of and experience for sustainable river basin management for NBA and its national counterparts.

grams for Al l Relevant Stakeholders

B Activity 2.2: Develop and Implement Regional, Na- tional and Local Training Program

Incre- mental cost

GEF Al- ternative

Component 3: Data Managen Activity 3.1: Strategic Assessment for Data and Information Management Activity 3.2: Assess Exist- ing National Data and Data Quality

Framework for a Basin- wide Environmental In- formation System Activity 3.4: Conduct Local, National and Re- gional Information Ex- change and Training Activity 3.5: Facilitate Dialogue for Basin-wide Environmental Manage- ment Activity 3.6: Supplement a Basin-Wide Economic Model with an Environ- mental Dimension

Activity 3.3: Identify a

Component 4: Regional Forui Activity 4.1 : Lessons Leamed and Linkages Activity 4.2: Expand Net- works and Study Tour

It Baseline

Incre- mental cost

GEF Al- ternative

- 1.81

- 1.62

- 3.43

5.05

1.13

6.18

Necessary regional, national, and local human resources and skill-base for implementing a regional project on land and water degradation i s not completely known. National and local capacity and institutions lack necessary expertise and ability to appropriately and sustainably manage the Niger River Basin. Elements put in place for a strategic development plan in the Basin. However, decision on international and national water and land resources remain unsustainable, inducing continued resource degradation. Kno\rlcdec of the issues \ r i l l be not accessible to 311 stakeholders. ETisting capacititj will be ajjcsscd and necessary sailing done for full operation of the Project Appropriate and necessary training of a11 NB.4 and member country personncl in\ ol\ ed in uattr resource5 management and other sectors and issues. Better kno\rledge of and cooperation on transboundary management and re\ ersal of land and uater degradation \\ill be obtained and nccessary information network de\tloped A l l stakeholderi, including communities and \rater users in general will be informed of and con- sulted on major decisions that can affect their livelihoods. and their opinion and knowledge hill be taken into account Efficient and integrated management of Niger Riter Basin water resourccs including inter-sectoral approach. social issues and environmental impacts. Information measures IO inform stakeholders regarding land and water degradation \\ ill be bcttcr designed, implemented, and get full support from \ arious stakeholders. thus impro\ ing global benefits as u e l l as community Iivehhoodj and environment.

Information sharing and benefit from other experiences of river basin management. SBA his limited knowledge of best practices and issues of global significance. Regional and national \rater institutions lack the tools for comprehensive planning and decision- making. and mamgement remains fragmented and unsustainable \Vide portions of the Basin remm uncovered and transboundary issues \rill be neglected. Information on best prxtices for natural resource conservation and manapemcnt under participd- tor} and decentralized manapement structures i s maintained. Though some effort i s made to expand data collection and exchangc. i t remains internuttent and

Study will be made of al l current projects and capitalization of their results on which the new Project can build or use acquired data. National and regional training course for data managers (collectors, processors, interpreters) and data users (policy and decision-makers) will improve quality of data management and dissemination. Necessary transboundary infrastructure including data collection instruments wil l be agreed upon by national governments and further developed to reverse land and water degradation. Capitalization of skills, lessons and experiences on climatological and hydrological data necessary for better knowledge of trends and for monitoring progress. Water resources management i s supported by improved data and the resource i s better undcrstood allowing for improved management decisions, thus preventing further degradation of water resources that may affect global environment. Global benefits will be achieved through basin-wide management of land and water resources and a regional frame for cooperation. Decentralized and efficient management of natural resources i s secured with cross-sectoral implications and benefits. An informational framework for water resources management i s set up, and incorporated into the economic model at regional level and used for planning new initiatives in an adequate manner. Decisions will be made to secure long-term sustainability of investments. Four new countries will be covered by the Project, which provides a basis for their full integration into the NBA. New opportunities and knowledge will emerge as a result of the implementation of pilot projects about best environmental management practices.

72


* Activity 4 3 Regional Forum

Component 5 Demonstration Activity 5.1 : Establish National and Local lnstitu- tional Structures Activity 5.2: Establish Demonstration Pilots Activity 5.3: Implement Demonstration Pilots Activity 5.4: Assess and Share Lessons Activity 5.5: Formulate, Implement, Monitor, and Evaluate

Component 6. TDA and SAP Activity 6.1: Finalize the TDA to Include Remaining Riparian Countries Activity 6.2: Develop the SAP based upon the TDA Activity 6.3: Draft and Validate SAP at National and Regional level Activity 6.4: Engage Do- nors to Implement the SAP

Costs I USD """i"" lion

ternative I

Incre- mental cost

GEF Al- ternative

lgrantl 17.70

- 5.00

- 22.70

I

lobal B

A broader, international network strengthens the collaborative process and information and knowledge exchange. NBA and stakeholders implement lessons and experiences that wi l l be applicable to the Niger River Basin in managing international waters and in reversal o f land and degradation trends.

)gram Current baseline projects have national scope and are sector-specific, lacking a transboundary element. Effort to improve land management, to reduce sedimentation and river degradation i s commenced but no mechanisms available for exchange of information and replication. N o framework for on the ground implementation of activities o f regional character exists. Locally-based efforts difficult to commence due to lack o f public information and knowledge o f best management practices. Microgrant demonstration projects wil l be run as stand-alone projects and no integration into SAP or replication i s possible. Implementation of on the ground activities to consolidate experience in land and water resources management and to establish joint country teams for cooperative work. Development o f Project manuals and determination o f sites, tasks and components on the basis o f technical standards. Preparation o f appropriate Project procurement and disbursement plans on the basis o f existing experience prior to implementation. Participatory approaches wil l be adopted to enhance participation in implementation and use o f local knowledge. Full coordination and exchange of experience to apply best practices and solutions for reversal o f degradation trends. Most land and water degradation issues are transboundary and need ful l cooperation on an agreed time frame, agenda and sharing of experience to enhance global benefits. Communities have the means to implement and improve sustainable resources management practice. Availability o f standards that wi l l be used as input for mid-term and final stage assessment of Project results. Enhanced participation and possibility to replicate microgrant-supported interventions basin-wide on the basis of lessons learned. Solutions and practices adopted to address trends in degradation o f land and international waters.

T h e current preliminary T D A remains limited to the 5 main N B A member countries and ful l Basin TDA i s not developed. Current methodologies. problems and potential for improving land resources management wil l not be taken into account when designing the Project. Use of data and knowledge captured by the TDA and subsequent action wi l l be limited to Project lifespan because o f the lack o f a long-term frame for continuous technical and financial support with regards to transboundary management o f land and water resources. SAP implementation capacity at national level does not exist and SAP recommendations wil l remain unimplemented to a great extent. Only conventional funding channels wi l l be explored. N o regional coordination of fund raising campaigns i s provided. The existing conditions wil l be not conducive to the implementation o f the SAP. National policies, laws, and institutions focus on domestic water issues and not transboundary ones. Extension o f the T D A to all 9 Niger River Basin countries and ful l study and coverage of transboundary issues identified in al l sectors o f land and water management. A full SAP for reversal o f land and water degradation trends i s designed using existing and future data from TDA studies to serve as a platform for negotiating further and longer-term support for implementation o f efficient activities to improve land and water resources management in a sustainable manner. Measures that wi l l be necessary for fu l l implementation o f SAP wil l be designed and integrated into Project activities. Financial provision for a fund raising campaign for fu l l donor support wi l l yield needed additional funding o f SAP activities. Different components of SAP wi l l be validated with the relevant stakeholders, and conditions wil l be created for its successful implementation. Creation of an enabling environment for basin-wide approach for reversing land and water degradation trends and comprehensive understanding o f transboundary issues and root causes for the SAP design. Support for the design of the SAP as part o f the Project wi l l sustain the benefit for global envi-

73


TOTALS

as the SAP implementation procedures are

ordination through the GEF Project

mental management and develop-

74

Annex 10: Project Preparation and Supervision

1. Project Schedule Planned - Project Concept Review April 28,2003 - Initial Proiect Identification Document (PID’, to PIC Ami1 28.2001

\ I A

September 19,2003 - Appraisal mission departure - Negotiations - BoarcURVP approval - Planned Date o f Effectiveness - Planned Date o f Mid-term review

January 19,2004 March 3,2004 May 20,2004 July 1,2004 February 2,2007

- Planned closing date August 3 1,2009 2. Project Preparation Rolehtesponsibility Organization

Team Ousmane Dione Senior Water Resource Management Specialist, Bank, AFTU2

Abdoulaye Ndiaye Andrew Hudson Principal Technical Advisor UNDP Martha Jarosewich-Holder -International Water Resource Management Consultant Bank, AFTU2 Marie-Adele Tchakounte- Program Assistant and Project Focal Point Bank, AFTU2 Sitchet Esther Monier-Illouz Community and Institutional Development Consultant Bank, AFTU2 Rohan Selvaratnam Program Assistant Bank, ECSSD Karen Hudes Senior Counsel Bank, LEGAF Yao Wottor Procurement Specialist Bank, AFTPC Henri Aka Procurement Specialist Bank, AFTPC Mamadou Yaro Financial Management Specialist Bank, AFTFM Bertrand de Chazal Senior Financial Management Specialist Bank, AFTFM Africa Olojoba Environmental Specialist Bank, AFTS3 John Boyle Senior Environmental Specialist Bank, AFTS 1 Abdoul Wahab-Seyni Social Development Specialist Bank, AFTS3 Gordon Appleby Social Development specialist Bank, AFTS4 Jeffrey Lecksell Cartographer Bank, GSDGP Tracy Hart Senior Economist Bank, AFTU2 Wil lem Zijp Quality Assurance Reviewer Bank, AFTOS James Richard Davis Senior Environmental Specialist (Peer Reviewer) Bank, ENV Inesis Kiskis Senior Environmental Specialist (Peer Reviewer) Bank, ECSSD Mohammed Bella Tuga Executive Secretary Niger Basin Authority Gustav Tchoue Director o f Planning and Project Execution Niger Basin Authority Ousmane Diallo Environmental Specialist Niger Basin Authority 3. Preparation assistance: USD million GEF PDF Block A Grant 0.025 GEF PDF Block B Grant 0.350 UNDP-SPPD 0.080 UNDP-TRIB 0.100

Total 0.555

Co-Task Team Leader Regional Coordinator, Co-Task Team Leader UNDP, GEF Africa Region

75

Annex 11: Documents in the Project File

Project Documents

PDF-B Project Brief, GEF/RAF/99/G41/A/lG/50, December 1999.

