INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET
CONCEPT STAGE
Report No.: AC2457
Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 08/24/2006
I. BASIC INFORMATION
A. Basic Project Data
Country: Ethiopia / Project ID: P098093Project Name: Productive Safety Nets APL II
Task Team Leader: Trina S. Haque
Estimated Appraisal Date: October 9, 2006 / Estimated Board Date: December 14, 2006
Managing Unit: AFTH3 / Lending Instrument: Adaptable Program Loan
Sector: Other social services (98%);Central government administration (1%);Sub-national government administration (1%)
Theme: Social safety nets (P);Nutrition and food security (P);Vulnerability assessment and monitoring (S);Other social development (S)
IBRD Amount (US$m.): 0.00
IDA Amount (US$m.): 150.00
GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00
PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00
Other financing amounts by source:
BORROWER/RECIPIENT 0.00
CANADA: CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CIDA) 42.00
UK: BRITISH DEPARTMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (DFID) 153.00
EC: EUROPEAN COMMISSION 86.00
IRELAND, GOV. OF 6.50
Financing Gap 357.50
645.00
B. Project Objectives [from section 2 of PCN]
The development objective of the overall PSNP is to contribute to improving the productivity and efficiency of transfers to chronically food insecure househoulds, reducing household vulnerability, improving resilience to shocks, and promoting sustainable community development. This will be achieved through (i) the timely provision of adequate transfers to beneficiary households, thus allowing effective consumption-smoothing and avoiding asset-depletion; and (ii) the creation of productive sustainable community assets, contributing to rehabilitation of severely degraded areas and increasing productivity for households in these areas.
The development objectives of APL I were to assist the Government to transition from a relief-oriented to a productive and development-oriented safety net by (i) providing predictable, multi-annual resources, (ii) replacing food with grants as the primary medium of support, (iii) making resources available for critical capital, technical assistance, and administrative costs, (iv) strengthening community involvement by supporting community targeting and local-level participatory planning as core principles of the program, and (v) relating public works activities to the underlying causes of food insecurity, especially with respect to soil and water conservation measures.
The second phase of the APL (scheduled to begin in the first quarter of calendar year 2007 pending satisfactory completion of the triggers for moving to the second phase) has as its overarching development objective to consolidate the progress made under Phase I, and to establish a system of assistance to chronically food insecure households which is well-targeted timely, adequate, financially sustainable integrated with worda development plans and contributes to the environmental transformation of program areas.
C. Project Description [from section 3 of PCN]
APL II will continue implementation of the program components approved as part of APL I, as well as the various modifications planned or underway to further strengthen core program implementation. APL I currently comprises two components: (i) safety net grants for labour-intensive public works (such as soil and water conservation, improvement of access roads, rehabilitation of health facilities, shallow wells, spring protection and development, small-scale irrigation and composting) and direct support.
Analysis and consultations during the identification stage, together with an early QER (December 2005), and the PCN Review meeting (August 2006) indicated that meeting APL II objectives will require work in the following areas, which define the design agenda for APL II:
(i) Strengthening governance and increasing transparency: The PSNP, implemented in a decentralized, low- capacity environment, requires strong checks and balances to protect the program from manipulation for personal ends or special interests. A project of this nature places significant pressures on local administrations to ensure a fair and transparent distribution of program resources, with the program likely to come under increasing pressure and scrutiny in this area. The recent review of program targeting indicated that, in this environment, the program has done well to ensure that program resources are targeted to the poorest households. It also indicated, however, that the current appeals process could be further tightened to guarantee timely and objective treatment for those who might have a grievance, and that more information should be available to the public at local level on program objectives, targeting criteria, and appeals procedures.
