Document o f

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No: 41053-BJ

PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT

ON A

PROPOSED GRANT FROM THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY TRUST FUND

IN THE AMOUNT OF US$4.3 MILLION

TO THE

REPUBLIC OF BENIN

FOR A

COMMUNITY-BASED COASTAL AND MARINE BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PROJECT

January 18,2008

Environment & Natural Resources Management Team Sustainable Development Department AFTSN Africa Region

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

(Exchange Rate Effective April 30,2007)

ABE ACCB

AfDB AIED

CAS CBCBM CBD CBCA CENAGREF

CENATEL CIED

COP CZMP DFID EMF EMP EU FA0 FMS FMR GDP GEF GOB GTZ IDA IEC IFAD IGN IUCNMAEP

CurrencyUnit = CFAF US$1 = 482CFAF SDRl = US$1.52

FISCAL YEAR January 1 - December 31

ABREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Agence Be'ninoise pour 1 'Environnement (Benin'Environment Agency) Aire de conservation communautaire de la biodiversite' (Community-based biodiversity conservation area) African Development Bank Association Intercommunale Eco-De'veloppement (Intercommunal association for eco-development) Country Assistance Strategy Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project Convention on Biodiversity Community-Based Biodiversity Conservation Area Centre National de Gestion des Re'serves de Faune (National Center for Wildlife and Protected Areas Management) Centre National de Te'le'de'tection (National Center for Remote Sensing) Conseil intercommunal d 'Eco-De'veloppement (Inter-communal Management Council) Conference o f Parties Coastal Zone Master Plan Department for International Development Environmental Management Framework Environmental Management Plan European Union Food and Agriculture Organization Financial Management System Financial Monitoring Reports Gross Domestic Product Global Environmental Facility Government o f Benin German Agency for Technical Cooperation International Development Association Information Education and Communication International Fund for Agriculture Development Institut Ge'ographique National (National Geographic Institute) International Union for Nature conservation ConservatiodMinistBre de

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

MDG MEHU

M E P N

METT MSY MTEF MUHLCE

N B S A P NEAP N G O PCGRN

PDF PERAC PGRN

PIAGE

PLAGE

P M A E PNGE

PRSC PRSP RPF sc UNCBD STAP WSSD WWF

l'agriculture, de 1'Elevage et de la P&che Ministere de 1 'Agriculture, de 1 'Elevage et de la P&he (Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries) Millenium Development Goals Ministere de 1 'Environnement, de I'Habitat et de I'Urbanisme (Ministry o f Environment, Housing and Urban Affairs) Ministere de 1 'Environnement et de la Protection de la Nature (Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection) Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool Maximum Sustainable Yield Medium-Term Expenditure Framework Ministry o f Urban Affairs, Housing, Land Reform and Coastal Erosion / (Minist&e Dklciguk chargci de I'Urbanisrne, des Logements, de la Rciforme Fonciere et de la Lutte contre 1'Erosion C6tikre a u p r b du Prksident de la Rkpublique) National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan National Environmental Action Plan Non Governmental Organization Programme de Conservation et de Gestion des Ressources Naturelles (Conservation and Natural Resources Management Program) Project Development Facility Public Expenditure Reform and Adjustment Credit Projet de Gestion des Ressources Naturelles (Natural Resources Management Project) Plan Intercommunal d'Amcinagement et de Gestion de Z'Environnement (Intercommunal Plan for Environmental Management) Plan Local d'Amcinagement et de Gestion de 1'Environnement (Local Plan for Environmental Management) Municipal Environmental Action Plan Programme National de Gestion de 1 'Environnement (National Program for Environmental Management) Poverty Reduction Strategy Credit Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper Resettlement Process Framework Steering Committee United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel World Summit on Sustainable Development World Wildlife Fund

Vice President: Obiageli K. Ezekwesili

Sector Manager: Marjory-Anne Bromhead Country ManagerDirector: Joseph Baah-Dwomold James P. Bond

Task Team Leader: Remi Kini

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance o f their off icial duties. I t s contents may not be otherwise disclosed without Wor ld Bank authorization.

BENIN Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

CONTENTS

A. STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE 1. Country and sector issues

2. Rationale for Bank Involvement

3. Higher Level Objectives to Which the Project Contributes B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1. Lending instrument

2. Project Components

3. Lessons learned and reflected in the project design

4. Alternatives considered and reasons for rejection C. IMPLEMENTATION

1. Institutional and implementation arrangements

2.

3. Sustainability and Replicability

Monitoring and evaluation o f outcomes/results

4. 5. Effectiveness conditions

Critical r isks and possible controversial aspects

D. APPRAISAL S U M M A R Y 1. Economic and financial analyses

2. Technical

3. Fiduciary

4. Social

5. Environment

6. Safeguard policies 7. Policy Exceptions and Readiness

Annex 1 : Country and Sector or Program Background Annex 2: Major Related Projects Financed by the Bank andlor other Agencies h e x 3: Results Framework and Monitoring Annex 4: Detailed Project Description Annex 5: Project Costs Annex 6: Implementation Arrangements Annex 7: Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements Annex 8: Procurement Arrangements

Page 1

1 6 6 7 7 7

10 12 13

13

15 16

17 18 19 19 19 19 20

20

21 21

22 26 27 36 46 47 53 58

Annex 9: Economic and Financial Analysis Annex 10: Safeguard Policy Issues Annex 1 1 : Project Preparation and Supervision Annex 12: Documents in the Project Fi le Annex 13: Statement o f Loans and Credits Annex 14: Country at a Glance Annex 15: Incremental Cost Analysis Annex 16: STAP Roster Review Annex 17: Description o f CBCA sites and map

64 65 67 68 69 71 73 82 91

BENIN

COMMUNITY-BASED COASTAL AND MARINE BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PROJECT

PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT

AFRICA

AFTEN

Date: January 18,2008 Country Director: James P. Bond Sector Director: John Henry Stein (acting) Sector Manager: Marjory-Anne Bromhead Project ID: PO71579 Focal Area: Biodiversity Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan

Team Leader: Remi Kini Sectors: General agriculture, fishing and forestry sector (100%) Themes: Environmental policies and institutions (P);Biodiversity (P);Other environment and natural resources management (S) Environmental screening category: Partial Assessment

Project Financing Data [ ]Loan [ ]Credit [XI Grant [ 3 Guarantee [ ]Other:

For Loans/Credits/Others: Total Bank financing (US$m.): 0.00 Pronosed terms:

Financing Plan (vS$m) Foreign Total Source Local

BORROWEWRECIPIENT 7.30 0.00 7.30 Global Environment Facility (GEF) 4.30 0.00 4.30 Total: 11.60 0.00 11.60

Recipient : Government o f Benin Cotonou Benin

Responsible Agency: Agence Beninoise pour 1'Environnement 03 BP 4387 Jericho Cotonou Benin Tel: (229) 21-45-56 Fax: (229) 21-45-43

Estimated disbursements (Bank FY/US$m) FY Annual Cumulative

8 9 10 11 12 0 0 0 0 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.30 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 1.50 2.50 3.80 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30

Project implementation period: Start April 30,2008 End: August 31,2013 Expected effectiveness date: April 30,2008 Expected closing date: December 3 1,201 3 Does the project depart from the CAS in content or other significant respects? Re$ PAD A.3 Does the project require any exceptions from Bank policies?

[ ]Yes [XINO

Re$ PAD D. 7 Have these been approved by Bank management? I s approval for any policy exception sought from the Board? Does the project include any critical risks rated “substantial” or “high”? Re$ PAD C.5 Does the project meet the Regional criteria for readiness for implementation? Re$ PAD D. 7 Project development objective Re$ PAD B.2, Technical Annex 3

The project aims to support the implementation o f the country’s National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) . I t focuses on the conservation o f biodiversity hotspots located in sites designated as globally significant by several organizations: (i) designated Ramsar sites; (ii) ‘Global 200’ priority eco-regions identified by WWF; and (iii) priori ty areas for conservation by the ‘Global Representative System o f Marine Protected Areas’ (IUCN). This objective will be achieved through the development o f an integrated approach to coastal wetlands and marine resource management that supports and empowers local communities to establish and manage community-based biodiversity conservation areas (CBCA).

[ ]Yes [XINO [XIYes [ ] N o [ ]Yes [XINO

[ ]Yes [XINO

[XIYes [ ] N o

Global Environment objective Re$ PAD B.2, Technical Annex 3

To promote the conservation and sustainable use o f biological diversity o f coastal wetlands and marine resources, while supporting the livelihood and economic opportunities o f the local communities living near and around the conservation areas.

Project description Re$ PAD B.3.a, Technical Annex 4

The project has four components:(l) Institution and Capacity Building for Coastal Zone Management; (2) Community-Based Biodiversity Conservation; (3) Monitoring and Evaluation o f Coastal Wetlands and Marine Biodiversity; and (4) Project Management and Coordination

Component 1 aims to strengthen the institutional and technical capacity for pol icy making and implementation in integrated coastal resource management and conservation.

Component 2 supports the creation and effective management o f four community-based biodiversity conservation areas (CBCAs) in the two major coastal Ramsar sites.

Component 3 is to generate and disseminate easily understandable and scientifically credible data and information on coastal ecosystems and biodiversity, in order to guide decision makers in conservation pol icy formulation and implementation.

Component 4 aims to ensure proper and effective Project management and coordination.

Which safeguard policies are triggered, if any? Ref: PAD D. 6, Technical Annex 10 Environmental Assessment (OP/BP/GP 4.01) Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12)

Significant, non-standard conditions, if any, for: Ref: PAD C.7 Board presentation: Board Conditions: no conditions for Board Board presentation: February 19,2008

Loadcredit effectiveness: Loadcredi t Effectiveness: April 30,2008

Covenants applicable to project implementation:

A. STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE

1. Country and sector issues

Economic Performance and Poverty Reduction Strategy

1. Benin has a population o f about 7.6 mi l l ion that grows at an annual rate o f 3.2 percent (2006). I t s economy is heavily dependent on the agricultural sector (in particular cotton and transit trade with Nigeria). The informal sector accounts for more than 90 percent o f non- agricultural employment and close to 70 percent o f the non-agricultural GDP (2006). The country experienced a decade o f good economic performance since the 1990s until 2002. The productivity gains associated with this performance allowed a slow rise o f per capita income despite a continuously high rate o f population growth. In later stages, progress was hindered by a number o f negative external factors, including l o w global cotton .prices and trade restrictions imposed by i t s main trading partner Nigeria, reducing economic growth and fiscal resources.

2. Despite these achievements, Benin remains a poor country with a per capita income o f about US$510 in 2005. In fact, poverty prevalence i s high: 39.6 percent o f the population i s considered poor, and 27 percent can be considered poor in monetary terms. The depth and prevalence o f poverty are higher in rural areas where three quarters o f the poor (74 percent), and 76 percent o f the extremely poor live (although rural dwellers make up only 61 percent o f the population). Socioeconomic indicators remain low. Malnutrition i s s t i l l high, especially among children, and malaria remains the most common and most deadly disease in Benin. Poor quality and l o w efficiency remain key concerns in the area o f education. Although there has been progress in water and sanitation services over the past decade, the coverage o f potable water in rural areas is only 41 percent (2005). The water facilities functionality rate has improved to 85 percent in 2005. Reducing poverty and achieving the Mil lenium Development Goals (MDG) remains a significant challenge and further progress will require accelerating and sustaining economic growth and strengthened policies to improve coverage, quality and delivery o f basic services.

3. The Benin 2007 PRSP was organized around several thematic areas including: (i) governance in the service o f development, including administrative, judicial, transparency and decentralization reforms; (ii) macroeconomic stability and promotion o f a business climate favorable to economic growth; (iii) development o f economic and social infrastructure, including better performance o f the agriculture, water, transport, energy, telecommunication, and housing sectors along with disengagement o f the state from public enterprises in these sectors; (iv) building human capital; and (v) assuring equitable development. The proposed project i s consistent with the priority thematic areas (iii), (iv) and (v).

Government strategy in environmental management

4. The Government o f Benin adopted i t s National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) in 1993. This Plan, revised in 2001, described the country’s major environmental and natural resource management challenges, and made a series o f recommendations pertaining to: (i) better planning o f urban development, (ii) more efficient provision o f sanitation services and waste management, (iii) pollution prevention, (iv) control o f coastal erosion, and (v) capacity building o f municipalities for local environmental management. In 2001, the former Ministry o f

1

Environment started the publication o f a number o f pol icy orientation documents. The main documents include (i) the medium-term strategic plan covering the 2002-2006 period, (ii) the National Environmental Management Program (PNGE) document, and (iii) the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan ( N B S A P ) recommending the need to protect Benin’s biodiversity hotspots.

5. All these documents helped the Government to plan and prioritize public investments in environmental management. The Ministry o f Environment was among the pi lot ministries covered by the 2002 Public Expenditure Reforms and Adjustment Credit (PERAC). The PERAC helped to strengthen public expenditure management and to increase the impact o f expenditures on environmental management through (i) improved budget preparation and execution using result-based budgeting and strategic resource allocation, (ii) administrative and institutional capacity building, timely budget execution, and reporting, and (iii) greater use o f monitoring and evaluation techniques in order to measure the performance o f budget-programs.

6. During the implementation o f the PERAC, the Ministry o f Environment’s absorptive capacity increased thanks to the adoption o f result-based budgeting and improved expenditure management. In fact, the Ministry o f Environment became an early champion o f the reforms supported by the PERAC. This success led to the participation o f the Ministry in the first series o f Benin PRSCs. Under PRSC1-3 (2004-2006), the Ministry o f Environment continued to improve its capacity in result-based budgeting, and in sector program and expenditure formulation. These capacity development efforts focused on the following activities:

a

a

a

7.

Administrative and institutional reforms (e.g., realignment o f central technical directorates and re-enforcement o f the roles o f regional directorates, definition o f a new governance structure that empowers municipalities and local governments in environmental management, etc.); Prioritization and reallocation o f resources to strategic policies and programs (rather than o n budget inputs by economic category); Definition o f a unified, reliable and predictable medium-term sector resource envelope (based on the macro-economic framework) for priority programs.

The budget programs and the medium-term expenditure framework (MTEF) o f the Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection are derived from the National Environmental Management Program. This Program, that consolidates al l publicly funded operations including externally-supported projects, has seven components including (i) Development o f environmental management tools, (ii) Integrated solid waste management in urban areas, (iii) Decentralized environmental management plans (municipalities), (iv) Integrated costal zone management, (v) Environmental awareness, (vi) Urban transport pollution, and (vii) Implementation o f global environment conventions. This consolidated program constitutes the core o f the environment department MTEF. Noticeable progress has been made in these areas, and the quality o f the MTEF o f the Ministry o f Environment has been known to be at the high end.

8. Despite these achievements in structural reforms, and in the implementation o f result- based environmental expenditure programs, efforts aimed at integrating and consolidating the investment programs (especially those related to forest resource management) o f the newly

2

created Ministry o f Environment and Nature are needed. The implementation capacity o f the field offices and their relationship with local governments need to be strengthened.