“Niger River Basin Annotated Bibliography,” S.R. Shanthikumar, July 2000.

Procurement Capacity Assessment Baseline o f Niger Basin Authority, March 2002.

Financial Management Capacity Assessment Baseline o f Niger Basin Authority, January 2002.

Preliminary Country Reports for Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (TDA): Benin, Guinea, Mali , Niger, and Nigeria (e.g., “Assessment and Analysis o f Hydro-Environmental, Eco- logical, and Socioeconomic Aspects o f the Niger Basin in Niger”)

Preliminary Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (in English and French) completed for PDF- B phase, March 2001.

PDF-B Regional Workshop Final Report, (in English and French), April 2002.

Project Br ief submission o f Full-Sized Project to GEF Council (PIMS 260), UNDP, M a y 2003.

Preparation Reports (four volumes) for NBA Program-Framework for Protection Against Hy - drous Erosion and Sand Encroachment in the Niger River Basin, supported by the African Development Bank, February 2003.

GEF Project, Environmental and Social Management Framework, GEF Project, Project Im- plementation Manual.

GEF Project , Microgran t Operational Manual,.

Other Documents

A-V-B Operation Kossou: Development o f the Bandama Valley.- Abidjan: The Bandama Valley Development Authority, 1971. - 32p.,

General Plan for Water Management o f the Middle Guinea. Final Document, Volume 5 B: Water Management “Near Future”. - Prague: Polytechna, Oct. 1981. - 109p., Tab, Maps; LG.: Fre; PROJECT: OMM-PNUD-GUI-74-014

General Plan for Water Management o f the Middle Guinea. Final Document, Volume 5 C: Water Management “Inventory”. - Prague: Polytechna, Oct. 1981. - 182p., Tab, Maps; LG.: Fre; PROJECT: OMM-PNUD-GUI-74-014

76

General Plan for Water Management o f the Middle Guinea. Final Document, Volume VI: Water Supply T o Some Major Towns. - Prague: Polytechna, Oct. 1981. - 112p., Tab, Maps; LG.: Fre; PROJECT: OMM-PNUD-GUI-74-014

General Plan for Water Management o f the Middle Guinea. Final Document, Volume 7: H y - dro Agricultural Schemes. - Prague: Polytechna, Oct. 1981. - 226p., Tab, Maps; LG.: Fre; PROJECT: OMM-PNUD-GUI-74-0 14

General Plan for Water Management o f the Middle Guinea. Final Document, Volume 8: Economic And Financial Evaluation. - Prague: Polytechna, Oct. 1981. - 225p.+ Annexes, Tab, Maps; LG.: Fre; PROJECT: OMM-PNUD-GUI-74-0 14

France. SociCt6 Grenobloise d’itudes et d’application Hydraulique, Grenoble, 00036 Access No.0 129 1

France. SociCtC Grenobloise d’ktudes et d’application Hydraulique, Sogreah, Grenoble, 0003,Access No.01292

France. SociCtC Grenobloise d’Ctudes et d’application Hydraulique, Sogreah, Grenoble 00038, Access No.01293

Mathematical Model o f River Niger: Topographic and Cartographic Works. Niger AutoritC du Bassin du Niger, ABN, Niamey,France. Institut GCographique National, IGN, Paris

Multilateral Assistance to NBA: Reports o f the Works, Services and Specifications, Contract No.DP/AF/83/027/VAGOW. - Niamey: ABN, [S.D.]. - 38 P., Tab.; LG.; Fre

Prospecting Study o f Niger River Basins: Maloum Basin. Annex 2. Grenoble: SOGREAH, M a y 1976.- 23p., Tab., Maps

Prospecting Study of Niger River Basins: Ouma Kouanza Basin. Annex 5. Grenoble: SOGREAH, M a y 1976.- 19p., Tab., Maps

Prospecting Study o f Niger River Basins: Kirtachi Basin. Annex 4. Grenoble: SOGREAH, M a y 1976.- 18p., Tab., Maps

Session of the Niger River Commission, 6‘h, 1971, Cotonou, Benin, RNC, February, 1971

Special Summit o f The Niger River Commission: Meeting o f Heads o f State and Government, 26th January 1979. - Niamey

Study on Formulation of Management Models; Pricing and Sharing o f the Costs of Water Re- sources Projects. - Niamey: MULPOC, 1995.-94p., Tab.

Telli, Dial lo Niger. Centre Multinational de Programmation et d’ExCcution de Projet de l a C E A pour 1’Afrique de I’ouest, Mulpoc, Niger AutoritC de Bassin du Niger, ABN, Nia- mey

77

Risk

To roject develo ment ob’ective: Riparians do not successfully or completely establish a transboundary land and water framework for the sustainable development o f ” the To Niger component River Basin. results

Component 1 (WB implementation support) Project management system, though established. i s not ful lv oDerationa1.

S

Risk Risk Mitigation Measure Rating

Component 2 (UNDP implementation support) Despite a public information campaign, local and national riparian capacity and awareness of land and water issues remain negligible.

Component 3 (WB implementation support) The regional, national and local data and information management dialogue and exchange are not improved and coordinated, requiring additional harmonization and coordination. Component 4 (UNDP implementation support) Regional linkages and networks are not established, with growing disparity between riparian stakeholders, the NBA and other regional Ba- sin organizations.

M

N

Component 5 (UNDP implementation support) Though the demonstration and Microgrant Program was piloted, i t s findings are neither successful nor validated, with further scaling up o f the Microgrant Program o f questionable value. Component 6 (WB implementation support) TDA i s completed; however the SAP i s incomplete, thus not capturing the critical sustainable path, and resources needed, for transboundary development o f the Basin’s land and water resources.

M

N

Riparian governments have agreed to GEF Project goals through Project preparation workshops. Risk mitigation lies in realistic scheduling o f mocess. timetable and budeet.

The focus w i l l be on meeting Basin’s human capacities through a variety o f training and capacity building options.

Target groups, communities, and local messages may be selected by each individual member state in order to balance riparian ownership and a Basin agenda. The Basin campaign may be linked to a larger environmental agenda and budget. The component has been designed so as to support the riparians in developing data sharing mechanism(s) per stated needs, without forced movement to single-format protocols. A basin-wide economic model should be one o f onen access. Targeted component activities w i l l work with policymakers and technical specialists, with closest linkages to Basin stakeholders, through engaging them in a study tour and a regional forum to exchange lessons with other regional basin organizations, and to strengthen the communication capacity o f the regional networks. Microgrant Program to be based on similar interventions for community productivity on land and in water, such as successful community-driven development projects in several o f the Basin member states.

Member state and donor support expressed through the Strategic Vision process as a baseline for cooperation. TDA and SAP draft circulations and stakeholder workshops as an opportunity for voicing input to, and signaling to Basin support o f SAP process.

78

Annex 13: Niger River Basin At A Glance

Development diamond'

Life expectancy

Niger River Basin at a glance 12/20/03

I POVERTY and SOCIAL

2002 Population, mid-year (millions) GNI per capita (Atlas method, US$) GNI (Atlas method, US$ billions)

Average annual growth, 1996-02

Population (%) Labor force (%)

Most recent estimate (latest year available, 1996-02) Poverty ("k of population below national poverty line) Urban population (% of total population) Life expectancy at birth (years) Infant mortality (per 7,000 live births) Child malnutrition (% of children under5) Access to an improved water source (% of population) Illiteracy ("A of population age 75t) Gross primary enrollment (% of school-age population)

,

Male Female

KEY ECONOMIC RATIOS and LONG-TERM TRENDS

GDP (US$ billions) Gross domestic investmenffGDP Exports of goods and ServiceslGDP Gross domestic savingslGDP Gross national savings/GDP

Current account balance/GDP Interest payments/GDP Total debt/GDP Total debt service/exports Present value of debt/GDP Present value of debt/exports

(average annual growth) GDP GDP per capita Exports of goods and services

1982

74.8 20.9 22.6 15.0

-12.0 2.5

37.7 22.0

1982-92

2.5 -0.5 3.5

1992

69.5 16.7 30.7 15.9 10.5

0.2 3.6

93.8 26.7

1992-02

3.1 0.4 3.8

Niger River Basin

222.3 330 72.6

2.5 2.6

41 46

113 30 60 42 73 81 64

2001

76.4 18.6 36.2 19.3 15.4

4.8 1.6

82.5 13.0 69.1

179.1

2001

3.3 0.8 1.1

Low & middle income

5,236.6 1,170

6,101.7

1.4 1.7

42 65 60

79 23

103 107 99

2002

80.5 20.5 33.6 17.3 13.6

-1.7 1 .o

78.5 11.0

2002

1.3 -1 .o

Development diamond'

Life expectancy

T 4

1 Gross h GNI

per * primary capita enrollment

Access to improved water source

-= "*Niger River Basin

Low & middle income group

T 4

Gross h GNI per * primary capita enrollment

Access to improved water source

-= "*Niger River Basin

Low & middle income group

Economic ratios'

Trade

T I

Investment Domestic t--i.

savings

, - I Indebtedness

j r Y S -.d' Niger River Basin - - Law R middle inromp nrniin

STRUCTURE of the ECONOMY

(% of GDP) Agriculture Industry

Services

Private consumption General government consumption Imports of goods and services

Manufacturing

(average annual growth) Agriculture Industry

Services

Private consumption General government consumption Grass domestic investment Imports of goods and services

Manufacturing

1982

30.5 27.7 10.7 41.8

70.8 14.2 28.5

1992

28.3 38.0 9.1

33.8

68.4 15.8 31.6

1982-92 1992-02

3.6 4.2 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.8 1.5 2.8

-0.3 4.3 0.4 -1.4 -1.9 1.9 -6.0 5.8

2001

33.8 27.9

7.7 38.3

61.7 19.0 35.5

2002

64.5 18.3 36.8

2001 2002

2.8 5.2 3.0 2.8 0.5 3.3 1.1

13.0

1 Growth of investment and GDP (%) b

' Growth of exports and imports (%) I

Note: 2002 data are preliminary estimates.This table was produced from the Development Economics central database. Niger River Basin includes Benin, Burkina Faso, Camerm, Chad, CBte dlvoire, Guniea, Mali, Niger, and Nigeria.

