Request for CEO endorsement/Approval
Project Type: Medium-sized Project
the gef trust fund
Submission Date: May 31, 2011
Expected CalendarMilestones / Dates
Work Program (for FSP) / n/a
CEO Endorsement / Jun-11
GEF Agency Approval / Aug-11
Implementation Start / Sep-11
Mid-term Review / Jun-13
Implementation completion / Mar-15
part i: project Information
GEFSEC Project ID:4298
gef agency Project ID: 4221
Country:Burkina Faso
Project Title:SPWA - Protected Area Buffer Zone Management in Burkina Faso
GEF Agency: UNDP
Other Executing partner(s):MEDD - Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development
GEF Focal Area(s):Biodiversity
GEF-4 Strategic program(s): BD-SO1 – SP3 ‘Strengthening Terrestrial PA Networks
Name of parent program/umbrella project: SPWA – Strategic Program for West Africa – Sub-component Biodiversity
- Project framework
Project Objective:To incorporate protected areas as a key tool for biodiversity conservation into Burkina Faso’s decentralization process through the operationalization of community managed protected areas, including gazetted forests and their buffer zones.
Project Components
/Type
/ Expected Outcomes /Expected Outputs
/Indicative GEF Financing*
/ Indicative Co-financing* / Total ($)($)
/%
/($)
/%
1) Governance frameworks for PA Mgt / TA / The governance framework for the incorporation of conservation into Burkina Faso’s decentralization process is establishedKey Indicators:
- The emergence of a model for PA stewardship agreement for gazetted forests and/or areas in their buffer zones involving communities, approved by DGCN, and under initial implementation in 160,000 ha of conservation / sustainable use zones in the Boucles du Mouhoun PA Corridor (1 national park, 4 gazetted forests and their buffer zones)
- > 20 community-based forest management committees established and functioning in the buffer zones and within PAs in the Boucles du Mouhoun PA Corridor
- All 3 municipalities (Boromo, Tcheriba and Gassan) and at least 10 local groups participating in the project will have improved financial, technical and human resources capacities as a result of the project
- Scores on the UNDP’s Capacity Development Scorecard for Protected Areas Management increase by 20% in absolute terms over the general baseline of 37 points out of 96 (or 39% - refer to PRODOC Annex 5 for more details)
1.2 Regional and local development planning systems in the Boucle du Mouhoun region incorporate community PA management objectives and ensure that (i) local area development programs are conservation-compatible and (ii) PAs contributes to economic development
1.3 Communities’ participation in PA management and conservation, and in the sustainable use of their buffer zones is adequately supported institutionally and financially, and through effective knowledge and information management systems / 122,000 / 5 / 2,411,819 / 95 / 2,533,819
2) PA management in pilot sites / TA / The effective management of community PAs is demonstrated in pilot sites (Deux Balés National Park and gazetted forests of Tisse, Oualou, Sâ and Sourou) in the Boucles du Mouhoun PA Corridor
Key Indicators:
- At least 1 national park and 4 gazetted forests and their buffer zones, covering approximately 160,000 hectares, are being co-managed by communities (e.g. through PA stewardship models)
- 50+ elephants in Deux Balés and the gazetted forests along the Mouhoun river corridor, from a baseline of 30
- All PA pilot sites count on up-to-date management and business plans under initial implementation
- SO1 METT scores increase to > 40 by mid-term and >50 by project end for 1 National Park or “NP”; and 4 Gazetted Forests or “FC”) in the Boucles du Mouhoun PA Corridor from the following baseline:
[2] Tisse FC30
[3] Oualou FC30
[4] Sâ FC30
[5] Sourou FC30
- Communities improved perception of their livelihood stake in the good stewardship of biological resources in pilot sites in the Boucles du Mouhoun PA Corridor, measured through the periodic and independent application of the ‘Most Significant Change’ (MSC) technique.