In addition, the current mix of community/ administrative targeting may need to be reinforced with elements of self-targeting as a way to reduce pressures on local administrations and communities. In this regard the terms of reference for a study are being finalized that will provide further information on (i) prevailing rural wages for unskilled labor and the extent of available employment at these wages in program areas, as well as (ii) time-use data for target households with various demographic profiles. The study will provide greater indication of the degree to which the current wage provides any incentive for non-target households to seek inclusion, the opportunity cost of participation for target households, and the degree to which work requirements under the program could be adjusted to discourage program demand among food-secure households. Key considerations to keep in mind as adjustments to the program are explored, will be the essential role of the PSNP to smooth consumption of critically vulnerable households and the need to avoid public works participation displacing household participation in other productive activities.
At a broader level, sustaining local and international support for the program in a contested political environment and with competing demands for scarce development resources requires not only good performance but also transparency that subjects the program to public scrutiny. The PSNP needs to demonstrate that it is functioning as designed, and that it is generating the results that it promises. Towards these ends, project preparation will support means to further strengthen transparency of the targeting process and resource allocation decisions (e.g. widespread publication/communication of rules, program data in public domain), local accountability in service delivery (e.g. citizen's report cards), and the application of grievance procedures (e.g. frequent follow-up of any mis-targeting allegations). The Institutional Support component under APL II will also focus on assisting the program to produce more timely information through its M&E system, prepare and implement a multi-media communication strategy and implement a full impact evaluation to address questions of effectiveness.
(ii) Improving efficiency and predictability of transfers: Preparation will focus on four areas in this context. First, emphasis on early planning and resource programming will continue to improve the predictability of program resources for woredas and allow better integration of program activities with woreda budget and development planning. Second, the focus on identifying and addressing key gaps in logistic capacity will continue (personnel, transport, computers, and generators), drawing on pilot experiences where possible for building capacity, for example, instituting mobile accounting teams. Third, options to harness technologies, such as the use of low-cost cell-phone technology, to reduce the transaction costs of delivering cash to beneficiaries, will be explored. Fourth, the pros and cons of providing ?PSNP beneficiary cards? will be explored. These cards would signify eligibility in the PSNP for more than one year, once the household has been identified as being eligible. Multi-year eligibility in the program would provide much-needed assurance of assistance to the household, enabling it to take on more risk in productive activities and to invest more. Fourth, the issue of utilizing established micro-finance institutions (MFIs) in the delivery of transfers will be revisited.
An additional area to be supported under APL II will be the implementation of pilot programs that provide an appropriate alternative to public works for pastoralist communities in Afar, Somali and eastern Oromiya Regions. For 2006 the Government has brought Afar inside the Program and provided Direct Support for these beneficiaries, while detailed design work is undertaken on a fully-fledged safety net sub-program appropriate for pastoralist areas. Until such time, Direct Support will continue to be the PSNP delivery mode for these populations.
(iii) Catalyzing environmental transformation: Sustainable land management and environmental rehabilitation is expected to take on an increasingly central role in PSNP implementation. The bulk of PSNP resources support labor-intensive public works that have a strong focus on soil and water conservation and small-scale irrigation and represent an important contribution towards graduation. Evidence both from Ethiopia and from other countries shows that it is possible for these activities to become a vehicle for significant environmental transformation and enhanced productivity. A recent review of the public works program indicated, that while the quality of public works projects was generally good, there is a need to improve the integration between bottom-up and top-down planning, and focus on providing high-quality technical support. There is also a need to strengthen the implementation of the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) to ensure that the design of the Public Works reflects good practice in the avoidance and/or mitigation of negative environmental and social impacts. The enhanced involvement of Natural Resources Management personnel in program implementation will be explored under APL II, as will the use of appropriate technologies to promote better planning and monitoring of public works. Discussions have also started on how to better promote inter-regional learning and sharing of best-practice, which will become a focus of APL II.
