Project Brief Identifiers



Download 0.93 Mb.
Page7/8
Date conversion29.04.2016
Size0.93 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8

Annex 3: Incremental Cost Analysis


BURKINA FASO: Sahel Integrated Lowland Ecosystem Management
A. Environmental Context in Burkina Faso
The national territory of Burkina Faso can be sub-divided in four agro-ecological zones being from North to South : a Sahelian zone , covering about 6 percent of the territory, with an annual rainfall of less than 350 mm mostly of pastoral use, a Sudano-Sahelian zone (rainfall 350 –600 mm) and Sudanian zone (rainfall 600-800) both covering about 32 percent and for agro-pastoral use and a Sudanian zone (rainfall over 800 mm) covering about 30 percent for agro-sylvo-pastoral use. Two third of the country, central and southern part is irrigated by the Volta river basin while the Northern zones comprises no rivers but is located between the Niger river basin- which at this location traverses Mali and Niger- and the Volta rivers. Both the Niger and Volta river basins are major international rivers within the region of West Africa as a whole. The large geographic importance of these major international rivers and the climatic circumstances characterized by one annual dry seasons, forcing part of the animals and human populations to seasonally migrate, make that the condition of the land and water resources between the four major agro-ecological zones within the country are strongly interdependent and linked with those of the surrounding countries. As a result, the application if integrated ecosystem management in the region of West Africa is of crucial importance to both sustainable regional rural development and the maintenance of global environmental assets.

In Burkina Faso, as in most other West African countries, however, due to a decline in annual rainfall during the last three decades and overexploitation of the natural resources, pressured by increasing populations and decreasing agricultural productivity, have caused a serious decline in overall productivity and biodiversity of the natural resources leading to land degradation and desertification, associated with fragmentation and loss of globally valued natural habitats, biodiversity, and carbon storage capacity while threatening the condition of important international waters.


Considered the most important human-induced threat to the condition of the natural resources in the country is the continuing uncontrolled expansion of unsustainable extensive cropping practices endangering the condition of natural rangelands, particularly valued natural habitats (such as forests and wetlands) and surface waters.
In view of the high dependency of the rural population in Burkina Faso on cropping, livestock holding and natural products for their primary needs relating to water, food, construction material, energy and health care and in the context of the high-risk agricultural circumstances involved, the preservation of water and a diversity of food resources through a balanced integrated management of the cropping systems, the sedentary and migrating livestock holding systems, the natural habitats and the surface water resources is crucial. The high-risk agricultural circumstances relate to the poor natural resources base in terms of water scarcity, the erratic climatic patterns, the poor soil condition and the relative high occurrence of agricultural pests and diseases.
Table 1: Linkages between the environmental situation (threats and root causes) in Burkina Faso, global environmental issues, and GEF-supported activities under SILEM.


Environmental Situation and Impact on Rural Development

Linkages with Global Environmental Issues

Threats

Root Causes

Project Components of Activities

Continuing overall land and water degradation in the country, partly involving desertification, characterized by a decline and fragmentation of natural habitats and overall productivity and biodiversity of the natural resources which decreases the amount, the diversity and the stability of the supply of water, fodder, food, household energy, construction material, medicinal and veterinary products representing the primary resource base of the rural population and directly affecting the poorest of the poor.

Widespread land degradation partly involving desertification

Encroachment of natural resources degradation on globally valued natural habitats threatening globally valued biodiversity and the condition of international waters (e.g. Volta river) accompanied by loss of carbon storage capacity.





Unsustainable extensive cropping, dispersing mainly from the lowlands, at the expense of the multiple functions of these lowlands as the cornerstones of nested larger local, national and regional ecosystems and as important sources for rural development. The three major functions of the lowland ecosystems at stake are:

High potential for increased agriculturaproductivity

Role as dry season water and fodder providers

Inclusion and/or proximity of particularly valued natural habitats.