2.2 Buffer zones and protected forests are demarcated and the corresponding sustainable management and business plans prepared
2.3 Land use and tenure/stewardship rights articulation at the local level provides incentives to communities for conservation-compatible resource use, including in PA buffer zones
2.4 A system for managing and monitoring biological resources in community managed forests is in place and provides relevant and scientifically-based information on the state of biodiversity in pilot sites
2.5 Effective consultation mechanisms are established for participatory management of protected forest resources and their buffer zones
2.6 Local groups and associations as well as municipal entities strengthened in their planning and decision-making capacity related to sustainable resource use and conservation / 661,000 / 13 / 4,513,708 / 87 / 5,174,708
3) Project management / 77,000 / 9 / 790,600 / 91 / 867,600
Total project costs / 860,000 / 10 / 7,716,127 / 90 / 8,576,127
B. Sources of confirmed Co-financing for the project
Name of Co-financier (source) / Classification / Type / Project / %*Austrian Cooperation through the Regional Development Program (PRD) in National Committee for Environment and Sustainable Development (CONEDD)* / Bilat. Agencies / Grant / $1,698,628 / 22.0%
MARH - Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Resources, through the PNGT2 - National Land Management Program Phase II / Nat'l Gov't / Grant / $4,022,979 / 52.1%
OFINAP - National Office for Protected Areas / Nat'l Gov't / Grant / $1,763,600 / 22.9%
APPFLN - National Agency for the Promotion of Non-Timber Forest Products / Nat'l Gov't / In-Kind / $56,920 / 0.7%
United Nations Development Program / Impl. Agency / In-Kind / $11,000 / 0.1%
United Nations Development Program / Impl. Agency / Grant / $70,000 / 0.9%
Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, Directorate for Finance and Administration / Nat'l Gov't / Grant / $93,000 / 1.2%
Total Co-financing / $7,716,127 / 100.0%
* Percentage of each co-financier’s contribution at CEO endorsement to total co-financing.
C. Financing Plan Summary For The Project ($)
Project Preparation Amount (a) / Project (b) / Totalc = a + b / Agency Fee* / For comparison:
GEF and Co-financing at PIF
GEF financing / 49,000 / 860,000 / 909,000 / 86,000 / 860,000
Co-financing / 49,000 / 7,716,127 / 7,765,127 / 3,090,000
Total / 98,000 / 8,576,127 / 8,674,127 / 86,000 / 3,950,000
*PPG fee previously approved.
D. GEF Resources Requested by Agency(ies), Focal Area(s) and Country(ies)
N/A
E. Consultants working for technical assistance components:
Component / Estimated person weeks (GEF Only) / GEF amount($) / Co-financing ($)* / Project total ($)Local consultants* [Sub-total] / 214 / 102,000 / 98,000 / 200,000
National Project Coordinator (pro-rata) / 52 / 30,000 / 0 / 30,000
Project Assistant (accounting and finance) / 156 / 66,000 / 0 / 66,000
Legal, Policy and Institutional Capacity / 6 / 6,000 / 0 / 6,000
Foresters at DGCN (Boromo, Tcheriba, Gassan) - 30% part-time / - / 0 / 18,000 / 18,000
Legal advisor at DGCN / - / 0 / 10,000 / 10,000
Central government officials / - / 0 / 30,000 / 30,000
Local government officials / - / 0 / 30,000 / 30,000
Project Evaluation / - / 0 / 10,000 / 10,000
International consultants* [Sub-total] / 6 / 18,000 / 24,000 / 42,000
Sustainable Resource Use & Conservation Finance Specialist / 3 / 9,000 / 0 / 9,000
Local Development Planning and Institutional Capacity Specialist / 3 / 9,000 / 0 / 9,000
Project Evaluation / - / 0 / 24,000 / 24,000
Total / 220 / 120,000 / 122,000 / 242,000
* Details are provided in Annex C.
F. Project management Budget/cost
Cost Items / Total Estimated person weeks/months (GEF only) / GEF amount $ / Co-financing ($)* / Project total ($)Local consultants [sub-total] * / 104 / 60,000 / 162,000 / 222,000
National Project Coordinator (pro-rata managerial responsibilities) / 104 / 60,000 / 0 / 60,000
National Project Director / - / 0 / 84,000 / 84,000
Mouhoun Project Officer at Dedougou / - / 0 / 78,000 / 78,000
International consultants [sub-total] * / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0
Office facilities, equipment, vehicles and communications [sub-total] * / 5,000 / 113,000 / 118,000
IT equipment / 5,000 / 0 / 5,000
One all-terrain vehicle financed by UNDP ($25K) + other project vehicles to be availed by government (estimated reserve $42K with maintenance costs incl.) / 0 / 67,000 / 67,000
Premises alterations / construction or rental / 40,000 / 40,000
Furniture / 6,000 / 6,000
Travel [sub-total] * / 0 / 9,000 / 9,000
Other [sub-total] : / 12,000 / 506,600 / 518,600
Professional Services: Translation, Editorial and Audit. / 11,000 / 0 / 11,000
Misc: Bank charges, insurance and other miscellaneous expenditures / 1,000 / 4,600 / 5,600
Communication costs (financed by UNDP) / 0 / 2,000 / 2,000
Rough estimates of other co-financier's mgt costs (in participating in the project) / 0 / 500,000 / 500,000
Total / 104 / 77,000 / 790,600 / 867,600
* Details are provided in Annex C.
