Document of The World Bank Report No: ICR00001159 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT (Loan/Credit No TF53233) ON A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF US$ 6.00 MILLION TO THE NIGER BASIN AUTHORITY FOR A REVERSING LAND AND WATER DEGRADATION TRENDS IN THE NIGER BASIN August 25, 2011 AFT – Water Resource Management (AFTWR) AFCW3, AFCF2, AFCW2, AFCC1 Africa CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS FISCAL YEAR January 1 – December 31 (Exchange Rate Effective) Currency Unit = US$ ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ACMAD African Centre of Meteorological Application for Development AFD French Development Agency (Agence Française de Développement) AfDB African Development Bank AGRHYMET Regional Centre for Agricultural and Hydrometeorological Research (Niamey) ANBO African Network of Basin Organizations APR/PIR Annual Performance Report/Project Implementation Review (UNDP) AWPB Annual Work Plan and Budget CAS Country Assistance Strategy CBO Community Based Organization CDD Community Driven Development CoM Council of Ministers of NBA ES-NBA Executive Secretary of NBA EIS Environmental Information System ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework FFEM Fonds Français pour l’Environnement Mondial/French Global Environmental Fund FM Financial Management GA Grant Agreement GEF Global Environmental Facility GEO Global Environmental Objective GIZ German Agency for International Cooperation (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit; former GTZ) HoS Heads of State Summit Hydro-Niger Niger Basin Hydrological Data Collection and Forecasting System IA Institutional Assessment/Implementing Agency ICR Implementation Completion and Results Report IP Investment Program ISR Implementation Supervision and Results Report IW International Waters (GEF) IW:Learn International Waters Learning Exchange and Resource Network IWRM Integrated Water Resources Management LCMC Local Coordination and Monitoring Committee M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MOM Micro-grant Operational Manual MTR Mid-Term Review NBA Niger Basin Authority NCC National Coordination Committee NEPAD New Partnership for Africa's Development NBO Niger Basin Observatory NFS National Focal Structures NGO Non-Governmental Organization NRB Niger River Basin NSC National (Project) Steering Committee NPT National Project Team OP Operational Policy (Bank)/Operational Program (GEF) PAD Project Appraisal Document PDO Project Development Objective PDP Pilot Demonstration Project PIM Project Implementation Manual PLCE Silting Control Project (Projet de Lutte Contre l’Ensablement, PLCE) PM Project Manager PMCU Project Management and Coordination Unit Prodoc Project Document PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper RAF Resettlement Action Framework RSC Regional (Project) Steering Committee SAP Strategic Action Program SDAP Sustainable Development Action Program SGP Small Grants Program STSC Scientific and Technical Sub-Committee SV Shared Vision for the Niger Basin development TDA Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis ToR Terms of Reference TTL Task Team Leader UNDP United Nations Development Program UNOPS United Nations Office for Project Services WRD-SEM Niger River Basin Water Resources Development and Sustainable Ecosystems Management Program Vice President: Obiageli K. Ezekwesili Regional Director: Yusupha B. Crookes Sector Manager: Jonathan S. Kamkwalala ICR Team Leader/TTL: Amal Talbi   REVERSING LAND AND WATER DEGRADATION TRENDS IN THE NIGER RIVER BASIN PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS   A. Basic Information .................................................................................................................................. i  B. Key Dates .............................................................................................................................................. i  C. Ratings Summary .................................................................................................................................. i  D. Sector and Theme Codes ..................................................................................................................... ii  E. Bank Staff ............................................................................................................................................ iii  F. Results Framework Analysis ................................................................................................................ iv  G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs ............................................................................................ viii  H. Restructuring (if any) .......................................................................................................................... ix  I.  Disbursement Profile .......................................................................................................................... ix  1.   . Project Context, Global Environment Objectives and Design  ...................................................... 1  2.   Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes ................................................................. 6  3.   Assessment of Outcomes ............................................................................................................ 11  4.  Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome ........................................................................... 17  5.  Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance ....................................................................... 18  6.  Lessons Learned .......................................................................................................................... 20  7.   Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners ............................ 22  Annex 1. Project Costs and Financing .................................................................................................... 24  Annex 2.1: Intermediate Results Indicators from ISR, PAD and ProDoc (UNDP)  .................................. 25  . Annex 2.2: Planned Activities, Output Targets and final Achievements by Project components ......... 27  Annex 2.3 Evaluation of Risks and Mitigation Measures identified in PAD ........................................... 32  . Annex 3. Economic and Financial Analysis  ............................................................................................ 34  Annex 4. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes ...................................... 35  Annex 5. Beneficiary Survey Results ...................................................................................................... 38  Annex 6.   Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results (if any) ........................................................ 39  Annex 7.    Summary of Borrower’s ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR ......................................... 40  Annex 8. Comments of Co�financiers and Other Partners/Stakeholders .............................................. 43  Annex 9.   List of Supporting Documents ......................................................................................... 44  Annex 10. Background on the Niger Basin Authority and on the Shared Vision Process ...................... 45  Map ........................................................................................................................................................ 49    A. Basic Information Reversing Land and Water Degradation Country: Africa Project Name: Trends in the Niger River Basin Project ID: P070256 L/C/TF Number(s): TF-50530,TF-53233 ICR Date: 08/24/2011 ICR Type: Core ICR NIGER BASIN Lending Instrument: SIL Borrower: AUTHORITY(NBA) Original Total USD 6.0M Disbursed Amount: USD 5.8M Commitment: Revised Amount: USD 6.0M Environmental Category: B Global Focal Area: I Implementing Agencies: Niger River Basin (NBA) Cofinanciers and Other External Partners: B. Key Dates Revised / Actual Process Date Process Original Date Date(s) Concept Review: 04/24/2003 Effectiveness: 04/14/2005 04/12/2005 08/11/2009 Appraisal: 01/19/2004 Restructuring(s): 08/03/2010 Approval: 05/20/2004 Mid-term Review: 02/02/2007 06/19/2009 Closing: 08/31/2009 02/28/2011 C. Ratings Summary C.1 Performance Rating by ICR Outcomes: Satisfactory i Risk to Global Environment Outcome Moderate Bank Performance: Moderately Satisfactory Borrower Performance: Moderately Satisfactory C.2 Detailed Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance Bank Ratings Borrower Ratings Quality at Entry: Moderately Satisfactory Government: Moderately Satisfactory Implementing Quality of Supervision: Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Agency/Agencies: Overall Bank Overall Borrower Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Performance: Performance: C.3 Quality at Entry and Implementation Performance Indicators Implementation QAG Assessments (if Indicators Rating Performance any) Potential Problem Project Quality at Entry Yes None at any time (Yes/No): (QEA): Problem Project at any time Quality of Supervision Yes None (Yes/No): (QSA): GEO rating before Moderately Closing/Inactive status Satisfactory D. Sector and Theme Codes Original Actual Sector Code (as % of total Bank financing) Central government administration 100 100 ii Theme Code (as % of total Bank financing) Biodiversity 13 13 Environmental policies and institutions 13 13 Land administration and management 25 25 Regional integration 24 24 Water resource management 25 25 E. Bank Staff Positions At ICR At Approval Vice President: Obiageli Katryn Ezekwesili Callisto E. Madavo Country Director: Yusupha B. Crookes Diarietou Gaye Sector Manager: Jonathan S. Kamkwalala Inger Andersen Project Team Leader: Amal Talbi Ousmane Dione ICR Team Leader: Amal Talbi ICR Primary Author: Johannes Geert Grijsen Amal Talbi iii F. Results Framework Analysis Global Environment Objectives (GEO) and Key Indicators(as approved) The objectives of the Project are: (a) to strengthen the capacity of the Recipient to promote and improve coordinated and sustainable land and water management in the Basin; (b) to strengthen institutional mechanisms in Member Countries for management of transboundary land and water issues; (c) to develop a Strategic Action Program (SAP) to improve the conservation and management of land and water resources in the Basin; and (d) to assist the recipient in coordinating donor support for implementing the Strategic Action Program and an effective transboundary management. Revised Global Environment Objectives (as approved by original approving authority) and Key Indicators and reasons/justifications (a) GEO Indicator(s) Original Target Actual Value Formally Values (from Achieved at Indicator Baseline Value Revised approval Completion or Target Values documents) Target Years Permanent collaboration and dialogue established between the Niger Basin Authority Indicator 1 : (NBA) and the nine (9) riparians yield harmonized regulatory policies for good integrated resources management practices for sustainable resource utilization. The nine countries collaborate as illustrated by (i) the Value Nine (9) riparians successful fully engaged in NBA mandate, preparation completion of the ongoing and (quantitative or of a Shared Vision, and N/A Shared vision process collaborative current NBA operations. (see Annex 10) and process in achieving Qualitative) (ii) the endorsement outcome indicator. by the Heads of State of a common 20-year investment program. Date achieved 05/20/2004 08/31/2009 02/28/2011 Comments Mostly achieved. The Project supported the intensified collaboration between the (incl. % countries and was the only project covering all the countries. With other donors, it contributed to the Water Charter and to the completion of the Shared Vision. achievement) HydroNiger has established a harmonized system for real time data, knowledge and Indicator 2 : good practice sharing (collection, compilation, analysis, and dissemination) with the nine national HydroNiger centers, to support appropriate decisions. iv hydrological data is The basin-wide available in the Niger network has a Basin Observatory greater appreciation Value and information Existing national and basin- of river hydrology, exchange protocol wide land and water data good practices, and exists. A hydrology (quantitative or networks and current basin - informed decision- N/A and economic model level indicators, current making on Basin has been developed Qualitative) basin-level protocols. development paths and is used in through dialogue informing decisions and consultation for the CoM and the among riparians. Heads of State. Date achieved 05/20/2004 08/31/2009 02/28/2011 Comments Mostly achieved. The protocol to exchange hydrological information exists (not always (incl. % functional due to electricity shortages resulting in server problems). The planned Basin information and data sharing network for data beyond hydrology progresses well. achievement) The Strategic Action Program (SAP) [complementing the SDAP] identifies future Indicator 3 : sustainable development investments in the Basin, as formulated and validated by the nine riparians and NBA. The Niger Basin TDAs are completed, validated and findings are The regional TDA Preliminary Transboundary disseminated. Based Value and all the national Diagnosis Analysis (TDA) on the TDA, the TDAs have been completed in five out of the Niger Basin SAP is completed. The SAP (quantitative or nine riparian countries. The completed and N/A was endorsed by the TDA needs to be extended donors make 29th Council of Qualitative) to the remaining four commitments to Ministers (CoM) in countries. support the SAP. November 2010. Decision-makers use SAP to orient actions and investments. Date achieved 05/20/2004 08/31/2009 02/28/2011 Comments Fully achieved. The CoM endorsed the SAP. In June 2008, a round table was held to raise funds for the SDAP, covering SAP's activities. The SAP is expected to be (incl. % mainstreamed in the SDAP and the NBA is approaching partners to implement SAP's key activities. achievement) v (b) Intermediate Outcome Indicator(s) Original Target Actual Value Formally Values (from Achieved at Indicator Baseline Value Revised Target approval Completion or Values documents) Target Years Strengthen the capacity of the Recipient to promote and improve coordinated and Indicator 1 : sustainable land and water resources management in the Basin. The NBA's Technical Land and water Department and management Observatory have Value The NBA Technical activities fully acquired enhanced Department has the overall operationalized capacity to (quantitative or task for coordinating within NBA's N/A implement projects. activities within the member Technical The NBA is Qualitative) countries. Department with implementing a concrete results on number of projects, the ground. with concrete results on the ground. Date achieved 05/20/2004 08/31/2009 02/28/2011 Comments Fully achieved. The project contributed to strengthening the NBA. As a result, the NBA (incl. % is currently implementing investment projects in the Basin. The Shared Vision process was key in this strengthening of the NBA. achievement) Component 1: An institutional and management system established and operational for Indicator 2 : the Project, to enable NBA to efficiently manage land and water resources across the Basin. All regional, national and local project NBA's regional and institutions were national staff has operational, including increased capacities Value the PMCU, Steering The NBA is already in project and Committees, national established with a clear role, financial project teams and (quantitative or mandate and program in management and in N/A local committees. order to coordinate actions M&E, with concrete The National Focal Qualitative) in the Niger Basin. actions on the Points of NBA were ground targeting replaced by land and water strengthened management. National Focal Structures. vi Date achieved 05/20/2004 08/31/2009 02/28/2011 Comments Mostly achieved. During project preparation, there has not been a dedicated monitoring (incl. % and evaluation staff in the Bank project team. There has been however training for the recipient at many levels on result focused management during implementation. achievement) Component 3: Improved regional, national and local data and information management Indicator 3 : between riparian countries of the Niger Basin, to enable more efficient and holistic management of the basin resources. Hydrology data is available in the Niger Basin-wide land and Basin Observatory The Niger Basin water data and (NBO) and Value Forecasting Center is information fully information exchange already established with a accessible and protocol exists. The data collection system, but shared by member process to exchange (quantitative or N/A needs to be updated and countries, land data progresses improved for efficient data contributing to basin well. A hydrology Qualitative) exchange, analysis and wide knowledge and and economic model dissemination. best management was developed and is practices. used to inform decisions for the CoM and HoS. Date achieved 05/20/2004 08/31/2009 02/28/2011 Comments Mostly achieved. Hydrology data exists. Data collection protocols are being discussed (incl. % with countries for environmental (incl. land) and socio-economic data. The NBO will continue to be strengthened via funding from AFD, EU, CIDA, and GIZ. achievement) Component 6: TDA and SAP completed, validated and disseminated, enabling joint Indicator 4 : transboundary management actions on the ground. The Niger Basin TDAs are The regional TDA completed, validated Value and all the national TDA completed in five out and findings are TDAs have been of the nine riparian disseminated. Based completed. The SAP (quantitative or countries. The TDA needs on the TDA, the N/A was endorsed by the to be extended to the Niger Basin SAP is 29th Council of Qualitative) remaining four countries. completed and Ministers (CoM) in donors make November 2010. commitments to support the SAP. Date achieved 05/20/2004 08/31/2009 02/28/2011 Comments Fully achieved. The CoM endorsed the SAP. In June 2008, a round table was held to raise funds for the SDAP, covering SAP's activities. The SAP is expected to be vii mainstreamed in the SDAP and the NBA is approaching partners to implement SAP's (incl. % key activities. achievement) G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs Date ISR Actual Disbursements No. GEO IP Archived (USD