* The diamonds show four key indicators in the country (in bold) compared with its income-group average. If data are missing, the diamond will be incomplete

79

Annex 14: Statement of Loans and Credits

Original Amount in USD Millions

Difference between expected and actual

disbursements

Project ID FY Purpose IBRD IDA SF GEF Cancel. Undisb. Orig. Frm. Rev’d

PO72881 2003 [3TJ BEAC Regional Payment System 0.00 14.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.60 1.12 0.00 PO70073 2003 2Nile Transboundary Environmental Action 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.00 0.00 8.00 0.02 0.00

PO63683 2001 [3E] REGIONAL TRADE FACILITATION PROJECT

0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.01 0.08 0.00

PO54884 2001 [3W] BCEAO REGIONAL PAYMENT 0.00 9.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.55 0.03 0.00

PO36037 1999 OIL SPILL CONTINGENCY 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 3.15 0.00 0.28 3.55 0.00 PO00001 1996 COMM CONSERV & WILDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.40 0.03 0.86 1.86 0.00

Total: 0.00 28.90 0.00 15.55 0.03 27.30 6.66 0.00

SYSTEMS

STATEMENT OF IFC’s He ld and Disbursed Portfolio

In Mi l l ions of U S Dollars

FY Approval Company

Committed Disbursed

IFC IFC Loan Equity Quasi Partic. Loan Equity Quasi Partic.

1999

1999

2003

1993

2002

0

200 1

2000/01

2002

2002

200 1 /04

AIF

AIF (Mgmt)

AIFH

Africa Fund

Africap

Energy Afr Ltd

MACS

MSICIH

Osprey

SABCO

TV Africa

0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

30.00 0.00 0.00

10.00 0.00

70.96

0.20

6.62

7.25

2.00

38.02

4.00

0.00 0.25

10.00

0.22

0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 20.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

25.89

0.10 0.27

7.25

0.46

38.02

0.00

0.00 0.25

10.00

0.04

0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

20.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total portfilio 40 00 139 52 20 00 0 00 000 8228 2000 0 00

~ ~~~~~

Approvals Pending Commitment

FY Approval Company Loan Equity Quasi Partic

1999 AIF

2003 African Lakes

200 1 MACS 2001 PAIP

0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04

0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00

Total pending commitment: 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.04

80

Annex 15: Letters of Endorsement Letter of Endorsement - Benin

March 5,2004

Mr. ('allisti, Madavo Vice President. Africa Rcgion The World IJank I81 8 1 1 Slreel, N W. Washington D.C. 20433

Denr Sir;

Subject: CiEF Grant Acreemeiit~ Reversing Land and Wale!: Uewtdiilion Trends in the Niger Kiter Wasirr Project

1. We icfcr to the prvpuvod Global Envirownent Fad i t hc twen the Interttalional Dwk fur Rcconatniction and Devel Niger Bitsin Authority (tiic Kecipicnt) and the Hank acting in i t s capaciti NS Rdininistrator of the funds for exectition o f the abuvc-ref'erenced Proiect as described iii tlnne..: 2 to the Cininr Ayreenienr

2. W e cortlirin tlint the ( iEk iiinds availahle for financing the I'iojcct ma> be allocated dircclly IO the Rucipient, in accordance t+ith the fenns and coiiditinns of thc (iraiit Agreement

? I he Kepiihlic of Henin I:, n tnem bel ( t i and a signatory LU rhe I'onvention Creating the Niger Ijdsin Auihorit> of the 21*' day ni'Ko\emher tY80, We are prepared to take a l l iicccssury steps and to elintiirate niiy ohciailen. hi) as tti eriable the Recipient to w n y out thc Project, and LO lliiil end shall pruniptly establish the IYationd Project 'I'eom, including the appt'intnirnt of'n C'ooidinatw and Accoiintuitt Assistant.

4. knvinmteriial aiid Socis1 Maiiagcmvnt i riv"wrk dated March 3, 2004. ct,nfim1 that \vu \LI11 ofSchediile 4 to the (

5 I he lieprihlic of Renin shall pr t ic ipate in the prepuralitw n F n ~ ~ ~ n s b ~ L i n ~ ~ ~ Diaynustii: A i ~ ~ i I j ~ i ~ lhdt &ill d rcy t imi appruoch tu gru thg water demand, divcrsion.;, firhcrics. p o w r generation, irrigation. ttater quality, future pollution threats, includiiq t h r m that ma) derive from increased oil exploration. drilling, prtductiun and transport. cfflrtcnt srxidartls, and tloodplairi manageiiwnt

% e conliiin tiitit lie K c c p c i i t SIKIII iinpleineiit [he Project in We also

ipstc joiiitl> in the mid-tcmm review referred to in paragraph 2 rust Fund Ciranr Agreement.

81

h 1 1 8 crlder 10 ciiwre su~\atiiahility uf shared resources, The Rcpuhlic of T h i n will take into account !lie ies i i l ts of the I ranshoundauq Diagnostic Analysis in Formulating, together wit11 the other Basin ripaiians, ii Strategic Action Program

82

Letter of Endorsement - Burkina Faso

March 9, ZOO4

Mr C';tllisto Mddavo Vice Prcstdeiit, Africa Kegion '1 Iw World Banh I 8 18 I1 Street, N. w Wsshlngiotl IXV 701.33

Uear Sir:

Stibjsct: GEF Grant hwccnicnl: Recarsitin Ltuid and Water Dcmdu t iq Trends in the NiPer River Basin Protect

1. We rcfei LO the proposed G l o b a l Environnicnt Facility ( C W ) Grant Agreement bctwcen the International Bank for Rccotistriictictn and 1) nt (the Bank) and the Nigw Basil? huthoiity (the Recipient) and the Ban in i l s capacity as Atlitiiiiistnitc~ uf the funds for execution o f the above-refei c i vxd Project as iiescrihed iii Aniicx 2 tu the Grant Agreement.

2. Wc confirm that the GEF funds availahle for lirilcncitig the Projwt may be allocated directly to the Recipient, in accordance with the t e r m and conditions tif the Gritit A p x " t i t .

3 . Burkina !;as(> i s a tricitibcr o l and a signatory to the Convention (kating the Niger fh.sin Atithoriiy o f the 21'' day of h"ovcriiber !%(I. \"ic are prepared to take ali nccessary steps and lo eliniiniite m y rhslaclcs, so i is lo cwb le the KeciI the Project, atid tu that end shall promptly establish the National Project ilie appointment of a Coordinator and Accoimtarit A

4. We confimi that tlic Recipient sitail implcnicrrt tlic. Project in iiccordancc with the Environriiental and Social Manogcmcnt Frmcwork dated Narcli 3, 2004. We also continn that we will participiite jointly in the titid-tern1 review rei'etred to iii p;wagraph 2 of Scliedulu 4 to the GEF Trust Fund Grant Ageemeni.

5. Rtirkina Faso dial1 participate in tlic preparation nf a '1'1-:inshoiiitdniy Ihyi tost ic Antilysis that w i l l take a regional qsproacli to growing water denistiti, diversions, fisheries, power gencr:itiori, irrig;kiiim, water q i i d i t ~ . A!tiirc poliiitioii thresrs, incltiiling those that turiy derive front incrcased oil expinratinri. drilling7 production tint1 transptxt, e I 'fl I i en t s iandarcls, aitd !l ooti p lai t i nianagen t er t r .

83

Letter of Endorsement - Chad

March 5, 2004

blr. Callisto Madavo Vicc Pic.&!ai:, A!iica Regioir The World Uenk 1 S i 8 H Street, N.W. W3shington D.C. 20431

Dcar Sir:

1 . U e d e r io the prtiposed Glohal E.nvironmcni Fdcitity ((iirf:) Grant Agrccinmt between the Iniern&titlw~aI &ink for Reconstruction and Dzvekipinent ([he Rank) and the Niger nabin Aui\ ionty (the I leciptent) arid the k ink &ling in i ts ciip>IcIty a9 Administralor of the fund5 fbr execution 01' thc aboi e-nkrsnccd Project ;IS described is i

Annex 2 Lo the Grant Agreeincnt

2 funds avitihbk fbr financing the I'rqject may be allocated directly to the Recipient, in accordance with the krnis and conditions or the Grant Agreenient.

3. The Kcptiblic of Chad i s a rnemtlcr of and 21 signntrwy tti the Con\rention Cleating the Niger Hiisill Authority of the 71" <la, u1'No\emhcr 1981) '1Ve are prcpared to t&x all iiccessarr s t q x and to eliiiiinaie any ubstacles, 30 as to entlhle the ltecipicnr to varrv out ilte f'ropxi. and to that end sliall pronipfly establish the National Projeci 'i'cain, including the appointiiicnt ol'd C'nortltnirtar diid A~~ i i u i i t d i i t Assisiaiit.