G. Does the project include a “non-grant” instrument? yes [ ] no [X]
H. describe the budgeted m &E Plan:
The project’s M&E Plan is thoroughly described in the UNDP PRODOC. For more detail, refer to Section I, PART IV: Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget. The table below provides a summary
Costed Monitoring & Evaluation Framework
Type of M&E activity / Responsible Parties / Budget US$Excluding project team staff time / Time frame
Inception Workshop and Report /
- Project Manager
- UNDP CO, UNDP GEF
Measurement of Means of Verification of project results. /
- UNDP GEF RTA/Project Manager will oversee the hiring of specific studies and institutions, and delegate responsibilities to relevant team members.
Measurement of Means of Verification for Project Progress on output and implementation /
- Oversight by Project Manager
- Project team
ARR/PIR /
- Project manager and team
- UNDP CO
- UNDP RTA
Periodic status/ progress reports /
- Project manager and team
Mid-term Evaluation /
- Project manager and team
- UNDP CO
- UNDP RCU
- External Consultants (i.e. evaluation team)
(includes travel and organization of meetings) / At the mid-point of project implementation.
Final Evaluation /
- Project manager and team,
- UNDP CO
- UNDP RCU
- External Consultants (i.e. evaluation team)
(includes travel and organization of meetings) / At least three months before the end of project implementation
Project Terminal Report /
- Project manager and team
- UNDP CO
- Local consultant
Audit /
- UNDP CO
- Project manager and team
Visits to field sites /
- UNDP CO
- UNDP RCU (as appropriate)
- Government representatives
TOTAL indicative COST
Excluding project team staff time and UNDP staff and travel expenses, but considering costs that remain to be determined. / ~US$ 65,000*
Note: Costs included in this table are part and parcel of the UNDP Total Budget and Workplan (TBW) in the PRODOC, and not additional to it. Costs will be shared between UNDP and GEF according to the TBW.
part ii: project justification:
A.State the issue, how the project seeks to address it, and the expected global environmental benefits to be delivered:
For more detail, refer to the UNDP PRODOC, SECTION I - PART I: Situation Analysis and PART II: Strategy. The project context, rationale and strategic approach may be summarized as follows:
Burkina Faso’s unique geographic position between the Sahelian and Sudanese eco-regions in West Africa constitutes an important ecological bridge across critical ecosystems which harbour a rich faunal and floral diversity and allow migration of important wildlife species across the region – a function especially critical during climate change regimes.
Because of these ecological characteristics and also because the country has managed to maintain a network of parks, game reserves and gazetted forests, Burkina Faso contains a surprising wealth of wildlife species (including emblematic African mammals such as elephants, antelopes and hippopotamus) and significant remnants of natural habitats, which have disappeared elsewhere in Western Africa.
Demographic pressure, poverty, and climate change are however increasing threats drivers to the remaining ecosystems and the country’s system of protected areas. These factors accelerate the processes of deforestation, encroachment of protected areas and overall ecosystem degradation, especially during the dry season when brush fires devastates the savannahs and affect the long-term viability of the remaining forests, wetlands and the network of protected areas.
This project will address these threats by support the enabling framework for and implementing participatory arrangements with the communities surrounding protected areas as a means to increase effectiveness of conservation action while also improving livelihood conditions for the local people. By making communities responsible for conserving biological resources and direct beneficiaries of the services that ecosystems provide, they will have a distinct state in protecting gazetted areas.
GEF support will strengthen the protection of approximately 160,000 hectares of existing conservation areas and their buffer zones (five forêts classées and a national park) and implement indirect conservation actions along the Mouhoun river forest corridor involving more than 328,000 hectares in western Burkina Faso. This project could be the first step of a long-term strategy towards the restoration and effective conservation of an important transfrontier migration routes for wildlife, while providing fauna, flora and people with an ecosystem-based protection against the effects of climate change.
The project’s goal is to conserve globally significant biodiversity in Burkina Faso by protecting and sustainably managing biologically significant forest resources in the Boucle du Mouhoun region.