millions) 1 11/24/2004 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.00 2 04/20/2005 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.00 3 12/15/2005 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.53 4 05/31/2006 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.84 5 06/26/2006 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.89 6 11/13/2006 Satisfactory Satisfactory 1.63 7 01/16/2007 Satisfactory Satisfactory 1.73 8 07/30/2007 Satisfactory Satisfactory 2.19 9 03/17/2008 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 2.78 10 08/01/2008 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 3.25 11 02/09/2009 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 3.89 12 05/28/2009 Moderately Unsatisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 4.05 13 09/15/2009 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 4.77 14 03/17/2010 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 5.05 15 10/31/2010 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 5.30 16 03/12/2011 Satisfactory Satisfactory 5.78 viii H. Restructuring (if any) ISR Ratings at Amount Board Restructuring Restructuring Disbursed at Reason for Restructuring & Key Approved GEO Date(s) Restructuring Changes Made Change GEO IP in USD millions 08/11/2009 MU MS 4.25 Extension of the Closing Date 08/03/2010 MS MS 5.15 Extension of the Closing Date I. Disbursement Profile ix   1. Project Context, Global Environment Objectives and Design 1.1 Context at Appraisal Regional context: The Niger River Basin constitutes an important freshwater resource shared by Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea, Mali, Niger, and Nigeria. The Niger River is socio-economically and environmentally important to the 110 million people living in its Basin. The River supports navigation, fisheries, irrigation, hydropower, and municipal and environmental uses. The Niger Basin Authority (NBA) has an institutional mandate to promote cooperation among the member countries in developing the Basin’s natural resources, harmonize national development policies, and ensure integrated development in all fields (see Annex 10 for more background on the NBA). Key Sector Issues: Since 2002, the Bank jointly with other partners supported the Shared Vision Process of the NBA, which is briefly described in the next sub-section (see Annex 10 for more background information on the Shared Vision Process). During this process, a number of diagnostic studies were conducted and formed the basis for the project design. During project preparation, a number of transboundary issues were identified that contribute to the degradation of the Basin. Key sector issues mentioned in the Bank project appraisal document (PAD) and the UNDP project document (Prodoc) included (i) unilateral planning and development, and (ii) weather shocks, floods and droughts and environmental degradation. Unilateral planning and development: Following the devastating droughts of the 1970s, countries have aimed at controlling the River’s flow. This focus, at the national level, led to a unilateral, uncoordinated, and sub-optimal development as it was short-term and sector-specific. At the regional level, there was a lack of coordination in the planning and development and both national and regional institutions lacked capacity to effectively manage the shared natural resources. The Shared Vision Process of the Niger Basin aimed at optimal Basin level planning and development of shared natural resources while strengthening the regional and national institutions. Weather shocks (floods and droughts) and environment degradation: The central part of the Basin is located in a challenging Sahelian environment in which weather shocks (floods and droughts) are common. Due to persistent weather shocks, particularly droughts during the 1970s and 1980s, and inadequate land and water management, most of the Basin countries have faced a water resources crisis and experienced significant environment degradation. Deforestation and erosion have been high throughout the Basin because increased needs for energy and limited access to electricity compel population to use wood and charcoal for domestic purposes1. The Niger River Basin significant hydro-power energy potential has been largely untapped with less than 20 percent of the potential developed, mainly in Nigeria. Deforestation and erosion result in land degradation and loss of fertility of pasture areas and agriculture, which is the mainstay of rural livelihoods providing the bulk of employment, food and income. Cumulatively, these factors have been perpetuating a vicious cycle of environment degradation, and concrete actions to reverse this degradation at a large scale still need to be implemented in the Basin. 1 At appraisal, firewood and charcoal met 80% of the Basin’s energy requirements. 1 Rationale for Bank’s assistance: The Niger Basin countries requested the Bank’s assistance to enable them to cooperatively manage the Basin’s resources in line with the Shared Vision (SV)2 and to support the Shared Vision Process. The SV defines the long-term objectives for basin development and is the corner stone of the Shared Vision Process. This process was launched in April 2004 when the Heads of State and Government of the nine member states signed the Paris declaration on the “Principles of management and good governance for a sustainable and shared development of the Niger River Basin�. The countries agreed to develop a SV supported by a Sustainable Development Action Plan (SDAP)3, which identifies optimal means and processes for sustainable multi-sectoral development and investments. The institutional and organizational reform of NBA, including the complete revamping of its human resources, was part of the Shared Vision process. These decisions endorsed by NBA’s highest political level decision- makers provided clear evidence of the nine riparian countries’ ownership and readiness to undertake cooperative actions in the Niger Basin. This project is one of several projects that contributed to the successful completion of the Shared Vision Process in April 2008. At appraisal, the project was consistent with the general sector goals of relevant Bank Country Assistance Strategies (CAS) and Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP). The CASs acknowledged the link between environmental degradation, inadequate water supply and poverty. Water resources are central to each country’s policies on economic growth, poverty alleviation and sustainable livelihoods. PRSPs recognized the importance of the environment for economic development. The project was consistent with the general sector goals of PRSPs and CASs to increase sustainable management practices, strengthen institutional capacity and reduce poverty. The project contributed to the overarching goals of the Regional Integration Assistance Strategy (RIAS) for Sub-Saharan Africa by strengthening collaboration across borders, promoting cooperation, and coordinating investments to support shared water resources. Designed to generate global benefits through sustainable transboundary water resources management and comprehensive participation of stakeholders in land and water management in the Basin, the project was fully aligned with GEF’s Operational Program 9 “Integrated Land and Water Multiple Focal Area�. OP9 aims to help - through the implementation of International Waters (IW) projects - groups of countries utilize the full range of technical, economic, financial, regulatory and institutional measures needed to operationalize sustainable development strategies for international waters and their drainage Basins�. 1.2 Original Global Environment Objectives (GEO) and Key Indicators The project aimed to provide a transboundary framework for the environmentally sustainable development of the Niger River Basin and to support a basin-wide cooperative programme for transboundary land and water management. While the PAD, Grant Agreement (GA) and Prodoc provide different descriptions of the PDO/GEO (see Table 1), these descriptions are complementary. They all agree on the need to strengthen the capacity of the NBA and to 2 In May 2005, in the Extra-ordinary session of the NBA Council of Ministers held in Abuja, the Shared Vision was adopted and states the following "The Niger Basin, a common space of sustainable development through an integrated management of water resources and related eco-systems, for the enhancement of the living conditions and prosperity of the populations by 2025." 3 The SDAP sets-out the Basin’s regional priorities based on these priority domains: (i) conservation of the Basin’s ecosystems, (ii) development of socio-economic infrastructures, and (iii) capacity building for the stakeholders. 2 strengthen national institutional mechanisms for the management of transboundary land and water issues. PAD (WB) Prodoc (UNDP) Grant agreement (WB) GEO: Reduce and prevent transboundary water related The GA mentions the objective of the environmental degradation; prevent land degradation; and project without specifying if this is the protect globally significant biodiversity through sustainable, Global Environment Objective or the informed and cooperative integrated management of the Project Development Objective. Basin, while ensuring greater public involvement in the decision-making process. The Objective of the Project: (a) to PDO: Provide the nine riparians PDO: To develop and strengthen the capacity of the Recipient to an opportunity to define a implement sustainable promote and improve coordinated and transboundary framework for the measures for reversing sustainable land and water management in sustainable development of the trends in land and water the Basin; (b) to strengthen institutional Niger River Basin, through degradation through mechanisms in Member Countries for strengthened capacity and better collaborative decision- management of transboundary land and understanding of the Basin’s making in the Niger water issues; (c) to develop a Strategic land and water resources. River Basin. Action Plan (SAP) to improve the conservation and management of land and water resources in the Basin; and (d) to assist the recipient in coordinating donor support for implementing the Strategic Action Program and effective transboundary management. Table 1: Description of the GEO/PDO in different project documents GEO outcome indicators were not provided in the PAD nor in the GA; however, key PDO Outcome (performance) indicators for the components4 implemented by the Bank were provided in the PAD and are consistent with the monitoring indicators used in the ISRs, as follows (see also section F):  Permanent collaboration and dialogue established between NBA and the nine riparians yield harmonized regulatory policies for good integrated resources management practices for sustainable resource utilization.  HydroNiger has established an harmonized system for real time data, knowledge and good practice sharing (collection, compilation, analysis, and dissemination) with the nine national HydroNiger centers to support appropriate decisions.  The SAP (complementing the SDAP) identifies future sustainable development investments in the Basin, as formulated and validated by the nine riparians and the NBA. Intermediate Outcome Indicators for the components implemented by the Bank were provided in the PAD and are consistent with the indicators used in the ISRs, as follows (see also Section F): 4 UNDP implemented components concerning Capacity Building & Public Awareness (Component 2), Regional Linkages (Component 4), and Pilot Projects and Micro-grant Programs (Component 5). 3  Strengthen the capacity of the Recipient to promote and improve coordinated and sustainable land and water resources management in the Basin.  An institutional and management system established and operational for the project, to enable the NBA to efficiently manage land and water resources across the Basin.  Improved regional, national and local data and information management between riparian countries of the Niger Basin, to enable more efficient and holistic management of the basin resources.  TDA and SAP completed, validated and disseminated, enabling joint transboundary management actions on the ground. The project objective was broadly defined and the project indicators were process oriented, lacking detailed baseline and target value. At the time of the project preparation (2000-2004), the focus on well designed monitoring and evaluation result framework was not at the standard level of current project preparation. In addition, this project was prepared around the same time as other GEF projects: the Senegal Basin, the Lake Chad Basin and the Southern Africa Development Community. At the time of the project appraisal, these GEF projects were either under preparation or at early stage of implementation and could not be used as a basis to design a focused objective and result oriented indicators. As a result, this project included in its design a significant share of learning by doing. Under section 3.2, there will be some discussion on how this broad objective and process oriented indicators increase the difficulty of full recognition of the project achievement. Further details on result indicators for all the components implemented by the Bank and by the UNDP are summarized in Annex 2.1 and planned activities, output targets and final achievements at project closure are summarized for each project component in Annex 2.2. 1.3 Revised GEO and Key Indicators, and reasons/justification There were no formal revisions of the original GEO, key and intermediate outcome indicators. 1.4 Main Beneficiaries Although the PAD did not explicitly identify the beneficiaries of the project, in retrospect, beneficiaries can be identified at three levels: (i) At the regional level, the NBA as the primary regional institution would benefit from institutional strengthening, capacity building to implement projects, and an overall advancement of its vision, mandate and strategic planning framework. (ii) At the national level, the principle beneficiaries would be the concerned ministries, water management institutions and NGOs. Institutions would benefit from capacity building and would follow up on the national-level process of the TDA and SAP. Governments would harmonize their activities and would attract donor support and investment for regional projects. (iii) At the local level, the primary beneficiaries are communities who would be involved directly in the project through demonstration pilot projects and micro-grant supported interventions. It was expected that these communities would become more involved in decision-making processes to manage their natural resources. The project would provide opportunities to address rural poverty and local priority issues, improving the livelihood of these rural communities. 4 1.5 Original Components The project included six components, as summarized below from the PAD and Prodoc (see also Annex 2). Components 1, 3, and 6 were implemented through the Bank and components 2, 4, and 5 were implemented through the UNDP. The total budget of the project was US$13 million, of which US$6 million was implemented through the Bank. 1. The Institution Building Component (US$3.52 million, Bank supported) aimed to augment existing regional and national institutional capacity to manage and implement current regional projects. Activities were to focus on strengthening the regional and national institutional capacity throughout the duration of the project, to promote good management practice and good governance. At the regional level, a Project Management and Coordination Unit (PMCU) was established jointly with the African Development Bank (AfDB) funded project (silting control project) to optimize human and financial resources. 2. The Capacity Building and Public Awareness Component (US$1.62 million, UNDP supported) aimed to raise environmental awareness in target communities, facilitate consultations, and – in synergy with component 5 - increase the stakeholders’ ownership of project interventions. This component included (i) increased capacity at various levels to address the Basin’s environmental problems, and (ii) public education and awareness programs and training at regional, national and local levels. 3. The Data and Knowledge Management Component (US$1.13 million, Bank supported) aimed to (i) build a partnership to manage land and water data at the Basin level, (ii) identify the institutional modalities for improved data collection, compatibility, processing, dissemination for decision-makers, sharing, exchange and monitoring in all nine countries, (iii) conduct training at local, national and regional levels, and (iv) develop a framework for an Environmental Information System (EIS), and (iv) supplement a basin-wide economic model with an environmental dimension. 4. The Regional Forum Component (US$0.38 million, UNDP supported) aimed to facilitate the exchange of lessons and good practices with other regional projects in Sub-Saharan Africa, expand on IW, learn and organize a regional study tour and a Regional Forum to strengthen the relationship with existing Pan-African and international networks of Basin Organizations. 5. The Demonstration Pilots and Micro-grant Program Component (US$5.0 million, UNDP supported) aimed to provide a mechanism to support community driven interventions through (i) assisting communities in tackling local environmental problems and improving livelihoods by implementing nine priority demonstration pilot projects of good practices in managing land and water resources, and (ii) implementing in parallel a series of community based, micro-grant supported interventions, using existing community institutions to assist in replicating good management practices learned from the pilot projects. This component was managed by national project teams with support from the local organizations and aimed at providing concrete actions on the ground. 6. The Trans-boundary Diagnosis Analysis (TDA) and Strategic Action Program (SAP) Preparation Component (US$1.35 million, Bank supported) aimed to finalize the preliminary TDA conducted during project preparation in the Niger’s main stem countries (Benin, Guinea, Mali, Niger, and Nigeria), by extending the diagnostic analysis process to the remaining four riparian countries. Based on this identification process of priority actions, 5 countries would prepare the SAP to complement to the Shared Vision's multi-sectoral SDAP, focusing on the environmental aspects of land and water issues. Donors were expected to be engaged to fund and implement part of the activities identified in the SAP/SDAP. 1.6 Revised Components None of the project components were restructured during project implementation, nor did significant changes related to project design occur. 