3. Wc confirm tliiil the Rccipicnt shall itiiplenient the Project in uccordancc Riih the I,in iruniiiLiit6ii JIIJ Stxi,l XLiiugeiiitiii I'rmitnuih d ~ t c d btnrcli 3* 2004 %'e d i o confirin tli'it w iitll par t iq< i tc jointly in the mid- temi rcuien rrrcrrcd h i i n paragraph 2 of Schedule 4 to the C i t b I rust fund Crrm Agreenicnt

5 1 he Keiwbltc of C'hatl shnll pAcipate in !tic p r c p r k m of a 1 riinsboundarj i)iagiic+tic tiialysis that ..\ill take a regionill approac!i to growing v.attr c iewwr l di\crricins fisticrwS. p w e r yeneratioil irrtg'\tirin Mater qti.dit), future pullutic*n threat\, incltiditlg those thai inu? cierive from irrcrcosed oi l cuploration, drilling, prodwtirui aid trdiisport, e l fluciit a t d ~ i d ~ , and flotrdpintn inanagcriii.iii.

We coiilirin thai the (

85

6. In order lo ensure sustainahility of' shurcd resources, 'i'lie Republic of Chad will t a l e intc? itccouni l l ie results OF the Transboundary Diagnostic Analyci3 in fumiulating, togethcr uith the other I3asin ripariais, a Strategic Action Program.

Yours truly,

86

Letter of Endorsement - Guinea

March 5,2004

Mr. ("allisto Z ldavo Vice i'residen\. Africa RPgion l'lie World Dtink 1818 11 Street. N.W Uiasliington DX'. 211433

Dear Sir:

Subject: C Z I 3 Grant Awcemciit: Rcvcrsrnr! Land-and Water Dewadation I rends in the Niger Itiver Basin Prciiect

1 We refer to the pioposcd Global If i iviroiin~cni Fwiliiy (CiEF) Grant Agreement hetween the International Hank for Reconstruction sild Dcveiopmcnt (the Bank) a i d ihe GSer Basin Authorit) (the Recipient) a i d the 13aiik acting 1 i i its capacilj as Administrator UT the finids lor execution of the above-rcfetenced i'roject as described iii Annex 2 lo the Grant Agrecmcnt.

2 We confinn that $lie <;I I. hind5 ;ivailahlc fix financing the Project niay be allocated directij iu the Iteccpiont i n acc(v dance with tlrc terms arid sonditrons irf tlic (icmt Agreeinant.

3 1 hc Reprthlic of (iurnea I S it iiicmbcr o f and a signatory to the Convention Creating the higcr Hasin Authority nf the 21*' d e j of Kovcmhcr 1'380 We we prepercd LO take dl necessary steps aiiti i o eliii i iticik <in) obstacles, so 4s to enable the Recipient to cari) out the Project, mtl IU th,u end shall promptly e s t a b k l i the Yational i"&r I cain, itic~ridtng the appoint!ncnl of d r (iordindtor and A~eo~inl:cnI Assislunt

1. We confirm il ia1 tlic Itccipieiil 41all i inplcncnt the h j e c t in accordance with the b i b tniiirnsntd "I Soci<il Mvlnnay~.nieni I rmewtirk dated March 3, 2004, Wc dbo confirm that we wi l l [)rlRiClp(itE loitill) in tlic inid-term review referred to in pdiagraph 2 of Schedule 4 10 the GbP I rust bund Grmt Agreeruent.

5 I'he lieptibiic of Guinea .ihall IvrtiCip& in the prcpuration uf' i t 1 ianshoundary Didgnostic 4nalysis that sill take a regional appruilcli tu growing hater dcniand. divcrGims, fislierics, p o ~ e r generettim, 117 igation, w t e r quality. Future pollutioii IkrcGili. Including tlioSc lhai nioq &rive li.oni incicctsrd oil exploration, drilling. production and i imspoi i. elllutnt s ~ i i n d d r d z , and Iludpi,iin inrinagenisi~(.

87

6 111 order tt, ensure swtainahility o f sharcd resources, I he I<cpublic of(iuinca nil1 ~ i k e into account the results of the 'I'ransbouidaly Uraylostic Analysis i r l hmtulatlilg, togethcr with the o i l ie r Ifasin riparians. a Strategic Action Prograan.

Yours truly, i - 7 I

i

88

Letter of Endorsement - Mali

\\ 1 i'l 3 >a>eIlP MlNlSTERE DE L'EGONOMIE

ET DES FINANCES

SECRETARIAT GENERAL

R~PUBLIQUE DU MALI UN PEUPLE - UN BUT - UNE FQI

Bamako, le 1 0 MAR 2004

Monsieur le Priitsidmt,

J'di I tiooncur de b"O& Iransmettre la kttre par laquelle le ~ ~ u v ~ r ~ ~ c ~ l F : n ~ tfu Mali con'irrw son erigaycn?ent dans le projet clu Fonds pour 1~~nvirc)nnemen~ P.4otidial (FEM) (( inversion des Tendances a la degradatiort des terres et des m t i x dam le tpassir! t i i i tlnuve Niger N et dbclare accepter le Secretariat Executif de 1"Autnrite clu Bassin du Niger (AUN) CU~:II'IC, rccipieritfairft cfe5 aides versees par le f EM au bim dc ~e prqel et garanttl au %:c+eiariat Executif ma totale assistance dam la nws eir muvre dri projet sur IP terntorrc du Mait en accord w e e I'esprtt et la lcttre des c l r ~ c u m ~ r ~ t s uu prole!

Monsieur

An1 pi hatims - Mme le Reprbsontant Rbsident de la Banque Mondiale au Mali - ABN

" MMEE

1% Prbsident, a i'assuranca de

89

i

--

gb& Projet FEM Bassin du Niger Inversion dcs Tendances B la degradation des teires et des 03ux dans le Wassin du ficuve NiQFtr

Dans le cadre de I'objet cite, J'ai I hannetir tie vous infor:ntsr (~ue les pays riirmtxes de I'Autorile du Bassin du Niger (ABN) b6n6ficieront a cornfiler du I"' ~d lu t 2004, de I'appui financier rlu Fonds pour I'Environnemenl R4orttlral (Ff Mf d un ~ ~ ' ~ r t t a n t de US $ 13 nitliions

A cet cffet, il est deinandh sfu Ministre des Finaitce~ de ctmque Etat nx"rt= de faire parvenir Lourant fewer 2004, du President r,e la Baiiiiue Fhoniliale me letlre r l Pngagemenr (voir mod8le ci joint) pour le Pru1e.L

Aussi VOL15 saurais-]e gr& do toutes les dispostlicat~, ult l t3t; qdi1 LWS tr~rivierirliait de faire piendrr a celtc fin

! e VOIIS ieinercic de vnlrt! culi,hor G4ttrtrr

I

1

90

Letter of Endorsement - Niger

March .5,201)4

1 We rel'er to the prupoied Glitbal Xinvironmeni Facility (GEF) Grant Agrcctncnt between tlic Itttc.mational Bank for R c c ~ ) n s ~ ~ u c ~ i ~ i ~ and Development {the Bank) and thc Niycr I h i n Autliority (ttir Ilecipiciit) md the Hank acting i n i t s capacity as Admiriistrillor ot the ti intis h r execution o f the ahow-rcferenced Project as described in Anne\ 2 to thc (irarii Agreement

2 U'e confirm that tile CiEF fitiids asutlahk for financirip the I'roject i r i q he al l~ ic~t tcd direct11 to t l ie Recipiicnt 111 xcurdance Rilh tl ie tcriiis and conditions of thc C itant hpret'iiieat

3 nieiiiher of and a signatory to thc Cowt.ention Crcating the Niger 13asin 4uthurity o f t h e 21" day o f Nocember 1980 We nrc prepared to take nil necessary slcps mtl to cliiriinate rlnj obstades, sn as to eiwble the Recipient to c x r y out lie Propct, i t i i t f to that crtd shall promptly establish the National Project Team, ~ricliiiitiig lie appmitmcnt of d l'oordiiiatot aiid Accountant As

4. Enviioriiiieiit'il ".i Soci6il Managenwrit F r m e w r k dilled March 3, 2004 coiifiriii thrlt n e nil1 <I t Schedulc 4 11, the I

5 I he RepLihliL or Viger .;hall pinicipatc in the pieparattori of a '1ranshouiidnry that w i l l tahc a rcgional approtlch to yrowrng water demand.

tfiveir;icin\. i i4 ie i te4, p m e r gcrieraticrti, irrigation, water yuafity. future pcilltition threats, includtn): ft iosc 1hdt may derive from increased oil explorarton, drilling, prvductii~ii and [ i m + o I i , i i j i t t i i i i Ji' i l lJadi. d i d i l~~oJpIain ii~anagemeirt

I lit. iicpubhc uf Niger i s

&'e conlimm tliet the llcciprent shall implement tlie Projt'ct in accordance with the We iilsct

icipate Iciritiy iii ihc mid-term revie\\ referred to in paragraph 2 1 rust Piitid Ctiarit Agreement

e..-- *----- -

91

h In order t o enstire sustainahiliiy of shared rcwurccs, flit Kcpublic of Niger will tnkc into mmtinf the results or tire Trarisbounditry 1)ragnostic Analysis in Flm"ting. togi.t1.ier with the othcr Hasin riperiaas, a Stratcgic Action hgram.

Yours tnily,

92

Annex 16: STAP Technical Roster Review

Final and Preliminary Reviews Reversing Land and Water Degradation Trends in the Niger River Basin

FINAL, DOWNSTREAM REVIEW NO. 1:

1. Overall impression - The Project Brief and Annexes (PB&A) have been revised to concur with comments made in the two earlier re-

views. Apart f rom a modified version o f the PB&A, responses to particular questions in the “upstream STAP Ros- ter Technical Reviews” have been given in Annex E. Some important issues have been clarified in Annex E, viz. the relations and complementarities o f SAP and SDAP; the conditions under which the microgrant program i s organised; the role o f the Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC); and, that i t i s a four year project. I am also pleased to note, “...Letters o f endorsement are in preparation”. In terms o f substance, it i s also appreciated that “ ... land and water tenure, urbanisation and other sector issues [are] to be addressed in the SAP SDAP process”. The same applies to Rain Water Harvesting and other specific interventions. There are still some issues that need to be clarified, which w i l l be presented in the sections below. An overall impression i s that the Project addresses serious problems in the Niger River Basin, with grave implications for present and future generations, in the basin as well as beyond. A second reading o f the (revised) documents reinforces the impression that the Project enjoys wide support f rom the riparian countries.