Decline in annual rainfall

Population growth

Lack of awareness, capacity and cooridination between various stakeholders on local, national and global level regarding the benefits of integrated management of the lowland ecosystem to rural development

Lack of financial resources on local and national level to allow for such an integrated intensification of the agricultural practices in the lowlands.

Unfavorable environmental and agricultural institutional and legislative setting to allow for integrated intensified management of the lowland resources.

Poorly competitive agriculture

Limited alternatives for rural development

Poor or unequal access to inputs/resources (gender/tenure/credit

Increasing knowledge/technology gaps


SILEM aims to complement the CBRDP by the following type of activities:

Local and national awareness raising and capacity building of rural communities relating to benefits and design and implementation of integrated ecosystem taking the lowlands as entry point.

Provide additional financial resources to the community-funds (FIL) established by CBRDP to promote integrated lowland ecosystem management.

Raise awareness, build capacity and support policy reforms of local, regional and national Governmental, non-profit and commercial organizations such as to facilitate integrated lowland ecosystem management.




B. Baseline Scenario
The base line scenario - the IDA-financed CBRDP without blending with the GEF-financed SILEM - aims to assist the Government in empowering the provincial and local communities to implement their own development process and as such to support poverty reduction and sustainable rural development. This project is one of the composing parts of the Programme National de Développement Rural Décentralisé (PNDRD). To achieve its goal, the CBRDP implements the following components of activities:
Local capacity building: Organizing villages and strengthening their capacity to plan, implement, operate and maintain investment.

Local investment Fund: Establishment of a local investment fund with two windows, one that channels resources directly to rural communities on a matching grant basis to finance demand-driven socio-economic and productive investments, and another window for larger investments identified by rural communities and implemented by provinces.

Institutional capacity building: Supporting the rural decentralization process on local, provincial and national levels, while giving training, equipping and operating the field teams and other service providers with whom the CBRDP has signed agreements.

Land tenure security pilot: A pilot study in six test sites representing the principal systems of land use and ownership problems is developed to improve land tenure security and access for all users.

Program coordination, administration and M&E: This component includes three sub-components: (i) support for the coordination office/forum of the overall PNDRD, (ii) support for the coordination and management of the IDA-supported Project and (iii)support for the program and project monitoring and evaluation.

Based on the experience of the PGNT - a community-based IEM project on which the design of CBRDP is based - on the short term, only a relatively small proportion of the community-driven projects would be expected to address natural resources management issues. Those IEM activities being proposed, will most likely focus on the short term recovery or maintenance of the areas under cultivation as sources for cash (e.g. cotton) and food crop production. Although, the attention given by the CBRDP to land tenure security, may significantly increase the local interest in longer term management of both the areas under cultivation and the communally exploited land and water resources, without further capacity building on the level of all stakeholders involved, policy reform and financial resources to enable integrated management of local natural resources as part of larger ecosystems, no particular attention will be given to environmental and rural development concerns of more national and international interest such as the maintenance of the condition of rivers as a whole, corridors for transhumant livestock and wildlife and particularly valued natural habitat.

Furthermore, without SILEM, the upscaling of the intervention sites of CBRDP towards 2000 villages during the first phase, no explicit priority will be given to locations and where integrated management of the natural resources will be of particular national and/or international environmental interest. As a result , under the baseline scenario, the natural resources management activities will tend to be of more short term and locally fragmented interest, missing the conditions to support national and/or international socio and ecological sustainability of interest to longer term national and international rural development of the sub-region of West Africa as a whole.


C. GEF Alternative Scenario
The global environmental objective of the GEF alternative scenario – the IDA –financed CBRDP complemented by the GEF financed SILEM - is to empower rural populations to apply integrated lowland ecosystem management in order to halt land and water degradation while generating multiple global environmental benefits. Integrated lowland ecosystem management is defined for this program as natural resources management aiming to maintain in particular the condition of the lower positioned and most humid lands in view of their multiple functions as sub-components of larger local, national and international ecosystems. The following three major interacting functions of the lowlands indicate their keystone role in the functioning of larger ecosystems and justify their selection as entry points to support overall integrated ecosystem management within the context of a broader national rural development program:
the relatively high potential for stable and increased agricultural productivity related to the moisture availability and most favorable soil conditions,

the crucial role as dry season water and fodder providers for local and migrating human populations, livestock and wildlife,

the inclusion and/or proximity of particularly valued and less common natural habitats such as gallery forest, sacred forests, nature reserves and wetlands.