The project’s objective is to incorporate protected areas as a key tool for biodiversity conservation into Burkina Faso’s decentralization process through the operationalization of community managed protected areas, including gazetted forests and their buffer zones.
In order to achieve the above objective, and based on the threat and barrier analysis (see PRODOC Section I, Part I), which identified: (i) the problem being addressed by the project; (ii) its root causes; and (iii) the barriers that need to be overcome to actually address the problem and its root causes, the project’s intervention has been organized in two components (with slightly improved formulations for outputs compared to what was presented at PIF stage), under which two ‘outcomes’ are expected from the project:
Outcome 1: Governance framework for the incorporation of conservation into Burkina Faso’s decentralization process established
Outcome 1will deal with the governance framework (policies, laws, strategies and plans) for the incorporation of conservation into Burkina Faso’s decentralization process, as well as with the institutional capacity that is necessary for it. This outcome will provide the normative and strategic conditions for the implementation of participatory management arrangements involving the communities surrounding protected areas in the Mouhoun region. Within the legal framework established by the Code Général des Collectivités Territoriales (Decentralization Law 055 of 2004) this outcome will provide support for the formulation at all levels of coherent policies and strategies necessary to establish the enabling environment for the participation of communities in the management and conservation of adjacent protected areas and gazetted forests. The resulting normative framework and intervention strategy applied in the three project sites, will provide a model for other communities along the Mouhoun river – and elsewhere in Burkina Faso – to adopt similar approaches and strengthen the participation of communities and municipalities in the management of the natural resources capital, in general, and the protected areas, in particular. Systemic, institutional and individual capacities will also be strengthened through policy/legal reforms, institutional review (including of PA finance aspects), the introduction of new operational systems (e.g. for PA monitoring), training and other means. It is worth noting that legislative / regulatory reform with respect to Natural Resource Management (NRM) and Sustainable Land Management (SLM) is being in different ways supported in broad manner by the UNPD/GEF CPP Subproject “PIMS 3969: Partnership for sustainable land management in Boucle du Mouhoun”. The focus here is much narrower and on the definition, at the level of regulations, of a ‘model for community co-management of PAs that builds on ‘stewardship’’, as will be explained under Outputs 1.1 and 1.2. While there are no obvious overlaps with respect to changes to policies and legislations that each of the UNDP/GEF projects are promoting, the potential for synergies (and perhaps even cost-sharing, since both projects are implemented by UNDP) is significant. These opportunities will be explored through the Technical Coordination Committee, where the CPP coordinator will be represented, as well as opportunties to collaborate with other programmes and initiative relaed to biodiversity conservation, sustainable land management, land governance on capacity building at institutional and systemic levels.
Outcome 2: The effective management of community PAs is demonstrated in pilot sites in the Boucles du Mouhoun PA Corridor
Under Outcome 2 and within the governance framework for Burkina’s decentralization process on-the-ground, the GEF will support the establishment of collaborative management structures involving communities with the mandate and capacity to ensure adequate protection and sustainable use of PAs and their buffer zones in three municipalities of the upper Mouhoun watershed. The five pilot sites are: (1) the Deux Balés National Park; and four Gazetted Forests, which are (2) Tisse; (3) Oualou; (4) Sâ; and (5) Sourou. Activities associated with this outcome will involve interventions at both the protected forest level (forêts classées / parc national), as well as in the surrounding buffer zones and connectivity corridors, and will require the active participation of communities and local authorities. Demarcation, zoning and management and business plans will be developed for the protected areas and their buffer zones including: six gazetted forests and one national park along the Mouhoun river corridor. Biodiversity-friendly activities will be promoted in the buffer zones and connectivity corridors through participatory arrangements and partnerships with community groups, NGO, and producers’ associations. Finally, in partnership with research institutions, the project will support the establishment of adequate baselines and effective monitoring systems for the project’s pilot sites.
The Outputs necessary to achieve the two above outcomes are thoroughly described in the UNDP PRODOC (Section I, Part II – Chapter ‘Project Goal, Objective, Outcomes and Outputs/Activities’).
The project will generate global biodiversity benefits in Burkina Faso by removing systemic and site level barriers to a more effective management of gazetted forests and protected areas and will contribute towards the integration of conservation practices into the rural development strategies of targeted areas. It aims at incorporating protected areas as a key tool for biodiversity conservation into Burkina Faso’s decentralization process through the operationalization of community managed protected areas.