A strengthening o f the mechanisms that could forge a better co-ordination between national and community institutional arrangements, on the on hand, and regional structures on the other, i s most important. Concurrence with NEPAD, ALWMI, LCBC, etc. adds relevance to the project. A most pertinent issue in the Niger Basin i s the ongoing land and water degradation and the significant reduction, and regional shift, in the water resources in recent decades in combination with land degradation and increasing pollution. A dwindling resource base and a continuous rapid increase o f the population i s most problematic combination. If allowed to continue unabated, these alarming trends w i l l have accelerating devastating effects on the environment as well as on society. They have already resulted in tensions in the basin. So far, i t seems that tensions at the international level have not been severe, but they could very well mount. In addition, the link between poverty and environmental degradation could be cemented. The Project Components are o f direct relevance in this regard: Efforts to strengthen institutional arrangements (Capacity building - Component 2), data and information collection and analyses (Data Management - Component 3), Regional Forum (Component 4) and the Microgrants (Compo- nent 5). Many o f the efforts to reverse the trends should be designed at a regional scale and then be translated into actions, dialogues and evaluations at the lower levels. At the same time, the importance of community-based approaches i s underlined in the PB&A.

Management o f the Project i s s t i l l not quite clear. In the Project Executive Summary (PES), i t i s mentioned that “The Project w i l l be executed by an executing agency on behalf o f the NBA Executive Secretariat who w i l l be responsible for supporting NBA Executive Secretariat.. ..”(Under: 5. Institutional Coordination & Sup- port). Apart from peculiarities o f formulation, i t i s not shown how the responsibilities of the executing agency w i l l be coordinated with the PMU, which w i l l be ‘’ ...p rimarily responsible for project implementation”. The difference between “execution” and “implementation” needs to be made explicit. In Table 1, Annex J, the executing agency i s missing. According to the same Table and in the text, i t seems that the PMU w i l l have both implementing/executing obligations and be the key agent responsible for monitoring. Monitoring, in tum, i s the basis for Project evaluation and, thus, for correction o f policy. This implies a double role for PMU, which could be problematic. I n Annex E (Response to STAP Technical Review) it i s noted, ”. . , The staffing o f the P M U wi l l be o f the highest caliber, competitively selected staff to assist in Project implementation”. That is well and good. What w i l l happen at the end of the four-year period?

- -

2. Relevance and priority -

-

-

3. Approach -

-

93

- The Niger River Basin Task Force i s another unit proposed to be part o f the management structure. I t i s supposed to serve as ‘.. A steering committee in an advisor capacity . . .”. The members are supposed to come from, among others, the executing agency. The member representing the executive agency would therefore be both an advisor and an executor. When reading the documents, i t appears that there i s a certain amount o f overlap o f functions between the units and that the roles given to the various units in the management structure should be more clearly identified and separated. In the previous Project Brief and Annexes, the role of legislation was highlighted and the importance o f enforcement. In the revised version, I have not been able to find a similar concern. Maybe this i s due to the fact that legal issues are part o f the institutional arrangements. I t is , however, relevant to make a special note about the significance o f the legal system or the legal principles. To the extent that the different riparian countries have legal systems, which do not match, i t should be a matter o f priority to address those differences that are contradictory. This i s important in order to reduce possible conflicts between the riparians in the future and to have a system and an arena where potential conflicting demands may be dealt with. If, for example, country X intends to go ahead with a particular project, e.g. a dam or an imgation project, which country (-ies) Y, Z. op- pose, a common legal framework or some agreed upon principles, would be important. In the documents, i t i s mentioned that Nigeria i s facing a critical situation in the energy sector and may want to increase i t s hydroelec- tric production. Hence, they do not want to have reductions in the f low in the river, which has implications for what Nigeria w i l l support or accept in terms o f water utilization in upstream countries. The creation o f a Regional Forum (Component 4) i s interesting. I am sure i t wi l l be o f great help. I t might be useful to also create a “Regional NGO Forum”, Le. a meeting place for the NGOs involved in the Project. In the light o f the difficulties that have been faced to involve local communities (Project Brief, p. 25), it i s vital that the NGOs are supported, since they are the direct links to communities. The selection o f NGOs i s also a crucial step. From the documents, i t seems that there is, yet, no clear focus in water policy with regard to the sectors o f society, which have a significant impact on water resources. On pages 7 - 8 in the Project Brief, i t i s mentioned that “Water resources initiatives are mostly tied to new water supply and sanitation projects ...” i.e. to the sector which has a low consumptive use o f water. If this i s so, there i s a need for initiatives. which refer to the sectors of society with a heavy consumptive use and/or activities, which have effects on f low (regulation). The Global Water Partnership w i l l be an important partner in this regard (see page 31, Project Brief).

4. Objectives The objectives are formulated in qualitative terms, which give a general picture o f what might be accom- plished. Considering the character of the project, this i s reasonable. The relation to other regional, national and local development efforts have become more clearly in the revised proposal. A valid motivation for the ar- rangement of data management has been added in the revised version.

As mentioned in my previous evaluation, the documents provide a good picture o f the situation and important trends. Justification for this project i s a strong need for increased capacity at various levels in the Basin to reverse the trends. So far, capacity at regional level i s weak. The presentation i s clear and valid in these regards. I also note that there is s t i l l a lack o f information about the recent or contemporary situation, for instance, in the case o f urbanisation. The same comment can be made about the NGO sector. Perhaps most important i s the need for an elaborate discussion about poverty; how to reach the poor; how to facilitate that programs w i l l not only mean a certain relief in the daily struggle to survive, but that the poor would be given opportunities to play a bigger role in development o f society. in production in service sectors etc. Again, i t i s important that legal provisions are used in a pro-active manner.

The documents give clear indications o f Government commitment and I believe that letters o f endorsement are being produced. Collectively, Governments w i l l contribute with USD 2.14 mil l ion to the Incremental Cost budget, mainly in kind. Wor ld Bank and UNDP contributions in the baseline and GEF Alternative scenarios are substantially much higher. I suppose that a large proportion o f these have to be repaid and, thus, could be seen as govemment commitments. The intention o f the Project to strengthen regional collaboration. Regional collaboration i s essential for reduction o f tensions, to foster exchange and i t facilitates donor support. There are, o f course, r i sks associated with the project. But the r isks associated with a policy where n o actions are taken to support declared ambitions to build regional capacity would be greater.

-

-

-

-

-

5. Background and justification -

-

-

6. Government commitment and sustainability -

-

-

7. Activities

94

- Activities w i l l be organized in relation to the six Project components. Sequence i s logical.

Please, see m y previous review.


A strategy for follow-ups after the project i s essential.



Please, see m y previous review

I am pleased with comments in Annex E.

8. Project funding

9. Replicability

10. Time frame

11. Global environmental benefits and goals of the GEF

12. Rationale for GEF support

13. Secondary issues to be addressed

14. Additional comments

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Windhoek, Februaly 23, 2003 Jan Lundqvist, Professor ([email protected])

FINAL, DOWNSTREAM REVIEW NO. 2: Upstream STAP reviews were undertaken by me and another STAP International Waters Expert in early January.

The project team based on comments received, including through these reviews, clarified and detailed elements o f the project design. Some modification o f the Project has also been done, mainly concerning the significance and content of the different components. I was invited to provide a final review based on the revised document.

As the main project framework including the project objectives etc. has not changed to any considerably extent, many o f m y comments in m y upstream review are s t i l l valid. I wi l l therefore only provide comments related what i s resulting f rom the clarification and modification.

1. Overall Impression M y overall impression o f the project remains positive. The stronger emphasis on capacity building, in-

cluding at local level, by a more developed Component 5, which would help local communities understanding and combating land and water degradation is an improvement that would hopefully result in a more sustainable situation even after the four year project. Comparing the text describing the different activities under the different components in the project brief with that in the Annexes, however, sometimes is a bit confusing. I t seems as the revised structure o f activities i s not fully reflected in the different annexes, such as Table 5 on Incremental costs in Annex A or in thz Project design summary in Annex B. This might be a technicality but to achieve effective implementation the project documentation needs to show conformity.

M y current concems regard the fairly complex administrative structure for the project, which seems to have developed into something that i s even more complex than in the previous version o f the project. I t is, i f such a complex structure shall really serve the purpose to achieve effective project implementation, extremely important to have in place efficient reporting systems to ensure the issue o f accountability. T o achieve transboundary results the links between local - national - regional levels must be strong, efficient and well function- ing.

M y second concem i s a technical issue. Technical terminology appearing in the text i s sometimes confusing. I t might be a result o f misunderstanding but terms used in the text may call for activities that are not ful ly efficient to combat land and water degradation in the area. The text is, for instance consequently using the term “siltation” instead of “sedimentation”. The latter would include deposition o f &l type of material, the first one only very fine-grain material and to prevent adverse impacts would require very different activities. The term “sand salutation” i s an unknown term, which I assume should be substituted by either “sand transport” or “sedimentation o f sand”, which o f course have different implications. “Hydro-erosion’’ i s another unknown term, which, would i t exist, should imply erosion b y any kind o f water, ground- or surface water, moving or still water. This i s technically impossible and I assume that the term to be used should be “fluvial erosion”, which i s erosion by running water. Annex A i s in describing the Global Environmental Objective using the term “hydro- ecological”, which again i s a confusing unknown term implying ecology in pure water. I t i s used to describe ecological elements (systems?) o f the Basin and would rather refer to both freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems.