(iv) Financing instruments for drought risk management: Without ensuring a predictable and timely response to drought, the possibility remains that chronic food insecurity will increase as a result of transient shocks. The emergency appeal system, which is still the only system in place for responding to transient shocks outside the PSNP, falls short of providing this response. The debate over a more appropriate portfolio of financing instruments for responding to drought is therefore coming to the fore of the policy debate in Ethiopia. The team is working with WFP to develop a strategy based around a coordinated portfolio of drought financing instruments. The instruments under review, which would build on the base provided by the PSNP would be (i) an Ethiopia specific contingency fund; (ii) a contingent credit with the World Bank/ IMF, and (iii) weather-based insurance instruments. The goal would be to sequence the instruments in such a way so that an emergency appeal would only be needed in the most extreme, or "outlier" events. The initiative seeks to use the Ethiopia Agricultural Drought Index (a weather-based index developed for Ethiopia's pilot weather-based insurance contract) to allow quantifiable triggers to be used across these different instruments. The optimal combination of these in response to the severity of any given drought shock would make up Ethiopia's drought-risk management strategy. Additional IDA financing would be needed to operationalize this component, but IDA commitment to the reform agenda would leverage significant additional resources from donor partners.
(v) Medium-term financial sustainability of the PSNP: At the outset of the PSNP, Government had indicated that the program would be operational for only five years, after which chronic food insecurity would have been addressed. While neither the Bank nor other development partners agreed with this assessment, it was felt that initiating the reform process of the safety net system was the immediate goal, and that issues of duration of the program and financial sustainability could be addressed at a later stage. With the start of APL II, these questions become of immediate relevance. This is especially true since the PSNP faces a large overall financing gap starting with Year 4 of implementation (i.e., 2008). It is thus proposed that efforts be undertaken in the course of APL II design and early implementation to mobilize longer-term commitment and financing from both existing and new PSNP partners to enable the program to continue at least for the next eight years (resulting in a ten-year commitment overall). To achieve this, the PSNP and FSP will jointly need to demonstrate their effectiveness. The Bank is also signaling its ongoing commitment to the PSNP with the proposal to extend the support to the PSNP with the addition of a third phase of support for 5 years.
D. Project location (if known)
Public works activities will be carried out in rural areas of Ethiopia.
E. Borrower’s Institutional Capacity for Safeguard Policies [from PCN]
Ethiopia has adequate EIA legislation covering individual projects with significant impact. Since the community projects are determined during the course of the project, for the purposes of the first phase of this project (APL I), an ESMF was produced by Government for APL I and disclosed.
It was noted during the recent APL I Public Works review that although woreda staff had in many cases received ESMF training, not all projects were being screened as required by the ESMF. It was also noted that monitoring of ESMF implementation had not yet been instituted by woreda or Regional authorities.
In response, the following measures are being taken for APL II:
(i) Staff of the Regional Environmental Protection Authorities, who have a key role in the ESMF procedure, and the woreda Environmental Focal Points, will participate in the awareness-creation and training courses for the PSNP Public Works, which includes ESMF II training; This trainIg will be provided by teams drawn from MoARD at Federal and Regional level, with technical assistance from the Natural Resources Management personnel of MoArd and WFP.
(ii) The provisions for monitoring implementation of the ESMF, including identification of the parties responsible for implementation and monitoring, will be reviewed jointly with the MoARD and re-designed to ensure implementation in APL II, taking into account existing capacities and any capacity-building requirements.
It is considered that with revised roles and responsibilities, and supported by awareness-creation and training in ESMF implementation and monitoring, the woreda technical staff will have the capacity to undertake the basic environmental screening required by the ESMF for individual sub-projects. Since it is not intended that the PSNP will include public works necessitating a separate EIA, it is considered that with adequate awareness-creation and training, the Regional Environmental Bureaus have sufficient capacity to review and determine, in the exceptional cases that may arise, where an EIA may be required, and to make arrangements for such an EIAs if necessary. Such an EIA would be conducted using BoARD staff with support from MoARD and other stakeholders as required.
F. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists
Mr Ian Leslie Campbell (AFTH3)
II. SAFEGUARD POLICIES THAT MIGHT APPLY