Coastal Zone Management: Development Opportunities and Key Environmental Issues Addressed by the Project

Opportunities

9. The coastal zone that consists o f a sea front 125 km long, and an area stretching 50-60 km inland from the Atlantic Ocean covers about 8 percent o f the country’s land area, but harbors 50 percent o f the population. The coastal zone is o f great economic importance to Benin as it harbors most o f the country’s economic infrastructure and contributes about 70 percent o f i t s GDP.

10. The ecological hnctions and the natural and biological processes taking place at the interface between the rivers, lagoons, lakes and swamps on the one hand, and the marine areas, on the other, make the Benin coastal zone one o f the most productive o f the Gulf o f Guinea. In particular, water bodies in the coastal inland have a relatively high productivity in fisheries with yields averaging 1 tonhdyear, compared to 200-300 kgihdyear for other West African lagoon systems. Overall, the coastal wetlands, swamps, lagoons, lakes and rivers provide every year 33,000 tons o f fish, shrimps, and crabs (as opposed to 7,000 tons from the sea) annually. Thus, fisheries play an important role in protein intake and food security, income generation and employment. The coastal zone i s also the provider o f key agricultural products including export crops such as pineapples, palm oil, and banana. A large number o f local food products and non- food products that are collected from wetlands and other permanent and seasonal water bodies play important roles in home consumption and income generation for rural households, especially, the poor.

1 1. The coastal zone o f Benin also harbors globally important and unique biodiversity assets. The variety o f geological, topographic, and hydrological conditions o f the coastal zone combined to create a wide variety o f ecosystems and habitats for rare animal species. Wetlands, lagoons, and rivers cover 40 percent o f Benin coastal zone, and these water bodies encompass eight different ecosystems that provide irreplaceable ecological knctions, and breeding, feeding and nurturing grounds for a wide variety o f fish and other aquatic organisms.

12. These critical human, natural and economic assets made the protection o f the production potential and the sustainable management o f the coastal zone resources a key priority for the Government. Integrated coastal zone management i s one o f the seven sub-programs o f the National Environmental Management Program. This sub-component seeks to ensure the sustainable development o f the coastal zone resources through (i) the establishment o f an integrated institutional and regulatory framework for coastal zone management; (ii) the strengthening o f the capacities o f municipalities for the integration o f environmental safeguards in local development plans; and (iii) the protection o f coastal biodiversity by creating biological reserves. The sustainable management o f the coastal zone also features prominently in the 2002- 2006 Strategic Plan o f the former Ministry o f Environment, Housing and Urban Affairs. Finally, the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) published in 2002 emphasized the need to protect biodiversity hotspots in the coastal zone by mainstreaming biodiversity conservation into sectoral policies. This recommendation led to the establishment o f the two

3

Ramsar sites in which the proposed community-based biodiversity conservation areas (CBCA) (“aires de conservation communautaire de la biodiversitk (ACCB)) are located (see Annex 17).

13. Sine 2002, investments related to the sustainable management o f the coastal zone have been included in the program budgets and MTEFs o f the Ministry o f Environment. These expenditures consisted mainly o f engineering and feasibility studies for the control o f coastal erosion, the financing o f local environmental management plans for municipalities, enforcement and compliance activities (environmental impact assessment, audits, zoning, etc.), and several thematic studies aimed at increasing knowledge o f the resource base and related development constraints and opportunities. The new ministerial alignment that puts forest resources and environment under the same ministry (Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection), and the creation o f a new ministry in charge o f urban affairs, housing, land reform and coastal erosion suggest renewed political wil l and stronger momentum for sustainable development in the costal zone.

Key Environmental Threats

14. The concentration o f economic activities and opportunities in the coastal zone where the major cities o f the country are located, and the lack o f viable economic opportunities in most rural areas led to relatively high population densities. The population density reaches 340 inhabitants per square kilometer in the coastal zone, compared to the national average o f 75 per square kilometer. High population density and the concentration o f economic activities, many o f which rely heavily on the exploitation o f natural resources, have resulted in an array o f environmental problems (see annex 18 for a more detailed roots and threats analysis). The key threats to the coastal zone resources include:

Lack o f clarity in the distribution o f powers and rights between the central and local governments leads to centralized top-down approach and weak incentives for resource stewardship and lack o f investments in environmental protection by municipalities and local communities;

Weak technical capacity o f municipalities and local communities for integrated resource management and planning hinders the integration o f environmental concerns into local development plans;

Lack o f effective mechanism to coordinate activities and establish consultation among various institutions whose activities have direct impacts on coastal ecosystems;

Deforestation and removal o f vegetative cover (due to high demand for firewood, agricultural land, and construction materials) leading to increased soil erosion, sedimentation o f coastal rivers and lakes, fragmentation and loss o f habitat;

Soil and water (lakes, rivers sea) pollution by industrial and household (solid and liquid) wastes; and,

Weak enforcement o f environmental regulations and property rights over resources leading to unsustainable exploitation o f natural resources (e.g., over-fishing, uncontrolled

4

sand mining on seashore for construction, illegal dumping o f hazardous wastes, poaching, conversion o f river banks and wetlands to agriculture, etc.).

Country Eligibility for GEF Financing

15. Benin ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity on June 30, 1994. Additionally, Benin signed the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands o f International Importance on November 24, 2000. The objective o f the proposed project i s h l ly consistent with the GEF Biodiversity Strategy and Operational Program 2 for Coastal, Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems and has an emphasis o n Operational Program 3 for Forest Ecosystems due to its focus on conserving mangrove forests on the coast. I t i s in line with the C B D Conference o f Parties’ (COP) guidance on the conservation in situ o f critical coastal and marine ecosystems (Art. 8) and with Agenda 21. The project i s consistent in particular with the strategic priorities for biodiversity SP1 “Catalyzing Sustainability o f Protected Areas“ and SP2 “Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Production Landscapes and Sectors” under GEF-3. In particular, this project supports C Z M related capacity building ensuring long-term sustainability at national and local level as wel l as the establishment o f community-based conservation areas (CBCAs) in Benin’s two coastal Ramsar sites. In addition i t wil l enhance mainstreaming biodiversity into tourism, fisheries, forestry and agriculture sectors through creation o f a coastal zone inter-sectoral commission, development o f application decrees o f the framework law on coastal zone management and integration o f CBCA management plans into communal and inter-communal development plans. The project follows the guidance and decisions o f the past COPS and in particular the recent COP 8 (see VIIY22.) for enhancing implementation o f integrated marine and coastal area management under the Jakarta Mandate on Marine and Coastal Biological Diversity by:

Conserving biodiversity through the creation o f CBCAs co-managed by local communities using an integrated management approach;

0 Involving local communities through training, knowledge sharing, networking, and the identification o f compatible incentives for the sustainable use o f coastal and marine resources;

Ensuring enactment and effective enforcement o f related legislation, including by raising awareness about the importance o f sustainable use o f coastal and marine resources;

Ensuring that information about the social, economic, health, environmental and cultural benefits o f integrated coastal and marine management are widely disseminated among government agencies, pol icy makers, users o f coastal resources and the general public;

Supporting collaboration with national efforts for the development and use o f a database o f integrated C Z M efforts including early warning systems for coastal hazards;

Supporting inter-sectoral resource planning, and collaboration across government levels (central and local) through the creation o f I C Z M policy coordination and consultation mechanisms, and through technical and institutional strengthening at national and local levels; and,

5

0 Developing economic incentives and community-based rules aimed to conserve and use biodiversity in a sustainable way.

2. Rationale for Bank Involvement

16. The project i s consistent with the Benin 2007 PRSP. In particular, i t addresses the Poverty Reduction Strategy objectives in the areas o f human capital development, equitable development, and sustainable development o f agriculture and water resources. Also, i t i s fully aligned with the Bank’s 2003 Country Assistance Strategy (Report No. 26054-BEN) for FY 04- 07 in i t s support to decentralized and community-based development as the primary target beneficiaries are local communities o f coastal municipalities.

17. Though there are a few other donors (see Annex 2) involved in natural resource management in the coastal zone, only the Bank deals with biodiversity conservation presently (in particularly through the 2006 approved WB/GEF Forests and Adjacent Lands Project). The project complements and adds value to the Bank’s previous and ongoing strategic and operational environmental dialogue with the Government in Benin. In addition to assisting in the preparation o f the NEAP, the Bank has provided related assistance to Benin through the Environmental Management Project that closed in 2001. Through the 2002 Public Expenditure Reform Adjustment Credit, the Bank assisted the Ministry o f Environment, Housing and Urban Affairs (MEW) to re-align i t s expenditures with the pol icy priorities described in the newly adopted National Environmental Management Program, while sustaining the achievements o f the Environmental Management Project.

18. The significant achievements o f the Ministry in the preparation and execution o f its budgets and medium-term expenditure programs, and in the monitoring and evaluation o f these programs led to the inclusion o f the Environmental Expenditure Program into the first series o f Poverty Reduction Credits (PRSC1, 2 and 3). The long involvement in the environmental sector, and the experience and benefits o f programmatic support to the MEW and ABE give to the Bank a significant comparative advantage in helping ensure the achievement and sustainability o f the objectives o f the proposed project. By supporting this project, both the Bank and GEF are playing a catalytic role in the implementation o f Benin’s long-term strategy o f biodiversity conservation. PRSC 4-6 wil l support the implementation o f reforms decided by the govemment to create the environment to facilitate the use and the integrated management o f water, land and other related resources in order to maximize the social and economic benefits without compromising the sustainability o f the critical ecosystems.

3. Higher Level Objectives to Which the Project Contributes

19. The long-term goal o f the National Environmental Management Program i s to help reduce poverty while protecting the natural resource base considered as a critical factor input to the economic activities o f the majority o f the population. By developing and promoting a viable system o f community-based biodiversity conservation that contributes to the sustainable management o f economically vi tal natural resources o f Benin’s coastal zone, the proposed project wil l help control the driving forces behind the over-exploitation and degradation o f biodiversity resources and balance livelihood needs with protection o f the resource base in a sustainable manner.

6

B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1. Lending instrument

20. The proposed project wil l be financed through a GEF grant o f US$4.3 mi l l ion and a Government contribution o f US$2 mi l l ion into the project designated account. In addition, the Government wil l contribute US$5.3 mi l l ion through the annual budget to finance investments o f the National Environmental Management Program activities that are closely related to the proposed project. These resources wil l be disbursed through the country’s public financial and expenditure management system.

21. Project Global Objective i s “To promote the participatory conservation and sustainable use o f biological diversity o f coastal wetlands and marine resources through establishment o f viable community-based coastal zone management systems in biodiversity priority sites.”

22. This objective i s consistent with the country’s NBSAP, and focuses on the conservation o f biodiversity hotspots located in sites designated as globally significant by several organizations: (i) designated Ramsar sites; (ii) ‘Global 200’ priority eco-regions identified by WWF; and (iii) priority areas for conservation by the ‘Global Representative System o f Marine Protected Areas’ (IUCN). This objective will be achieved through the development o f an integrated approach to coastal wetlands and marine resource management that supports and empowers local communities to establish and manage new community-based biodiversity conservation areas (CBCA) within defined zones for eco-development.

Key indicators

23. outcomes are:

The project’s key performance indicators to measure achievement o f the project

KPI 1: By year 5 o f the project, al l four community-based biodiversity conservation areas are managed by local communities according to agreed conservation effectiveness principles described in the management and conservation charter o f each site; KPI 2: 70 percent o f conservation related activities included in the management plans for the four community-based biodiversity conservation areas are implemented by year 5; KPI 3: 50 percent increase in the management effectiveness score o f the four community-based biodiversity conservation areas by year 5 compared to site-specific baseline assessment.

2. Project Components

24. The proposed project has four interrelated components aimed at creating the enabling conditions for protecting and managing coastal biodiversity resources o f Benin in an integrated coastal zone management framework. These components include: (i) Coordination, Institution and Capacity Building for Integrated Coastal Zone Management; (ii) Community-Based Coastal Biodiversity Conservation Areas; (iii) Monitoring & Evaluation o f Coastal and Marine Biodiversity, and (iv) Project Management. A succinct description o f these components is provided below. Annex 6 provides fbrther details o f the activities o f each component.

7

Component 1 : Coordination, Institution and Capacity Building for Integrated Coastal Zone Management: US$6.5 million’ (GEF US$ million: 0.80)

25. The current threats to the health and productivity o f coastal ecosystems result mostly from a variety o f activities and policies that are implemented by, or under the control o f different sectoral ministries, government agencies, and private agents. The lack o f coordination among these sectoral ministries, public agencies and private agents leads to policy, program and regulatory inconsistencies that contribute to perpetuating the mismanagement and degradation o f coastal natural resources. The lack o f appropriate technical capacity in many government agencies at the central and local level also hinders the adoption o f an integrated approach for managing the coastal zone resources. This component aims to address these institutional and technical constraints by supporting two types o f activities dealing with the strengthening o f coordination mechanism for policy making and implementation, and capacity building for integrated coastal resource management and conservation. The main target group and beneficiaries are the sectoral ministries and the municipalities (refer to the stakeholder matrix in Annex 6).

26. The activities related to the establishment and strengthening of coordination mechanisms in order to ensure the integrated management o f coastal zone resources constitute a follow-up to those initiated during the preparation phase o f the project. These activities will focus on (i) adopting the coastal zone master plan, (ii) adopting the coastal zone framework law, and preparing and adopting the required implementation decrees o f this law, (iii) creating the national commission for coastal zone protection and management (NCCZPM), and (iv) creating the municipal or inter-municipal councils for eco-development in order to help the coastal municipalities to integrate the sustainable use and conservation o f biodiversity in local development plans.

27. The capacity building activities will consist mainly o f short-term training sessions, workshops seminars, awareness raising, study tours, participation in regional conferences, and above al l ‘learning-by-doing’. Training activities will focus on developing ski l ls in the following areas: (i) integrated land use planning, (ii) conflict resolution in resource multiple-use systems, (iii) environmental impact assessment, and (iv) participatory monitoring and evaluation in sustainable natural resource management. The main outputs o f these activities wil l include: (i) guidelines to integrate conservation aspects into sectoral policies and programs, and into municipal development plans, (ii) guidelines and technical packages to help extension workers to mainstream biodiversity into production landscapes (e.g., agriculture, fisheries), (iii) guidelines for environmental impact assessment for selected sector investments, development o f environmental management tools for local Governments, (iv) the implementation o f local environmental management plans, and (v) selective community-based investments for alternative livelihood activities.

* This fmancing includes a contribution o f US$5.3 m i l l i on f rom the Government to finance investments o f the National Environmental Management Program that are closely l inked to the proposed project. This amount wil l be disbursed through different channels of the national budgetary and financial management system.

8

Component 2: Community-Based Coastal Biodiversity Conservation Areas: US$2.8 million (GEF US$2.2 million)

28. Despite tremendous human pressure, the coastal zone o f Benin s t i l l harbors significant natural resources o f great biodiversity value. The high value o f these biodiversity resources led several organizations to designate the coastal zone o f Benin as globally significant biodiversity hotspots. This component aims to fill this gap by supporting the creation and effective management o f four community-based biodiversity conservation areas (CBCAs) in the two major coastal Ramsar sites. The key target groups o f actors are the municipal authorities and communities o f the project area. This component wil l finance two categories o f activities: (i) the generation o f socio-economic, and institutional baseline information that influence the sustainable use and conservation o f coastal biological resources, and (ii) the creation o f the four CBCAs.