The role of many lowlands as water collection sources for international waters


As related to the particularly valued habitats, these are known to include a significant portion of the native species traditionally used as sources for fodder, food, household energy, construction material and medicinal and veterinary care. Accordingly, they are relatively rich in biodiversity while they also have a relatively high carbon storage capacity.
Presently, however, the maintenance of these major three functions of the lowlands within the territory of Burkina Faso is increasingly threatened by uncontrolled expansion of unsustainable extensive cropping systems which disperse from the arable lowlands towards the uplands and the lands adjacent to (semi-) permanent surface waters. This situation not only negatively affects the sustainability of the cropping systems themselves- for example through the use of shorter fallow periods and cultivation of marginal lands - but also increases the exploitation pressure on the remaining non-cultivated areas –covering the more common natural rangelands habitats and the scarcer particularly valued natural habitats- which in turn degrades the availability of dry season water and fodder resources and the integrity of the above mentioned particularly valued natural habitats. In short, uncontrolled expansion of unsustainable extensive cropping practices generally goes at the expense of the interests of the croppers themselves but also of those of livestock holders, hunters, fishermen, wood collectors, gatherers of native food and medicinal and veterinary species and environmental conservationists.
In view of this situation, the program aims to empower the rural population to reverse this trend by enabling them to apply integrated lowland ecosystem management such as to simultaneously (i) intensify the cropping system, (ii) maintain and/or recover the dry season water and fodder resources and (iii) preserve the particularly valued natural habitats. Pro-active attention would be given to guide integrated lowlands ecosystem management plans such as to foster financial sustainability and social equity.

The expectation is that once a sound management of the lowlands ecosystem is in place, - accompanied by a decentralized and modified natural resources tenure policy – the resulting decentralized environmental governance and the additional income generating resources developed through the GEF-Alternative – being CBRDP complemented by SILEM - will allow further community investment in the vaster but ecologically and socially less complex upland areas.


To make the most effective use of the limited GEF resources, the activities during the first phase will be confined to 100 lowland sites. The geographic selection of these sites is in progress and is based on (i) the magnitude of land and water degradation, including desertification, (ii) the proximity and importance of particularly valued natural habitats and (iii) the proximity of international water. Proximity to the potential intervention areas of another Bank/GEF co-financed project under development (PAGEN ) will be part of the selection criteria as well. Map 2 in Annex 1 indicates the pre-identified main geographic areas of interest in the national territory.
Over the 15 years life time of SILEM, seeking to mainstream integrated ecosystem management, land and water degradation is expected to have significantly reduced while many local and national areas enclosing particularly valued habitats will have been preserved. Both these achievements will be accompanied by the preservation of globally valued biodiversity, carbon storage capacity and the condition of international waters. both achievements . For example, particularly valued natural habitats benefiting of the SILEM activities (besides sites in proximity of PAGEN intervention zones) are: the W park across the borders of Benin, Burkina Faso and Niger and multiple micro natural habitats scattered across rural areas throughout the country. Regarding the maintenance of the condition of international waters, both the Niger and the Volta river basins will be profiting.
The root causes behind the continuing expansion of unsustainable extensive cropping practices at the expense of the multiple function of ecosystems as a whole are (see Table 1):
the increasing food demands as relating to a continuing population growth combined with unfavorable rainfall patterns during the last three decades reducing the productivity of in particular the Sahelian agro-ecosystems

the lack of awareness and knowledge of all stakeholders involved of the importance of integrated lowland ecosystem management to support ecologically sustainable rural development

the existence of an unfavorable institutional and policy frame work to enable and foster integrated lowland ecosystem management

the lack of financial resources to support all stakeholders in supporting and/or implementing integrated lowland ecosystem management.