95

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

The mis-use o f geomorphological terminology might just be a result o f misunderstanding or ignorance but should not be allowed to influence the real activities o f the project. Relevance and priority I continue to see the project as timely and urgent. Approach As I stated in the upstream review, the real strength o f the project i s the strong local component, demonstrated in particularly by the strong Component 5, based on the principle o f the very successful UNDP Small Grants Pro- gramme. Another strength i s the linkage to other ongoing processes in the area such as the SDAP, which also needs to be linked to the NEPAD-process. This i s a strength but could, i f the complex administrative and implementing structure does not comply with i t s different roles, be a weakness. Objectives The objectives, in particularly in the light o f the responses by the team given to the upstream STAP reviews, are clear and focused and should be able to achieve given the activities outlined. Background and Justification As I voiced in the upstream STAP review, the project background documentation, in particularly for those countries where no TDA exists i s weak, in particularly regarding on existing institutions that w i l l be accountable for the implementation at national level concerning al l aspects. This will, however, according to the response be detailed through the appraisal process. What I raised under i tem 1 on terminology i s hopefully just misuse o f terminology and not a result o f weak background documentation! Government commitment and sustainability Given the revised background documentation and the responses by the Project Team, the governments commitments to sustainability o f the project seems ful ly secured. M y only concern regarding sustainability i s that it i s important that the complex project administration and implementation structure secures a strong base for the institutional structure that w i l l continue implementing activities in accordance with the project in post-project time. Activities The revised system o f activities under the different components in particularly under component 5 as well as the continuous processes under SAP and SDAP would, according to the documentation, ensure that the activities are in compliance with the objectives. Project Funding The project funding structure has been modified to further emphasis the component 5, which i s acknowledged with satisfaction but which makes i t even more important to ensure effective results f rom that important component, including by the preparation o f a manual for these processes and by the monitoring and evaluation process. Replicability The lessons-leamed from other regional initiatives i s demonstrated as being important in the modified project documentation. Time frame Even though the time-frame o f the project i s four years, i t i s important that i t w i l l generate sustainable activities that w i l l continue in post-project time. Global Environmental Benefits and goals of the GEF The Global Environment Benefits and the goals o f the GEF are sufficiently addressed in the revised project document. where i t i s emphasised that the project w i l l also be able to address issues linked to the Desertification Convention under the new Focal Area o f Land Degradation. Rational for GEF support This i s sufficiently covered i n the revised project documentation. Secondary issues to be addressed The modified project document i s allowing for the addressing o f issues such as mitigating desertification, the MDGs to the extent possible. and also compliance with objectives under NEPAD. The Team response to the upstream STAP reviews also ensured the identification o f compliance with social and environmental safeguards. I t i s important to ensure that the project in this also include provisions that w i l l include the poor people o f the region.

Giinilla Bsrklund

February 27,2003

96

Preliminary STAP Reviews Reversing Land and Water Degradation Trends in the Niger River Basin

PRELIMINARY UPSTREAM REVIEW NO. 1:

1. Overall impression - The Niger River Basin i s a river system and basin that i s shared by 9 countries, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon,

Chad, Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea, Mali , Niger and Nigeria. A River Basin Organisation, Niger Basin Authority, exists and i s creating a framework for cooperation in actions o f mutual interest concerning the Niger River and i ts basin. Al l nine riparian countries are signatories to the convention that established the NBA out o f the former Niger River Commission in 1980. The NBA i s financially supported by its member states, who are a l l committed to involve the appropriate ministers and governmental and non-governmental organisations to fulfil the mandate o f the NBA and also work towards implementation o f the proposed GEF project. Several manageable threats hindering reversal o f degradation trends o f land and water resources o f the Niger River Basin have been identified. Even though the NBA i s to “harmonize and coordinate national policies for development, plan the development o f the Basin; and, realize, exploit and maintain common works and projects”, s t i l l there i s no coordination between countries on environmental management policies, strategies, laws and programs. There are also limited avenues for public involvement and capturing o f local knowledge and practices in land and water management. There i s a lack o f instruments and guidelines for determining environmental and social impacts o f current decisions on regional land and water resources. And there i s a lack o f cross-border activities to provide for exchange o f data and information for averting possible pollution and degradation threats to land and water. The Niger Basin Authority has developed a Strategic Vision for the Basin and i s developing a Sustainable De- velopment Action Plan, SDAP, which i s to ensure socio-economic development through agricultural production, energy, industry, transportation, trade, and other related socio-economic activities. Activities as proposed in the outlined framework of activities are foreseen as being launched by the NBA and the World Bank. The proposed GEF project based in the GEF Strategic Action Plan, should be managed in a complementary process where the GEF SAP i s prioritising environmentally-focussed issues and sectors across the Niger River Basin member states, as well as developing a framework for environmental management for all development in the Niger River Basin. The project i s concentrated around six components; Project management to augment regional, national, and local institutional capacity in al l nine Basin countries; Capacity building primarily by focusing on environmental aspects and by including local organisations; Data management, mainly b y filling existing gaps by providing for the ability to undertake integrated analysis o f national and transboundary natural re- courses, including ground and surface water and socio-economic concern; Regional Forum to facilitate the exchange o f lessons learned and Basin management best practices in regional Projects in Sub-Saharan Africa; Demonstrate change in the Niger Basin Microgrant Programme to promote community involvement, ownership and care o f local resources based on experience from the UNDP-GEF Small Grants Programme; and complement the Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis and the Strategic Action Programme for those riparian countries where that i s lacking. The overall impression idea o f the GEF project i s good. I t w i l l be a necessary complement in the area o f achieving inter-basin and regionaVgloba.1 environmental objectives, in working in a complementary process to the implementation process for the Niger Basin Sustainable Development Action Plan. The project w i l l serve as an important framework to provide increased regional, national and local capacity to reduce and prevent transboundary land- and water-related degradation. A clear benefit i s the strong emphasis on involving local communities within a river-basin framework. Further the strong coordination component would make the project result in sustainable environmental management and help reversing land and water degradation trends in the Niger River Basin.

The project w i l l be a necessary complement to other projects both in the Niger River Basin and in Sahelian region as such. In concentrating on reversing land- and water degradation trends in the Niger Basin it w i l l address root causes as defined in the TDAs that already exist and ensure the speedy preparation of TDAs for the remaining countries. The issues thus to be addressed are not focussed in complementary projects which makes the project an important building block in the larger Strategic Vision for the Niger River Basin.

The success o f the project to achieve i ts objectives i s very much depending on to what extent the riparian countries at national and local level can build the capacity at a l l levels and coordinate their efforts based on such ca-

-

-

-

-

2. Relevance and priority -

3. Approach -

97

pacity towards reversing the land and water degradation trends. The approach presented in detail in the table to Annex A clearly demonstrates how the suggested interventions would contribute towards strengthening institutional capacity which would result in provisions for increased technical as well as human capacity. The project approach includes addressing the problems emanating f rom the root causes to land and water degradation at river basin as well as national and local level, and thereby also address the root causes. The linkage to the root causes is, however, not always clearly expressed in the main text but i s implici t from studying the table in the Annex. The strong local component i s the real strength o f the project, and it i s particularly important in those sections to demonstrate its contribution towards reversing the degradation trends.

The GEF Operational Programme “Integrated Land and Water Multiple Focal Area” objectives for this project are to reduce and prevent transboundary water-related environmental degradation, prevent land degradation, and to protect globally significant biodiversity. This would be achieved through sustainable and cooperative integrated management o f the Basin, enhance existing capacity, informed decision-making and ensure the public’s greater involvement in the Basin’s decision-making process. The Project’s specific development objective i s to develop and implement sustainable measures for reversing trends in land and water degradation through collaborative decision-making in the Basin. The objectives are clear and focused and should be able to achieve given the activities outlined.

The background material provided in the project documentation include documentation on the Niger Basin Au- thority, brief documentation on national policies including very briefly on national Country Assistance Strate- gies, CAS, based on the World Bank CAS, and Strategic Context and Sector issues, mainly at basin level. Documentation on Key Sector Issues i s mainly based on what exists out o f the ongoing process on Transbound- ary Diagnostic Analysis, TDA, where some TDAs st i l l remain to be done under the project. The material provided gives sufficient information at River Basin level. However, information on the different riparian countries i s meagre. I t i s understandable that information sometimes has been difficult to obtain, in particularly for those countries where no T D A exists but to be able see national conditions including existing institutions, that w i l l be accountable for the implementation at national level more decomposed information at riparian state level would have been desirable.

The origin o f the project was a request to UNDP and the World Bank from the Niger Basin Authority, supported by all nine riparian countries, to provide assistance in preparing an SAP for sustainable management o f the Ni- ger Basin’s land and water resources. The countries have thus expressed their commitment to regional actions and to support the regional mechanism. The project clearly address issues such as strengthening the regional mechanism, grassroot actions and localhational institutions to achieve sustainable land and water use and management.

The different components as defined in the project brief are not to be seen as a step-by-step process: but should be undertaken simultaneously. The activities under each component are often to be seen as steps in a sequence. So should the steps under component Project Management logically result in a strengthen capacity to fulfil the management, even though the use o f consultants should be cautioned for project sustainability reasons. The capacity building and data management components are both necessary to provide a sound basis o f fitting land and water degradation projects into a better context and securing good results but also to get full support f rom various stakeholders. The data management component w i l l secure a bases and instrument for land and water resources management. The Regional Forum component wi l l ensure comparative analysis o f and cooperation with other international basins. The Microgrants component will, building on outcomes of the final TDA and SAP, ensure implementation o f on-the-ground activities to consolidate experience in land and water management.

The financing plan for the project, including the diflerent components, GEF project component, other preparation costs, and co-financing is clearly defined as are associated activities. In the Incremental Cost Matrix the direrent components are defined and costed showing proposed levels of jiinding for the different components that s e e m very reasonable and adequate.