Yet, these hotspots are not represented in Benin protected area system.

29. The creation and management o f the CBCAs wil l include the following activities: (i) consultation and sensitization o f local populations (about conservation goals, potential socio- economic impact, long-term benefits, participation and involvement in the management o f the conservation areas, etc.); (ii) preparation and adoption o f municipal conservation statutes designating the targeted areas as legally protected; (iii) demarcation o f the conservation sites; (iv) adoption o f co-management arrangements, namely a management and conservation charter for each site; (v) preparation and implementation o f conservation management plans; (vi) the creation o f the management units for each CBCA, and (vii) the creation and capacity strengthening o f resource associations, as representative o f local communities, and partners for the implementation o f the conservation management plans.

30. The financing o f the management plan o f each CBCA will include resources earmarked (US$150,000 per site) for the mainstreaming o f the biodiversity conservation into agriculture, fisheries, and other livelihood activities currently practiced in the buffer zones o f each CBCA. These grant resources wil l help local producers to finance the transition costs for moving from the current practices to conservation-friendly practices. Resource user groups wil l compete for these limited resources by developing investment proposals that wi l l be submitted to a selection committee. The criteria (including environmental and social safeguards) for awarding the grants are detailed in the project implementation manual.

Component 3: Monitoring & Evaluation of Coastal and Marine Biodiversity: UW.4 million-(GEF US$1 million)

3 1. In order to formulate, implement and monitor effective biodiversity conservation programs, the Government needs reliable information on the current status and trends o f biological resources. Some amount o f environmental and biodiversity information i s available in Benin. However, systematic efforts to generate biodiversity-related statistics and monitoring data are s t i l l embryonic. Three main information and knowledge-related factors constrain the effective monitoring o f coastal and marine biodiversity: (i) data and information necessary for informed decision-making are unavailable or unreliable, (ii) data are not presented in a format that pol icy makers and other stakeholders can readily use, and (iii) lack o f sustained efforts to track changes in coastal biodiversity.

9

32. Obiective: This component aims to generate and disseminate easily understandable and scientifically credible data and information on coastal ecosystems and biodiversity in order to help monitor the status o f coastal biodiversity, and to guide decision makers in conservation policy formulation and implementation. This objective will be pursued by (i) establishing an integrated and cost-effective biodiversity monitoring and information system (National Coastal Observatory), and (ii) supporting inventorying and monitoring activities that wi l l help to track the changes in coastal biodiversity resources, to determine priorities for conservation, and to assess the effectiveness o f conservation measures.

33. The establishment o f the biodiversity monitoring and information system wil l include the following activities: (i) design o f data architecture and infrastructure; (ii) data sharing and dissemination, and (iii) acquisition o f data management equipment and tools. Activities related to the monitoring and evaluation o f coastal biodiversity resources include (i) inventorying, and (ii) monitoring and evaluation including studies, and targeted research.

Component 4: Project Management: US$O.9 million -(GEF: US$0.3 million)

34. The objective o f this component i s to provide support to the implementation o f the project activities by procuring goods and services required for the operations, assuring financial management and reporting, activity planning and coordination, project performance monitoring and evaluation, and mobilizing and providing assistance and advisory services to the technical partners o f the project (see annex 6). ABE i s responsible for the implementation o f this component.

3. Lessons learned and reflected in the project design

35. Experience from the World Bank and other development organizations with coastal zone management projects in different parts o f the developing world suggests that adopting an effective participatory approach, building in-country capacity, and creating mechanisms for policy and implementation coordination are among the key conditions for achieving the development objectives o f these projects. The design o f the proposed project integrates these features.

Effective participatorv approach

36. I t has long been established that in order to elicit effective participation, i t is necessary at minimum to: (i) encourage intended beneficiaries to express their needs, (ii) explore how the project can design measures needed to accommodate these needs, (iii) assess in advance possible adverse socio-economic impacts and identify design features that the project may adopt in order to eliminate or mitigate such impacts, and (iv) ensure that a broad range o f stakeholders are involved and participate in al l stages o f the project development.

37. From the outset, the national project preparation team clearly demonstrates its goal o f eliciting local participation through the consistent involvement o f local populations and traditional authorities (e.g., community leaders, religious leaders) in strategic project development issues at the earliest design stage. The participatory approach adopted was tailored to fit the expectation and role o f each category o f resource users. A two-phase consultation process was adopted in order to ensure an effective participation o f al l categories o f users and actors. The first phase consisted in organizing user/actor-specific consultations through focused

10

groups discussions and workshops where the specific needs and concerns o f each category of stakeholders (farmers, fishermen, traditional religious leaders, women, youth groups, local governments, NGOs, etc.) are examined in light o f the proposed project activities. This phase was preceded by participatory appraisals, and several thematic studies that reviewed land and resource uses, as wel l as existing resource use conflicts.

38. The second phase o f the participatory process consisted in organizing regional workshops involving al l the key categories o f stakeholders. These jo int workshops discussed the project objectives with the aim to identify and examine opportunities and constraints pertaining to the interests and views o f various stakeholders. These discussions o f the overall project concept and goals provided project beneficiaries and stakeholders with an opportunity to interact and provide feedback on the design and implementation arrangements o f the proposed project. In turn, they provided the project preparation team with increased knowledge o f the local social, economic, cultural and biological factors that shape resource use patterns. This two step process increased significantly the intended beneficiaries’ willingness and commitment to participate in project activities, and allowed the project team to identify and take into the conditions that wi l l increase the extent and benefits o f their involvement in the creation and management o f the community- based conservation areas.

39. The results o f this two-step participatory approach helped to strengthen the design component 2 by developing a collaborative framework that integrates equity and effectiveness, and builds on the complementarity o f the distinctive role o f each category o f stakeholders. The design o f this component that also draws lessons from the Bank-supported Natural Resource Management Project and the National Park Conservation and Management Program (both closed) i s based on the link o f conservation efforts with the local communities’ social, economic, and cultural needs within and outside the conservation areas.

Capacity building o f key stakeholders

40. The acknowledgment o f the need to build in-country capacity i s one the most important lessons learned from donors’ involvement in integrated coastal management in Sub-Saharan Africa during the last decade. The multi-disciplinary nature o f integrated coastal zone management, and the specific capacity requirements for successful coastal and marine biodiversity conservation make capacity building a key condition for achieving the objectives o f the proposed project. In order to meet this condition, Component 1 i s devoted to technical and institutional capacity strengthening. The capacity building activities o f the project are tailored to meet the functions and responsibility o f each category o f stakeholders.

41. In order to empower local communities and to increase their capacity to implement project activities successfblly, the project wil l train beneficiary groups participatory monitoring and evaluation, integrated resource planning, etc.. The project wil l also provide local and indigenous institutions with the technical and organizational sk i l ls to control resource use, to prevent and manage conflicts associated with multi-resource users, and to increase conservation awareness and knowledge at the community level. Capacity building efforts toward government agencies dealing with various resources (forest, fisheries, agriculture, freshwater), and local governments (e.g., municipal councils) dealing with natural resources as part o f their administrative mandate wil l focus on the sk i l ls and institutional arrangements for integrating conservation concerns into sectoral policies, and local development initiatives.

11

Coordination mechanisms

42. Mechanisms to coordinate the activities and interests o f various economic agents and sectors are found to be crucial for beneficial socio-economic outcomes, and successful natural resource management, including biodiversity conservation in coastal areas. The design o f the project component 1 addresses these coordination mechanisms through (i) the establishment of intergovernmental and inter-sectoral institutional arrangements (e.g., commissions, committees, councils), (ii) the enactment o f regulations related to the use o f coastal resources, and the protection o f fragile and/or high value ecosystems (e.g., adoption o f a framework law including legislation for boundary setting and zoning, and (iii) the adoption o f a cross-sectoral management and operational framework that integrates economic development plans with environmental and social goals (e.g., adoption o f a coastal zone master plan).

4. Alternatives considered and reasons for rejection

43. Two alternative designs were considered for the proposed project. The first one aimed to integrate both the financing and the activities o f the project into the series o f Benin PRSCs. This design meant that the activities o f the proposed project would be fully mainstreamed into the budget and expenditure programs o f the Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection. Along with IDA resources, GEF grant resources would be channeled through the national budget. The yearly budget allocations o f the implementing agency (i.e. ABE) would include resources earmarked for both the baseline and alternative activities aiming at achieving the global environment objective o f the project. Theoretically, these resources would complement the normal appropriations o f the implementing agency.

44. Because there seemed to be insufficient assurance that ex-ante agreements on the adequate level o f ABE’s budgetary appropriations would be executed, this alternative was abandoned. Two main obstacles prevented the adoption o f this approach. The first obstacle was the uncertainty associated with (i) the overall level o f yearly budget appropriations (i.e., from the national budget) to the Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection (liquidity constraint due revenue mobilization cycle), and (ii) intra-sectoral allocations within the Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection. The second obstacle was the difficulty to trace the use o f GEF incremental resources once they are transferred to the national treasury. In addition to the potential fiduciary r isks involved, the fimgibility o f resources could have increased the difficulty to link specific results to GEF financing.

45. The second alternative was related to the conservation approach. In trying to bridge the gap in its biodiversity conservation system, the Government considered the alternative o f creating fully protected conservation areas in the coastal wetlands and marine ecosystems. This would have meant demarcating these areas and creating control brigades responsible for the enforcement o f the conservations laws and regulations. This approach was successful in the two national parks located in the savanna ecosystems o f northern Benin; although co-management and effective benefit-sharing schemes played and continue to play a key role in the successful management o f these parks. One o f the main reasons why this approach worked in the northern parks i s l o w population density in this part o f the country. High population density and competition for resources would make such an approach unattractive in the southern wetland and coastal areas. Consequently, this alternative was rejected.

12

C. IMPLEMENTATION

Partnership arrangements

46. The participatory approach used in the project preparation allowed wide consultations and provided the opportunity to explore the interests, views and expectations o f each category o f the project stakeholders. These consultations provided a forum where the economic, social, and cultural feasibility o f the proposed project activities and associated socio-economic and environmental trade-offs were discussed in light o f the overall economic development opportunities o f the project area. These discussions explored the opportunities o f collaboration between the proposed project and other development interventions in the project area.

47. In particular, i t was agreed that in implementing the CBCA management plan (sub- component 2.2.) and supporting activities in the surrounding eco-development buffer zone, the project wil l coordinate i t s interventions with those o f the Sustainable Fisheries Livelihoods Regional Program (DFIDBAO), the Traditional Fisheries Support Program (AfDB and IFAD), the IDA-funded National Community-Driven Development Project, and the GEF Small Grants Program for CBOs and NGOs. The first two programs include interventions in fisheries resource management and alternative livelihoods activities in areas that overlap with the proposed project. Coordination wil l be particularly important in the identification, development, and enforcement o f technologies for the sustainable exploitation o f fisheries and other coastal and marine resources and in the support to alternative livelihood activities. The fact that the Ministry o f Agriculture, Fisheries and Livestock i s part o f the multi-disciplinary Technical Committee o f the project wil l be h e l p h l in providing timely inputs and advisory services to the ABE and the municipalities when necessary. If needed, the collaboration between the project and these programs wil l be based on direct memoranda o f understanding.

1. Institutional and implementation arrangements

48. The institutional arrangements for the project implementation are based on a mix o f temporary and long-term coordination mechanisms put in place to ensure the coherence and effectiveness o f the project activities, and to enhance sustainability o f project results. ABE (Benin Environmental Agency), an institution o f the Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection (MEPN) wil l implement al l the components o f the project. A Technical Committee chaired by the MEPN will provide technical guidance to ABE in the planning and implementation o f the project activities. The Board o f ABE will provide overall oversight to the agency’s activities and performance.

49. The project wil l help to establish Communal Councils for Eco-development (CCED), and Inter-communal Eco-Development Councils (CIED) for CBCAs covering more than one municipality. These CCED and CIED wil l play an important role in the implementation o f the project. In particular, these councils will: (i) validate the conservation charter for CBCAs, (ii) ensure the enforcement o f the conservation statute, and carry out the associated statutory functions, (iii) oversee the formulation and implementation o f the conservation management plan o f the CBCA, (iv) approve and submit the annual work program and the monitoring and evaluation reports prepared by the site management units to ABE, and (v) assist in the management o f resource use conflicts.

13

50. The project wil l also help to establish Local Consultative Groups in the areas where the CBCAs are located. The Consultative Groups consisting o f the user associations, traditional leaders, deconcentrated technical staff o f sectoral ministries, and a representative o f the management unit o f the CBCA wil l (i) s i g n the management and conservation charter, (ii) validate the annual work program o f each CBCA, (iii) oversee and monitor the implementation o f this work program, (iv) validate the micro-projects submitted by local populations to the micro-project selection committee, (v) participate in this selection committee, (vi) monitor and report on the implementation o f the approved micro-projects, and (vii) help to manage resource use conflicts at the community level.

51. ABE will play the lead role in the implementation o f the environmental program that has been part o f the PERAC and the PRSCs. I t also provides technical guidance to sectoral ministries and to the private sector in the areas o f environmental impact assessment and environmental audits. These activities have strained the agency’s resources over the years, and in 2005 the Government adopted a new organizational structure that provides for additional staff for the agency. However, this measure has not been implemented. In order to ensure the effective and successful implementation o f the project, i t i s important that the adopted organizational chart be implemented by the project effectiveness. The agency’s yearly operating budget should also increase (by 90-100 mi l l ion CFAF) in order to match the expended operational needs, as the efficiency and productivity o f its investment budget i s undermined by insufficient financing o f key operating costs. These measures were discussed and agreed with the Government during the appraisal mission. Finally, total financing o f the Government during the project l i f e i s CFAF 2 bi l l ion (approximately US$2 million). The initial Government contribution at effectiveness i s CFAF 100 mi l l ion (approximately US$200,000).

52. I t was also agreed that the Government wil l secure the current level o f the national budget resources allocated to the National Environmental Management Program that support several types o f activities related to integrated coastal zone management. These secured resources that amount to US$5.3 mi l l ion for the duration o f the project wil l be managed through the national budget (public financial and expenditure) system. The supervision missions will report on the (i) rate o f disbursement o f the annual tranche o f the US$5.3 mi l l ion from the national budget, (ii) the activity implementation rate, i.e., the implementation progress o f the PNGE activities linked to the proposed project, and if necessary (iii) draw the attention o f the implementing agency and/or the Ministry o f Environment to any required adjustments.

53. These resources wil l finance (i) environmental enforcement and compliance, especially environmental impact assessment o f large infrastructure investment in the coastal zone, and pollution and effluent control into the coastal lagoons and the sea in the two major cities o f the country (Cotonou and Porto-Novo), (ii) development o f environmental management tools, especially for secondary cities, (iii) capacity building and support to some municipalities in the preparation and implementation o f local environmental management plans, and (iv) co- financing selective alternative income generating activities in coastal communities where reliance on natural resource exploitation for livelihood is leading to noticeable resource degradation.

