Request for CEO endorsement/Approval
Project Type:
the GEF Trust Fund
Submission Date: 12/20/2007
Re-submission Date: 02/19/08
Expected CalendarMilestones / Dates
Work Program (for FSP) / N/A
GEF Agency Approval / March 15, 08
Implementation Start / April 15, 08
Mid-term Review (if planned) / April 15, 10
Implementation Completion / April 15, 11
part i: project Information
GEFSEC Project ID:
gef agency Project ID: P104229
Country(ies): LIBERIA
Project Title: CONSOLIDATION OF LIBERIA PROTECTED AREA NETWORK (COPAN)
GEF Agency(ies): , ,
Other Executing partner(s): Forestry Development Authority
GEF Focal Area(s): , , ,
GEF-4 Strategic program(S): SP 2 and SP3
Name of parent program/umbrella project: N/A
A. Project framework (See also annexes A and E)
Project Objective: /Project Components
/Indicate whether Investment, TA, STA**
/ Expected Outcomes /Expected Outputs
/GEF Financing*
/ Co-financing* / Total ($) /($)
/%
/($)
/%
/1. Strengthening of FDA and EPA / Investment, TA / Improved conservation and environment management capacity / Twenty qualified staff in place and performing in FDA (both in Monrovia and in the field) and EPA / 0 / 0% / 1,288,000 / 100% / 1,288,000
2. Consolidation of protected area management instruments / TA / Better suited conservation legal framework and management instruments / 1.Comprehensive law on wildlife management put in place
2. MOUs with Sierra Leone and Guinea partner institutions for management of transboundary PA
3. Transfer mechanism from Ministry of Finance to FDA of commercial logging receipts earmarked for PA operation cost is in place and functioning
4. Liberia Conservation Trust Fund (CTF) established
5. PA system management strategy prepared / 110,000 / 9% / 1,000,000 / 91% / 1,110,000
3. Creation of new protected areas / Investment, TA, STA / Conservation of globally significant ecosystems / 3 National PAs demarcated and under improved management, as measured by GEF METT tracking tool,
Basic Infrastructure for the 3 PAs put in place
Management plans for the 3 PAs elaborated and approved by relevant institutions and stakeholders / 584,000 / 26% / 1,607,000 / 74% / 2,191,000
4. Development of Conservation livelihood systems / Investment, TA / Reduced dependency of community from PA resources / 20% of communities around the park are involved in biodiversity friendly sustainable activities (e.g. agroforestry, arts and craft and wood products). / 0 / 0% / 2,435,000 / 100% / 2,435,000
5. Project Management / - / Project management units are formally established and operating effectively. / 56,000 / 15% / 300,000 / 85% / 356,000
Total Project Costs / 750,000 / 6,630,000 / 7,380,000
* List the $ by project components. The percentage is the share of GEF and Co-financing respectively to the total amount for the component.
** TA = Technical Assistance; STA = Scientific & technical analysis.
B. Financing Plan Summary For The Project ($)
Project Preparation* / Project / Agency Fee / Total at CEO Endorsement / For the record:Total at PIF
GEF / 56,000 / 750,000 / 80,600 / 886,600 / 750,000
Co-financing / 80,000 / 6,630,000 / 6,710,000 / 4,050,000
Total / 136,000 / 7,380,000 / 80,600 / 7,596,600 / 4,800,000
* Please include the previously approved PDFs and PPG, if any. Indicate the amount already approved as footnote here and if the GEF funding is from GEF-3. Provide the status of implementation and use of fund for the project preparation grant in Annex D.
C. Sources of confirmed Co-financing, including co-financing for project preparation for both the PDFs and PPG
Name of co-financier (source) / Classification / Type / Amount ($) / %*Government of Liberia / Nat. govt / Grant / 668,000 / 10%
World Bank (3 projects namely Forestry, Agriculture and Infrastructure and IDA growth projects) / Multilateral / Grant and Credit / 2, 656,000 / 40%
US Government / Bilater Donor / Grant / 500,000 / 7.5%
Conservation International / International NGO / Grant / 1,306,000 / 20%
Flora and Fauna International / International NGO / Grant / 1,000,000 / 15%
IUCN / International NGO / Grant / 500,000 / 7.5%
PPG cofinancing / 80,000 / 0
Total Co-financing / 6,710,000 / 100%
* Percentage of each co-financier’s contribution at CEO endorsement to total co-financing.