The project would, on top o f increasing coordinated efforts to reverse land and water degradation for the Niger River Basin, also result in exchange o f lessons leamed on root causes and demonstrating solutions and best practices to address problems o f reversing trends in land and water degradation that are applicable inside and outside

-

4. Objectives -



7. Activities -

8. Project funding -

9. Replicability -

98

of the Sahelian region. The project component Regional Forum intends to ensure provisions for such added value.

The clear commitments b y the riparian governments and the Niger Basin Authority as well as the ensured participation at grassroot level should guarantee an impetus towards a swift implementation o f the project. Wi th the institutional framework in place the objectives should be possible to reach within the given time frame.

The project i s clearly addressing issues resulting in global environmental benefits in terms o f International Wa- ters. that i s integrated transboundary water resources management and activities. Even though the text refers to protection o f globally significant biodiversity through sustainable and cooperative management o f the Basin, this i s not specifically indicated in any definition o f the activities, but may be a result o f actions taken as a result o f the increased capacity built within the project. The approach proposed for the project would, if carefully applied ensure avoidance o f negative environmental effects.

The project w i l l serve to support “better use o f land and water resource management practices on an area-wide basin”, which i s the objective o f the GEF OP9. I t w i l l further assist the countries to better understand the environmental concerns o f shared intemational water and land resources and assist the countries to work collabora- tively to address these concerns. I t w i l l contribute to the building o f capacity in existing institutions and implement measures that address the priority transboundary environmental concerns.

The project would by addressing the TDA also address other focal areas such as mitigate desertification. The objectives to be achieved as a result o f the project implementation w i l l fit under the Afr ica Integrated Land and Water Initiative o f the GEF implementing agencies. I t w i l l further contribute toward the fulfilment o f the UN Mil lennium Development Goals, MDGs, and the objectives for the New Partnership for Africa’s Development, NEPAD. Important aspects under the project are the strong degree o f stakeholder participation at national, local and NGO-level under al l components, in particularly under the Microgrant component where the main aspect i s to secure the involvement o f local stakeholders in the project. Implementation o f the SAP would through increased capacity lead to mobilizing and generating o f sustainable national development projects. Capacity building aspects at al l levels o f decision making as well as implementation are important to the sustainable outcome o f the project. The innovativeness o f the project i s that i t addresses all levels regional, national and local and that it, through its GEF-Small Grants Programme designed Microgrant component provide for a strong involvement at the grasroot level.

The project complements and builds on other initiatives and projects .both at River Basin level, such as the broader Strategic Shared Vision and Sustainable Development Action Plan, and at national level, such as World Bank, UNDP TRAC Fund or supported by bilateral donors. I t s global environmental objective makes i t complementary to these other initiatives. I t s approach, to work at both r iver basin, national as well as local level, including by involving the grassroot level makes it contribute to coordination and cooperation that would result in increased sustainable development at al l levels not only f rom an Intemational Waters perspective but from an environmental, economic and social perspective. I t i s therefore recommended that the project be approved.

10. Time frame -

11. Global environmental benefits and goals of the GEF -

12. Rationale for GEF support -

13. Secondary issues to be addressed -

-

-

15. Conclusions -

16 January, 2003 - Gunilla Bjorklund

PRELIMINARY, UPSTREAM REVIEW N0.2 : 1. Overall impression

- The documents reveal grave imbalances between (i) aggregate human needs, (ii) technology and institutional capac- i t y to meet these needs, and (iii) biophysical resource base. A low level o f understanding o f the environmental consequences o f resource use practices compounds the problem. A more inspiring impression i s a growing realisa- tion about the need for co-ordination o f national efforts. The capacity and commitment in this regard are difficult to assess. Letters o f endorsement are. for instance, missing. Institutional issues, including sensitising efforts, legal and enforcement issues and generation & management o f datdinformation are highlighted. The documents are less clear on connections to concrete efforts in the various sectors. which could “yield more from less”. I t seem vital to enhance the productivity of land and water resources.

99

2.Relevance and priority - The project forms one important component in the Strategic Vision for the NRB. However, ”..a shared vision and

the SDAP i s s t i l l being designed ...” (Project Brief, p. 25). Projects with a similar orientation have been started: NEPAD, ALWMI, LCBC, etc. The GEF project i s timely.

The approachfits with the current drives of regional collaboration and recognition of the need to include NEPAD, Millenium Development Goals, etc. in development efforts. The six components are all relevant. The focus on institutional issues is valid. But the mix of integrated strategies and changes in sectoral policies could be elaborated. The GEF Operational Programme 9 refers to “..integrated land and water management strategies that help achieve changes in sectoral policies and activities while promoting sustainable development”. In the agricultural sector, for instance, it seems relevant to assess the potential of rainwater hawesting (rain-fed agriculture is mentioned in TDA, but not RWH). Similarly, the TDA stresses the low level of water use efficiency and high usage of fertilisers and pesticides in irrigation systems. The recommendations refer to education, sensiti- sation and investments. I n addition, it is relevant to review subsidies, which I suppose are liberal (for some), irr i- gation technology options and, generally, combinations of technical options and institutional arrangements. Land and water tenure is not discussed. With regard to biodiversity, i t i s mentioned that problems could be tackled through “.. sustainable and cooperative integrated management o f the Basin, enhance existing capacity, informed decision making and ensure the public’s greater involvement in the Basin’s decision-making process (Project Brief, p. 4). Measures at basin level are important, but prime challenges, and “root causes” l i e at another level. As far as I know, there are many “pockets” o f relatively small areas where biodiversity i s high, but where species are threatened through poachers, dire poverty, etc. Many o f the ‘Lroot causes” w i l l not be effectively tackled only through a greater involvement in the Basin’s decision-making process. Urbanization results in environmental stress and pollution. In Annex G, the section on urbanization i s quite brief. Reference i s made to a document f rom 1975, which deals with erosion. The conclusions and recommendations are not very elaborate. I s , for instance, clean production technology a realistic alternative? Treatment plants are important, but they are associated with many shortcomings. H o w i s urban and basin management coordinated? The division o f responsibilities and the difference between execution and implementation o f project management (Project Brief, 20 ff) are not clear. W i l l the private sector executing agency continue after the project i s over? I t seems as i f the Scientific Advisory Committee i s only expected to be involved in “..project implementation and reporting” (Project Brief. #76): i.e. not in project identification and design. Are microgrants offered to communities but not to individuals (Project Brief, pp. 5, 16, 17, 19)? This might be an appropriate approach in the energy and transportation sectors, but would i t work in the agricultural sector? And in the industrial sector?

-The objective i s valid, but formulated in general terms (Project Brief, p. 5). The last sentence in # 10 indicates that national and basin priorities have to be harmonized “. . . These elements are transboundary in nature and clearly transcend national capacities and pnorities..”(ibid.). Have reasonable assurances have been obtained so that national and transboundary priorities match? -The fourth bullet (#35), stresses that “.. national programmes would b y their nature not address the Basin’s transboundary issues.. . preparation o f nine separate national programmes would be costly and expend significant resources in coordinating activities”. A Basin project will, however, not be a substitute for national programmes. An important question i s rather: which tasks should be taken care o f at the regional level and what tasks are suitable for national level? In the case o f data management, i t i s proposed that “ ...rip arian countries collect and process data within their national jurisdictions” (p. 15). I f possible? the data management should be organised at the regional level.

The documents give a good picture o f the situation and important trends. Justification for this project i s a strong need for increased capacity at various levels in the Basin to reverse the trends. So far, capacity at regional level i s .weak. The presentation i s clear and valid in these regards. Some information i s old, e.g. in the case o f urbanisation as noted. There i s no information about the strength o f NGO, who they are, their track record, etc. Another missing topic i s land and water tenure. I t i s mentioned that growth rate i s now 5%, but there i s no discussion about allocation o f national budgets, how subsidies are decided and similar.

3.Approach -

-

-

-

-

-

4. Objectives -

-


-

100

- A discussion on how to involve the poor and improve their lot i s missing. Community involvement in decision- making does not automatically empower the poor. I t i s rather the vocal and better-off segments who make use o f such opportunities. Specific actions are required.

-Collectively, Govemment w i l l contribute with USD 2.14 million to the Incremental Cost budget, mainly in kind. World Bank and UNDP contributions in the baseline and GEF Alternative scenarios, are substantially much higher. I suppose that a large proportion o f these have to be repaid and, thus, could be seen as government commitments. -The project could play an important role in facilitating sustainability. The intention to strengthen regional collaboration i s very important. L ike in all parts o f the world, regional collaboration i s essential for reduction o f tensions, to foster exchange and i t facilitates donor support. Risks must be interpreted in relation to political circumstances and how successful the project w i l l be in engaging end-users (Project brief, p.18). There are serious political problems in West Africa, but most o f them are currently outside the Niger basin countries.

-Activities w i l l be organized in relation to the six Project components. Sequence is logical. A few additional activities have been suggested above: testing the potential for Rain Water Harvesting; the potential o f clean production technologies; urban planning in a basin context.

-The task i s huge, but the funding i s also substantial. I t may be relevant to discuss if the budget for some activity should be increased, possibly at the expense o f some other component?

-A t this stage, i t i s rather this project that might replicate from experiences in other similar projects, e.g. the N i le River Basin Initiative and projects in West Africa. Worldwide, there i s a growing experience o f microgrants. The ambition to learn f rom other projects i s mentioned.


-

-

7.Activities -

8. Project funding -

9.Replicability -

10. Time frame - In Project Brief, a 3-year Action Plan o f the NBA (p.26) i s mentioned. In table 2 (Annex A), i t i s stated “..full pro-

gramme implementation during four years”. I t i s important to have a timetable, wi th dates, duration o f the various activities and when results are expected. A strategy for follow-ups after the project i s essential.

11.Global environmental benefits and goals of the GEF -Yes, the project addresses global environmental benefits but these could be much more clearly described. In Table 2 (Annex A), the column “Overall Global GEF Alternative Benefits” provides no insights about benefits. I t i s a list o f activities and mechanisms.