14

54. The Communal Council for Eco-Development (Conseil Communal d’Eco- DCveloppement--CCED): Membership o f the CCED includes: (i) the mayor or hisher representative, (ii) two representatives o f the Association o f resources users, (iii) one or two representatives o f credible environmental NGOs operating in the commune, (iv) representatives o f central government technical agencies at the commune level, (v) representatives o f key development projects (one per project) operating in the commune, and (vi) one representative (designated by ABE) o f the management unit o f the CBCA.

55. When the CBCA i s shared by more than one municipality, the Inter-communal Council for Eco-development (Conseil intercommunal d ’Eco-Developpement - CIED) will play the role o f the CCED. The CCED and the CIED wil l assume hll responsibility for managing the CBCAs at the end o f the project. The management unit for each C B C A wil l consist o f a core technical team that will rely extensively on collaboration with the association o f resource users, community-based organizations, NGOs, and other specialized service providers for the implementation o f the annual work plans.

2. Monitoring and evaluation of outcomes/results

56. The monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system o f the project has three main objectives: (i) to measure adequately implementation progress toward the achievement o f the intermediary output and impact targets, and the global environmental objective o f the project; (ii) to generate the information and knowledge that wil l enable ABE to take timely corrective actions; and (iii) to disseminate timely information about the project achievements to the stakeholders, and to the. wider public. The M&E system will be linked to the Financial Management System in order to allow the monitoring o f activities against disbursement. The main features o f the system, i t s main activities and actors, the data sources and reporting systems are described below.

57. Desim o f overall system: The M&E system o f the project wil l build on the existing information and M&E system o f ABE. The project wil l help upgrade the existing system by developing the standards and operating procedures required for high performance M&E systems. ABE will upgrade its current Environmental Information and Monitoring System to include a coastal and marine biodiversity related database. This database will be linked to the project M&E system.

58. The main M&E activities include: (i) acquisition and installation o f hardware and software, (ii) establishing and implementing a participatory M&E plan, (iii) collecting data to establish the baseline situation o f the project areas, (iv) carrying out periodic studies and data collection to monitor and evaluate project performance, and to make adjustment if necessary, (v) preparing, and implementing an M&E capacity strengthening plan adapted to the needs o f participating actors, and (vi) preparing and disseminating M&E reports.

Activities and main actors:

59. ABE will be responsible for the establishment and the effective operation o f the M&E system. ABE will be responsible for (i) overall collection, analysis and management o f data, (ii) production and dissemination o f the M&E reports as defined in the project’s M&E implementation manual, (iii) coordinating and ensuring quality control o f a l l M&E activities. I t wil l therefore develop guidelines and procedures, and standards for data collection and analysis, and for reporting in order to ensure rigor and consistency in the M&E activities and results. ABE

15

i s responsible for assuring quality control and delivery o f contracts with consultants and other third-party partners (including the municipalities and local communities) in the implementation o f the M&E activities. The main actors contributing to the operation o f the M&E system include: ABE (M&E specialist, the financial management team), the Management Units o f the CBCAs, the communes, and NGOs involved in the implementation o f the CBCA plans. The specific roles and responsibilities o f these actors are described in the project’s M&E manual.

3. Sustainability and Replicability

Sustainability 60. The sustainability o f the project is strengthened by several design features. First, the project design builds on Benin decentralization law that devolves the authority and responsibility for managing natural resources from the central to the municipalities and to lower level institutions. By helping the municipalities to implement the provisions o f the decentralization law, and by developing the capacity o f the municipalities the project will strengthen the technical, organizational, and institutional framework for sustainable natural resource management by local governments. Secondly, the project will help to establish collaborative management arrangements between local traditional and customary institutions and the municipalities for the conservation o f biodiversity on private as well as communal lands. These arrangements wil l be supported by a charter that includes local communities’ rights (sustainable use, technical assistance, access to small matching grants for improved or alternative livelihood activities, etc.) and responsibilities (collective and individual action to protect biological resources) in managing biodiversity in demarcated areas, and in production landscapes. Third, the project wil l help to establish a permanent coordination mechanism, Le., National Commission for the Protection and Management o f the Coastal Zone that will oversee the implementation o f the Coastal Zone Master Plan, and help to integrate environmental and biodiversity conservation aspects into sectoral and municipal development programs.

61. Finally, the project wil l generate modest recurrent costs (mostly associated with monitoring and evaluation, and capacity strengthening activities) after i t s completion. These i s strong evidence that the Government will provide the financing required to support the recurrent costs o f the project because these activities are part o f the core activities o f the Integrated Coastal Zone Management sub-program. This sub-program i s one o f the seven sub-programs of the National Environmental Management Program that i s currently financed by the national budget. In fact, the Government spent about US$4.5 mi l l ion from 2003 to 2006 on coastal zone management activities. These resources supported coastal erosion control, planning o f habitat conservation, environmental compliance, and capacity building in local environmental management in municipalities. Most o f these activities (except the control o f coastal erosion) are included in the regular annual work plans o f ABE, i.e., the implementing agency o f the proposed project.

Replicability 62. Valuable lessons are expected from the innovative community-based approach, and the methods used to integrate the conservation o f coastal biodiversity into local development plans, and from the formalized partnerships with traditional religious and community leaders for the conservation o f sacred sites with high biodiversity. These lessons wil l help to replicate and to scale-up the conservation activities into other biodiversity hotspots o f Benin coastal zone. These lessons could also provide guidance for the development o f similar projects in other Gulf o f

16

Guinea countries where the same systems o f coastal wetlands and estuarine lagoons exist (e.g., Togo and Cote d’Ivoire where there i s no coastal zone management initiative, yet).

Overall Risk Rating

63. coastal wetlands conservation in other West African countries:

In fact, a number o f factors favor the prospects for developing Benin as a springboard for

Benin’s Environmental Agency i s a member o f the Administrative Council o f the new regional Center for Wetlands in Accra, Ghana. The Center offers training and a platform for exchange o f experiences in the sub-region. I t i s expected that lessons learned wil l be disseminated to neighboring countries through the Center; Benin’s wetlands are highly representative o f the ecosystems o f the Gulf o f Guinea coastal wetlands; and,

0 Threats to Benin’s coastal wetlands are similar to those o f other West African coastal

0

M

countries. tical risks and possible controver

Risk

Decentralization efforts are inadequate to clarify distribution o f powers and rights between central and local governments.

Increased land scarcity and rising population pressure in project area undermine the effectiveness o f collaborative conservation efforts.

Government and MEPN poli t ical and budgetary commitment to ICZM and to project and design (ABE as implementing agency, National Commission o n Coastal Zone Protection and Management) i s not sustained; e.g., changes affecting the macroeconomic and fiscal framework, and/or changes in intra-sectoral priorities.

Inabi l i ty t o recruit and retain qualif ied staff at national level. I

Slow pace o f formulation and implementation o f management plans due to weak technical and organizational capacity at the local level (municipalities, village conservation units) and l imitat ion o f external expert support.

a1 aspects Risk Rating

M - S

M - S

M

M

M

Risk Minimization Measure

Component 1 activities address aspects o f property rights and clarif ication o f mandates between national and local level.

The establishment o f the community based biodiversity conservation areas will not preclude a l l resource uses.

Bank implementation support missions will include participation in the discussions and preparation o f MEPN MTEF and annual budget to ensure that adequate funding i s secured for baseline activities.

MEPN and ABE to train c i v i l servant staff in state o f the art techniques for ICZM and created capacity both in local and central governments to provide reliable technical support t o project. ABE i s preparing a new career development p lan to help retain qualif ied staff.

Tailor-made and site-specific capacity building wil l start after project effectiveness, and use o f consultants wil l help bridge potential CBCA capacity gaps at project start. Signing o f charter i s expected to increase ownership and level o f engagement.

sgligible o r L o w R isk

17

4. Effectiveness conditions 64. The conditions for the Grant Effectiveness are:

(a) The project account has been opened and an init ial contribution equivalent to CFAlOO mi l l ion has been deposited therein;

(b) The Recipient has produced and adopted (i) a Project Implementation Manual (PIM); (ii) a Project Administrative, Accounting, and Financial Manual (PAAFM); and (iii) a Project Monitoring and Evaluation Manual (PMEM) satisfactory to the Bank;

(c) The Recipient has recruited an independent auditing firm to carry out annual accounting and financial audit o f the Project’s funds;

(d) The execution and delivery o f this Agreement on behalf o f the Recipient have been duly authorized or ratified by al l necessary governmental and corporate action;

(e) The Recipient has implemented the New Organizational Chart o f ABE and recruited the following additional staff: (i) the director o f the Environmental Information and Monitoring Unit, (ii) the director o f the Local Environmental Management Unit, and (iii) the head o f the Coastal Environmental Monitoring Office.

65. The covenants o f the Grants are:

(a) Within 18 months o f Project effectiveness, the Recipient shall create 4 CBCAs with each its management unit and plan;

(b) Within 12 months o f Project effectiveness, the Recipient shall have established an internal auditing function within ABE;

(c) Within 10 months after Project effectiveness, the Recipient shall have deposited the equivalent to CFA 200 mi l l ion in the project account and shall continue to deposit CFA 100 mi l l ion every six months thereafter until the Closing Date o f the Project;

(d) During the length o f the Project, the Recipient shall continue to maintain the same level o f budgetary allocations to ABE for the implementation o f the PNGE;

(f) (e) Within 6 months o f Project effectiveness, the Recipient shall have created the Technical Support Unit to be created under Component 1 o f the Project, and within 18 months o f Project effectiveness, the CIEDs, the CCEDs and the Local Consultative Groups.

18

D. APPRAISAL SUMMARY

1. Economic and financial analyses

66. financial or economic analysis.

The design and structure o f the proposed project is not amenable to a full stand-alone

67. be eligible for GEF financing has been developed (see Annex 15).

In addition, an incremental cost analysis (ICA) assessed the incremental costs that would

2. Technical

68. The proposed project is technically justified on the basis o f the urgent need to protect the fragile coastal wetlands and marine ecosystems and their internationally important biodiversity resources. This assessment is based on the accelerated rate o f resource degradation resulting from uncontrolled development o f the coastal zone, urban sprawl, pollution, high rates o f coastal erosion, and the absence o f any viable national or local coastal zone management plans.

69. The project i s technically sound (see Annex 16 for the STAP review) as it draws on best practices in community-based and participatory (coastal zone) resource management techniques from developing countries. This soundness lies in the fact the design o f the project is strongly grounded on the realities o f Benin’s coastal zone dynamics. Taking into account the concentration o f the country’s population in the coastal zone, the types o f coastal and marine ecosystems present and the politico-administrative context, the strategic objectives o f the project and the policy, technical, financial or institutional means to achieving these objectives are clarified. The components o f the project are designed to meet the need o f protecting the livelihood o f the largest share o f the population living in the coastal zone, and the globally important biodiversity resources therein. They are also designed to generate the capacity that will help Benin meet i t s long-term needs for biodiversity conservation.

3. Fiduciary

70. The assessment o f the financial management system o f the Benin Environmental Agency (ABE) responsible for the implementation o f the proposed project was carried out in line with the guidelines issued in June 2001 by the Financial Management Sector Board. The assessment concluded that ABE’s financial management system meets IDA’S requirements under OPBP 10.02. In fact, ABE has successfully implemented several donor-funded projects, including an IDA project closed in 2001. However, ABE does not have an internal audit function. Since this function is essential for a fully integrated internal control and accountability system and for efficient delivery o f outputs, i t was agreed that ABE will establish this function and nominate the responsible for executing this function within 12 months o f the effectiveness o f the project.

7 1. The capacity assessment o f ABE for handling adequately the procurement o f goods and services was carried out in 2004. The conclusion o f the assessment was that the agency has adequate capacity. However, some staff did not seem familiar with al l the guidelines for procuring goods and services. In order to avoidminimize the risks associated with procurement, a training plan o f the project staff, including the procurement assistant has been adopted. The project wil l help finance the continued update o f the sk i l ls in procurement for the key operational

19

staff o f the agency. Furthermore, the project implementation manual wil l include a detailed account o f the guidelines for procuring goods and services, as well as the means for ensuring adequate oversight o f procurement tasks (including supervision by the Bank).

4. Social

72. The French Development Agency supported Project “Appui a l a Gestion Durable des Zones Humides du Sud Bknin: Lagunes C6tibres” (closed in 2006) has completed some o f the ground work and social assessments for the proposed project. I t helped to collect socio- economic data, and to conduct rapid social assessment in some o f the municipalities targeted by the proposed project. The “Projet Lagunes C6tibres” also helped to design a communication plan that was used during the stakeholder consultation phase o f the proposed project. The results o f the stakeholder consultations and the social assessment helped to integrate the most critical social considerations into the design o f the project. In particular, these results generated valuable information on the distribution o f the incremental costs and benefits o f conservation among various groups o f resource users. This information was factored into the design o f the incentive scheme associated with the constellation o f rights and responsibilities that wil l be included in the co-management arrangement charter. These results also the allowed the project appraisal team to identify and integrate women’s needs into the choice o f the eligibility criteria and the design o f the selection process o f the matching grants for alternative livelihood. The social assessment and the consultation also allowed the project preparation team to value and integrate very valuable indigenous knowledge o f coastal wetland ecosystems into the design o f Component 3 “Monitoring and Evaluation o f Coastal and Marine Biodiversity”. Finally, the selection o f conservation sites, and the sharing o f management responsibilities between the municipalities and local communities strongly draw from the informal and customary institutions and the traditionaVreligious belief systems that govern natural resource use at the local level. The integration o f these critical social and socio-cultural aspects into the design o f the project wil l contribute to strengthening its social acceptability and sustainability.

5. Environment

73. The potential environmental effects associated with the planned operations are related to component 2 o f the project. More specifically, these effects relate to the establishment o f the CBCAs. The recipient prepared two safeguards documents. The first one, an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) provides guidance for the selection and implementation o f micro-projects that the project will support as part o f the conservation management plan o f each CBCA. The ESMF defined standards methods and procedures that specify how sub- projects whose location, size, and nature are not known at this stage wil l address environmental and social issues. Thus, the ESMF will enhance the environmental and social sustainability o f the project by providing specific guidance to the micro-project selection committee and to the participating communities for the screening o f micro-projects for potential adverse environmental and social aspects, and for the implementation and monitoring o f required environmental and social mitigation measures o f these micro-projects.

74. The second safeguard document i s the Resettlement Process Framework (RPF). The objective o f the RPF is to ensure that the community members who would be adversely affected by the project are effectively compensated for losses o f consumption and income attributable directly to the project. The RPF describes (i) the project activities that may impose restriction on

20

natural resource use and the process by which the affected people participate in the design o f the project, (ii) the criteria for eligibility o f the affected people, (iii) the measures to assist these people, (iv) the process for resolving potential conflicts in affected communities, (v) the administrative and legal procedures applicable, and (vi) the monitoring arrangements to ensure the effectiveness o f compliance with the above measures.