Seeking to remove the root causes for uncontrolled expansion of the cultivated areas, as far as in reach of a rural development project, SILEM will complement the CBDRP activity components as follows:

Local Capacity Building: Limited to the 100 lowlands intervention sites, several type of activities will be involved: (i) Incorporated in the awareness raising activities of CBRDP, SILEM will discuss the characteristics of integrated lowlands ecosystem management, the various type of stakeholders involved, and the linkages with the existing national environmental and rural development policies and action plans. (ii) SILEM will provide the communities with relevant national and international agro-ecological data and technical assistance to develop a natural resources use map of their territory which will enable and foster the design of IEM activities representing the composing parts of integrated ecosystem management and which could be integrated in the local development plans. (iii) like CBRDP, SILEM will support the strengthening and emergence of community-based organisations, “extra-ordinary governance bodies”, only when these would facilitate the implementation of relevant IEM activities. SILEM would support such organizations also in relevant activities taking place outside the SILEM intervention sites. (iv) SILEM will provide training in the technical implementation of integrated lowlands ecosystem practices through service providers” covering also the financial management of integrated lowland ecosystem management activities. (v) SILEM will support study tours by community members inside and outside the country to exchange knowledge and experiences relating to integrated ecosystem management, (vi) SILEM will assist in the establishment of longer term financial IEM partnerships with national and international stakeholders and (vii) unlike CBRDP, SILEM will also support the establishment or strengthening of local private or communal commercial activities if their activities would contribute to the achievement of the ILEM objectives.


Local Investment Fund)(FIL): For the 100 intervention sites of SILEM, the GEF resources will provide an additional USD1-2 per capita per year (equaling about 40 % of the total amount of GEF financing) to the CBRDP budget of USD3-5 per capita per year. As in CBRDP, there will be two sub-windows, one for financing village and inter-village IEM micro projects and one for supporting the provinces and the regions for applied IEM studies Aiming to preserve the previously described major functions of the lowlands as parts of larger ecosystems , the GEF will co-finance micro-projects and applied research studies which are selected based on a natural resources use map and plan which reflects the objectives of integrated lowlands ecosystem management. These micro-projects and applied research activities may be undertaken either and or at the level of (i) the cultivated areas, (ii) the non-cultivated areas, covering natural rangelands and particularly valued habitats and (iii) surface waters. Table 2 gives examples of eligible activities. Through its financial contribution, the GEF will enable the LIF to demand significantly reduced community-required contribution for such activities.


Table 2: Partial listing of activities eligible for GEF co-financing through SILEM.


Management of Cultivated Lands

Limit extension of area under cultivation

Take marginal lands under cultivation with annual crops out of production and/or recover through introduction of perennial and/or leguminous species to recover soil fertility and water retention and if possible increase fodder production.

Diversify cropping system through the introduction of native natural rangelands species of particular human, animal and/or anti-erosive use.

Allocate portion of cultivated land to production of fodder, with either native or introduced with mixed leguminous and/or perennial species

Maintain diversity in traditional crop species (long cycle)

(Re)introduce traditional and biologically sound technologies to improve soil fertility, water retention capacity of soils and pests control.

Applied research activities to test various relevant technologies.


Management of Non-cultivated Lands (covering the more common natural rangelands and the particularly valued habitats such as gallery forest, nature reserves, sacred forests and wetlands.

Prevent expansion of cultivation of marginal lands with annual crops.

Protect areas with particularly valued natural habitats against cultivation and other potentially damaging activities such as uncontrolled bushfires and/or over exploitation through either grazing, hunting, wood collection and non-wood plant product gathering.

Establish or recover linkages between fragmented parts of particularly valued natural habitats .

Allocate, maintain and respect corridors for seasonally migrating livestock and wildlife

Apply controlled bushfire management

Protect and/or recover severely degraded lands.