D. GEF Resources Requested by Focal Area(s), Agency(ies) or Country(ies) – N/A
GEF Agency / Focal Area / Country Name/Global / (in $)
Project Preparation / Project / Agency
Fee / Total
(select)World BankUNDPUNEPAsDBAfDBEBRDIADBFAOUNIDOIFAD / (select)BiodiversityClimate ChangeInternational WatersLand DegradationOzone DepletionPOPs
Total GEF Resources
* No need to provide information for this table if it is a single focal area, single country and single GEF Agency project.
E. Project management Budget/cost
Cost Items
/Total Estimated person weeks
/GEF
($) /Other sources ($)
/Project total ($)
Local consultants*
/145
/ 19,200 / 39,000 / 58,200International consultants*
/ 0 / 0 / 0 / 0Office facilities, equipment, vehicles and communications**
/ 22,000 / 146,000 / 168,000Travel** / / 14,800 / 115,000 / 129,800
Total / 56,000 / 300,000 / 356,000
* Provide detailed information regarding the consultants in Annex C.
** Provide detailed information and justification for these line items.
- Justification: the FDA conservation department will need some office equipment, motorbikes and access to radio/telephone and internet in order to run the project. FDA will give this material mainly to the field offices of the 3 Protected Areas that will be established at the beginning of the project
Also, FDA officials will need to travel from Monrovia to the various counties for meetings and consultation in relation to the creation of the protected areas network. The travel expenses estimates are related to this fundamental participatory and monitoring aspect of creating a PA network.
f. Consultants working for technical assistance components:
Component
/Estimated person weeks
/GEF($)
/Other sources ($)
/Project total ($)
Local consultants*
/912
/ 30,000 / 334,800 / 364,800International consultants*
/ 9 / 45,000 / 0 / 45,000Total
/ 921 / 75,000 / 334,800 / 409,800* Provide detailed information regarding the consultants in Annex C
G. describe the budgeted m&e plan:
The M&E plan will be based on the agreed indicators of the results framework that will be measured 2 times per year. A methodological data-sheet on how to collect and measure each indicator will be prepared by FDA in the first quarter of project implementation when also the baseline will be established. FDA will prepare a report twice a year for World Bank revision on the progress in achieving the indicators, on implementations, on progress towards achieving the development objective and on financial management and procurement. The World Bank will carry out one supervision mission per year to oversee implementation progress. The estimated budget for M&E for the project is US$ 150,000.
part ii: project justification
A. describe the project rationale and the expected measurable global environmental benefits:
The Upper Guinea Forest Biodiversity Hotspot extends from Guinea to Togo and is one of 35 such critical areas for global biodiversity conservation. Forests in this region have been reduced to an estimated 14.3% of their original extent with Liberia maintaining 43% -- approximately 4.52 million hectares -- of what remains in two large blocks of forest including evergreen lowland forests in the southeast and the semi-deciduous mountain forests in the northwest. Despite its exceptional importance for biodiversity conservation, only 4% of Liberia’s forests are contained in two protected areas: Sapo National Park (180,000 ha) and the Nimba Nature Reserve (13,500 ha). Therefore, Liberia is the “heart of the hotspot” – critical to successful conservation in the region, and in need of immediate conservation action.
Biologically, Liberia is exceptionally diverse, with high rates of endemism and many species that are nearly extinct outside the country. Liberia is home to approximately 125 mammal species, 590 bird species, 162 native fish species, 74 known reptiles and amphibians and over 1000 described insect species. In December 1999, The West African Conservation Priority-Setting Exercise for the Upper Guinean Ecosystem (funded by the Global Environment Facility) identified Liberia as by far the top priority country in humid West Africa for conservation. However, opening up of new concessions, hunting and mining into previously inaccessible forest is quickly undermining the forests’ ecological balance. The ‘empty-forest’ syndrome, which results from over-hunting, has been recorded since 2002 in several forest areas thought to be wildlife strongholds. Botanical knowledge of Liberia is poorer than for any other country in the Upper Guinean Ecosystem. However, Liberia is thought to contain over 2000 flowering plants including 240 timber species. Botanical experts suspect that the high-intensity rainfall zone along the coast represents a center of plant endemism. In late 2002, botanical collections at Sapo Park found 6 species new to science in only 10 days. Such a level of undiscovered species is almost unheard-of in continental Africa, outside of the Congo Basin. Given that no systematic inventories have ever been carried out of southeast and northwest Liberia’s flora, or its insects, amphibians, arachnids, gastropods or other animal species displaying a high degree of dependence on specific plant hosts, the uniqueness of Liberia’s flora and fauna can only be surmised.