On al l four accounts, the answer i s “yes”. Some comments above could be iterated here.

Reference to related conventions i s implicit rather than explicit. According to TDA “.. the energy situation i s char- acterised by an abundance o f resources”. If new dams are given priority in the NRB, the likelihood o f damaging environmental effects increases. I t i s also possible that the microgrants could be used for projects that are not conducive to environmental objectives. Generally, i t i s conceivable that choices between poverty reduction and safe- guarding the environment could favour the former. I t i s a tricky issue!

14. Additional comments I t i s crucial that the institutional arrangements are designed with due regard to incentives and sanctions for the em- ployees. The motivation of project staff to contribute to project performance and their compliance with the idea o f the project are o f significant importance.

-

12. Rationale for GEF support:

13. Secondary issues to be addressed -

-

-

Jnnunrj 15, 2003 Jan Liinclqvist

101

RESPONSE TO FINAL AiSD PRELIMINARY STAP REVIEWS Reversing Land and Water Degradation Trends in the Niger River Basin

RESPONSE TO THE FINAL STAP REVIEWS:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Overall Impression: The Team i s pleased with the both o f the final, STAP reviews, and that the comments f rom the preliminary, so-called upstream reviews have been satisfactorily addressed in the revised Brief. The Team hopes to further clarify the few additional comments from both reviews. There has been an attempt to clarify the component activities and institutional arrangements for consistency. Further efforts during the Appraisal phase w i l l finalize both the details o f the activities and their detailed efforts, and similarly efforts to simplify the institutional arrangements for efficient implementation. Appropriate hydrologic and geomorphic terminology and the Basin processes are recognized and have been reflected in the final draft. Relevance. Current assessment acknowledged. Approach Acknowledging that the UNDP and World Bank interchange the use o f executing and implementation agency relative to their institution. Clarification has been made in this terminology and during the Appraisal phase, clarifications w i l l be made to all aspects o f the institutional arrangements and process. The institutional structure and responsibilities w i l l be further detailed, to streamline for most effective and efficient implementation arrangements, for the regional, national and local levels. Though i t ’ s not the intention to promote changes in existing legislation, or propose new legislation, i t i s however envisioned that through both Component 2 and Component 3 policy frameworks could be drafted and developed in the future for a more comprehensive basin-wide management policies and legislation. The Global Water Partnership could be engaged through project implementation. Objective. - Review acknowledged. Background and justification - Recognizing that this Project’s objective w i l l be achieved through strengthened regional, national and local capac-

ity. It’s the intent that through the Component 5 activities (where thirty-eight percent o f the GEF funds are targeted for community-based microgrant supported interventions) hope to improve the livelihood o f the basin communities, thus making some effort to reduce poverty while promoting sustainable good management practices. The Beneficiaries section o f the Br ief addresses poverty alleviation. Terminology changed to reflect geomorphic processes.

For the sake o f clarity, to define the true value o f the incremental benefit f rom this Project, the baseline was defined by a specific parameter to include j u s t those baseline activities, which contribute directly to the Project; this would then include the national-level in-kind contribution. Through the SAP and SDAP process. the framework for sustainable economic development would provide the mechanism to minimize future risks.

Government Commitment and sustainability -

Activities - Comment acknowledged. Project funding -

Replicability -

With further definition o f the specific project subcomponent/activities, which w i l l be completed during the Ap- praisal phase the Project financing and detailed budget, and allocations for each component w i l l be defined.

Comment acknowledged, Component 4 activities would provide a forum for the exchange o f regional lessons. 10. Timeframe

- It i s envisaged that through the SAP and SDAP. which wi l l establish a strategic development framework for the Basin, there wi l l be opportunities for continued investments in the Basin.

Comment acknowledged and the integration o f sectoral activities and future policies would develop as part o f the SAP and SDAP. The incremental cost matrix has been modified to reflect the incremental cost assessment.

12. Rationale for GEF support - Comment acknowledged.

13. Secondary issues to be addressed - Comment acknowledged. The document has been developed to explain in greater detail the benefits of the Project

activities, especially Component 5 activities, to improve rural livelihood.

11. Global environmental benefits and goals of the GEF -

103

14. Additional Comments. - The Team acknowledges that the responses to the comments from the upstream review were satisfactorily ad-

dressed.

RESPONSE TO PRELIMINARY UPSTREAM REVIEWS NO 1 & No2: The Project preparation Team i s pleased with the two stage STAP review process and the critique o f the Project objective and design. The two upstream STAP reviews provided a fair critique during Project preparation providing the Team an opportunity to clarify and detail elements o f the project design; while the subsequent STAP review provided a final overview. The Team appreciates the Reviewers comments and the documents were modified to best address the comments. The fol lowing provides a summary o f Team’s effort to respond and modify the Project document:

1. Overall Impression: - The letters o f endorsement are in preparation during the upstream review, and w i l l be included in Annex C. The

project focuses on institutional capacity building confirming that the primary focus o f the Project i s to strengthen institutional capacity, not only to reinforce the NBA but also to strengthen the national and local level decision- making capacity. This strengthened capacity hopes to address concrete efforts in the range o f sectors impacting the Basin and to inevitably achieve local level sustainable livelihood.

The Team concurs the GEF Project i s timely and urgent.

In concert with the SDAP, the project focuses on strengthening the regional, national and local capacity; the scru- tiny o f the array o f opportunities i s developed during the GEF SAP process. I t i s envisioned that the Project’s outcome, the SAP, and subsequent funding to implement the SAP and SDAP w i l l be the mechanism to address the primary sector issues to include but not limited to biodiversity, the agricultural sector, or urbanization impacts. Options for addressing the range o f sectors, land and water tenure agricultural credit and/or cultivation loans, have a significant role in resource management and are anticipated to be addressed in the SAP process. Though i t i s not the intent o f the Project, to tackle al l the root causes but through the TDA and SAP process identify the priorities and the mechanism to better address the root causes and sector issues. The Team has attempted to clarify the World Bank’s and UNDPs “executing arrangements” and implementing arrangements, and concurs with the Reviewers that the staffing o f the PMU wi l l be o f the highest caliber, competitively selected staff to assist in Project implementation. The Scientific Advisory Committee has a significant role in addition to advising on technical matters during Pro- ject implementation and reporting, but also supporting. at the national level project design as i t pertains to Compo- nent 5, the microgrant supported activities, and all aspect o f the further project design and preparation elements within the context o f project implementation. Component 5 the microgrant supported Demonstration Program activities and community-based interventions are based on the principles of the UNDP Small Grants Programme which has local community based experience to a range o f applicants, and through the public information and outreach program hopes to target those communities and stakeholders within the immediate context o f the project design and project objectives. The UNDP-SGP has been successful in successfully implementing projects and disbursing funds, which this Project hopes to build-on and replicate. Though the Project activities are, for al l practical means, generally implemented at the national level, though some regional efforts in strengthening the regional institutional capacity i s targeted, so in terms o f project activities and disbursement o f funds, the intent o f the Project i s to systematically address the transboundary issues and concems in the Basin.

2. Relevance and priority:

3. Approach -

-

-

-

-

-

4. Objectives - The concurrent development o f the SDAP with the SAP wi l l help identify the linkages with the national and trans-

boundary priorities, and not at the expense o f national programs. but i t i s important to note national programs would by their nature not address the Basin’s transboundary issues, and the need for coordinated management o f the Basin’s land and water resources. The intent of the project i s to strengthen the subsidiarity o f basin management, decentralizing from the regional level, and strengthen at the national and local efforts, in data collection, analysis to help contribute to the regional decision making process. The Project promotes subsidiarity, informed and strengthened local and national capacity i s vital to the regional success.

The Project provides an overview, through Component 2. the implementation o f a public participation program as a means to engage and involve the local stakeholders and the NGO. Details o f the public information, media, and out-

5. Background and Justification -

1 04

reach program w i l l be detailed through the appraisal process. As noted above other sector elements, land and water tenure, urbanization, and other sector issues to be addressed in the SAP SDAP process.

Reviewer’s comments acknowledged and the language in this section was modified to stress the importance of the govemment’s commitment to sustainability and the political and social risks. The Brief provides a summary o f the Ba- sin’s commitment to the Project, SAP and SDAP, and letter o f endorsement i s further commitment.

Through the SAP and SDAP process, the Rain Water Harvesting and other specific interventions could be taken into consideration.

The Project Br ief provides an overview o f the Project financing as determined during the preparation process, during the Appraisal phase the component activities and project budget w i l l be detailed and adjusted accordingly.

The Team concurs and the Brief modified to noting the Project would benefit f rom the lessons-leamed f rom other regional initiatives.

The Project i s a four-year project.

The Project benefits are addressed in terms o f how they support and achieve the Project objective, though i t i s the intent through the strengthening of regional, national, and local institutional capacity anticipating through Component 2 activities those sectoral policies and activities w i l l promote global environmental benefits. Annex A, the incremental cost matrix was modified to clarify the global benefits, rather than just identifying the mechanisms to achieve the benefits.

Within the Project Brief, comments acknowledged

The Team acknowledges the Reviewers comments. As part o f the Component 5 microgrant-supported interventions, Activi ty 5.6 includes the preparation o f the Microgrant Program Operational Manual, which w i l l include the specifics o f the selection criteria and compliance with environmental and social safeguards. As part o f the Project Implementation Plan, the Environmental Management Framework w i l l identify the framework for compliance with social and environmental safeguards.

The Team acknowledges that i t i s crucial that the institutional arrangements are designed with due regard to incentives and sanctions for the employee. During the Appraisal phase details o f the institutional arrangements w i l l be detailed to support technical integrity and ownership.

6. Government Commitment and Sustainability -

7. Activities: -

8.Project Funding: -

9. Replicability -

10. Time Frame

11. Global Environmental Benefits and goals of the GEF: -

-

12. Rationale for GEF support:

13. Secondary issues to be addressed: -

- -

14. Additional Comments: -

105