6. Safeguard policies

Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project Yes No Environmental Assessment (OPBPIGP 4.0 1) [XI [I Natural Habitats (OPBP 4.04) [I [XI

Pest Management (OP 4.09) [I [XI Cultural Property (OPN 11.03, being revised as OP 4.1 1) [XI

Involuntary Resettlement (OPBP 4.12) [X I [I Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20, being revised as OP 4.10) [XI

Forests (OPIBP 4.36) [I [XI

Safety o f Dams (OPBP 4.37) [I [XI Projects in Disputed Areas (OPBPIGP 7.60)* E l [ X I

Projects on International Waterways (OPBPIGP 7.50) [I [XI

[I

[I

7. Policy Exceptions and Readiness Does the project require any exceptions from Bank policies? Ifso, what are they and how are they justified?

75. The Project does not require any exceptions from Bank policies.

Have these been approved by Bank management? NIA. I s approval for any policy exception soughtfrom the Board? NIA.

Does the project meet the Regional criteria for readiness for implementation? If not, in what way(s)?

76. The Project meets the AFR criteria for readiness for implementation.

* By supporting theproposedproject, the Bank does not intend to prejudice thefinal determination of the parties’ claims on the disputed areas

21

Annex 1: Country and Sector or Program Background Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

PRSP/PRSCs and Environmental Management

1. The 2003 Benin CAS (26054-BEN) derives directly from the 2003 PRSP. The CAS enhances the strategic focus on programmatic lending started under the Public Expenditure Reform Adjustment Credit (PERAC) through consolidated programmatic lending to support growth and poverty-reducing policies. This support has taken the form o f annual PRSCs starting in 2003. The Ministry o f Environment was included in the first series o f PRSCs through the National Environmental Management Program, and the Urban Management Program.

2. The participation o f the Ministry o f Environment (MEHU) in the PERAC helped to improve i t s strategy, and to refine i t s operational programs. The Ministry updated the National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP), prepared a National Environmental Management Program (PNGE), and developed i t s Medium-term Strategic Plan (2002-2006). The significant progress achieved by MEHU in the implementation o f the reforms supported by the PERAC allowed to access an increased, unified, reliable, and predictable medium-term resource envelop to support i ts priority programs under the f i rst series o f PRSCs:

Environmental management tools, 0 Municipal environmental action plans, 0 Information, education, and communication,

Urban water supply and sanitation, 0 Environmental information and monitoring system, and 0 Integrated coastal zone management.

Main Environmental Coastal Issues and Constraints 3. Benin’s coastal zone is comprised o f two distinct complexes o f wetland ecosystems centered respectively on the Ou6mC river basin in the east and the AhemC river basin in the west. The ecological finctions and the natural and biological processes taking place at the interface between the rivers, lagoons, lakes, swamps, and marine areas make the Benin coastal zone one o f the most productive o f the Gulf o f Guinea, and they play a key role in sustaining the livelihood o f local populations, with natural resources used to derive incomes and general sustenance. However, the littoral, inhabited for at least eight centuries, has started suffering since the last decade o f the 20th century from noticeable deleterious impacts on its coastal ecosystems and resource base. Population pressure has dramatically increased during this period due to higher fertility rates and rapid urbanization (increase o f 4 percent per year). This trend coupled with stagnant, if not decreasing per capita cash income, has firther increased the dependency o f local populations on direct exploitation o f natural resources for both subsistence and income generation. Urban sprawl along the Atlantic coast, increasing urban and rural poverty, lack o f appropriate regulations pertaining to land use and their enforcement, open access, and weak institutions have al l contributed to the decline o f the economic potential, the ecological health, and the biological diversity o f the coastal areas (see below and Annex 17).

22

Weak Enforcement o f Formal and Informal Regulations 4. In addition, the large increase in the proportion o f individuals o f different cultural and social background constrains the application o f local (informal) rules for resource exploitations based o n shared ethnic and social backgrounds as wel l as common religious and other beliefs. This situation has led to the breakdown o f the informal conservation rules that coastal communities imposed upon themselves for many centuries in order to ensure the sustainable use o f the natural resources that maintain their livelihoods. The replacement o f these local resource management regimes by formal governmental regulations did not prove yet to be successfbl. Several factors inhibit compliance and enforcement with formal laws and regulations pertaining to the use o f land, forest, fisheries and wildl i fe resources. The first constraint relates to the general vagueness o f the content o f the environmental law and the absence o f specific implementation statutes. The second derives from the inconsistency or incompatibility between regulations. It stems from the lack o f an integrated planning framework for institutions sharing the same resource base for formulation o f their policy and from inadequate up-date or removal o f outdated laws and regulations. The third limitation i s the lack o f information and sensitization about the regulations and their purpose in both the official and local languages. The breakdown o f the local management rules, the perceived unfitness o f government regulations, and the lack o f government means to enforce its regulations led to de facto prevalence o f open access and the degradation o f the resource base in most areas.

Institutional Weakness 5. A large number o f sectoral institutions are engaged in economic activities that affect directly or indirectly coastal wetlands and marine ecosystems. These institutions have different mandates based on laws and policies that differ in more than one way. Collaboration among these institutions faces several challenges:

L o w technical capacity o f the staff o f these institutions in policy development analysis pertaining to coastal resource management; Lack o f effective mechanism to coordinate activities and establish consultation among various institutions; and Slowly decreasing degree o f centralization o f pol icy development processes and top- down approach that prevented until now the (i) establishment o f community-based resource management regimes, and (ii) the devolution o f resource planning and regulatory authority to lower levels o f governments.

0

0

0

Government 's Environmental Strategy 6. The responsibility for environmental pol icy formulation and implementation lies with the previously designated Ministry o f Environment, Housing and Urban Affairs (MEHU) created in 1991, since 2006 restructured into the Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection (MEPN), the Ministry o f Urban Affairs, Housing, Land Reform and Coastal Erosion, and the Benin Environmental Agency (DE).

National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) 7. The implementation o f the NEAP (adopted in 1993 and updated in 2001), has been one o f the key tasks o f the former MEHU and the new MEPN. The following objectives pursued by the NEAP have a direct bearing on coastal zone management:

Conservation and management o f biodiversity through a better knowledge and monitoring o f existing resource stock, sustainable management o f protected areas through decentralization o f Government responsibilities and involvement o f local communities;

23

Applied and adaptive research on sustainable agriculture technologies, communal land management, agro-salvo-pastoral integration; Preparation and implementation o f a water management master plan and strengthening o f capacity for water quality control; Improvement o f infrastructure and services in rural areas and formulation o f land tenure policy; and, Improvement o f infrastructure and services in urban areas through better planning and rehabilitation o f urban centers, management o f waste disposal, provision o f sanitation infrastructure and services, and control o f pollution and coastal erosion.

0

0

0

8. The Government adopted several pol icy instruments aimed to achieve the above-outlined NEAPS objectives. These instruments include (i) the national environmental management program, (ii) the coastal zone mater plan, and (iii) the coastal zone framework law. More details on these instruments are described below.

National Environmental Management Program (PNGE) 9. program PNGE’ included in the MEHU medium-term strategic action plan.

Integrated coastal zone management i s one o f the components o f the environmental

Coastal Zone Master Plan (CZMP) 10. The Government has completed volume 1 (diagnostic, 2000), volume 2 (sectorial study results and regulations, 2003) and most o f volume 3 (detailed maps, 2003) o f the Coastal Zone Master Plan (CZMP). Volume 1 reviews the main biophysical characteristics o f the coastal zone, and analyzes the key demographic, environmental, institutional, and technical constraints to sustainable planning and management o f coastal resources. I t includes assessments o f (i) biodiversity, agriculture and fisheries, forestry; (ii), impacts o f industries, such as sand mining, urban development, energy, transport, forest exploitation, and fisheries; (iii) current and envisioned land constraints; and (iv) planning for management and zoning o f resources. Volume 2 (i) proposes distinct development options that are compatible with specific ecosystems o f the coastal zone, and (ii) develops sectoral guidelines for the mainstreaming o f biodiversity into sector policies and the regulatory and legal framework including zoning, environmental, and social safeguards. Volume 3 includes 36 general habitat maps.

Framework Law for Coastal Zone Management 11. The Government has prepared a framework law for coastal zone management. I t i s expected to be adopted by the National Assembly in 2007. The law clarifies the condition o f access and use o f coastal zone resources and describes the main legal, institutional, and technical instruments that wil l guide the management o f the coastal zone.

Environmental law and N B S A P 12. The Government adopted a general framework law for environment in 1999. The N B S A P (2002) emphasized the need to protect and conserve biodiversity hotspots in the coastal zone and stressed the importance o f mainstreaming biodiversity conservation into sectoral policies, in particular, agricultural and forestry policies and into the PRSP process.

24

Administration and decentralization 13. Under Law 97-028, administration in Benin i s assured by the “deconcentrated” authorities and technical services o f the state and by “decentralized territorial collectives”. Under Law 97-029, the scope o f responsibility o f the autonomous communes includes local development, land use & management, transport infrastructure, environment, hygiene & sanitation, primary education, literacy & adult education, health & socio-cultural action, markets & investments and management o f communal “heritage” or assets. Where a ministry or other technical authority has recognized authority, the commune is obliged to manage in consultation with that authority (e.g. fisheries, forestry, agriculture, environment, tourism etc.). Where a management issue affects more than one commune, communes are obliged to co-operate, forming a special management entity if necessary (the CIED).

Sector Issues to be addressed by the Project and Strategic Choices 14. The proposed project wil l provide solutions for addressing the causes for pol icy failure in the area o f coastal wetland management and protection at three strategic levels. At the first level, the project wil l build on the existing environmental legislation framework by (i) working with the central and local governments to enforce pollution control and environmental impact assessment o f coastal zone development; (ii) establishing consultation and pol icy coordination mechanisms at national and local level in order to harmonize sectoral interventions; and (iii) filling the regulatory gap by preparing implementation decrees o f the coastal framework law. At the second level, the task wil l consists o f clarifying among the central and local governments, property r ights over natural resources in the coastal zone through studies and workshops involving key stakeholders. Actions at the third level seek to create the enabling conditions (technical capacity, financial, organizational and institutional support, creation o f community- based biodiversity conservation areas) for local governments and communities to manage the coastal resources under their jurisdiction, and protect the critical ecosystems o f the coastal wetlands. This third level o f activities within the project is critical as i t empowers communities and local authorities and provide for a shift from resource utilization to resource protection, conservation and sustainable management.

25

Annex 2: Major Related Projects Financed by the Bank and/or other Agencies Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

Sector issues

1. The proposed project complements and follows a series o f national or regional investments operations in the coastal zone. A summary o f these (some o f which are on-going, other are closed) i s provided in table below.

Project I Budget (US$ million I Status

Sustainable natural resource management and sustained agricultural productivity and growth. Capacity building o f national institutions for environmental management. Multi-sectoral, sub-national government administration, social services, aiming to reduce poverty.

Capacity assessment for global environmental management

Community-Based NRM

Worsening rural poverty, degradation and depletion o f fisheries

Degradation o f wetlands, pollution, loss o f biodiversity, rural poverty

IDA Financing Natural Resource 14.1 Completed June 1999 Management Project

Environmental Management 8.0 Completed December

(IP S, DO S)

Project 1999 (IP S, D O HS)

National Community Driven 40 Effective since 2005 Development Project

GEF Financing Self-Assessment o f National 0.200 Effective since mid-2004 Capacity Building Requirements Project Small Grants Program 0.500 Just launched in January

2007. DFID Financing

Sustainable Fisheries 32.0 (for 25 countries) On-going Livelihoods in West Africa

South Benin Wetlands 0.570 Completed Management Project (PAZH)

Dutch Financing

Decentralization support to coastal I Project Lagune

Encroachment o f national parks, poverty in buffer zones

I Completed (2003 - 2006)

Degradation o f water resources, fisheries, weak capacity, rural

Sustainable Management o f Forest Plantations

poverty Multi-sectoral. sub-national

Forest Plantation and Ongoing Fuelwood Production (Phase

government, administration, communities.

Multi-Donors National Park Conservation I GEF: 6.8; Rep o f and Management Program

Traditional Fisheries Support Program

Germany:4.8- EU: 4.47

Dutch Coop:2.07 African Development Bank/IFAD: 25

AFD-FFEM:2.0

Communities 0.35 GEF 6.0

Completed December 2005 (IP S, D O S)

On going

Effective since September 2006

26

..

2 0 4

a B

m .E m

a 8

4 a B

0 C .r

i c .r E

E c r r

5 Q b

cc U c

i

E g E Q b b 4

$5. o m m c

E s El

E ' I n

0 - $ 2

g

E

z s 8 8 3 %

E

z s & 8 3 %

0 m

8

+ u p: u2.53 u, a

g 2

g g E: m

+ u p: 3 2 . 5 3 a

g 2

0 $ g E: W

g 2

g g 2 m

g W

g s E: 2

g m

g 0 vl

0 0 0 0

w 54 2 s e:

d d E: s s o m m v

d d

d d

CI CI 0 I

0 0 0 I

0 0

N m

F? F?

3 0 2

3 v, r-

g 2

3

3

v, N

0

a 0 .9 3 3 0

0 0 0

F?

0

N s v1 m

N s m m

N s v1 m

I 0

Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E)

1. The overall objective o f M&E is to ensure better planning, targeting, feedback to relevant stakeholders and timely decision making in order to improve service delivery. The m&e system as supported under component 3 and 4 wil l help to: .

8

.

. 2.

improve implementation o f annual work plan and supporting activities; ensure optimum use o f funds and other resources; draw lessons from implementation experience so as to improve the project approach; strengthen the capacity o f stakeholders to monitor and evaluate; improve information sharing systems and enhance advocacy for programs, policies and other resources; improve national and local capacity for effective data collection and assessment; improve the scientific knowledge base on which national and global resource management policies and decisions rely.

I t wil l have a results-based M&E system that will monitor project processes using the following methods and tools: . A wel l defined results framework; . A wel l defined M&E implementation strategy for project processes, information

requirements, tools and methodologies for data collection, analysis and reporting; . A comprehensive M&E plan with clear roles and responsibilities as they relate to indicators tracking with respect to data gathering and reporting; . Internal and External periodic assessment and evaluations which would include baseline studies, beneficiary assessments, mid-term evaluations, ex-post evaluations and impact evaluations; Participatory Community Monitoring and Accountability approaches; Knowledge Dissemination Plan to support information sharing with key stakeholders.

. .

35

Annex 4: Detailed Project Description Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

1. The proposed project has four interrelated components aimed at creating the enabling conditions for protecting and managing coastal biodiversity resources o f Benin in an integrated coastal zone management framework. These components include: (i) Coordination, Institution and Capacity Building for Integrated Coastal Zone Management; (ii) Community-Based Coastal Biodiversity Conservation Areas; (iii) Monitoring & Evaluation o f Coastal and Marine Biodiversity, and (iv) Project Management.