Due to 14 years of conflict, data on Liberia’s biodiversity is poor and fragmented relative to many other African countries. However, surveys in recent years conducted by the Forestry Development Authority (FDA) in partnership with Fauna & Flora International and Conservation International provide sufficient data to both validate expert opinion of Liberia’s biodiversity value and justify land-use planning for conservation. This information has been organized in a Key Biodiversity Area database showing all species of significant global biodiversity value in Liberia as determined by the World Conservation Union (IUCN.
Protected areas selection was defined during an international multistakeholders workshop (see Annex H) held in August 2007 (and financed by Conservation International) based on a number of criteria including species diversity, threats, data availability, community involvement, endangered species, funding, connectivity, population density, uniqueness, land use security, management capacity conflict, physical attributes, protection education, accessibility, political support, legal framework, geographical, contribution to environment, partnership, and size of area. Ten protected areas were selected for the creation of the protected areas network and 3 were prioritized for initial establishment. The result of this workshop suggested that the best suited areas to start protection were lake Piso, Gola forest and Wonegizi forest (see annexes I and J)
Lake Piso (proposed protected area: 48,593 ha). Biodiversity richness includes migratory birds species, sea turtles, hippos, manatees, primates, fish species and medicinal plants. No other proposed PA have such a variety of habitats and ecosystems such as costal, marine, forest, mangrove, brackish water, island, freshwater habitats are present in Lake Piso. The main opportunity are (i) very unique marine biodiversity and mangroves breeding ground for important marine species; (ii) enough baseline data for establishing a PA[1]; and (iii) potential for funding from tourism, research and fishery sectors as well as high interest for investment in area including some private US funds. The main threats are deforestation of mangroves, unregulated fishing, hunting, farming and settlements on hills, high population due to the presence of a town and the vicinity of Monrovia, port development, erosion of dunes (sand mining) and offshore mining for oil.
Gola Forest (proposed protected area: 97,975 ha) is endowed with significant biodiversity richness (endemic amphibians, elephants, hippos, birds, plants, etc) and a number of unique habitats such as forests, gallery forest, swamp forest and fram bushes. The most evident opportunities include (i) good funding potential based on charismatic fauna (elephants, hippos), transboundary conservation potential, security of border area and eco-tourism potential; (ii) lessons learned from Gola in Sierra Leone in terms of management experience, biological data, community exchanges and fund raising experience; (iii) potential effectiveness of transboundary/peace park management leading to coordinated response to threats; and (iv) being regarded as hotspot in the Upper Guinea Forest. The main threats include (i) the possibility for forest concessions to be reinstated; (ii) diverse land uses such as hunting, mining, logging, farming, and transboundary migration of people from Sierra Leone; (iii) possibility of opposition from locals and others whose livelihoods might be threatened by PA’s establishment (boundaries issues); and (iv) lack of FDA capacity in the area/site.
Wonegizi Forest (proposed protected area: 29,894 ha). Biodiversity richness includes chimps and other primates (endangered), elephants, pygmy hippo (flagship spp for Liberia). Wonegizi is a unique habitat (IBA) for Picathartes (rock fowl). Conservation opportunities include (i) steepness of slope as a disincentive for farming, (ii) funding from IUCN, Birdlife, USAID, MIKE, KFW, CEPF, FDA, Great Apes; (iii) research attention; (iv) ecotourism potential (species, culture, scenery); (v) extension of Guinea Forest (500,000 ha only); (vi) corridor (Wologizi) into Guinea; (vii) transboundary nature (peace park); and (viii) scattered farming communities offer opportunity for integrating community land use practices in PA mngt (e.g. buffer zones). Most important threats include (i) mining for iron ore with the possibility of the extension of the Wologizi deposit entailing possible erosion and contamination of waterbodies; (ii) returning of refugee that could increase population density and result in land use change (farming expansion) especially in the next 5 years; (iii) legal and illegal logging; (iv) commercial hunting; (v) potential fires of savannah grass.