1.7 Other significant changes The closing date was first extended by one year to August 31, 2010, as necessary due to the delay of the project’s effectiveness. A second extension was granted till February 28, 2011, to allow the final SAP document to be endorsed by the 29th Council of Ministers meeting in November 2010. Remaining project funds were reallocated at the same time, mainly to provide additional funds for operational costs, the consultancy costs for the independent mid-term review and an independent final evaluation. The UNDP also extended its closing date till December 2011 to provide sufficient time to organize the regional forum (held in June 2011), and to support the NBA in (i) mainstreaming the SAP in the SDAP and (ii) funding some key activities of the SAP (through the preparation of a follow up GEF project). 2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes 2.1 Project Preparation, Design and Quality at Entry Project preparation was conducted in the context of the Shared Vision Process with a strong ownership by the NBA, the countries, and coordination with development partners. In April 2004, 22 partners signed the NBA’s Partners Cooperation Framework and the Bank was asked to be the lead Partner. A set of projects, including this project, were designed based on the comparative strength of each partner. For instance, the Bank supported components focused on institutional aspects, while the UNDP supported component focused on activities on the ground (the implementation of the pilot project and micro-grant) based on their experience on the Small- Grant-Program. Project design followed the standard approach for GEF supported IW projects: a balance of top- down and bottom-up approaches was used. The Bank supported (top-down) components focused on the NBA and its institutional structure across member countries, while the UNDP supported (bottom-up) components focused on activities at grass-root levels, working with numerous NGOs and local communities. Because of the strategic choice to cover all nine countries, these grass-root level activities benefited from a limited budget. The strategic priority was to cover all nine countries with an equitable budget. This equity principle was a strategic choice of the NBA to demonstrate that every single member country was key for a successful regional cooperation in the Niger Basin. This project was the only NBA project implementing activities in the nine countries, thus having a unifying effect. The implementation of this high number of small scale activities turned out to be challenging for the PMCU due to the multiple institutional levels, coupled with the UNOPS’ centralized disbursement procedures. Project preparation and design benefitted from an assessment of lessons learned from other regional GEF IW and non-GEF projects, including: (i) creating ownership and constituency by 6 fostering the notion that the whole is greater than the sum of parts; (ii) strengthening institutional capacities for achieving the Shared Vision in coordination with other developing partners; (iii) supporting sustainability by stakeholder participation in implementing and evaluating project activities; (iv) addressing regional-scale issues effectively and sustainably by building capacity at the regional, national, and local levels; (vi) making realistic project planning, schedules and assumptions, and take into account beneficiaries’ needs; and (vii) demonstrating innovative, locally appropriate and cost-effective best practices for integrated land and water management and replication through micro-finance. The Quality Assessment Group’s (QAG) first “Learning Review of Regional Projects� took place in October 2009. The panel judged that the project was well-designed, on the basis that (i) the PDO remained highly relevant in view of the SDAP implementation, and problems such as erosion and sedimentation require transboundary actions; (ii) in a thorough institutional assessment, two of the six components addressed institution building (for the NBA and member countries); (iii) the division of responsibility between the Bank and the UNDP was built upon the strengths of the two institutions, and (iv) it was appropriate that there were no investments under this project except for micro-grant activities and pilot demonstration projects. The only shortcoming identified was the underestimated political risk to component 6. The risk that the completion of the SAP could get delayed and thus not inform the development of the SDAP was not anticipated. Similarly, the risk to component 3 was underestimated (see Annex 2.3). 2.2 Implementation The factors that contributed to a successful implementation of the project include: (i) strong commitment by the NBA and the member countries, (ii) strong coordination among development partners, (iii) selection of highly qualified staff in the PMCU and the NBA, and (iv) coordination with other projects and initiatives, allowing for an efficient use of limited resources. Less favorable factors relate to: (i) logistical difficulties in communication between the PMCU and National Project Teams (NPTs), and between NPTs and the local level, (ii) different implementation procedures between the Bank and UNDP, (iii) delayed mid-term-assessment, and (iv) the security situation in some countries of the Basin. Strong commitment of the NBA and the member countries to smoothly implement the project. The strong ownership by the NBA and member countries of the Shared Vision Process and this project, which was among the projects funded by development partners to support the process, facilitated a successful implementation. In April 2004 (i.e. at the same time as the project went to the Board), the Heads of State and Government signed a document that became known as the Paris Declaration, which defines the principles of management and good governance for a sustainable and shared development of the Niger Basin. In this context, the project benefitted from an enabling institutional environment to achieve its objective. Strong coordination among development partners enabled developing a portfolio that was effective in supporting the NBA as it built on the strength of each development partners and reduced redundancy. In April 2004, the development partners signed the “NBA Partner’s Cooperation Framework� to support the NBA and to harmonize their interventions in the Basin. That harmonization was effective in terms of substance and was cost effective. For example, the project’s PMCU and the AfDB’s PMCU shared six experts -- three were funded by the project and the other three by the AfDB—in an attempt to pool resources for cost effectiveness. 7 Selection of highly qualified staff in the PMCU and NBA stimulated a successful implementation of the project. The transparent selection process of the PMCU staff permitted selecting highly qualified and committed staff at the PMCU. In parallel, in 2005 in the wake of the institutional audit of the NBA, key technical staff were hired on a competitive and transparent manner allowing for selection of highly qualified staff. The NBA was thus able to support the PMCU in implementing the project, which was much needed given the challenging geographical scope and objectives of the project. Coordination with other projects and initiatives allowing for an efficient use of limited resources. The project realized significant savings in the training category by coordinating with other projects on pooling training in an effective way. This joint programming and pooling helped on: (i) reducing the unit cost of training, (ii) limiting redundant training and thus saving significant time for the participants of the NBA and for the countries, and (iii) harmonizing the training plan among the NBA projects. Logistical difficulties in communication between the PMCU and National Project Teams (NPTs), and between NPTs and the local level. The project required significant building and coordination with the national and local institutional structures of the project, which was a challenging and time consuming process. This building and coordination resulted in a slow start of activities at the national levels and delays in the procurement of consultancies. The project was implemented in nine countries with very poor transportation and communication means (flights, roads, and highly unreliable virtual communication), which put severe strains on regular communications and meetings between the PMCU and NPTs and between the NPTs and the local level. Different implementation procedures between the Bank and UNDP. The project experienced at the start difficulties in harmonizing reporting and financial procedures (different cycles and forms) and receiving funds in a timely manner. The Bank’s part of the budget was channeled through the NBA/PMCU, while the UNDP part was disbursed from UNOPS5. This initial lack of progress coincided with the initially infrequent supervision of the project (see Section 5.1(b)), which was not under the control of the PMCU or the NBA. Delays in disbursement resulted in delayed implementation of the pilot demonstration projects (PDPs) (component 5). Other reasons for the delays in implementing of PDPs were (i) complex contracting procedures, (ii) inadequate operational, technical and fiduciary capacities of some of the agencies executing the PDPs, and (iii) inadequate design of the interventions. Given that PDPs require time to deliver expected impacts, the closing date for the components supported by UNDP has been extended. Even though the PDPs did not inform the SAP development as intended (instead the SAP was informed by the Micro grant activities), this extension of the UNDP supported components increases the likelihood of achieving the expected impact of the PDPs. Delayed Mid-Term Review Assessment. An independent MTR assessment was carried out in early 2009, followed in March – June 2009 by extensive consultations of the Task Team in all member countries (except Guinea due to the country situation at the time). The MTR, which was delayed due to lack of funding, should have taken place at least one year earlier to allow sufficient time to implement recommendations. While disbursements were two years behind planning, the MTR (i) confirmed the NBA and the countries’ ownership of the project, (ii) judged that the objectives continued to be relevant and achievable, (iii) considered the project to 5 Based on the independent mid-term-review and independent final evaluation the disbursement from UNOPS was often with large delays. 8 be progressing successfully towards the achievement of the PDO/GEO and major outcomes, and (iv) recommended a one-year extension and reallocation of the budget to allow all development objectives to be achieved. By the end of the project most of the funds had been disbursed. The security situation in some countries of the Basin caused some delays at national level. The security situation mainly in Chad and Côte d’Ivoire at the start of the project and in Guinea towards the end of the project resulted in delays in some national training and capacity building. While this did not impact the overall achievement of the project, it did present additional implementation challenges to the PMCU, the NPTs and the local level. 2.3 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Design, Implementation and Utilization Project monitoring versus environmental status monitoring. For the evaluation of the quality of the monitoring and evaluation, a distinction needs to be made between the two different types of monitoring. Project monitoring is defined as the monitoring of overall progress and achievement towards meeting project objectives. Environmental status monitoring is defined as measuring environmental status indicators such as hydrological, environmental, and socio-economic information. The project monitoring has been moderately satisfactory. This project was of a catalytic nature, aimed to mobilize a process of reforms, and as such had a strong capacity building dimension. Therefore, the project success cannot be expected to be measured against environmental trends or status indicators, but only against process indicators or proxies such as the completion of the Shared Vision and the successful round table in 2008. In the PAD, a list of broadly defined output and process indicators were provided; however, it would have been helpful if the baselines and end-of-project outcome/output targets were clearer. Given the lack of existing experience in regional project on international waterways at the time of project preparation, it is understandable that only process indicator were provided. The monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework of the PAD has been used as a basis for supervision and monitoring of the project’s implementation progress. The independent evaluation review reports that the regional specialist recruited for M&E of the project (one of the six shared experts between the project and the AfDB funded project) did not make supervision missions. At the time of the preparation of the project, the M&E focus at the Bank was at its early stage and there was not the same level of standard and support to teams on how to design strong M&E framework. Environmental status monitoring has improved during the lifetime of the project thanks to collaborative effort among partners and good coordination among the NBA implemented projects. The Niger Basin Observatory, established in 2006, monitors hydrological status and is expected to monitor the remaining 28 indicators that have been indentified and validated at the Basin level under component 3. Already the NBA has established an on-line catalogue of Meta data (http://georepertoire.abn.ne), providing information relative to the available data for these indicators, and conducted an assessment of the quality of existing data. The prototype for the Environmental Information System (EIS) for the Basin is complete and on-line (http://sie.abn.ne) (although due to electricity shortage the site is not always accessible). An exchange protocol is already in place for hydrological data, which started with support of the Niger-Hycos. And the exchange protocol for the additional indicators -- identified under component 3 of the project— is currently being discussed in the Basin and is progressing well. Among these 28 indicators, the Niger Basin Observatory has prioritized and intends to initiate the measurement of the indicators in a phased approach, which is a sound decision. Given the importance of environmental 9 monitoring of the Niger Basin, development partners especially the French Development Agency (AFD), CIDA, EU, and GIZ, are continuing to support the strengthening of the Niger Basin Observatory. 2.4 Safeguard and Fiduciary Compliance Environmental and social safeguard compliance assessment: The project was classified as environmental category B (partial assessment) due to the potential of only minor short-term environmental impacts of the UNDP supported PDPs and micro-grant supported interventions. Two safeguards policies were triggered: Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01) and projects on International Waterways (OP 7.50). During project preparation, the NBA developed an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) for the micro-grant activities and PDPs. These are small-scale and focused on activities that improve the environment and have no major impacts on the environment. The Micro-grant Operational Manual (MOM) provided selection and screening criteria, notification and procedural rules for implementation, and institutional responsibilities for the micro-grants program. Selection criteria included the requirement that interventions would not have negative environmental or socio-economic impacts. Based on field visits and discussions with NPTs and the local level, supervision missions noted that there have been no major issues and that environmental and social safeguards were in compliance. Financial management: Implementation Status Reports (ISRs) ratings for Financial Management (FM) declined from an initial satisfactory to moderately unsatisfactory by March 2009, and increased again to moderately satisfactory after the MTR. The MTR noted delays in disbursements due to initial weaknesses in planning and lack of pro-activity in budgeting. These initial difficulties and the decline to moderately unsatisfactory were due to delays (i) in the MTR, which for a time resulted in a lack of clear guidance for some activities, and (ii) in the recruitment of qualified accounting staff and the turnover of this position. The flow of funds between the PMCU and NPTs was satisfactory. The MTR - FM supervision of the PMCU and selected NPTs in late 2009 noted: (i) adequate accounting systems, internal controls and flow of funds between the PMCU and NPTs, along with (ii) weaknesses in budget preparation, financial reporting and the allocation of per diems. Neither Bank supervisions, audits, nor the final mission revealed any critical issues and by the end of the project the FM rating was upgraded to moderately satisfactory. Procurement: Procurement was generally rated moderately satisfactory. Initially procurement experienced significant delays due to the lack of procurement experience in the PMCU. A post- procurement review was carried out at the PMCU and at the NPTs during the period March to June 2009. The review concluded that: (i) contracts were awarded in line with the approved procurement plans, and (ii) procurements (standard bidding documents, evaluation and contract awards) were generally carried out according to Bank procedures. Several inadequacies were noticed during the first two years of the project, but procurement and contract document archiving improved significantly and is satisfactory for all the contracts awarded since an experienced procurement specialist was posted at the PMCU in 2007. The PMCU’s procurement performance was thus deemed moderately satisfactory. 