Component 1 : Coordination, Institution and Capacity Building for Integrated Coastal Zone Management US$6.3 million3 (GEF US$0.8 million)

2. The current threats to the health and productivity o f coastal ecosystems result from a variety o f activities and policies that are implemented by, or under the control o f different sectoral ministries, government agencies, and private agents. For example, water resource management falls under the Ministry o f Energy, Mining, and Hydrology; the management o f fisheries, are under the responsibility o f the Ministry o f Agriculture, Livestock, and Fisheries, whereas the Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection oversees environmental management and pollution and the newly created Ministry o f Urban Affairs, Housing, Land Reform and Coastal Erosion has the mandate to address coastal erosion. This fragmentation often results in lack o f coordination among agencies and actors, and leads to policy and regulatory inconsistencies that contribute to perpetuate the mismanagement o f coastal natural resources.

3. Decentralization also presents a real challenge in terms o f putting in place an integrative and holistic system that ensures the sustainable management o f coastal resources. Following the elections in December 2002, Benin established a two-tier government system consisting o f the central government and the communes. However, i t i s st i l l not entirely clear what property rights and regulatory powers over natural resources are devolved to local governments, and i t is unclear how much o f such rights and powers the communes are currently exercising over the natural resources o f their territories. Also, most o f the newly established municipalities lack the technical capacity and institutional arrangements required to assure sustainable natural resource management at communal and inter-communal level.

4. Objective: This component addresses the weakness o f the current technical, institutional, policy and legal framework that hinders the integrated management o f the coastal zone resources in Benin. Therefore, i t aims to create the enabling environment for integrated coastal zone management and coastal biodiversity conservation through (i) the preparation and enactment o f new regulations, (ii) the creation o f effective coordination mechanisms that wi l l help to reduce the fragmentation o f pol icy making and implementation that prevent the sustainable management o f coastal zone resources, and (iii) the strengthening o f the technical capacity for integrated and sustainable coastal zone management in government and at the local level. This component wil l support two types o f activities: (i) establishing policy coordination mechanisms at the central and

This amount includes US$5.3 m i l l i on o f Government budget allocations to various agencies implementing activities o f the National Environmental Management Program including investments that are related to the activities o f the proposed project. This amount i s disbursed through the public frnancial and expenditure management system.

36

local level, and (ii) building capacity for the effective design and implementation o f interventions aimed to ensure the sustainable use o f coastal zone resources.

5. Target Beneficiaries are: line ministries, coastal municipalities, the Benin Environmental Agency, and local communities, especially those living near biodiversity conservation areas. The expected outcome i s the existence o f effective coordination mechanisms and a robust technical framework that allow the Government and municipalities to manage coastal natural resources in a sustainable way, and to protect globally important coastal biodiversity.

Establishing coordination mechanisms for coastal zone management 6. In order to overcome the current fragmentation o f pol icy and institutions dealing with the management o f coastal resources, and to reduce the degradation o f such resources, the project will finance the establishment or enactment o f the following coordination mechanisms or regulations:

Adoption o f the coastal zone master plan;

Adoption o f the coastal zone framework law, and the preparation and adoption o f related implementation decrees;

Creation o f a national commission for coastal zone protection and management (NCCZPM) that wil l help to harmonize-various sector policies and programs (e.g., various sector policies and programs that affect coastal resources) that affect coastal resources;

Creation o f communal councils (Conseil Communal d ’Eco-dkveloppement - -CCED), and inter-communal council for eco-development (CIED) (i) to coordinate economic development and the management o f critical natural resources, including biodiversity hot spots in communal territories, and areas that span over several municipalities, and (ii) to oversee the implementation o f the management plans o f the community-based conservation areas.

Capacity building for sustainable coastal resource management 7. The capacity building activities wil l consist mainly o f short-term training sessions, workshops seminars, awareness raising, study tours, participation in regional and international conferences, and above al l ‘learning-by-doing’ . Training for government agencies and municipalities wil l focus on developing skills in:

Developing technical guidelines for the integration o f biodiversity into sectoral policies and programs, and into municipal development programs;

Environmental impact assessment o f development projects and sector programs;

Developing extension packages for mainstreaming biodiversity conservation into agriculture, fisheries, forest management;

Conflict resolution in multi-purpose resource planning and use;

37

0 Participatory monitoring and evaluation;

0 Environmental enforcement and compliance;

0 Development o f environmental management tools, especially for secondary cities, (iii) capacity building and support to some coastal municipalities in the preparation and implementation o f local environmental management plans; and,

Co-financing selective alternative income generating activities in coastal communities where reliance on natural resource exploitation for livelihood i s leading to noticeable resource degradation.

Component 2: Community-Based Coastal Biodiversity Conservation Areas: US$2.8 million (GEF: US$2.2 million)

8. The objective o f this component i s to establish four community-based coastal biodiversity conservation areas (CBCAs) in the two main Ramsar sites o f Benin. The expected outcome is the existence o f well managed community biodiversity conservation areas representative o f Benin coastal ecosystems. The key target groups o f actors are the municipalities and communities o f the project area. Before describing the activities that will establish the CBCAs, the next paragraphs wil l present the conceptual and operational framework that supports the creation and management o f these CBCAs.

The selection of the CBCAs and the approach for conservation management

9. Site selection: The four CBCAs areas include (see annex 17 for details): (i) the Bimyns Swamp Forest (a community swamp forest managed by nine villages, (ii) the Togbin Mangrove Ecosystem (a mangrove community forest), (iii) the sacred portion o f the coastal lagoon (‘vodount6’), and (iv) the Bouche du Roy (an aquatic ecosystem at the interface o f the coastal lagoon and the Atlantic Ocean). The four sites have been selected among eight biodiversity hotspots (o f the Ramsar sites) that were identified during the preparation phase o f the project. Their selection was based on the following criteria:

0 Although the exact number o f species may not be accurately known, the site is known to be r ich in species (flora and fauna) o f global significance;

0 There is some level o f voluntary conservation management as evidenced by the relative effectiveness o f on-going indigenous community conservation efforts based on religious beliefs;

0 There is some potential for ecotourism development, or other economically beneficial sustainable uses;

o Local stakeholders’ commitment to enter into a formal agreement for co- management with the Government; and,

38

e The site i s threatened or under imminent threat o f large-scale and irreversible degradation due mainly to intense human pressure.

10. Conservation management approach: The results o f the initial surveys conducted during the preparation o f the project pointed to very little possibility to set aside extensive tracts o f land as strictly protected areas for biodiversity Conservation because o f urban sprawl, development pressures and high population density in the coastal zone. These results showed that the most promising and effective conservation approach would consist in reconciling to the greatest extent possible, the conservation o f high value biodiversity areas (e.g., lagoons, coastal wetlands, and forest ecosystems) with multiple land-use regimes. Thus, the activities o f this component aim to promote the long-term protection and maintenance o f biodiversity and natural habitat while, providing as much as possible a sustainable f low o f natural products and services that meet the livelihood needs o f local communities. This objective is pursued through a conservation management approach that has two main features: (i) ecosystem management, and (ii) adaptive management.

1 1. The adopted conservation management approach seeks to conserve globally important biodiversity through the protection o f an array o f areas representative o f coastal ecosystems. This approach combines protected area measures with efforts to maintain habitat fragments and semi-natural habitats interconnected where necessary by corridors that create as much as possible an optimum spatial scale for successful biodiversity conservation. Thus, each CBCA wil l include a core area where little if any resource extraction i s allowed, and a buffer zone in which controlled livelihood activities are allowed.

Ecosystem management:

12. Adaptive management: The above-stated conservation goal and the expected benefits are set in an operational context where uncertainty is great. This uncertainty i s due mainly to the lack o f knowledge and information about such basic issues as the full identity and populations o f species, the role o f specific components o f biodiversity on various ecological processes, and the vulnerability and resilience o f ecosystem services to loss o f diversity and human exploitative activities. Also, there i s limited experience with some o f the tools and methods to be applied in conservation management. Adaptive management where effective monitoring generates results that enable technical staff, communities and other stakeholders to learn and refine tools, methods, and interventions in order to improve the effectiveness o f conservation measures by adapting them to the changing social, biological and physical environment.

Establishment of Community-Based Biodiversity Conservation Areas

13. In order to achieve the conservation objectives o f the CBCAs, the baseline biodiversity, environmental, socio-economic, and institutional conditions must be adequately characterized, monitored and evaluated over time. The characterization o f these baseline conditions constitutes a key step in the planning and successful management o f the conservation areas. This component will finance (i) the generation o f baseline related to the socio-economic and institutional conditions (the characterization o f the baseline biological conditions are addressed in component 3), and (ii) the creation o f the CBCAs.

Information generation 14. Socio-economic analysis: Under this theme, the data collection and information generation efforts will focus on: (i) demography and pattern o f human settlements, (ii) degree o f

39

reliance o f local economy and households on existing resources, (iii) past and current practices o f resource exploitation s and sustainability thereof, (iv) dominant economic activities, (v) culturaVreligious diversity and l i n k s with natural resources, (v) main resource constraints, potential for, and existence o f resource use conflicts. These activities have begun and wil l be completed during first year o f project.

15. Institutional arranaernents: Data collection efforts wil l target: (i) the effectiveness o f the roles and responsibilities o f local communities, traditional authorities, cultural and traditional associations in natural resource management, (ii) identification and analysis o f indigenous property rights regimes over the targeted areas, (iii) the effectiveness o f municipalities and central government entities in assuring sustainable resource exploitation, and environmental compliance (e.g., environmental impact assessment) in project areas, (iv) identification and analysis o f key resource management regimes, and their effectiveness in enticing local populations into sustainable resource management, (v) role o f private sector involvement in resource exploitation industries in the targeted areas, etc.

Creation and management of CBCAs 16. the monitoring and evaluation o f the conservation management plans. activities that will benefit from the project support are provided below.

The creation o f the CBCAs wil l involve several steps ranging from the planning stage to The details o f the

17. Sensitization and consultation o f local populations. and local aovernments: The project will finance sensitization and consultation activities aimed to secure the effective participation o f local populations in the design and management o f the CBCAs. These activities wil l focus, among other things on the following themes:

e Discussion o f the envisaged restrictions on activities that currently have adverse impacts o n biodiversity, and review o f the potential social and economic impacts o f such restriction, and reassurance o f local populations about the fact there wil l not be any displacement or resettlement o f households;

e Explanation and exchange o f information o n alternative technically and economically feasible land uses that integrate conservation in agriculture, grazing lands, fisheries, and forestry, and on the types o f assistance that the project wil l provide in order to promote the adoption these alternative production practices;

e Emphasis on, and review o f the expected long-term benefits o f biodiversity conservation, in particular (i) social, cultural and spiritual benefits through the secured access o f traditional religious leaders and their communities to sacred sites for religious r i tes and practices, and (ii) economic benefits resulting from the sustainable use o f land for agriculture, fisheries, livestock, from the sustainable use o f non-timber products, and from potential ecotourism activities;

e Explicit recognition o f local communities’ rights to land and natural resources through the adoption o f institutional arrangements that ensure the appropriate level o f involvement and participation o f local populations in the management o f the CBCAs.

40

18. Formalization o f the conservation status o f the targeted areas: The project wil l finance activities pertaining to the adoption o f a communal statute designating the targeted sites as CBCAs. This communal statute that wil l create the basis for using economic incentives and regulatory measures to integrate conservation and sustainable use practices in production and natural landscapes wil l also:

e Define the goals o f community-based conservation and the governance structure, including the authority and responsibilities o f different levels o f governments in the management o f the CBCAs;

a Define the enforcement mechanisms that will entice local populations, private and public agents into behavioral changes that are consistent with the stated goals o f community-based conservation;

e Provide explicitly for public participation in the management o f the CBCAs, and confer jurisdiction and powers to municipalities and local communities for the conservation o f biodiversity and the sustainable use o f i t s components; and

a Provide for management bodies, and give them the necessary powers to incorporate and enforce restrictions o f resource use into a legally binding management plan for each CBCA.

19. for demarcating the core conservations area and the buffer zones.

Demarcation o f the Conservation sites: The project wil l finance the activities necessary

20. The project wil l finance the preparation and adoption o f co-management regimes that enable private interests, in particular traditional land owners, traditional religious leaders managing sacred sites, and various groups o f local resource users to engage in effective biodiversity conservation and sustainable use. These stakeholders united in an Association (Association des Riverains) will s ign a site management and conservation charter with the management body o f each site (e.g., Comitk Municipal d’Eco- dkveloppement or Comitk Inter-municipal d’Eco-d6veloppement). This charter wil l describe the co-management regime that specifies and guarantees the functions, rights and responsibilities o f the associations in the management o f the CBCAs. Typically, each CCED or CIED wil l include representatives o f central government agencies, representatives o f local governments, conservation or environment NGOs, traditional land owners, traditional religious leaders, and representatives o f the Associations des Riverains. The responsibilities o f this body include, among other things (i) overseeing the formulation o f the conservation management plans, (ii) adopting these plans, (iii) overseeing the implementation o f these plans, and (iv) ensuring enforcement and compliance with the communal conservation statute.

Preparation and siwina o f the conservation charter:

21. The project will help establish and finance the operating o f a small technical team to support the preparation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation o f the conservation management plan o f each CBCA. This multidisciplinary team will be headed by a technical assistant (charge de mission).

Establishment o f the site management units for the CBCAs:

41

22. o f the management plan for each site. Tentatively, each plan wil l include:

Formulation o f conservation management plans: The project wil l finance the preparation

Enforcement and compliance measures,

Enforcement and compliance measures,

Guidelines for integrating conservation into production landscapes,

Rehabilitation o f degraded ecosystems,

Small grant to support communities’ efforts in resource conservation practices,

Conservation awareness raising plan, and

Monitoring and evaluation plan.

23. The financing o f the management plan o f each CBCA wil l include resources earmarked (US$150,000 per site) for the mainstreaming o f the biodiversity conservation into agriculture, fisheries, and other livelihood activities currently practiced in the buffer zones o f each CBCA. These resources wil l finance the transition costs for moving from the current conservation- unfriendly practices to the proposed ones. These costs may include the acquisition o f improved tools, the purchase o f seedling for the rehabilitation o f degraded ecosystems, the init ial cost for establishing in aquaculture, etc. Exceptionally, these resources may finance very limited rehabilitation o f social infrastructure (rural clinic, school, or repair hand pump for rural water supply). Resource user groups wil l compete for these limited resources by developing investment proposals that wil l be submitted to a selection committee. The criteria (including environmental and social safeguards) for awarding the grants are detailed in the project implementation manual.

Component 3: Monitoring and Evaluation of Coastal and Marine Biodiversity: US$1.4 million (GEF: US$1 million) 24. In order to formulate, implement and monitor effective biodiversity conservation programs, the government needs reliable information on the current status and trends o f biological resources. Some amount o f environmental and biodiversity information is available in Benin. However, systematic efforts to generate biodiversity-related statistics and monitoring data are st i l l embryonic. Policies and actions affecting biodiversity and natural resources are often based on inadequate information. As a result, monitoring coastal and marine biodiversity, and assessing the effectiveness o f sustainable natural resource management and conservation measures are problematic. Three main information and knowledge-related factors constrain the effective monitoring o f coastal and marine biodiversity: (i) data and information necessary for informed decision-making are unavailable or unreliable, (ii) data are not presented in a format that pol icy makers and other stakeholders can readily use, and (iii) lack o f sustained efforts to track changes in coastal biodiversity.