Install anti-erosive measures on moderately degrading lands

Protect and/or recover declining native plant and animal species within both the more common and the particularly valued natural habitats.

Control grazing, hunting, wood collection and non-wood plant product gathering.

Listing of function of native species of particular human and/or animal use –such as for food, fodder, medicinal, veterinary, construction material and household energy – and those of use as barriers against wind and/or water erosion, while indicating those of which the productivity is declining.

Identification and protection and/or recovery of declining native plant species and/or habitats or portions of the community rangelands of particular human, animal or anti-erosive use.

Appraisal of degree of importance of these native species in the identified uses for humans and/or animals.



Management of Surface Waters

Maintenance and/or recovery of riparian vegetation.

Identification and protection and/or recovery of declining native plans species and/or habitats or portions of riparian vegetation of particular human, animal or anti-erosive use.

Allocation, maintenance and respectation of livestock watering areas.

Control fishing practices.

Control community-based water flow alteration activities.

Institutional Capacity Building and Reform: In addition to CBRDPs support to the decentralization process, SILEM will (i) raise awareness of development practitioners of the characteristics of integrated lowlands ecosystem management, the various type of stakeholders involved, and the linkages with the existing national environmental and rural development policies and action plans, as mentioned above for the local communities, (ii) disseminate on a nationwide scale knowledge and experiences of communities with practices related to integrated ecosystem management through the use for example of radio, TV and publication of secondary school booklets , (iii) organize biannually stakeholders roundtable discussions to identify policy constraints to integrated ecosystem management and to propose policy reforms, (iv) train relevant service providers the transfer of technical knowledge regarding the implementation of integrated lowlands management activities, (v) promote policy reform such as to improve local access to organic and mineral fertilizers and to intensify the integration of livestock and cropping systems, (vi) support the establishment of incentives for adoption of IEM technologies with time-lagged benefits such as for example the application of agro-forestry, (vii) assist relevant national land and water use planning units in the formulation of natural resources management policies, (viii) train relevant policy task forces and community-based organizations to prevent and resolve natural resources use conflicts, and (ix) promote and assist the development of fiscal tools to enable local governments to mobilize resources to finance IEM activities.


Land Tenure Security (Pilot): SILEM will strengthen the activities of the CBRDP related to the Land Tenure Security Pilot by raising awareness regarding the land tenure security constraints which represent barriers to the application of integrated ecosystem management. Within the SILEM intervention sites, SILEM will (i) support the poor to obtain acceptable lowland-use contractual arrangements with landlords and land priests and (ii) establish locally accessible natural resources use conflict resolution mechanisms.
Program Coordination: Apart from integrating the monitoring of the implementation progress of SILEM in the existing CBRDP internal M&E system, SILEM will establish the following three addition M&E activities: (i) a community-based M&E system to evaluate the local implementation progress and environmental and socio-economic impact, (ii) a scientific M&E system to assess the impact of the project on local, national and international environmental and socio-economic parameters with the condition of the lowland ecosystems as entry point and (iii) an external M&E system involving national and international experts under the supervision of CONAGESE to provide external assistance.
As such, the GEF-financed SILEM activities, will enable the CBRDP to upscale its objectives to empower rural populations to take charge of their own medium to long term development toward an empowering of the rural population to sustain their own longer term development by safeguarding the long term interests of the national and international ecological and socio-economic development of the sub-region of West Africa as a whole. In return, SILEM will profit of an integration with CBRDP through its nationwide and multi-sectoral approach towards rural development, providing the rural population with the basic needs, required to allow for an interest in more longer term and national and international development issues.
The close collaboration of the management of SILEM with PRONAGEN, WAFEM, a similar community-based project in NIGER (CAP) and ALWI will strengthen the global environment partnership in the region.
D. Incremental Cost Analysis
The incremental cost of the first phase of SILEM is estimated based on the following reasoning.
The “Baseline Scenario”: SILEMs intervention sites relating to community-based local development plans are limited to only 100 sites of the 2000 sites of CBRDP, for the first phase project only. Therefore, only 5% of the costs budgeted for the components of activities “local capacity building” and “local investment fund” under CBRDP is considered, while 100 % is taken for the activities which are entirely of interest to SILEMs objectives being “Institutional Capacity Building and Policy Reform” and the “Land Tenure Security Pilot”. For the “Project Coordination” an estimated 15% is taken based on the coverage of all type of activities. As for the “Physical and Price Contingencies” only the proportion of the total resulting from herewith described approach regarding the former activity components if being taking, being 31%.
The “GEF Alternative Scenario”: Per activity component, the sum of the amounts considered under the “Baseline Scenario” and the budgeted GEF-financing is considered.
The results are presented in Table 3.
Table 3: Incremental cost matrix for GEF funding