2.5 Post-completion Operation/Next Phase 10 The Project successfully contributed to the institutional strengthening of the NBA, resulting in a conducive and enabling environment. This environment will support the long-term, environmentally sustainable development of the Basin’s transboundary land and water resources. Results have achieved a sustainable footing due to: (i) NBA’s strengthened position and role in the Basin; (ii) the cooperation between the NBA and the development partners as per the partners’ cooperation framework (signed in April 2004); and (iii) the endorsement at the adequate political level of the SAP, SDAP and the 20-year investment program (IP) for a value of US$8 billion. A testimony of this conducive environment is the success of the June 2008 round table, where a high number of development partners pledged a total of US$1.4 billion to support the first five year priority plan of the IP. Out of the US$1.4 billion, agreements have already been signed for an amount of US$0.68 billion and another US$0.36 billion is in the process of being signed totaling an amount of US$1.04 billion. Thus the remaining pledge that the NBA needs to mobilize is only US$0.36 billion. The agreements are signed either with the NBA or with one or more countries depending if the legal procedures of a given development partners allow signing convention directly with a river basin organization. There has also been a recent round table of the Kandadji program (in Niger), which is part of the IP, in July 8, 2011, in Vienna (Austria). The development partners (including the World Bank) pledged a total of US$257 million for filling the financing gap of the second phase of the Kandadji program. This shows the continuous support of the development partners on supporting the NBA and countries to implement activities of the SDAP and the IP. During the June 2008 round table, the Bank pledged US$500 million Program (WRD-SEM APL) of which the first phase APL represent US$186 million and covers five countries, namely Benin, Guinea, Mali, Niger, and Nigeria. The success of the Shared Vision Process and the implementation of this project, were the base for the Bank’s approval of the US$500 million, which is a significant commitment for regional cooperation in the Africa region. This WRD- SEM APL benefits from and builds on the results of the GEF project based on the acquired experience. The WRD-SEM APL includes a significant share of investment in the five countries ranging from rehabilitation of two key dams in Nigeria to watershed restoration. There is a strong focus in this WRD-SEM APL project to continue working at the institutional level to implement the result of the Shared Vision Process on the ground while working on larger investment and smaller activities with communities. In the case of small activities on watershed restoration, in the WRD-SEM APL, the communities are working for cash providing then income opportunities at the local level. Finally, the Bank, as the lead development partners, coordinates with other development partners on the activities to fund and implement the SDAP and IP, to which the SAP contributes. This coordination allows a continuing efficient dialogue between the NBA and the development partners. 3. Assessment of Outcomes 3.1 Relevance of Objectives, Design and Implementation The project and its objectives remain relevant to sectoral strategies of the member governments, the NBA, the Bank and the UNDP, as well as to the strategic objectives of the GEF. Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper and Country Assistance Strategy: Water resources are central to each member country’s policies on economic growth and poverty alleviation and all member 11 countries have developed a national water policy. Given that the poverty reduction strategy papers (PRSPs) of most member countries recognize the importance of the environment for economic development; the project’s objectives remain relevant to priorities of the member countries. In response to the PRSPs, the Bank’s Country Assistance Strategies (CASs) acknowledge the link between environmental degradation and poverty, and support regional integration. As such, the project and the related WRD-SEM APL project contribute to CAS objectives through its contribution to infrastructure, increased income opportunities for the poor, improved community-based natural resource management, and reduced environment degradation. GEF priorities: The project is fully consistent with the updated strategic priorities for GEF-IW projects under GEF-4, and remains relevant under GEF-5. It specifically fits with the Strategic Program #3 on “Balancing overuse and conflicting uses of water resources in surface and groundwater basins that are of transboundary nature.� At the time of project preparation, the GEF still required the use of the TDA/SAP process as instruments for IW projects. These assessments were carried out to fill a substantial knowledge gap in a participatory process. The NBA’s priorities: The project contributed to progress in implementing the NBA’s Shared Vision “The Niger Basin, a common space of sustainable development through an integrated management of water resources and related eco-systems, for the enhancement of the living conditions and prosperity of the populations by 2025.� The project is also in line with two out of the three priority domains of the SDAP, namely the conservation of the Basin’s ecosystem, and the capacity building for stakeholders. 3.2 Achievement of Global Environment Objectives The project, in coordination with other partners’ projects, has been satisfactory in achieving the project development objective (PDO) and has allowed major contribution to the long-term global environment objective. The Niger Basin is the only basin in which all the nine member countries (via the NBA) approved a development scenario path and a 20-year investment program, at the highest political level (i.e. Heads of State and Government). This outstanding result took only six years to be achieved and deserves a highly satisfactory rating of the project. However, given that the objective of the project was broadly defined with indicators that were process oriented, lacking baseline and end target, the team has opted to rate the project as satisfactory only. Also, the team chose to upgrade the ISR of the project to satisfactory only when the SAP was endorsed by the CoM in November 2010 with a resolution that the SAP will be mainstreamed in the SDAP and the IP. This resolution was an indication that the spirit of the Shared Vision of one IP for the Niger Basin is maintained. The outstanding achievement is the result of a strong ownership of the member countries and the NBA and the partnership and strong coordination among development partners. More specifically, to achieve this result, the project contributed to: (i) Strengthening collaboration and dialogue between the NBA and the member countries; (ii) Improved knowledge base and data sharing at the Basin level; (iii) Validation at the regional and national level of Transboundary Diagnosis Analysis and SAP conducted in an inclusive process (and the SAP was endorsed by the CoM as a regional policy framework), and (iv) Delivery of positive impacts on the ground through micro-grant program and public participation program. 12 Strengthening collaboration and dialogue between the NBA and the member countries. This stronger collaboration yielded to the development of a sustainable strategic action plan and a 20- year investment program for the Niger Basin for an amount of US$8 billion. The project has contributed to a conducive and enabling environment and supported the ongoing dialogue and intensification of collaboration between the nine countries. The project modalities provided an opportunity for multi-sectoral dialogue, sharing of lessons, learning from each other, and building cohesiveness of key partners. This project was the only NBA project with activities implemented in the nine countries. In close coordination with the other development partners, following the Cooperation Framework (signed by the Partners in April 26, 2004), this project contributed to the success of the Shared Vision Process6 that resulted in the completion of: the Sustainable Development Action Plan7 (in 2007), the Investment Program8 (in 2008), and the Water Charter9 (approved in 2008, and effective in 2010). These results are unique in the substance and in terms of the short time it took to achieve them. Improved knowledge base and data sharing supported appropriate development decisions at the Basin level: In the context of the SDAP, hydrological and economic models of the Niger Basin for key development scenarios and key sectors (irrigation, energy, livestock, etc) were developed. The results of the models allowed the Niger CoM meeting to chose a specific development scenario and the Heads of State Summit, in April 2008, approved the investment program (IP) related to this specific development scenario. Without the modeling it would have proven difficult to compare and justify the choice of one of the nine potential development scenarios. The modeling allowed to have specific results in terms of impacts (on the inner delta (wetland in Mali), reduction of flow in the river, etc), and benefits (job creation, higher economic return, higher rice production, etc). The CoM had pertinent information to compare development scenarios and choose the one that presents the lower impacts and the higher benefits for the Basin. This is a concrete example on how better knowledge (through the hydrological and economic models currently used in the NBA) allowed for appropriate development decisions at the Basin level. The project activities also contributed to the capacity building of the Niger Basin Observatory (NBO), which is a critical department of the NBA in terms of modeling, monitoring, and providing the base of policy makers’ decisions in the basin. The support of the NBO continues to be supported by partners, mainly AFD, ACDI, the EU and GIZ. 6 In May 2005, the extraordinary session of the NBA CoM held in Abuja adopted the statement of the Shared Vision as follows: ‘‘The River Niger Basin, a common space of sustainable development through an integrated management of water resources and related eco-systems, for the enhancement of the living conditions and prosperity of the population by 2025�. With regard to the Shared Vision Process, it was agreed that the process will be based on the following two items: (i) Strategic assessment of the basin development opportunities and constraints, and (ii) Development and adoption of the Sustainable Development Action Program (SDAP) to be by a 20-year Investment Program. 7 The SDAP constitutes the strategic framework of reference which defines and orients the shared development process of the Basin. It follows two phases: (i) a baseline report on stakes and priority themes for the development of the Basin and (ii) a Master Plan to develop and manage the Basin. This Master Plan defines the strategic orientations for a sustainable development, identifies the development actions according to the three priority development areas – development of socio-economic infrastructure, ecosystem preservation, and capacity building- , analyzes the compatibility and complementarity of the main infrastructure of the Basin, proposes development options and the set of the SDAP action. 8 The US$8 IP articulates the budget needed for the implementation of the SDAP, which was adopted by the CoM on July 26, 2007. The IP covers the period from 2008 to 2027. 9 The Water Charter aims at encouraging cooperation based on solidarity and reciprocity for a sustainable, equitable, and coordinated use of the Niger Basin. Among other things, the water Charter aims to (i) reinforce solidarity and promote integration and sub-regional economic cooperation, (ii) promote harmonization and monitoring of national policies for the preservation and protection of the Niger Basin, (iii) define the principles and rules for the prevention and settlement of disputes regarding the use of the Niger Basin Water Resources, and (iv) define the procedures for the participation of water users in decision-making process regarding Basin water Resources management. 13 Validation at the regional and national level of Transboundary Diagnosis Analysis and SAP conducted in an inclusive process, and the SAP was endorsed by the CoM as a regional policy framework. A comprehensive Transboundary Diagnosis Analysis (TDA) and a Strategic Action Program (SAP) were completed following a participatory process that included multidisciplinary teams at the national and regional level. The TDA analysis conducted during the project preparation in the main stem countries was completed in 2009 and validated through a participatory process. It presented the transboundary problems as identified and prioritized by the basin stakeholders, with high and medium priorities assigned to respectively (i) land degradation (degradation of vegetation cover and soil erosion), (ii) water resources degradation (reduced water availability and quality), and (iii) loss of terrestrial biological diversity. Following the conclusions of the TDA, the SAP is a policy document that: (i) complemented the SDAP, (ii) identified future sustainable development investments in the Basin, (iii) ranked trans-boundary environmental problems, (iv) provided information on specific sites on the Basin that have a rich biodiversity, (v) identified political, legal and institutional reforms, and (v) integrated aspects related to climate change/variability emphasizing their transversal character and socio-economic impacts. The SAP also provided a first estimate of the cost of addressing the transboundary environmental aspects that were not yet included in the SDAP and estimated the cost to be about US$1.5 billion. Even though a more refined estimate will be provided when the SAP is mainstreamed in the SDAP, this report provides a first estimate of the order of magnitude of cost to address transbounday environmental problems in the Basin. It is important to note that the SAP was endorsed at the appropriate political level (the Council of Ministers) in November 2010 and it covers the period 2013 – 2027, parallel to subsequent SDAP phases. The CoM endorsed the resolution that the SAP needs to be mainstreamed in the SDAP and the IP, so that a unique IP is the reference for future sustainable investment in the Niger Basin. In the same spirit, considering the fact that a donor round table was already held in June 2008 for the SDAP and IP, it was not considered necessary to hold a separate SAP-specific donor round table. The NBA will approach development partners so that part of the pledge made in June 2008 is used to implement key activities of the SAP, while the SAP is mainstreamed in the SDAP and the IP. Delivery of positive impacts on the ground through a micro-grant program and a public participation program. The positive impacts can be summarized in terms of awareness, environmental activities used as a basis for poverty alleviation, and concrete activities on the ground for reversal of environmental degradation. Under the UNDP-implemented components, intensive awareness campaigns on environmental issues and the role of the NBA were conducted and resulted in improved awareness of the NBA and its activities. These local activities have increased the visibility of the NBA across all the countries of the Basin. Local activities were supported with 108 micro-grant interventions to demonstrate environmentally sustainable approaches for the reversal of land and water degradation, as a basis for poverty alleviation. Local beneficiaries in each country have been consulted and encouraged to participate in resource management, and have developed an environmental awareness that could benefit long- term integrated basin resources management. In this process, NGOs/groups of youth and women were given the opportunity to implement local activities. While the number of activities could have been reduced to be more focused in each country, it appears that the micro-grant program and awareness campaign were successful. In terms of more concrete activities in reducing the environmental degradation, under the African Development Bank-funded project on Siltation Control, which had a shared PMU with the project, concrete results on the ground were achieved 14 in terms of environmental restoration. For example, 5,087.2 hectares were reforested and revegetalized and 227.7 km of embankment were protected. While results on the ground of the AfDB funded project are significant, yet they do not compensate for the environmental degradation of the Basin as a result of key issues describes in section 1.1. For that reason, the WRDSEM-APL and other development partner project continue this work of implementing concrete activities on the ground for environmental restoration. Based on the above accomplishment of the performance indicators, the achievement of the project objective is rated Satisfactory. 3.3 Efficiency10 The operational and project management costs of the project were high due to the project’s focus on institutional strengthening and the high operational costs of travel, field visits, workshops, meetings and communications between the nine member countries. To reduce costs, a building of synergies with other initiatives was successfully conducted and resulted in an overall cost for training and workshop that was significantly lower than planned during the preparation. Given the context of the strong coordination with other development partners, looking at this project alone could be misleading. For example, there was a strategic choice, due to the institutional strengthening nature of the project, to increase the operating costs. This choice was based on the fact that the comparative advantage of the Bank’s project was a strong PMCU and national teams in the nine member countries; hence, requesting high operating cost. The funding of development partners during the Shared Vision Process was about US$75 million and that included projects with concrete activities in the ground. This quite modest funding leveraged a pledge from partners to about US$1.4 billion during the June 2008 round table. Of this US$1.4 billion pledged by development partners in June 2008, agreements have already been signed for an amount of US$0.68 billion and another US$0.36 billion is in the process of being signed totaling an amount of US$1.04. Thus, the remaining pledge that the NBA needs to mobilize is only US$0.36 billion. Similarly, on July 8, 2011, a round table was organized for filling the gap for the funding of the second phase of the Kandadji program, which is part of the Investment Program (IP), and the development partners (including the World Bank) pledged a total of US$257 million, which is an indication of the continuous momentum of development partners in activities from the IP. The SDAP and the IP includes a number of projects on irrigation and hydropower having in the medium and long-term multiple benefits in terms of food security, mitigation, and adaptation to climate variability and climate change, while looking at ways to ensure benefits to the communities around the infrastructure. These projects will contribute to (i) improve the resilience of the Basin to water shocks (floods and drought), (ii) improve access to cost effective energy through hydropower development, and (iii) provide new opportunities of local development to communities around infrastructure. The Water Charter endorsed by the Heads of State in April 2008 is one powerful instrument to ensure that these activities in the Basin can be implemented smoothly. The Kandadji program is an example of such comprehensive program and the level of funding secured for the program is a positive development for a concrete implementation of activities of the SDAP and IP. 10 A classic economic analysis is not applicable as this was a regional GEF grant and not an investment project. 