42

25. Obiective: This component aims to generate and disseminate easily understandable and scientifically credible data and information on coastal biodiversity in order to help monitor the status o f coastal and marine biodiversity, and to guide decision makers in conservation pol icy formulation and implementation. This objective will be pursued by (i) establishing an integrated and cost-effective biodiversity monitoring and information system (National Coastal Observatory), and (ii) supporting inventorying and monitoring activities that wil l help to track the changes in coastal biodiversity resources, to determine priorities for conservation, and to assess the effectiveness o f conservation measures.

3.1, Establishment o f a biodiversity monitoring and information system

26. This sub-component wil l build on the existing environmental information and monitoring system (SystBme d 'Information et de Suivi de 1 'Environnement-SISE) which i s managed by ABE. While an encouraging endeavor, the SISE is still at its early phase o f development, and therefore has a few shortcomings. In particular, technical and institutional barriers to data integration and sharing tend to constrain the use and effectiveness o f the system. Also, SISE's capacity to meet the needs o f al l potential users o f data and information is limited. In particular, the role o f SISE in decision-making in biodiversity management seems l imited due mainly to issues o f data validity and unavailability.

27. This sub-component wil l help to upgrade the SISE by adding a coastal and marine biodiversity monitoring module. I t wil l help to develop data management and information dissemination tools that ensure timely access to reliable biodiversity data to monitor coastal and marine biodiversity, and to help decision-makers in planning and evaluating the effectiveness o f biodiversity conservation measures. The sub-component wil l finance the activities described below.

28. Designing data architecture for information sharing: This sub-component wil l help to define how the different components o f the database fit together in order to assure maximum integration and comparability o f different data sets, and to reduce the transaction costs to users o f accessing and analyzing the needed data. The main activities include:

e

e

e

e

29.

Define data integration and accuracy standards that allow one data set to be compared with another in order to foster the effective use o f biodiversity data and information in decision-making ;

Require and assist each data producing agency to prepare metadata that include data specifications (features, relationships between features, analytical methods used, etc.);

Adopting a data hierarchy, eliminating redundancies and sharing features between data sets originating from different sources; and,

Drafting data and information exchange procedures and protocols to be adopted by data producing agencies.

Building data infrastructure: The project wi l l finance the establishment o f baseline data sets that wil l provide reference point for monitoring (changes in biodiversity), and context for evaluating project achievements and impacts. The following activities are envisaged:

43

Assess the availability o f data and information that can be used or adapted, and determine the datdinformation gap to be filled;

0 Define data formats (e.g., numeric/categorical data, text, spatial data, remote sensing data, satellite imagery, etc.) to be included in the database;

0 Collecting priori ty baseline biodiversity data (e.g., land use and cover, soils, biodiversity, economic activities, populations, etc.) for monitoring changes in resource status, and evaluating the performance o f conservation programs, including the proposed project.

30. Providing access to data and information: The project will support activities that promote the systematic utilization o f biodiversity data and information by development actors at the local and central level (including sector pol icy planners) by making a critical mass o f standardized data and information available to decision makers and the wider public. The project wil l support the following activities:

Assist data base custodians to prepare and adopt a code o f conduct for data release that promotes data sharing by establishing a network linking existing databases and making them available to broader audiences;

0 Maintain and publish metadata catalogs that document existing data sets; and,

0 Making these catalogs known and available to al l stakeholders and the wider public through printed materials, CD-ROMs, the internet, and other communication channels.

3 1. Acquisition of data management tools: The project wil l finance the acquisition o f up-to- date information technology equipments that will help to upgrade ABE’s environmental monitoring and information system, including: (i) the procurement o f computer equipment, (ii) the installation o f local area network for ABE and one or two other database custodians, and (iii) the acquisition and installation o f environmental application softwares.

3 -2. Monitoring and evaluating coastal biodiversity resources

32. This sub-component wil l support two types o f activities, including (i) inventorying o f resources, and (ii) monitoring and evaluating biodiversity resource status and trends. A number o f planning actions need to be executed before investing in inventorying and monitoring o f biological resources.

33. Planning inventorying and monitorinx;

Definition and adoption o f common statistical framework (sampling design, statistical analysis) in order to ensure the statistical and biological validity o f (inventorying and monitoring) results, and the use o f standard methods that wil l allow the comparability o f with those o f other locations and times;

Definition o f the spatial scale: e.g., the Ramsar sites versus the selected CBCAs;

44

Definition o f the temporal scale: Le., inventory every one, two or five years; and,

0 Definition o f pertinent indicators (e.g., populations, species, or ecosystedlandscape level) that communicate information about the statudtrends o f biodiversity and about human activities that affect it-- in ways that draw attention to the effectiveness o f on- going policies and conservation management.

34. Inventorying: The project wil l support surveying, quantifying and mapping o f significant biological resources (e.g., rare, threatened, etc.) in order to provide a snapshot o f the state o f biodiversity and baseline information against which subsequent changes wil l be measured. These activities wil l focus on the selected CBCAs; but other relevant areas o f the Ramsar sites (to be selected during the f i rst year o f the project).

35. Monitoring and evaluation of biological resources: The project wil l finance on-going measurement and periodic data collection, surveys and studies in order to monitor pre- determined crucial biological, and socio-economic indicators that measure changes in status and trends in environmental health and ecological stability o f biodiversity hot spots o f the coastal zone (including the CBCAs). These monitoring activities that may include targeted research will allow the assessment o f the effectiveness o f biodiversity management efforts in the CBCAs in particular, and in the coastal zone, in general.

Component 4: Project Management: US$0.9 million (GEF: US$0.3 million)

36. The objective o f this component i s to ensure an effective and efficient implementation and coordination o f the project. The main activities o f the component include: (i) procuring goods and services required for the operations, (ii) assuring adequate financial management and reporting, (iii) assuring effective activity planning and coordination, (iv) assuring project performance monitoring and evaluation (including use o f the coastal and marine information and monitoring system), and (v) mobilizing and providing technical assistance and advisory services to the implementation partners o f the project (see annex 6).

45

Annex 5: Project Costs Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

Local Foreign Total

$million $million $million Project Cost By Component and/or Activity us us us Component 1 : Institution and Capacity building for 6.18 0.32 6S4 Coastal Zone Management

Component 2: Community-Based Biodiversity 2.5 0.3 2.8 Conservation

Component 3: M&E o f coastal and marine biodiversity

0.8 0.6 1.4

Component 4: Project Management, Monitoring and 0.9 0 0.9 Evaluation and Coordination

Total Financing Required 10.38 1.22 11.6

GEF Total Project cost by component and source of funding (US$ million) Component 1 : Institution and Capacity building for 5.7 0.8 6.50

Government

Coastal Zone Management

Component 2: Community-Based Biodiversity 0.6 2.2 2.8.0 Conservation

Component 3: M&E o f coastal and marine 0.4 1 .o 1.4 biodiversity

Component 4: Project Management, Monitoring 0.6 0.3 0.9 and Evaluation and Coordination Total Financing Required 7.3 4.3 11.6

This amount includes US$5.3 m i l l i on o f Government budget allocations to various agencies implementing activities of the National Environmental Management Program including investments that are related to the activities of the proposed project. This amount i s disbursed through the public financial and expenditure management system.

4

46

Annex 6: Implementation Arrangements Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

1. The Benin Environmental Agency (ABE) wil l implement al l the components o f the project. When necessary, i t will resort to consultant services for the implementation o f some activities. In order to achieve the effective and successhl implementation o f the proposed activities, ABE will establish close collaborate with many other technical directorates o f its host ministry, i.e., the Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection. In particular, it wil l maintain strong collaboration with the Forest Directorates and the Protected Areas Directorate. Other line ministries including the Ministry o f Agriculture and Fisheries (MAEP), the Ministry o f Water Resources, the Ministry o f Territory Administration and Decentralization, the Ministry o f Urban Affairs, Housing, Land Reform and Coastal Erosion will play an important role in the implementation o f the project. The coastal zone municipalities and communities constitute the key stakeholders o f the project. The role and responsibilities o f each category o f actors involved are described below.

2. The Benin environmental agency (ABE): ABE is the implementing agency o f the project, and will be responsible for the implementation o f a l l the project components. I t wil l ensure the effective coordination, timeliness, and oversight o f the project activities. I t wil l ensure the provision o f technical assistance to the Site Management Units o f each CBCA, to the municipalities where the CBCAs are located, and to the local communities in carrying out their respective role in the effective management o f the conservation areas. In particular, ABE will assist the communal eco-development council in taking over the overall oversight o f the management o f the CBCAs, and in carrying out the statutory functions prescribed by communal conservation statute creating the CBCAs. ABE wil l also maintain effective operational links with current and future projects operating in the coastal zone, especially those dealing with natural resource management, and community development.

3. The Multidisciplinary Technical Committee (ComitC Technique): Membership o f the M T C consists o f technical experts from line ministries, from the university, from research institutes, and individuals whose expertise can help the implementing agency to maintain the highest standards o f the project implementation. This Committee wil l play an advisory role by reviewing and making recommendations on the annual work programs and by providing assistance for the resolution o f specific technical implementation problems, on demand. Its membership includes representatives o f sectoral ministries, local governments, local populations, the university and research institutes, and environmental NGOs. The Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection (MEPN) wil l chair this Committee. ABE will serve as a secretariat to the TC.

4. The Communal Council for Eco-Development (Conseil Communal d’Eco- DCveloppement--CCED): Membership o f the CCED includes: (i) the mayor or hisher representative, (ii) one representative o f the Association o f resources users, (iii) one representative o f credible environmental NGOs operating in the commune, (iv) representatives o f central government technical agencies at the commune level, (v) representatives o f key development projects (one per project) operating in the commune, (vi)and (vii) one representative o f the management unit o f the CBCA, and (vii) a representative o f ABE. Responsibilities o f the Council include (i) validate the conservation charter for CBCAs, (ii)

47

ensure the enforcement o f the conservation statute, and carry out the associated statutory functions, (iii) oversee the formulation and implementation o f the conservation management plan o f the CBCA, (iv) approve and submit the annual work program and the monitoring and evaluation reports prepared by the site management units to D E , and (v) assist in the management o f resource use conflicts. When the C B C A is shared by more than one municipality, the Inter-communal Council for Eco-development (Conseil Inter-communal d’ Eco- Developpement (CIED) will play the role o f the CCED. The CCED and the CIED wil l assume full responsibility for managing the CBCAs at the end o f the project.

The project wil l create Local Consultation Groups (Groupes Consultatifs Locaux) in the areas where the CBCAs are located. The responsibilities o f these Consultative Groups include (i) signing the conservation charter on behalf o f the local populations, (ii) approving the annual work plan prepared by the management unit o f each CBCA, (iii) monitoring and evaluating the implementation o f the work plan, (iv) overseeing and participating in the selection committee o f the community-based micro-projects, (v) monitoring and evaluating the implementation o f these micro-projects, and (vi) helping to resolve resource use conflicts at the community level. The membership o f the Local Consultation Groups consists o f (i) representatives o f resource users, (ii) traditional leaders, (iii) representatives o f local offices o f sectoral ministries, and (iv) the local administration officer (Chef d’arrondissement).

5. The management unit o f the CBCA: The management unit o f the CBCA is responsible for: (i) preparing and implementing the management plan o f the conservation area, (ii) preparing monitoring and evaluation reports, (iii) preparing a mid-term implementation report, and (iv) preparing a completion report at the end o f the project. The management unit o f the each CBCA consists o f a three-member technical team that wil l rely on collaboration with local populations (mobilized through the Local Consultation Group), NGOs and other service providers for the implementation o f the annual plans.

Stakeholder Participation Plan

6. The Benin Environment Agency has developed a strategy for participatory management and conservation o f the coastal zone resources. This strategy includes a charter describing a shared vision (Government-local communities) for the conservation and sustainable use o f coastal zone resources. This charter was discussed and validated in regional workshops with local stakeholders.

7. Local populations and authorities have been part o f the project preparation right from the beginning. The participatory approach adopted i s based on the specific role o f each category o f stakeholders in the exploitation or control o f wetlands and coastal resources before and during project implementation. The content and process o f the consultation reflected the needs o f each category o f stakeholders. A two-step consultation process was adopted in order to ensure an effective participation o f al l categories o f actors. The first phase consisted o f organizing separate discussions evolved around the needs o f each category o f stakeholders (resource users, community leaders, public administrators, etc.), whereas the second step consisted in organizing a workshop where information on the project objectives and planned activities i s shared with al l the stakeholders.

48

8. During project implementation, a l l documents and reports pertaining to monitoring and evaluation wil l be in the public domain and be made easily available to the stakeholders. The key stakeholders and a review o f their role and interests within the project are presented in the following table:

Key Stakeholders

Stakeholder Participation Matr ix

Current roles Functions and tasks related to the project

Governmental agencies

Ministry o f Tenitory Management

Ministry o f Higher Education and professionalhocational training

Ministry o f Justice

Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection (MEPN)

Ministry o f Urban Affairs, Housing, Land Reform and Coastal Erosion

ABE

Defines policies for the organization and the management o f the national territory

Implements Governmental educational policies

Produces laws and regulations in al l domains

Implements Government policies related to environmental issues and nature protection

Implements Government policies related to environmental management

Prepares and executes national projects and programs implementing environmental policies and strategies

Prepares and promotes technical analysis,

49

Member o f the multi-disciplinary technical Committee (SC)

Monitors the implementation o f sectoral policies in the project area, in terms o f equipment and management

Supports studies and ecological monitoring o f major species

Takes part in research activities on threatened species and habitats

Takes part in research on good practices for community management

Supports the adoption o f the framework law on coastal zone management

Supports the production o f implementation decrees o f the framework law

Supports the definition o f the juridical status o f CBCA.

