PROJECT INFORMATION DOCUMENT (PID)
CONCEPT STAGE
Report No.: AB3195
Project Name / NATIONAL PROTECTED AREA MANAGEMENT PROGRAMRegion / AFRICA
Sector / Central government administration (70%);Forestry (30%)
Project ID / P111290
GEF Focal Area / Biodiversity
Borrower(s) / GOV'T
Implementing Agency / Ministry of Environment, Office of Parks and Reserves and the Foundation
Environment Category / [ ] A [X] B [ ] C [ ] FI [ ] TBD (to be determined)
Date PID Prepared / January 9, 2008
Estimated Date of Appraisal Authorization / March 20, 2008
Estimated Date of Board Approval / August 14, 2008
A. Key development issues and rationale for Bank involvement
1. In the 1960s and 1970s, Côte d’Ivoire experienced an average real GNP growth rate of 7% per year. As a result, per capita incomes rose at about 4 percent/ yr in real terms, and the standard of living in both urban and rural areas improved greatly. This impressive growth performance was largely based on agricultural expansion which grew at about 5 percent p.a in real terms. Timber production also contributed substantially to the continued growth of the economy. However, it soon became clear that this growth could not be sustained because of unsustainable harvesting practices: Timber production was a result of the conversion of the rain forests whose gradual disappearance led to a drastic decline in timber (from 5 million m3 annually in the 1980s to less than of this by 2000). Agricultural growth, fueled by a population growth of 3.8%, led to uncontrolled burning, and more and more forested land was converted into crop land. This, coupled with deforestation for fuelwood and other needs, has had a marked impact on soil degradation and erosion, and ultimately on small-holder yields. Finally, the conversion from natural forest to agricultural lands has had an impact on potential tourism and ecotourism revenues to be generated from wildlife and natural forested lands. Of the initial 13 million ha of rainforest in the 1960s, less than 2 million ha remained in the early 1990s and this has further rapidly declined in recent years. It is clear that if unchecked, this process will impact the country’s ecological balance and damage its agricultural and economic development.
2. In 1996, the Government adopted a National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) which proposed three areas of intervention: (a) to protect the existing parks and reserves; (b) to promote the sustainable use of wild resources outside protected areas; and (c) to improve biological knowledge through the development of research programs. In 1999, the government prepared a Forest Policy and in February 2002, parliament adopted a new law: Park and Reserve Management and Financing. The interventions targeted a national system of protected areas, comprising 6% of the country’s land area, and included the largest intact ecosystem within the Guinea-Sudanian savanna ecosystem (the Comoé) and the largest areas of relatively undisturbed lowland rainforest in West Africa (Tai-N’Zo). Together, these areas cover over 1.5 million hectares and provide security for nearly 90% of the mammal and bird species in the region, including significant populations of regionally endemic birds, antelopes and primates[1].
3. The Bank’s response to the Government’s need to put their ecological priorities in order was to initiate the preparation of a National Protected Areas Management Program (PCGAP) in 1995, which was conceived as a 15 year APL with 57 million in IDA and GEF funding, to create and support the Office of Parks and Reserves and a Foundation. The extensive preparation work was based upon the following four aspects that were envisaged as the components of the program -1) strengthening the national, legal, institutional and technical framework; 2) building human resource capacity; 3) Supporting the establishment and operation of a Foundation and 4) Managing and promoting priority protected areas. Phase 1 of component 1 focused on the physical construction of the Office and the management and information system for the office. Phase II focused on strengthening capacity and fine-tuning the management and information system. The goal of this component was that by the end of Yr 15, the Office would be fully operational and would function only on government allocation and income from tourism concessions. However this project, despite its clear objectives, was eventually withdrawn from the Bank’s lending portfolio because of political insecurity and conflict in the country, a situation which lasted from the late 1990s to the mid 2000s.