15 The closing date of project was extended by 18 months, and at that point disbursement was 96.38 percent, which is a good achievement. It is important to note that the last six-month extension of the closing date of the project was due to the fact that the SAP was to be submitted to the CoM for endorsement and hence the NBA had to wait for the CoM to take place. The CoM takes place once a year and as such, even though the SAP was already finalized by the closing date of August 2010, yet the project had to be extended to account for the estimated time for the CoM to take place, hence a six-month extension was granted until February 2011. Given the coordination with the other initiatives, the disbursement rate, the successful achievement of the Shared Vision Process, the medium and long term benefits of the implementation of the IP, and the pledge of the development partners for US$1.4 billion, the implementation of this operation has been efficient. 3.4 Justification of Overall Outcome Rating The overall outcome for the project is rated Satisfactory taking into account the evaluation results for section 3.1, which evidence that the GEO and PDO continue to be highly relevant, and the section 3.2 achievement of the GEO, which evidence the success of the project. Key outcomes that have been essential to the project success and its replicability are the following: (i) supporting the successful implementation of the Shared Vision Process which was critical in the revival of the Niger Basin Authority and the rebuilding of the member countries trust in the NBA; (ii) mainstreaming environment from the policy and strategic level (TDA, SDAP, SAP, etc) to the local/operational level (through awareness campaign and grass roots activities); and (iii) the project’s contribution to the preparation the WRD-SEM APL project and its catalytic role in IDF funding (for an amount of US$0.5 million), which led to a CIDA-funded capacity building project for an amount of US$7.2 million. 3.5 Overarching Themes, Other Outcomes and Impacts (a) Poverty Impacts, Gender Aspects and Social Development The pilot projects and micro-grant interventions generally improved prevailing conditions in the selected areas for the interventions and several of the interventions of component 5 focused on women’s and youth groups. Public participation drives helped to open up the decision-making process to a broader range of local stakeholders. (b) Institutional Change/Strengthening As highlighted throughout this document, the essence of the success of the project was its contribution to the key Shared Vision Process that revived the NBA and fused trust of the member countries and the development partners in the NBA. Between 2004 and 2010, a high number of challenging milestones were achieved, indicating the strengthening capacity of the NBA and the increased trust of its member countries. From a national and local perspective, the project also contributed to the following:  At the national level, the project strengthened the capacity of staff of key institutions responsible for land and water management with potential transboundary impacts.  At the local level, the project actively involved communities in the participatory management of protected areas, communal land resources, the fight against desertification, and in the 16 equitable sharing of the benefits derived from such management through the support of CBOs. (c) Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts The project, jointly with other development partner initiatives, formalized the participation of the Niger Basin Users in the regional cooperation. In each country, there is now a national cell of representatives of users of the Niger Basin resources. During the technical meetings of the Council of Ministers, the regional cell of the Niger Basin Users is an observer and for each item discussed in preparation of the CoM, comments and reactions are sought from the regional cell of the Niger Basin Users. While formalizing, this involvement of the Niger Basin Users is still relatively recent, yet it sensitized the political level on the importance of providing to the civil society a platform to convey its view on the development of the Niger Basin. The success of the Shared Vision process and of the project resulted on the IDA-funded WRD- SEM APL. Due to the regional nature of the project, the national IDA for each of the five participating countries was leveraged based on the following: for each million of national IDA, two millions of regional IDA are provided. As such, the regional cooperation allowed the five countries participating in the WRDP-APL1 to benefit from additional IDA resources. 3.6 Summary of Findings of Beneficiary Survey and/or Stakeholder Workshops Not available. 4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome The risk to the Development Outcome of this operation is rated Moderate. Factors in favor of the sustainability of project interventions are: (i) the NBA’s improved financial position now that most riparians have cleared their past arrears in annual contributions; (ii) the NBA core operation costs are independent of development partners (they are funded by the countries) and as such the closing of the project does not affect the functioning of the NBA; (iii) the close implementation relationship between the WRD-SEM APL project and the project provides opportunities to ensure that activities will continue to be integrated within the regional, national and local development plans; (iv) the integration of the SAP in the SDAP – as stipulated in the resolutions of the 29th CoM (November 2010) - increases the likelihood of implementation of SAP components in the SDAP financing framework; (v) the continuing and large scale coordinated development partners’ support for the NBA to implement the SDAP and the IP; (vii) the effectiveness of the Water Charter; and (viii) the increasingly important role of the NBA in managing the Niger River’s water resources, particularly when the planned Fomi, Taoussa and Kandadji dams come under implementation. The understaffing of the NBA’s Technical Department and Observatory has been a concern; however, during the 30th CoM, the member countries have issued a resolution to increase the technical staffing of the NBA in the next two years. The development partners have committed to support this bridging phase of two years. Some of the micro-grant supported interventions at the local level may face sustainability issues due to the non-availability of funding for future maintenance and consolidation of achievements. The lessons learned based the regional forum of micro-grants activities are that: (i) micro-grants that have an income generation component and (ii) funds (revolving funds) have been established are likely to be sustainable. These lessons 17 learned can be used in future project as sustainability factor/criteria to be used in micro-grant selection. The NBA is working on mainstreaming micro-grant interventions in the NBA- implemented projects and in national projects. 5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance 5.1 Bank (a) Bank Performance in Ensuring Quality at Entry Rating: Moderately Satisfactory. The project was aligned with the CAS in member countries and the GEF-IW strategy and OP 9 guidelines. It was designed in close interaction with the NBA and major stakeholders. The project did not have a quality enhancement review but was peer- reviewed by senior technical staff. The Quality Assessment Group’s (QAG) first “Learning Review of Regional Projects� took place in October 2009. The panel judged that the project was well-designed. The objectives of the Project remain highly relevant today, as it supported institutional and policy measures needed to pave the way for the WRDP-APL program. Project preparation and background analysis were detailed. However, while the design included a detailed results framework, indicators did not have good baseline estimates and end-of-project targets. This is due to the fact that (i) at the time of project preparation in 2004 there was not the same focus as today on the design of the result framework, and (ii) regional project on international waterways in Africa such as the Nile, the Senegal, the Lake Chad and the SADC projects were either under preparation or at early stage of implementation; hence, there was no existing experience on which to base expected results and detailed end-of-project targets. The implementation of several components got delayed mainly to the delay in the effectiveness and the high turnover of the PMCU staff at the start of the project. The project was effective a year after the Board date because of delays in the recruitment of the PMCU staff. This delay was due to the fact that at the time a number of decisions were taken at the level of CoM resulting in long procedures. (b) Quality of Supervision Rating: Moderately satisfactory. The Bank team has seen three task team leaders and the aide memoires suggest that supervision was insufficient between 2005 and 2007, which may have contributed to the slow start of the project. The first two supervision missions following the May 2005 project launch took place in May and December 2006, followed by a supervision mission in June 2008. However, as of 2008, supervision missions increased and the MTR was conducted in a series of missions that cover all the member countries (except Guinea due to country situation). There have been regular subsequent missions until the end of the project. The MTR was delayed for nearly two years due to budgetary problems. ISRs indicate some field visits by the task team leader and/or others in October 2005, June 2007 and November 2007, although no mission documents are available to substantiate this. While the successful implementation of the UNDP- supported components was considered important for the success of the Bank-supported components, there was little Bank leverage to influence UNOPS’ performance. The UNDP participated to all the project steering committees providing the strategic guidance to the annual work plans and budget. As such, the supervision of the Bank and the UNDP were complementary. While UNOPS was not able to monitor field activities, the agreement for grass- root activities was between the NBA and the GEF UNDP Small-Grant-Program (SPG), as such 18 the coordination units of these SPG provided the follow up in terms of selection and monitoring of the grass-root activities, While procurement and financial management supervision took place from the beginning of the project, it has not been adequately recorded in IRIS until the time of the MTR by mid 2009. Annual work plans produced by the PMCU could have provided more specific information on the project’s achievements and bottlenecks. This would have supported the yearly follow up outside the supervision missions. Although supervision was economized by involving multiple Bank staff based in the region, annual supervision budgets were generally not commensurate with the fact that the project was covering nine countries in a complex region requiring intensive supervision. Overall, there is insufficient documented evidence that supervision proactively identified threats to achieving development outcomes in the first three years of the project. At the same period there was a change in regional coordination, which left the project without a coordinator for about eight months. However, the supervision of the project improved after these three years till the end of the project allowing a successful completion of the project. (c) Justification of Rating for Overall Bank Performance Rating: Moderately Satisfactory. Based on the two ratings above and the outcome rating in Section 3.2, the overall Bank performance is rated as moderately satisfactory. 5.2 Borrower Performance (a) Government Performance Rating: Moderately Satisfactory. Overall, the Governments of the member countries demonstrated a satisfactory level of commitment to NBA and to achieving the development objectives of the project. The countries and the NBA generally complied with the applicable covenants and agreements, and country ownership has been significant, as evidenced by the countries’ continuous participation in the regional and national planning for the project. Annual work plans were validated each year in August at the RSC and NSC levels, and then adopted by the subsequent CoM meetings, indicating the countries’ keen interest in the project at a high political level. In most countries, the performance of NPTs and LCMCs in assisting local CBOs was severely affected by governmental budget planning requirements, imposed reductions in means and goods, weak organization, and insufficient funding, which initially delayed project achievements at the local level. (b) Implementing Agency Performance Rating: Moderately satisfactory. The performance of the PMCU in managing the project’s implementation is rated moderately satisfactory. Indeed, despite a challenging environment, the PMCU showed strong commitment and managed to keep the momentum with the national project teams in the nine countries. By the end of the project, disbursement was 96.38 percent, while achieving the project’s objective. The PMCU faced many difficulties beyond its own control. Initially, project planning, financial management, and procurement were not at par with expectations set at appraisal due to initial high turnover of key staff (2005-2006) and problems with the timely recruitment of a procurement specialist. This resulted in inadequate budgeting and procurement plans for the first two years of the Project, all of which affected the initial project implementation and delayed 19 disbursements. Consequently, the project took two to three years from the start to achieve some momentum. Quarterly progress reports and financial reports were initially also submitted with delays. Annual work plans lacked specific information and did not include an elaboration of past achievements and bottlenecks experienced. Project management, procurement and financial management improved during the second half of the project, accelerating progress in implementation. At local level, the PMCU and NPTs managed to successfully engage stakeholders in micro-grant supported interventions. The MTR rated the PMCU’s procurement and financial management performance moderately satisfactory. The independent Final Evaluation and minutes of RSC meetings have reported that the inadequate support of UNOPS and its heavy procurement and disbursement procedures has severely penalized the project and caused long delays in the mobilization of funds and project activities. There is no evidence that M&E contributed significantly to informed decision-making, or to project planning and management. The PMCU shared three experts with the AfDB funded project on Siltation Control, but this was not as successful as expected due to work overload, priority conflicts, differences and delays in project implementation. The independent final review states that the shared regional specialist recruited for M&E reportedly did not make any supervision mission to the countries for the project. The NBA’s performance was moderately satisfactory in view of its support to the PMCU in achieving the project’s outputs and its coordination with major stakeholders and development partners. The institutional arrangements put in place by the NBA in accordance with the PAD were adequate in the context of regional projects, at the level of PMCU, NPTs, Steering Committees and LCMCs. The PMCU was overall equipped with adequate expertise (although the planned expert in IWRM was never recruited, which did not affect the performance of the project). NPTs consisted of a National Coordinator and a specialist in micro-grant supported interventions. NPTs were not provided with adequate financial resources for their proper functioning. The initial project implementation was severely delayed in 2005 – 2006 by several staff resignations from the PMCU and NPTs, without timely replacement and adequate job transfer to the new incumbents. Unequal arrangements for salaries and benefits for the Bank and UNDP supported components caused demotivation and negative impacts on project implementation. Annual audit reports were generally provided in time. Justification of Rating for Overall Borrower Performance: Rating: Moderately Satisfactory. Based on the above ratings and the outcome rating in Section 3.2, the overall Borrower performance is rated as moderately satisfactory. 