Component

Cost Category

Cost

US$ M

Domestic and Global Benefits

1. Local Capacity Building

Baseline

0.27

Increased capacity of communities to design and implement natural resources management activities primarily of medium to long term local environmental and development interest with some random global benefits, mostly in the area of halting land degradation and desertification.




GEF Alternative

1.47

Increased capacity of communities to design and implement integrated lowland ecosystem management of long term local, national and global environmental and development interest. The global environmental benefits will involve: (i) halting land degradation and desertification, (ii) preserving biodiversity ,(iii) preserving carbon storage capacity and (iv) maintaining the condition of international waters.




Incremental

1.20




2.Local Investment Fund (LIF)

Baseline

1.69

A limited number of IEM micro-investment planned and implemented, mostly of medium to long term local environmental with some random global benefits (see above).




GEF Alternative

3.49

A significant number of IEM micro-investment planned and implemented based on an “integrated lowland ecosystem management plan” and generating local, national and global environmental benefits (see above).




Incremental

1.80




3. Institutional Capacity Building

Baseline

12.73

Institutional capacity strengthened and policies reformed such as support and encourage local communities to implement IEM activities, mostly of medium to longer term local environmental and development interest with some random global benefits (see above).




GEF Alternative

13.53

Institutional capacity strengthened and policies reformed such as to support and encourage local communities to implement IEM reflecting “integrated lowland ecosystem management” generating longer term local, national and global environmental and development benefits (see above).




Incremental

0.80




4. Land Tenure Security Pilot

Baseline

3.10

Land tenure policies developed to create medium to longer term commitment to IEM, mainly focusing on local environmental issues and stakeholders with some random global environmental benefits (see above).




GEF Alternative

3.3

Land and water tenure policies developed to support “integrated lowland ecosystem management of local, national and global environmental and stakeholders interests (see above).




Incremental

0.2




5. Project Coordination, Administration, M&E

Baseline

0.82

Efficient and capable staff in place to implement , manage and evaluate the project, of which the number of IEM activities will be limited and mostly of medium to long term local interest associated with some random global environmental benefits (see above).




GEF Alternative

1.12

Efficient and capable staff in place to implement, manage and evaluate the projects, of which the number of IEM activities will be significant and of longer term, local, national and global benefit (see above). The evaluation of the projects environmental impact will be assisted by relevant community-based and scientific institutional monitoring and evaluation activities.




Incremental

0.30




6.Physical contingencies

Baseline

0.25







GEF Alternative

0.25







Incremental

0.00




7. Price contingencies

Baseline

1.66







GEF Alternative

1.86







Incremental

0.20




TOTALS

Baseline

20.52







GEF Alternative

25.02







Incremental

4.50



The incremental cost of USD 4.50 on a total of USD 25.02 under the GEF Alternative represents 18%. This incremental cost should be viewed conservative, since many of the activities under “local capacity building” and the “local investment fund” by the nature of supporting “integrated ecosystem management” are designed to have a much larger geographic reach then just the intervention sites. Furthermore, the direct interaction with the CBRDP base program will certainly have a spin off effect towards the overall projects approach to support the development of community-based local development plans in other sites.




1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8


The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page