4. With relative peace restored to Côte d’Ivoire, the Government, still firmly committed to improving its systems of protected areas, approached GEF to urge it to resuscitate the old PCGAP project. Given (a) the obvious biodiversity threat that has intensified in Côte d’Ivoire the last few years; (b) the strong Government commitment as shown by the Government’s financial investment in the parks systems in the last few years, (c) prioritization of biodiversity protection in the last full CAS[2] for Côte d’Ivoire (1997) as well as the 2002 interim CAS[3] and the 2008 Interim Strategy Note (goes to the board this year) and (d) financial support for this project by development partners, GEF decided to approve an allocation of 2.54 million, which, according to the new GEF guidelines, is the maximum that can be given to Côte d’Ivoire.
B. Proposed objective(s)
5. The proposed development objective (PDO) of the project would be to:
“Increase the capacity of the Government to manage protected areas effectively in Côte d’Ivoire ” This will in turn impact the global development objective which is that current biodiversity trends are slowed down or halted in priority parks and reserves.
The expected benefits of the project are to: (a) ensure that staff are adequately equipped and trained to manage protected areas; (b) incorporate pilot community based approaches to protected area management thereby improving the effectiveness of parks management; (c) improve the financing mechanisms for parks and reserves management in Côte d’Ivoire.
C. Preliminary description
Financing
6. The project is funded with a US$2.54 million GEF grant. Government will continue to fund the National Parks and the OIPR as well as the Foundation (US$3,639,016) during the project period. IDA will finance micro-projects and livelihoods (2.2 million) in communities around the park periphery. The EU will provide an additional US$510,000 to fund environmental governance.
7. The project has four main components:
8. The project will be implemented in two areas: (i) in Abidjan and (ii) in the north-east of the country, in four of the five sectors around the Comoé National Park. The project is therefore expected to cover an area of more than one million hectares (the size of the park) and will benefit a total number of 200,000 people residing around the park. Most of these people will benefit through exposure to environment-related radio programs. Communities that live on the park’s fringes will benefit more directly through the livelihood programs and specific training geared to ensure their more active participation in park management.
Component 1: Institutional, Financial and Technical Strengthening for Protected Area Management and Oversight (GEF: US$1.1M, Government: US$3.156M) strengthens the institutional, financial and technical capacities of the OIPR and of the Foundation for management of the National Parks System. Subcomponent 1.1 is implemented by the Office of Parks and Reserves at Headquarters and by their field offices at the Zone level. Subcomponent 1.2 is implemented by the Foundation. GEF funds will finance the activities and Government will finance the associated OIPR staff costs.
9. Sub-component 1.1 Capacity Building for the Office of Parks and Reserves: GEF funds will be used for capacity building (training, equipment) needs for the OIPR staff in the north-east jurisdiction where the Comoé National Park lies and also for the staff and newly recruited procurement and financial specialists at the Abidjan OIPR headquarters.
10. Sub-component 1.2 Support to the Establishment and Operations of the Foundation for the Parks and Reserves of Côte d’Ivoire: The Ivorian law created the OIPR and Foundation as two parts of one entity dealing with the park system. The logic behind this is to secure sustainable financing for the National Parks. The Foundation is to attract long-term donor financing, preferably endowment funds, to be invested and used for the park’s recurrent costs. GEF funds will finance capacity building activities that will improve the Foundation’s ability to attract and manage an endowment and/or sinking fund(s). The subcomponent will therefore fund training in fundraising, local training in financial management, asset management, communications and governance.
Component 2: Management Planning and Implementation for the CNP (GEF: US$ 0.93M, Government: US$0.203M) addresses biodiversity conservation more directly by financing the design and implementation of a management plan for the Comoé National Park. This component is implemented by the OIPR north-east field offices with the assistance of local communities and with input from other key stakeholders such as the Wild Chimpanzee Foundation (WCF).
11. Subcomponent 2.1: Updating the Comoé Park Management Plan This sub-component will use ecological surveying (some already completed by WCF), site visits, discussions with community members and demographic data to update the 1991 Comoé Park management plan to reflect the current realities on the ground. The management plan will also determine what activities need to be initiated over the five year period. The management plan will also identify opportunities for community engagement in the implementation of the plan as well as solicit community feedback and acceptance of the plan. It is expected that the management plan will also show detailed maps of the CNP, its boundaries, the road networks, and the sites and status of important infrastructure.