6. Lessons Learned The following lessons can be drawn from the final evaluation of this project: The Sustainable Development Action Program (SDAP) consisted of nine development scenarios enabling the Council of Ministers (CoM) to select the best scenario based on tangible indicators. The tangible indicators were related to economic rate of return, job creation, increase in the rice production, reduction in navigable days, reduction in the inner delta surface (key wetland for the Basin in Mali), minimum flow in three locations in the Basin (Markala 20 (Guinea), Niamey (Niger), and Malanville (Benin), and increase energy (hydropower) production. The SDAP report was a rich informative report, yet it presented key resulted in a digested way that enabled effective communication with decision maker in the Basin. For example, the SDAP key results for decision makers were presented in one table that included all the nine development scenarios and tangible indicators for each scenario. This clear presentation was an effective communication that allowed the CoM, in July 2007, to make an informed decision on the optimal scenario for the Basin. The investment program (IP), developed on the basis of this optimal scenario, was then endorsed by the Heads of State and Government in April 2008. While the Shared Vision Process was successful, using a multi-donor trust fund (MTDF) could have simplified the design and the measure of progress. Many development partners funded the Shared Vision Process and each partner came with its requirement and procedures. Using a MTDF would have had the benefit of one set of procedures for the NBA and allowed also more flexibility in packaging of studies and of capacity-building and grass root-level activities. While having activities on the institutional level and activities at grass root level may appear adding complexity, it also allows strengthening the institutions from the two ends. Indeed, working solely on the institution without investment (even at pilot level) lacks tangible results on the benefit of regional cooperation on the ground and does build and prepare the institution to implement or supervise the implementation of future investment. Working solely on investment (even at pilot level) without strengthening the institutions (i.e. working on the long-term vision and the soft aspect of regional cooperation) lacks building the cohesion and cooperation that are required to implement smoothly large infrastructure with trans- boundary effect. As such, the NBA, the countries and the development partners made the strategic choice to strengthen the NBA from the top-down and bottom-up ends to effectively prepare for the next generation of larger investments in the Basin. While it is acknowledged that this could have stretched the NBA, the design of the project included a strong PMCU that supported effectively the NBA in responding to this challenge. The establishment of a strongly coordinated development partners group and the regular interaction of the group with the NBA proved to be very effective. In the context of the Niger Basin, the development partner group is part of the organigram of the NBA. During the Shared Vision the strong coordination among the development partners, the countries, and the NBA stimulated efficient support in terms of studies to be conducted (Institutional and organizational audits, the SAP, the SDAP, the IP, etc), while projects are implemented in the ground for communities. This dual track (of institutional and investment support), with a strong coordination among the development partners, the countries, and the NBA resulted in a Shared Vision process that has been successful and conducted in a timely manner. GEF Grant funding can play a catalytic role in strengthening a regional organization and leveraging additional funds and preparing the institution to the next level of capacity building. The processes of joint planning, good practice sharing, and implication of all stakeholders 21 proved crucial in abiding by the principles of the Shared Vision. Indeed, the GEF project was catalytic in strengthening the NBA in its role as a regional river basin organization. The TDA/SAP process played an important role for mainstreaming environment at all levels. The project included a number of activities that adhered to the principles of active stakeholder participation, which also followed the spirit of the Shared Vision. The GEF funding served an important catalytic function for the strengthening of the NBA, as illustrated by the successful June 2008 round table during which development partners pledged US$1.4 billion. In addition, the NBA is also now ready for the next level of capacity building dealing with the increase resilience of the Basin to climate variability and change. Actually, the Bank is working jointly with the NBA on the climate risk management of the SDAP and the IP, which focuses on how the SDAP and IP activities are resilient to climate variability and change. The preliminary results indicate that the SDAP and the IP are resilient. Other aspects to pay attention to in the next generation of the capacity building are: improve of flood and drought warning system and getting the information to users timely and effectively in a way that is easy to understand. Other key elements relate to decision support tools. Already partners such as the AFD, GIZ and EU are providing funding in this vein to the Niger Basin Observatory. The Bank should be realistic regarding project implementation planning and difficult supervision of regional projects. There is a need for realism in operations that combine relatively low capacity of the Recipient with multiple players at the regional, national and local levels. The project implemented many broadly scattered activities in nine countries at multiple institutional levels, compounded by the strongly centralized and cumbersome disbursement procedures for grass-root level activities. All of these may have put unrealistic demands on the PMCU. Given the high cost of implementation, the sharing staff cost among partners (UNDP, AfDB, and the Bank) was a good cost effectiveness initiative. However, different benefits among institutions resulted in staff with different level of salaries and benefits, which created some tension during the implementation. It is recommended hence that either one partner funds all the positions or ensuring that the same benefits are provided across development partners. The supervising of the project by the World Bank was also a challenge as it required visiting regularly nine countries in the context of limited supervision funding. As such, the team opted for cost effectiveness: (i) combined supervision mission with the WRD-SEM APL1 supervision missions, (ii) took the opportunity of Council of Ministers to interact with national teams, (iii) team members based on Bank Country offices lead supervision missions on the field, and (iv) there has been audio-conference and video-conference meetings to provide guidance in between supervision missions. 7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners (a) Borrower/implementing agencies Refer to Annex 7 for a summary of the Borrower’s ICR. The draft ICR was submitted for review to the NBA. Received comments are included in the project files and are mostly incorporated in this document. (b) Co-financiers 22 Comments were received from CIDA, GIZ and UNDP. The comments are summarized in Annex 8 and are mostly incorporated in this document. (c) Other partners and stakeholders (e.g. NGOs/private sector/civil society). Not applicable. 23 Annex 1. Project Costs and Financing (a) Project Cost by Component (in US$ million equivalent), as on December 31, 2010 Appraisal Latest Percentage Components Estimate Estimate Appraisal Bank funded 6.00 6.00 100% 1. Institution Building 3.52 4.29 122% 3. Data and Knowledge Management 1.13 0.77 68% 6. TDA and SAP Preparation 1.35 0.94 70% UNDP funded 7.00 7.00 100% 11 2. Capacity Building and Public Awareness 1.62 2.14 132% 12 4. Regional Forum 0.38 0.59 155% 5. Demonstration Pilots and Micro-grant Program 5.00 4.27 85% Total Baseline Cost 13.00 13.00 100% Physical Contingencies Price Contingencies Total Project Costs 13.00 13.00 100% Project Preparation Facility (PDF A/B) 0.38 0.38 100% Total Financing Required 13.38 13.38 100% (b) Financing Appraisal Type of Latest Estimate Percentage Source of Funds Estimate Financing (US$ million) Appraisal (US$ million) Recipient (NBA/countries) In-kind 2.07 GEF – Project funding 13.00 12.80 98.5% CIDA (Canada) Parallel 7.2 GIZ (former GTZ) Parallel 11.32 African Development Bank Parallel 21.87 21.87 100% French Cooperation Agency Parallel 4.78 20.32 425.1% NORAD (Norway) Co-financing 0.16 0.16 100% Dutch Government (BNWPP) Co-financing 0.59 0.57 96.8% GEF (PDF A/B) 0.38 0.38 100% UNDP (SPPD/TRIB) 0.17 0.17 100% Total 43.02 74.79 173.87% 11 The budget for component 2 has reportedly also financed activities for other components. 12 Actual disbursement for component 4 was only US$0.20 million in December 2010. 24 Annex 2.1: Intermediate Results Indicators from ISR, PAD and ProDoc (UNDP) Intermediate Intermediate outcome Summary of Result UNDP Output Results per indicators (from ISR) Indicators (Annex 3 of Indicators (ProDoc) Component PAD) 1 (WB) - Institution 1.1 Strengthen the Operational regional, Established operational Building: capacity of the national and local Project PMCU with clear Recipient to promote institutions established and administrative An institutional and and improve NBA’s regional and responsibilities, management system coordinated and national staff obtained transparent financial established and sustainable land and increased capacities management, and operational for the water management in through project effective technical project. the Basin. management and financial capacity. training. 1.2 An institutional and management system established and operational for the Project, to enable NBA to efficiently manage land and water resources across the Basin. 2 (UNDP) - Diversified information Enhanced regional, Capacity Building sources regarding the national and local & Public sustainable development of institutional capacities Awareness: land and water resources between and among the are made available, and Basin countries and the Enhanced local and national and local NBA, through improved national capacity stakeholders promote collaboration and capacity and increased community participation in building tools, to better awareness of the micro-grant programs. address and manage challenges and transboundary issues. issues in the Basin. 3 (WB) - Data & 2. Improved regional, A shared framework for Improved data collection Knowledge national and local data land and water data, and and data exchange Management: and information Basin degradation mechanisms established management between indicators is adopted, a in all nine countries, and Improved regional, riparian countries of the Basin-wide Environmental agreed cooperation national and local Niger Basin, to enable Information System is protocols for greater data and more efficient and being established and knowledge of the Niger information holistic management of basin-wide land and water River as it relates to the management; the basin resources. data are generated for the environment, river increased dialogue proposed SDAP economic hydrology, and land and and exchange model. water degradation. within and between riparians. 4 (UNDP) - Lessons learned and good Exchanged good Regional Forum: practices in land and water management practices with other regional lake 25 Regional linkages management assessed. and river basin programs, and networks Effective regional linkages and defined processes and established and between international practices to minimize operational. waters programs and the land and water project established through degradation, and support exchanges and a regional environmental Forum, and action conservation and strategies regarding land sustainable development. and water degradation across regional communities determined. 5 (UNDP) - Successful demonstration Enhanced local Demonstration pilot projects and a micro- community education and pilots and micro- grant program yield awareness and local grant program: experiences, models and communities involved lessons learned on good through a CDD process in Demonstration pilot practices for land and water implementing micro-grant projects applied, degradation reversal. supported interventions validated and and demonstration pilot packaged for Community groups have projects, that promote scaling-up and received micro-grants, effective land and water micro-grant executed priority actions management practices to program executed and adopted new practices, address targeted sector and documented yielding increased issues; learned awareness of Basin implementation lessons environmental challenges in incorporated and local community groups exchanged, and and stakeholders. implementation processes monitored and evaluated. 6 (WB) - TDA and 4. TDA and SAP National TDAs completed Completed TDA and SAP preparation: completed, validated for all riparians, basin-wide adopted SAP, which and disseminated, SAP adopted by the CoM provides a framework for TDA and SAP enabling joint of NBA, and funding for priority actions for completed and transboundary SAP implementation sustainable development disseminated. management actions on committed by donors in the Basin. the ground. 26 Annex 2.2: Planned Activities, Output Targets and final Achievements by Project components Component 1 – Institution Building (US$3.52 million; Bank supported) - Establish operational regional, national and local Project institutions and provide regional and national staff with increased capacities to manage regional projects. Activities Output Targets Achievements at completion 1.1: Establish the PMCU PMCU operational at project Mostly achieved. Project management and to facilitate and coordinate effectiveness, with clear planning, timely approval of annual work the work program of the administrative plans and budget (AWPB), and procurement project, deliver project responsibilities, transparent and financial management processes outputs, provide TA and financial management, and improved during the project period. Annual manage program activities effective technical capacity. work plans were generally inadequate on the basis of approved although the M&E framework was not fully annual work plans. operationalized neither the audits not the FM supervision noted major issues in the financial management of the project. 1.2: Establish the project All regional and national Fully achieved. All 9 NPTs and 33 LCMCs implementation structure structures operational in were established and operational, although at national level, including 2006 and all local structures operations were constrained by severe 9 National Steering operational in 2007. financial limitations. Government Committees13 (NSC), 9 commitment was key to support the NPTs National Project Teams and LCMCs in conducting their tasks (NPT) and numerous despite a financially constrained Local Coordination environment. The RSC and NSCs conducted Committees (LCMC), and annual meetings, fostered regional conduct national level cooperation for management of the Basin, meetings to approve and approved the annual work plans and annual work plans. budget. The project’s institutional setting enhanced the dialogue between NBA and the countries and reinforced the concept of the Shared Vision. 1.3: Conduct regional and Regional and national Mostly achieved. Result-based management national project project management, training was funded through an IDF14 grant. management training financial management and Financial management training was programs, including M&E training completed. completed, but additional training in project financial management and management and M&E processes would procurement. have further supported RPCU, and NPTs. Component 2: Capacity Building and Public Awareness (US$1.62 million; UNDP supported) - Increase awareness of environmental and transboundary issues in target communities, facilitate consultations, and build enhanced regional, national and local institutional capacities regarding environmental management. Activities Output Targets Achievements at completion 13 The existing Regional Steering Committee (RSC) for the AfDB funded project ‘Development of a master plan for siltation control in the Niger Basin’ also functioned as RSC for the Niger Basin GEF Project. 14 Institutional Development Fund 27 2.1: Implement public Diversified information Achieved. Public awareness programs were education, information, sources regarding the completed. A film documentary and communication and sustainable development of brochures on NBA and the status of the awareness programs for all land and water resources are Basin’s land and water resources have been relevant stakeholders at made available; roll-out produced. Consultation meetings, regional, national and local from 2007 leads to increased workshops on conflict prevention and levels, to better understand stakeholder awareness of resolution of IWRM related issues, as well environ-mental issues in environmental trans- as public debates and radio talks were the Basin and introduce boundary issues and conducted. best practices. engagement in local and national decision-making. 2.2: Implement regional, Enhanced institutional Achieved. Formal training under this national and local training capacities at various levels component focused on CBOs and training of programs on CDD to manage transboundary ‘communicators’. programs, micro-grant issues; stakeholders promote interventions, and public community participation in participation in natural micro-grant programs under resources management and component 5, and participate decision making. in developing SAP. Component 3: Data and Knowledge Management (US$1.13 million; Bank supported) – Establish a shared institutional framework for land and water data collection and sharing, and a basin-wide Environmental Information System (EIS), for improved data and information management with increased dialogue and data sharing between riparians. Activities Output Targets Achievements at completion 3.1: Strategic assessment A national level framework Achieved in coordination with the of hydrological, for land and water data and a Observatory. Both studies and a meta data environmental and socio- set of environmental and base (http://georepertoire.abn.ne/) – an on- economic data and socio-economic indicators at line data catalogue with information on bio- information management basin level is assessed. physical and socio-economic indicators - at Niger Basin level. Diagnostic report available were completed in 2009 and endorsed at the 3.2: Assessment of in 2006. regional level. Access to this website is existing national data and hampered by local electricity and server data quality, to maintenance problems. complement activity 3.1. 3.3: Define a framework Increased number of local, Mostly achieved. This activity was for a regional and basin- national, and regional transferred15 to the Observatory of NBA wide Environmental and specialists participating in (NBO) to ensure that sufficient funding is Socio-economic EIS through data exchange available to conduct the independent mid- Information System (EIS); and coordinated basin-wide term-review and the independent final define data needs, decision-making. evaluation review. The EIS framework is modalities for data This component was achieved and the prototype is available. The collection, processing and transferred to the NBO, and follow up on the EIS continues to be funded dissemination. funded by the FFEM (AFD). under a separate FFEM project. The 15 Components 3.3 and 3.6 were transferred to the Observatory of NBA (NBO) and funded from other resources in order to release adequate funding for the independent Mid-Term Review and Final Evaluation. 28 GEF funds for this prototype EIS (data base and GIS) is on-line component were reallocated (www.sie.abn.ne) and covers 28 priority to cover the cost of MTR and indicators. IT infrastructure has been final evaluation. provided for the NBO. Access to the website is hampered by local electricity and server maintenance problems. 3.4: Conduct local, Improved data collection and Mostly achieved. A conceptual manual on national and regional data exchange mechanisms standardized and harmonized procedures training on standardized and protocols established in was prepared and shared through 8 national procedures for data all nine countries. workshops. A regional workshop was collection, analysis, Information and data sharing conducted in February 2011. For hydrology dissemination and sharing. network fully operational by data, the information and data sharing 3.5: Facilitate a dialogue 2008. network is fully operational, and the on data collection, data information exchange protocol between management and NBA and countries is fully achieved for information sharing. hydrology data. The NBA’s is going beyond hydrology data by adding environment and socio-economic data. As similar process of exchange protocol is on-going for these additional environment and socio-economic data. 3.6: Supplement the Basin-wide land and water Achieved. This was transferred to the NBO existing basin-wide data generated and evaluated and the economic module is part of the river economic model with an for the proposed SDAP basin system model developed in 2007 for environmental dimension; economic model. the SDAP. The NBO training on the implement, apply and integration of environmental aspects in the evaluate the enhanced Basin’s economic model has been model. conducted in the context of the SDAP. Component 4: Regional Forum (US$0.38 million; UNDP supported) - Exchange good basin management practices with other regional lake and river basin programs, and establish regional linkages and networks, in order to define processes and practices to minimize land and water degradation and support environmental conservation and sustainable development. Activities Output Targets Achievements at completion 4.1: Prepare an assessment Report on lessons learned Mostly achieved. Till December 2010, of lessons learned on Basin and good practices in land workshops to assess lessons learned from management strategies and and water management micro-grant supported interventions were micro-grant supported completed and disseminated; held in at least 6 countries. The comparative programs, and the tools strategy for micro-grants analysis of good Basin management and mechanisms to program implemented; practises and strategies, and the compilation strengthen relevant Basin relevant Basin management of knowledge and experience on Basin networks. and action strategies management acquired elsewhere was carried regarding land and water out in Mali in February 2011. degradation across regional communities applied. 4.2: Strengthen Study tour completed and Achieved. Under the IDF TF, two study relationships with Pan- coordinated action strategies tours were conducted one in the Seneagl African and international with other Basins identified. River Basin Organization and the other in 29 networks (e.g. UNCCD, the Danube River Basin. The NELSAP SADC, ANBO and under the Nile Basin Initiative has INBO); conduct a study conducted a study tour in the Niger Basin tour. Authority with an exchange of experience. When the SAP of the Lake Chad was approved, the NBA and RPCU participated to the technical meetings and to the CoM and this exposure supported the SAP process conducted by the NBA. 4.3: Conduct a Regional Regional forum held in Achieved. The Regional Forum was Forum to establish 2007; regional and Pan- successfully held in Mali in June 2011. effective linkages with African networks reinforced. other IW projects, and Effective regional linkages promote and strengthen between other IW programs relevant network and the Project established. relationships. Component 5: Demonstration Pilots and Micro-grant Program (US$5.0 million; UNDP supported) - Enhance local community education, awareness and involvement through pilot projects demonstrating and promoting good practices in land and water management, and take advantage of emerging experiences through a series of micro-grant supported interventions. Activities Output Targets Achievements at completion 5.1-5.2: Evaluate and LCMCs and 9 PDPs are Mostly achieved. 33 LCMCs were made operationalize Local organized and prepared, operational, although financial resources Coordination and reflecting sector priorities were scared, which required support from Monitoring Committees for addressing transboundary the countries. Pilot projects were (LCMC) and prepare 9 problems, with mechanisms implemented with delays due to processing pilot demonstration pilots for micro-grant problems, but did lead to positive results. (PDP). disbursement in place. 5.3-5.4: Implement Successful PDPs yield Mostly achieved. Seven out of the nine training and 9 pilot reported and shared PDPs were satisfactorily achieved. demonstration projects experiences, models and However, due to implementation delays, the (PDPs), and evaluate and lessons learned on good intended lessons could not be derived from share lessons learned. practices in land and water the PDPs instead the lessons for the SAP management, to serve as were derived from the micro-grant reference framework for the activities. micro-grant programs and inform SAP development. 5.5: Formulate, implement, Community groups have Achieved. 108 successful micro-grant monitor, evaluate and received micro-grants for supported interventions were financed. report outcomes of micro- interventions with a focus on There haves been very positive impacts of grant supported resources management and these micro-grant in terms of awareness, interventions, yielding have adopted new practices. community development, some income increased awareness of Micro-projects generate generation for communities, and some environmental challenges immediate environmental reduction on the ground of environmental in local community groups and socio-economic benefits. degradation. In the selection of the activities and stakeholders. It is also important to note that micro-grant benefited women and youth groups. 30 Component 6: TDA and SAP Preparation (US$1.35 million; WB supported) - TDA and SAP completed, adopted and disseminated, to provide a regional policy framework for priority actions for sustainable development in the Basin. Activities Output Targets Achievements at completion 6.1: Complete and update In 2006 nine country TDA’s Achieved. The regional and national TDAs the TDA to include the 4 are completed and validated were completed and validated in an remaining riparian and findings are inclusive process at national and regional countries. disseminated. levels in 2009. 6.2 – 6.3: Develop the Based on the regional TDA, Achieved. The nine national action plans SAP with support of the SAP is developed, were completed in 2010, while the SAP was national and regional validated by stakeholders validated at a regional workshop (August specialists, stakeholders and disseminated, to provide 2010), prior to endorsement by the 29th and authorities; validate a regional policy framework CoM in November 2010. The CoM issued a the SAP through for priority actions for resolution requesting the NBA to ensure that consultations and sustainable development in the SAP is mainstreamed in the SDAP and workshops at various the Basin. IP in a timely manner. levels. 6.4: Hold a donor meeting NBA committed to Achieved. Since the SAP will be integrated for engaging donors in implementation of priority in the SDAP and IP, and a successful donor SAP funding and actions of the SAP, with conference for financing of the SDAP/IP implementation. funding committed by took already place in April 2008. The donors. pledge of development partners for the lP and SDAP are broad enough to integrate priority actions identified in the SAP. Another round table would have been redundant and would not have been in the spirit of the Shared Vision process that is one investment program for the Niger Basin. 31 Annex 2.3 Evaluation of Risks and Mitigation Measures identified in PAD Risk Rating Risk Mitigation Measure Risk assessment at ICR (PAD) stage To PDO: Riparians do not Riparian governments have Risk adequately estimated: successfully or agreed to GEF Project goals The project’s institutional setting completely establish a through Project preparation enhanced the dialogue between transboundary land and workshops. Risk mitigation NBA and the countries and water framework for lies in realistic scheduling of reinforced the concept of the the sustainable process, timetable and budget. Shared Vision. In the project development of the period the countries adopted the Niger River Basin. M SDAP, the SAP and a Water Charter for the Niger Basin. The Project contributed to these achievements, which reflect progress in the establishment of harmonized regulatory policies and integrated resources management practices. To Project Component results Component 1 The focus will be on meeting Risk adequately estimated: Project management the Basin’s human capacities Most of the project activities system, though through a variety of training started with considerable delays established, is not fully S and capacity building options. and were completed at a late stage operational. of the project, due to rather weak management capacities within the PMCU, NBA and the countries. Component 2 Target groups, communities, Risk adequately estimated: Despite a public and local messages may be The targets for component 2 were information campaign, selected by each individual achieved but with some delays. local and national member state in order to riparian capacity and S balance riparian ownership and awareness of land and a Basin agenda. The Basin water issues remain campaign may be linked to a negligible. larger environmental agenda and budget. Component 3 The component has been Risk underestimated: The regional, national designed so as to support the The Studies, the EIS framework, and local data and riparians in developing data and training activities were information sharing mechanism(s) per completed in 2010. The planned management dialogue stated needs, without forced Basin information and data sharing and exchange are not movement to single-format network is established, but not improved and protocols. A basin-wide always functional due to electricity M coordinated, requiring economic model should be one shortages and server problems. An additional of open access. effective protocol and mechanism harmonization and for making hydrology data coordination. available is established and now will be further extended to the 28 indicators developed under the project. 32 Component 4 Targeted component activities Risk adequately estimated: Regional linkages and will work with policymakers networks are not and technical specialists, with The planned activities have been established, with closest linkages to Basin achieved. growing disparity stakeholders, through engaging between riparian them in a study tour and a N stakeholders, the NBA regional forum to exchange and other regional lessons with other regional Basin organizations. basin organizations, and to strengthen the communication capacity of the regional networks. Component 5 Micro-grant program to be Risk adequately estimated: Though the based on similar interventions Demonstration pilots took longer demonstration and for community productivity on than expected due to processing micro-grant program is land and in water, such as problems. Lessons learned have piloted, its findings are successful community-driven hence been extracted from the neither successful nor M development projects in micro-grant programs to inform validated, with further several of the Basin member the SAP development. The micro- scaling up of the states. grant program was successful and micro-grant program of also among the beneficiaries questionable value. included women and youth groups. Component 6 Member state and donor Risk underestimated: TDA is completed; support expressed through the The SAP was completed and however the SAP is Strategic Vision process as a adopted by the countries with incomplete, thus not baseline for cooperation. TDA delays, and could therefore not capturing the critical and SAP draft circulations and inform the development of the sustainable path, and stakeholder workshops as an SDAP. However, in order to resources needed, for opportunity for voicing input mitigate this aspect, the Council of transboundary to, and signaling to Basin Ministers in July 2007, approved development of the support of SAP process. the SDAP as a living document in N Basin’s land and water order to incorporate the SAP when resources. it is finalized. This has been further confirmed by the Council of Ministers in November 2010 during which the SAP has been approved and in which the resolution further remind that the SAP is to be mainstreamed in the SDAP and IP. 33 Annex 3. Economic and Financial Analysis Not applicable as this was a regional GEF grant and not an investment project. 34 Annex 4. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes (a) Task Team members Responsibility/ Names Title Unit Specialty Lending/Supervision/ICR Sr. Water & Sanitation Amal Talbi Sr. Water & Sanitation Specialist AFTWR Specialist Ousmane Dione Sector Leader LCSSD Sector Leader Senior Procurement Yao Wottor Senior Procurement Specialist LCSPT Specialist Sr. Financial Management Mamadou Yaro Sr. Financial Management Specialist AFTFM Specialist Johannes Geert Grijsen Consultant AFTWR Consultant Martha Jarosewich-Holder Consultant AFU2 Consultant Senior Environmental Africa Eshogba Olojoba Senior Environmental Specialist AFTEN Specialist Sr. Social Development Abdoul-Wahab Seyni Sr. Social Development Specialist AFTCS Specialist Idah Z. Pswarayi-Riddihough Sector Manager AFTEN Sector Manager Marie-Adele Tchakounte Sitchet Language Program Assistant AFTU2 Language Program Assistant Senior Environmental Amos Abu Senior Environmental Specialist AFTEN Specialist Ibrah Rahamane Sanoussi Procurement Specialist AFTPC Procurement Specialist Alpha Mamadou Bah Procurement Specialist AFTPC Procurement Specialist Sr. Financial Management Akinrinmola Oyenuga Akinyele Sr. Financial Management Specialist AFTFM Specialist Vice President & Head of Inger Andersen Vice President & Head of Network SDNVP Network Senior Environmental Nagaraja Rao Harshadeep Senior Environmental Specialist AFTEN Specialist Sr. Financial Management Maimouna Mbow Fam Sr. Financial Management Specialist AFTFM Specialist Elias Tiamiyu Akanmu Bada Driver AFCW2 Driver Kouame Kouadio Driver AFCF2 Driver Alassane Issaka Driver AFMNE Driver 35 Madefing Kaba Driver AFMGN Driver Senior Procurement Kouami Hounsinou Messan Senior Procurement Specialist AFTPC Specialist Habib Niang Driver/Messenger AFCF1 Driver/Messenger Kouassi Kouakou Driver AFCF2 Driver Luke Udobit Akpan Driver AFCW2 Driver Financial Management Beth Wanjeri Mwangi Financial Management Specialist AFTFM Specialist Wolfgang M.T. Chadab Senior Finance Officer CTRFC Senior Finance Officer Luis M. Schwarz Senior Finance Officer CTRFC Senior Finance Officer Hyacinth D. Brown Senior Finance Officer CTRFC Senior Finance Officer Chau-Ching Shen Senior Finance Officer CTRFC Senior Finance Officer Aissatou Diallo Senior Finance Officer CTRFC Senior Finance Officer Papa Aynina Diop Finance Analyst CTRDM Finance Analyst Lydie Madjou Finance Assistant CTRDM Finance Assistant Esther Illouz Loening Infrastructure Specialist GPOBA Infrastructure Specialist Water Resources Mgmt. Undalla Alam Water Resources Mgmt. Spec. Spec. Carmen Brinckhaus Consultant Consultant Pierre Jacques Lorillou Jr. Professional Officer Jr. Professional Officer Dirk Nicolaas Prevoo Senior Operations Officer AFTEN Senior Operations Officer Senior Environmental Amadou Konare Senior Environmental Specialist AFTEN Specialist Senior Environmental Inesis Kiskis Senior Environmental Specialist ECSSD Specialist Bertrand D. De Chazal Consultant Consultant Rohan Selvaratnam Operations Analyst SASDA Operations Analyst Karen Hudes Senior Counsel LEGAF Senior Counsel Henri A. Aka Operations Officer SASHN Operations Officer John A. Boyle Consultant AFTWR Consultant Gordon Appleby Consultant AFTOS Consultant Jeffrey N. Lecksell Cartographer GSDPG Cartographer Senior Environmental Tracy Hart Senior Environmental Specialist MNSEN Specialist 36 Willem Zijp Quality Assurance Reviewer AFTOS Quality Assurance Reviewer Senior Environmental James Richard Davis Senior Environmental Specialist ENV Specialist Lucson Pierre-Charles Program Assistant AFTWR Program Assistant (b) Staff Time and Cost Staff Time and Cost (Bank Budget Only) Stage of Project Cycle USD Thousands (including No. of staff weeks travel and consultant costs) Lending FY00 41.10 FY01 85.14 FY02 72.5 FY03 68.28 FY04 40.15 Total: 307.17 Supervision/ICR FY04 20.15 FY05 77.76 FY06 50.2 FY07 120.3 FY08 100.25 FY09 94.9 FY10 85 FY11 64.34 Total: 612.90 37 Annex 5. Beneficiary Survey Results Not available. 38 Annex 6. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results (if any) Not available. 39 Annex 7. Summary of Borrower’s ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR Summary Borrower Implementation Completion Result Report This Implementation Completion Report summarizes the achievements of the project "Reversing Land and Water Degradation Trends in the Niger River Basin" from the signing of the Project in May 2005 to is closing in February 28, 2011. The Executive Secretariat of the Niger Basin Authority (ES-NBA) and the nine NBA member countries received a Grant from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) for an amount of US$13 million for an initial period of five (5) years. The project covered nine countries of the NBA, namely: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea, Mali, Niger and Nigeria. The project was part of the GEF’s Operational Program 9 “Integrated Land and Water Multiple Focal Area� whose long-term goal is to "achieve multiple global environmental benefits through the implementation of International Waters projects based on integrated strategies for managing land and water to achieve changes in sectoral policies and activities while promoting sustainable development." The Global Environment Objective was to "Reduce and prevent transboundary water related environmental degradation; prevent land degradation; and protect globally significant biodiversity through sustainable, informed and cooperative integrated management of the Basin, while ensuring greater public involvement in the decision-making process." The project development objective was to "Provide the nine riparians an opportunity to define a transboundary framework for the sustainable development of the Niger River Basin, through strengthened capacity and better understanding of the Basin’s land and water resources." This implementation completion report provides the main achievements by component since the start of the project. It also identifies the constraints and difficulties and provides lessons learned. A summary of the level of achievement for each component is described below:  Component 1: The Institution Building Component: Overall actions planned in the project appraisal document under this component were completed satisfactorily. The regional, national and local institutions were satisfactorily functioning. The Project has benefitted from experience built in the NBA for the last forty years (as the NBA is the oldest Basin Organization in West Africa).  