12. Sub-component 2.2: Implementation of the Management Plan The subcomponent will fund the implementation of the management plan. One key aspect of the management plan will be the implementation of surveillance plan for the CNP.
13. Subcomponent 2.3 Biodiversity Impact Monitoring A system of biomonitoring has been set up by WCF in the Tai National Park using trained locals as data collectors. WCF will train both locals and the OIPR in data collection, analysis and presentation. The OIPR will sign an MOU with WCF to put in place a bio-monitoring system in the Comoé tailored to the Savannah ecosystem. This system will entail air transects as well as ground transect. The data will be used to identify poacher locations and hide-outs and to track animal concentrations, densities and frequencies. The Comoé has such a large surface area that locating key concentrations of biodiversity and ensuring heightened surveillance in these areas will be a useful monitoring strategy.
Component 3: Support to Park Communities
(GEF US$0.27M; PGNTER US$2.2M; EU US$0.51 M; Government: US$0.061M)
14. This component will provide support to the park communities, defined as the 200,000 people living on the park fringes. It does this through public awareness campaigns, biodiversity training, land management contracts and governance training, the latter funded entirely by EU funding. The GEF funds will support training to enable park communities to understand the importance of biodiversity and permit them, with training, to be able to participate in park management. The livelihood and associated livelihood training aspects will be implemented by a contracted firm/NGO financed by the PNGTER project with support from the OIPR. The EU will finance all governance activities.
15. Sub-component 3.1: Increasing Public Awareness and Biodiversity-related training To have any impact on the park’s fringe inhabitants, the project will need a means of reaching them that is both cost effective and sustainable. This subcomponent will fund: (a) training and public education and (b) public awareness campaigns through the expansion of the Man and the Biosphere (MAB) radio-station at Naissian from its current coverage of 15 percent of the project area to at least 70 percent. The radio station currently uses volunteers to broadcast natural resource and agriculture related programs. The project would finance a study to evaluate the most cost-effective means of expanding the network as well as fund the expansion of the network. There will be minimal support to the operations of the radio station during the project period.
16. Subcomponent 3.2 Support to Livelihood and Development Activities. The PNGTER project will fund livelihood investments (approximately 200 micro-projects) around the park. A contracted firm/NGO, financed by the PNGTER project, will be responsible for the implementation of the livelihoods. The role of the PARC-CI project is to interface at the project site with the PNGTER project. OIPR staff will educate the communities on the essential link between the micro-projects and conservation and will dedicate an OIPR staff to work with the PNGTER staff. In addition, the PARC-CI project will recruit local trainers (animateurs) to assist with ongoing education of the communities.
Component 4: Project Management and Monitoring for Results (GEF-US$0.23M; GOV US$0.216)
17. This component will finance project management and monitoring of GEF funds. This will include general project coordination through a project management unit. Component 4 will finance:
§ Support to Project Management. The project will finance the recruitment and retention of a Project Manager for the project. The role of the Project Manager is largely to manage the day to day activities of the project in the field. He will be based in the field at Bondoukou and work with the Zone Director, but answer to the project coordinator. The project will also finance a procurement specialist at the OIPR offices in Abidjan and an accountant based in the field at Bondoukou. A financial manager and M&E specialist for the project (based at OIPR headquarters in Abidjan) has been nominated internally from within Government.
§ AnnualFinancial audit. The project will fund an annual financial audit.
Institutional Framework
18. The OIPR (Office of Parks and Reserves) from the Ministry of Environment is responsible for the implementation of the project thereby reinforcing the country’s park related institutions. A small project coordinating unit (PCU) within the OIPR will be responsible for project coordination, procurement, financial management and monitoring and evaluation. The coordinator for the project, already nominated, is the Director General of the OIPR. The financial specialist is also nominated from the Government and the procurement specialist is to be recruited. The PCU will send its reports directly to the Bank, the Foundation and the Director General. The Director General will also reports to the “Conseil de Gestion” within the OIPR hierarchy.