Component 2: Capacity building and Public Awareness: Overall actions planned in the project appraisal document under this component were completed satisfactorily. Activities under this component helped improving the understanding of the role and responsibilities of the NBA. The activities of this component have also improved awareness on environmental issues and responsibilities of each stakeholder. A dialogue was established between various stakeholders through platforms and local networks of exchange. Youth and women have been prime beneficiary of the activities of this component. The public awareness campaign aimed at NGOs, local stakeholders, industry and the private sector, particularly community based organizations (CBOs) eligible for micro-grants program. Messages were conveyed through appropriate local channels of 40 communication and helped to get interest in the activities of the beneficiaries. These beneficiaries have had their capacities built through the various sessions organized and the technical local support structures. The emphasis on CBOs shows complementarity and synergy between the activities under this component and those of the Component 5. Synergies have also been developed with the activities under the Africa Development Bank funded project on siltation control at national and local levels through the sharing of expert communication and participatory approaches.  Component 3: Data and Knowledge management. All the outputs of this component were transferred to the Niger Basin Observatory to help provide a framework for exchange and sustainable data communication between the various stakeholders of the basin (national actors, regional and international). Indeed, the meta data base (http://georepertoire.abn.ne) is a notable step in ensuring access to information on existing data across the Niger basin. It should (i) facilitate a better development of synergies between stakeholders, (ii) provide a tool for better planning in the basin and (iii) reduce the risk of redundancy and duplication of interventions. Also, the Environmental Information System (EIS) of the Niger Basin Observatory provides a formal framework for production and exchange of reliable environmental and social data produced in the Niger Basin. This step is a critical milestone in sharing and exchanging data as the EIS is a powerful tool for access and exchange data between different actors in the basin.  Component 4: Regional Forum. Most of the activities have been achieved under this component, Workshops for national review and learn lessons from the implementation of the project, particularly for learning from the implementation of field components, i.e. components 2 and 5 were conducted. Regional and national staff participated to study tour to enhance their knowledge on the areas that are pertinent to the project. Regional workshop on comparative analysis and compilation of knowledge and experience acquired on Basin management was carried out in Mali.  Component 5: Demonstration Pilots and Micro-grant Program. Most of the activities under this component were conducted satisfactorily. With regard to the demonstration pilots, they were completed satisfactorily in seven out of the nine countries. With regard to the micro-grant program, a total of one hundred and eight (108) micro-grants were implemented in the nine countries. These micro-grant projects were implemented by community-based organizations (CBOs) and Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs). The component was the only one to provide concrete work on the ground for communities and it was important to show how communities can benefit in concrete terms from regional cooperation.  Component 6 – The Trans-boundary Diagnostic Analysis and the Strategic Action Program. The achievements of this component were completed. As a strategic document for policy makers, the SAP and the Water Charter are key policy document of the NBA and the country's environmental protection and integrated management of transboundary 41 water and land resources. In the spirit of the Shared Vision, the investment program (IP) of the sustainable development action plan (SDAP) will be both updated through the mainstreaming of the SAP in the SDAP and IP. Borrower’s comments of the draft ICR The NBA provided additional information and clarification on some aspects of the ICR. The NBA wished to clarify that:  Even during project preparation, it was not foreseen that the SAP will be completed before the SDAP and before the completion of the Shared Vision Process. The Bank team takes note of this clarification and the ICR presents well how the SAP will be mainstreamed in the SDAP.  The leadership of the NBA for basin organizations in Africa in relation to concerted and harmonized resources (including international waters) of a transboundary basin. The Bank team notes this and believes it is well reflected in the report when describing the strengthened NBA.  The delay in the independent MTR was due to the fact that this activity was not budgeted in the project preparation and required discussion with other NBA’s initiatives to free funds to conduct the independent MTR and the independent final evaluation. The Bank team agrees with the statement and is reflected in the ICR.  The closing date of the UNDP component was corrected to December 2011. The Bank team reflected this correction in the ICR.  The number of indicators in component 3 was corrected from 47 to 28. The Bank team agrees and reflected this in the ICR.  There is a need to clarify why the financial management of the project was downgraded to moderately unsatisfactory. The NBA clarified that this was due to the delayed MTR and high turnover of staff at the start of the project. The Bank team agrees and reflected this aspect in the ICR.  The lessons learned for the regional forum under component 4 of the project on the sustainability of micro grant were given by the NBA and relate to (i) the income generation aspect and (ii) the revolving fund. The Bank team reflected these lessons learned in the ICR.  There were comments on the Data Sheet and editing aspects. The Bank team reflected most of these comments in the ICR. 42 Annex 8. Comments of Co-financiers and Other Partners/Stakeholders Comments were received from GIZ, CIDA and the UNDP. GIZ commended the team for the quality of the report and corrected factual information on the number of indicator in the component 3 of the project. The Bank team reflected this correction in the ICR. CIDA noted that the link of the project with their support of civil society. They noted the success of the 108 micro grant projects and the results in terms of sensitization of NGOs, women and youth groups. In order to benefit from this experience, they noted that it would be good to have more detailed information on each micro-grant and an analysis of the success and lessons learned for the sustainability, which is usually a challenge. The Bank team will request the NBA to share the evaluation report of the micro-grant activities with CIDA and to provide the report of the regional forum under component 4, which looked at these aspects. CIDA was wondering if the project involved the Niger Basin users cells (national and regional) and how they were involved. The Bank team does not mention the national and regional cells since the project design was completed well before the cells were created and the design as such did not include them in the project. UNDP commended the team for the document and provided three main comments. The first comment was in relation to the closing date of the UNDP-led components and the reasons for the extension. The Bank team agrees and reflected the comment in the ICR. The second comment relates to the conclusions of the regional forum on the micro grant. The Bank team agrees and this was also mentioned by the NBA. The conclusions of the forum have been included in the ICR. The third comment pertains to providing more information on the supervision of the UNDP (through participation to the project steering committee) and clarifying that the issues with UNOPs did not affect significantly the progress since the small grant contract was between the NBA and the small grant program offices of UNDP in each country. The Bank team noted this clarification and reflected it in the ICR. 43 Annex 9. List of Supporting Documents 1. WB: NRB-GEF Project Appraisal Document, April 2004 2. WB: NRB-GEF Trust Fund Grant Agreement, July 2004 3. WB: Implementation Status and Results Reports (ISR), 2005-2010 4. WB: Aide-Memoires and BTOs of supervision missions; FM review and Procurement review reports, 2002-2010 5. WB: QAG Learning Review of regional Projects, October 2009 6. WB: Country Assistance Strategies (CAS) for riparian countries 7. UNDP: Cadre de gestion environnementale et sociale des projets pilotes de démonstration et du programme des micro-subventions, March 2004 8. UNDP: Project Document (Prodoc), 2004 9. UNDP: Annual Performance Reports and Project Implementation Reviews (APR/PIR), 2006 - 2009 10. NBA: Mid Term Review Report, ADA Consultants, July 2009 11. NBA: Final Evaluation Report , ADA Consultants, December 2010 12. NBA/PMCU: Rapport d’Achèvement du Projet, March 2011 13. NBA : Minutes of Annual Regional Steering Committee meetings, 2005 – 2010 14. NBA: Minutes of NBA’s Council of Minister meetings, 2005 – 2010 15. NBA: Water Charter for the Niger River Basin, 2010 16. PMCU: Annual Work Plans and Budget for 2006 - 2010 17. Trans-Environmental Diagnostic Analysis of the River Niger Basin, Final Regional Synthesis Report, February 2009 18. Rapports Nationaux du Plan d’Action National; National Action Plan (NAP) reports, May 2010 19. SOFRECO: Elaboration of a Strategic Action Program (SAP) for the River Niger Basin, September 2010 20. CRC Sogema and University of Sherbrooke: Evaluation of the Strategic Management of Environmental and Socio-economic Data and Information for the Niger River Basin, May 2009 21. AfDB: Closing mission Aide-Memoire for the Siltation Control Project July 2010. 44 Annex 10. Background on the Niger Basin Authority and on the Shared Vision Process Background on the Niger Basin Authority The Niger River Basin covers nine countries namely, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Côte d’Ivoire, guinea, Mali, Niger, and Nigeria. The Niger River is the Africa’s third longest river (4,200 km) and the Basin area is 1.5 million km2. The Niger Basin Authority (NBA) is a regional organization set-up by the Niger Basin countries which emerged out of the defunct Niger River Commission (NRC). Established in 1963, the Niger River Commission was formed by member states in recognizing the importance of regional cooperation in the use and management of the Basin’s resources followed by signing of the navigation agreement. Nevertheless, the NRC limited its mandate to controlling navigation in the Niger River, and confined itself to studies, collecting data and disseminating technical information. In 1980, the NRC was transformed into the Niger Basin Authority (NBA) with a strategic mandate to promote cooperation between the member countries, to jointly develop the Basin’s natural resources and to harmonize national development policies. However, weak institutional, financial, technical and human capacity resulted in lack of results and led the countries to revise the NBA Convention in 1987. In the late nineties, the Heads of States decided to revitalize cooperative framework of the Niger Basin, after which the Shared Vision Process started in 2002. The Mandate of NBA The Convention which was revised in 1987 assigned NBA the following five major objectives: 1. Harmonize and coordinate national policies aimed at the development of water resources in the basin. 2. Plan the development of the basin through an integrated development plan of the basin. 3. Design, complement, use and maintain common works and projects. 4. Ensure monitoring and regulation of all forms of navigation on the river, its tributaries and sub-tributaries in compliance with the “Act of Niamey�. 5. Participate in formulating requests for assistance and mobilizing funds for studies and works aimed at the development of water resources in the basin. Background information on the Shared Vision Process Phase 1 of the Shared Vision Process (see figure 1 below) The start of the Shared vision process In February 2002 in Abuja (Nigeria), at the 7th NBA Heads of State Summit, the Basin countries acknowledged the threat they faced as a community from unilateral planning and committed themselves to reform and revitalize. The Chairman requested support of the Bank and other donors for cooperative development of the Niger River. The Summit agreed to develop a Shared Vision supported by a Sustainable Development Action Program (SDAP). 45 � January 2004 in Yaoundé (Cameroon) The NBA’s Council of Ministers agreed to undertake an institutional and organizational audit of the NBA with the WB and other donor’s support. The implementation of the Shared Vision Process � April 2004, Paris. The NBA’s Heads of States signed the Paris declaration launching the Shared Vision process supported by the SDAP. Also, the Niger Basin Partners Framework was approved. � May 2005, Abuja (Nigeria) The NBA’s Council of Ministers (CoM) adopted : o Adopted the Shared Vision statement, which reads: “The River Niger Basin by 2025: a common area enhancing the living conditions and the well being of the populations through sustainable development and integrated management of water resources and related eco-systems.16 o Approved the institutional reform of the NBA, including the revamping of its human resources. � July 2007 the NBA’s CoM adopted the Sustainable Development Action Program (SDAP). Phase 2 of the Shared Vision Process (see figure 2 below) Completion of the Shared Vision Process � April 2008 in Niamey (Niger) The NBA’s Heads of State Summit adopted the 2008-2027 Investment Program (IP) of the Niger River Basin and the Water Charter of the River Niger Basin. � June 2008 the round table of donors in Niamey (Niger) Partners have pledged 1.4 billion dollars for the implementation of the first five years priority program of the IP. 16 Proposed translation from the official French version. 46 PHASE 1 Focal Points workshop Duration 26-27/01/04 Expert workshop 02-03/03/04 Intermediate validation : • ToR national studies • Draft Methodology Guide CM / NBA 6-9/04/04 April 04 Paris Conference: 26-27/04/04 • Heads of State Paris Declaration • Guide to the Shared Vision Process PILOT COMMITTEE • Principles of good conduct of donors Recruitment of national and regional consultants May 04 Launch of the national studies (Executive Secretariat and National Focal Structures) Institutional and organizational reforms of the NBA Sept 04 National workshops Regional workshop Duration CM / ABN Drafting the SDAP Draft of the Shared Vision Figure 1: Diagram of Phase 1 of the Shared Vision Process 47 PHASE 2 Heads of State Summit Preparation of the Investment Program Action 1 Action 2 Action 3 Action 4 Investment projects finalized Extensive consultations Heads of NBA State Summit Partners Advisory Committee Investments in place Figure 2: Diagram of Phase 2 of the Shared Vision Process 48 IBRD 33021 15° NIGER RIVER BASIN 0° 5° 10° 15° OIL AND MINING Area of Map PESTICIDE POLLUTION ALGERIA WATERBORNE DISEASES WATER WEEDS PERENNIAL RIVERS INDUSTRIAL URBAN WATER POLLUTION TEMPORARY RIVERS AFRICA AREAS IMPORTANT FOR BIODIVERSITY AND FISHERIES LAKES/RESERVOIRS AREAS SUCEPTIBLE TO WATER WEED INFESTATION RIVER BASIN LIMITS SOIL EROSION/LAND DEGRADATION MAIN ROADS SEVERE DROUGHT PRONE AREAS SELECTED CITIES 20° SILTATION NATIONAL CAPITALS DESERTIFICATION INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES 20° PASTURE LAND BASIN BOUNDARY 5° OVERGRAZING u Tilem si GULLY EROSION 10° Édjérir ée d M A U R I TA N I A ll Va Aleg This map was produced by the Map Design Unit of The World Bank. 'Ayoûn el 'Atroûs NIGER The boundaries, colors, denominations and any other information shown on this map do not imply, on the part of The World Bank r R. N ige Kiffa Agadez Group, any judgment on the legal status of any territory, or any Néma endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Gao MALI Tar ka 15° aba Nioro 15° l bink du Sahel SENEGAL ou Dargol Tahoua G Kayes Markala Mopti Lake CHAD Tambacounda Chad so Goulbi Maradi Zinder Sirb NIAMEY l Madu r i i s . Bo a Kita rR Ségou B an Ouahigouya a Maradi Dallol N ige BURKINA u Rim l lo BAMAKO o Da Sokoto F A S O Diamong poa ot o Ga a Ch So a k iw d da N'DJAMENA w w n OUAGADOUGOU Ta Ni Zamfara Maiduguri oé ge d d a w rR Kano ulé rou ag d Tink isso Siguiri B Ku o Mek Labé Ba . Dabola Sikasso W so W so ou Was soulou GUINEA San darani ha NIGERIA a i Fie Bobo A libo r ri nK R. d ja ger u ti Guib i Maroua Kad Ni Dioulasso Pen ou r a O r a tago n Sota Kaduna in Kankan Ka Kon 10° l M il o yo Ti e 10° oL Eme n a Kadu fo u n d an Gongo l a y Ma Mayo Ma Ma Sw a i Ke CONAKRY h u Nia bi Ek Baoule GHANA Garoua ion Dion SIERRA y ao Korhogo Yola Re Shema n k ABUJA Bako o M ay ema ema Kissidougou Wa le LEONE Gurara Jebba BENIN TOGO a ra e e CÔTE D'IVOIRE Reservoir ar Gu um F F Fa FREETOWN Benue r ro r Bo Us R. K Bouaké Makurdi Niger R. a at a siiin Lake aA Daloa Ibadan LIBERIA Volta la a a Kumasi MONROVIA YAMOUSSOUKRO Lagos CENTRAL LOMÉ PORTO- Onitsha Bamenda AFRICAN NOVO REPUBLIC 5° Greenville ACCRA CAMEROON 5° Abidjan Port Sekondi- Harcourt Takoradi Douala 0 100 200 300 Kilometers MALABO YAOUNDÉ Gulf of Guinea EQUATORIAL 0 100 200 Miles GUINEA 10° 5° 0° 5° 10° 15° MARCH 2004