Chair o f the SC

Oversight o f ABE

Responsible for policies and legislation

Implements the project

Plays the role o f SC secretariat

Ensures the definition o f the juridical status o f CBCAs

Prepares management contracts o f

Directorate o f Urbanism and Sanitation

Ministry

National Geographic Institute

Directorate o f Fisheries

programming and environmental integration tools in development policies, plans, programs, projects and activities

Supports local collectivities in the preparation and implementation o f their environmental policies, plans and programs

Promotes inter-community in environmental and natural resources management

Designs, plans and coordinates Government intervention in the sanitation and urbanism sector

Supports collectivities, governmental institutions and NGOs for urbanism and sanitation related questions

Enforces the implementation o f norms and regulations pertaining to urbanism and sanitation

Prepares basic cartography

Prepares cadastre plans

Designs national policies on fisheries

CBCA

Ensures that the National Commission for Coastal Zone Protection and Management i s operational

Ensures the implementation o f the SDAL by al l coastal zone communes

Ensures the implementation o f inter-community in the coastal zone area

Ensures the preparation o f PLAGES

Ensures the implementation o f stakeholders training plans

Ensures the implementation o f RAMSAR sites implementation plans

Monitors coastal zone indicators, prepares and d i fhses reports

Conducts studies on threatened species

Ensures that M&E structures are operational and that data collection procedures are fblly used

Conducts studies on the project impact on beneficiaries

Manages the Observatory o f the Coastal Zone

Member o f the SC

Supports operations allowing to capture surface waters

Takes part in the formation o f maintenance and management committees

Support the delimitation o f CBCAs

Member o f the SC

Takes part in capacity building activities for small-scale fishers

Supports fishers in the establishment o f autonomous

50

Directorate o f Agriculture Designs the agricultural national policy

Commerce Chamber

House o f collectivities

National Center o f Remote Sensing

Directorate o f Livestock

Directorate o f Forests and Natural Resources

Eco-development Inter- communal councils

Prepares forest cartography

Conducts forest inventories

Designs notional policies pertaining to livestock

Produces and enforces norms and regulations

Designs the national policy o f natural resources and forests protection

Promotes private sector growth

Directorate o f Water Resources

Directorate o f Programming

_______ ~~

Advisory services% Communes

Designs national policies pertaining to access to drinking water

Supports populations in the management o f water facilities

Monitors sectoral project rational, and link with national strategies

Guarantee that inter-community i s operational in the management o f shared ecosystems and natural resources

Coordinate initiatives in the project zone

Directorate o f Tourism

regulations for the fishery sector

Promotes the use o f “clean” and high-productivity crops in the project zone

Monitors agricultural practices and promotes those not using chemical

Supports the set up the GIS data base

inputs

Prepares the budget o f the ministry

Implements Government policies in terms o f tourism

Enforces regulations for the management o f tourism structures and hotels

Supports the delimitation as well as agreements upon pasture areas.

Member o f the SC

Trains forest exploitation owners on tree replanting techniques

Supports the project by playing an advisory role in the establishment o f water facilities in the project area

Member o f the SC

Ensures that counterpart fund are planned in the national budget

Takes part in the monitoring o f the project

Member o f the SC

Supports the development o f eco- tourism

Ensures the coordination o f private tourism operators

Member o f the SC

Takes part in capacity building activities intended to communes

Members o f the SC

Support the restoration o f damaged natural habitats

Identify eligible project to GIZC financing

Ensure coherence o f interventions in their areas

Settle conflicts on shared natural

51

I 1 resources

Validate proposals to manage shared resources from CBCA management units

Take part in awareness activities I Local level

Communes

Villages or Neighborhoods within cities

CBCA Management Units

Council o f Environmental NGOs

Prepare and implement their development plans in synchronization wi th national strategies

Through village or neighborhood councils they give their views on matters o f interest for the village or the neighborhood

Manage the CBCAs

Coordinates the activities o f environmental NGOs

Adopt the PIAGE

Prepare PLAGE through the consolidation o f infi-a-communal plans

Prepare management plans for CBCA located in their area

Supports NGOs involved in the execution o f PLAGE activities

Produce monitoring reports

Provide data to the costal zone observatory

Prepare management plans

Take part in the management o f CBCAs

Establishment and daily management o f CBCAs

Take part in decision-making processes within communal structures

Member o f the SC

Takes part in the training o f villagers

Takes part in the selection process o f NGOs involved in PLAGE activities

Takes part in the awareness o f specific target groups

52

Annex 7: Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

Summary of the Financial Management Assessment 1. The objective o f the Financial Management Assessment is to determine whether the entities identified for the implementation o f the Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project (CBCBM), in particular the ABE, has an acceptable financial management arrangement in place. The assessment includes review o f the entity’s system o f accounting, reporting, auditing, and internal controls. The entity’s arrangement i s acceptable if it i s considered capable o f recording correctly al l transactions and activities; i t supports the preparation o f regular and reliable financial statements, safeguarding the entity’s assets and is subject to a satisfactory auditing process.

2. Financial management assessment was carried out for the ABE and in particular i t accounting arrangements in view o f the needs o f the project. The assessment was carried out jo int ly by a World Bank Financial Management Specialist and the ABE financial specialist. Internal control questionnaires and interviews o f key financial personnel o f CNLS and the projects supervised by CNLS were used as part o f the assessment.

3. The Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project (CBCBM) wil l be implemented by the Benin Environmental Agency (ABE) which has already implemented several projects in the past, including World Bank-financed projects, and is familiar with Bank’s procedures. The assessment o f the financial management system o f ABE was carried out in line with guideline issued by the Financial Management Sector Board in June 2001 to determine if the existing system meets the requirement o f the Bank. Based on the results o f the assessment, ABE’s financial management system meets IDA’S minimum requirements under OPBP 10.02.

Financial Management and Disbursement Responsibility 4. ABE, an autonomous executing agency under the Ministry o f Environment, Housing and Urban Planning has successfully implemented a Bank-financed project closed in December 2001 with a community based initiative component. ABE is well staffed and has a sound information and accounting system. ABE will be in charge o f the Disbursement and Financial Management o f the al l Project activities. I t wil l also be responsible for the preparation o f technical and financial reports, as wel l as the annual work program, including the consolidated budget and financial statements for a l l Project components. Finally, it wil l also monitor the disbursements o f the Project and ensure that they are in compliance with IDA requirements.

Institutional and implementation arrangement 5. The project activities span over several sectoral ministries and involve a large variety o f actors. The success o f the project will depend on how the implementation arrangements coordinate effectively the interventions o f al l these actors. ABE will ensure overall coordination o f the project, in collaboration with its executive board . ABE has successfully implemented donor-funded development project including the Environmental management project financed by IDA, and i s therefore familiar with Bank procedures. The Environmental Management project also financed community based initiative as does the proposed project. ABE has acquired expertise in the planning, budgeting and administration o f funds for capacity building and local environmental management at the municipal level, and for community-based development

53

activities. The ABE’s Directorate o f Administrative and Financial Affairs which consisting o f the Head o f the directorate, a procurement specialist, two accountants wi l l have the overall responsibility for accounting for the project funds. The staffing o f the Directorate o f Administrative and Financial Affairs is adequate in light o f the current duties, and the planned work under the project.

Risk Integral use o f Country

Country Issues for Benin: Overall Financial Management Risk Ratings 6. The overall Inherent Risk rating o f the public financial management system in Benin was rated as “High” due to: (i) large proportion o f expenses made using exceptional procedures including excessive use o f payment orders; (ii) weakness o f the control mechanism, and a poor accounting and financial reporting system. These issues raised in the 2001 and 2005 C F A A reports are being addressed by the Government o f Benin with donor’s support. I t affects mainly the DPL. Since M a y 2006, the new Government has taken strong measures to tackle these issues. The abusive use o f the exceptional procedure has been strictly limited. Also with the reform supported by PRSC3, the Government has adopted a new decree to organize the internal control function. The delay in production and audit o f Government accounts i s s t i l l important. Additional measures are being taken to reduce this delay. On the basis o f these measures taken since M a y 2006 and the positive evolution noted within a very short period, a new assessment o f the risk may be undertaken by end o f 2007 to appreciate the sustainability o f this evolution. The overall control risk for Bank-funded projects is rated as “Moderate”. The project wil l be implemented ABE which has already implemented successfully IDA financed project.

Risk rating Mitigation Measure Country FM system and Standard Public Expenditure

Fiduciary risks and actions proposed to mitigate them 7. Mobilization o f Government contribution: The mobilization o f counterpart’s funds i s a challenge in Benin. Despite the fact that the provision i s made in the budget, it i s sometimes difficult to get the funds released on time. The only expected contribution wil l be about US$0.5 mi l l ion in taxes.

Financial Management System and Standard Public Expenditures procedures for this project.

External auditors by the Supreme Audit Institution (SAI).

S

S

Procedures will be introduced only gradually, depending on their efficiency. Therefore, a specific FM system will be designed for this project in line with other IDA financed projects in the country. The project FM data will be recorded ex ante in the country FM system. The Supreme Audit Institution does not deliver on time and i s not yet sufficiently acquainted with the World Bank audit procedures. An independent, accredited audit firm will be recruited for the Droiect.

54

Disbursement arrangements Disbursement methods 9. Disbursements under the IDA credit wil l be made according to the category amounts and disbursement percentages reflected in the table below which indicates the category description, amounts and percentages and follow the procedures outlined in the Bank‘s Disbursement Handbook as well as the disbursement letter sent to the Recipient upon signature o f the financial agreement.

Disbursement based on FMR 10. ABE has the capacity to produce relevant FMRs, and report-based disbursement methods can be used. However, at the beginning o f the project, the Grant wil l be disbursed following the traditional method, i.e. special account, direct payment, reimbursement, and special commitment. The Agency wil l continue to produce FMR on a quarterly basis. The conversion to report-based disbursements may be envisaged 12 months after effectiveness.

Use of Statements of expenses (SOE) 11. Expenditures against contracts below the Bank’s prior review threshold for this project will be reimbursed on the basis o f SOEs. All the documentation supporting such expenses must be easily accessible and kept at an appropriate place for control and audit purposes. All disbursements are subject to the conditions o f the Grant Agreement and the procedures defined in the Disbursement Letter.

Flow of funds 12. The overall Project funding wil l consist o f GEF Grant and counterpart funds from the government. The Caisse Autonome d’Amortissement ( C A I ) i s the assigned representative o f the Recipient for the mobilization o f IDA funds. Withdrawal requests are prepared by ABE, signed by a designated signatory or signatories (the signature authorization letter i s signed by the Minister o f Finance), and sent to the Bank for payment. Funds will f low from the Grant Account through the Transit Account opened in the Central Bank and released into the Designated Account to be opened in a commercial Bank acceptable to IDA.

Designated Account (DA) 13. While shifting to the disbursement based on the Financial Management Report (FMR), the initial allocations would be CFAF 150 mi l l ion for Designated Account. The World Bank will deposit the above amounts into the Designated Account upon Grant effectiveness. The Designated Account would be used for al l payments inferior to twenty percent o f the init ial allocation. Further deposits by IDA into the DA would be made against withdrawal applications supported by Interim Financial Reports (IFR).

14. The following principles will apply:

0 All expenses related to contracts disbursed on the basis o f Interim Financial Reports and the documentation supporting the IFRs wil l be made available for review by Bank supervision missions and by the external auditors at any time. However, expenses amounting to more than 20 percent o f the project’s quarterly liquidity needs may be processed as direct payment transactions and or through Special Commitment based on Letters o f Credit (opened by the recipient’s bank) in favor o f the suppliers on the request o f project authorities in the usual manner where full documentation will be provided.

55

Transaction-supporting documentation for Interim Financial Reports and any Statements o f Expenditure (if used) wil l be retained by ABE. The primary responsibility for maintaining the records rests on the ABE.

Audit arrangements Internal audit 15. The current organizational and hnctional structure o f ABE does not fully reflect the recent recommendations for including an internal audit hnct ion with qualified staff. Currently, the internal control function is assumed either by the financial controller or by the monitoring and evaluation specialist. I t should be mentioned that the financial risk was limited thanks to the segregation o f duties. A forma internal audit Department has been created and wil l be operational within 12 months o f the effectiveness o f the project.

External audit 16. The supreme audit institution (“Chambre des Comptes”) which i s supposed to audit any public fund has a limited capacity in terms o f staffing and experience to audit project financial statements and i s not yet sufficiently acquainted with the World Bank audit procedures. Therefore, the ABE will appoint an independent auditor acceptable to IDA for the audit of the project. The audit wil l be conducted in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (ISAs) and under terms o f reference acceptable to IDA. 17. The appointed auditor wil l be responsible for the annual audit o f the project financial statements, and provide an opinion on the (a) project account; (b) transactions o n the Designated Account; (c) statement o f expenditures (SOE) and the eligibility o f the expenses withdrawn o n the basis o f SOEs. The auditor wil l also submit a management letter giving observations and comments, and providing recommendations for improvements in accounting records, systems, controls and compliance with financial covenants in the IDA Agreement. The audit report shall be submitted to IDA within six months o f the end o f the project fiscal year. The recruitment o f the auditor wil l take place before the Grant effectiveness.

Reporting and Monitoring 18. The Bank requires projects to prepare interim unaudited financial reports (IFR) (previously referred to as financial monitoring reports (FMRs) in the areas o f finance, procurements including contract details, and project progress. The semi-annual IFRs will include:

0 The Semi-Annual Financial Reports, consisting o f Sources o f Funds and their Uses, Statement o f Uses o f Funds by Project Components and Activities, Special Account Reconciliation statement and a six-month Project Cash Forecast where need be.

0 Semi-Annual Project Progress Report consisting o f Output Monitoring Report on contract management and on Unit o f Output by project activity.

Semi-Annual Procurement Report, consisting o f procurement process monitoring and contract expenditure reports for goods, works and consultants’ services. The report compares procurement performance against the plan agreed at negotiations and appropriately updated at the end o f each quarter. The report should also provide any

56

information on complaints by bidders, unsatisfactory performance by contractors and any contractual disputes.

CatCgories Works

19. The ABE Finance Unit wil l be responsible for preparing and submitting the IFR required to be produced under the project and submit copies to the Bank within 45 days o f the end o f each six months. The contents and format o f the IFRs were agreed at negotiations.

Amount OOOUS$ 500.00

Accounting policies and procedures 20. GEF Grant, Counterpart Funds wil l be accounted for by the project on a cash basis. This will be documented with appropriate records and procedures to track commitments and to safeguard assets. Accounting records wil l be maintained in local currency. The Chart o f accounts will facilitate the preparation o f relevant quarterly and financial statement including information on the total project expenditures, the financial contribution from each financier and expenditure by componentlcategory. Annual Financial statements wil l be prepared in accordance with International Accounting Standards. All accounting and financial procedures will be documented in the Financial and Accounting manual.

Goods

Grants Operating Costs Unallocated

Total

Consultant Services, audits and Training

Supervision Plan 21. Supervision activities will include review o f quarterly FMRs; review o f annual audited financial statements and management letter as wel l as timely follow-up o f issues arising; annual SOE review; participation in bi-annually project supervision missions as appropriate; and updating the FM rating in ISR.

600.00 2,200.00

400.00 400.00 200.00

4,300.00

Table A. Allocation o f Loadcredi t Proceeds Percentage of financing 100% 100% 100% 100% o f amount disbursed 100%

57

Annex 8: Procurement Arrangements

Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

Background - Procurement Reform

1. A Country Procurement Assessment Report (CPAR) for Benin was prepared in April 1999. In November 2002, an action plan for a procurement system reform was developed during a national workshop and i t integrates the CPAR’s recommendations. This action plan supports the modernization o f the regulatory and institutional framework, and its objectives are to: (a) improve the management o f public contracts, (b) modernize public procurement procedures, (c) strengthen capacities, (d) establish an independent control system, and (e) adopt anti-conuption measures. In addition, the plan provides for the gradual empowerment o f the decentralized procurement entities; the definition o f a strategic framework for capacity building in procurement; and the updating o f tools such as standard bidding documents and manual for procurement procedures to ensure effective use o f the procurement Code.

2. Implementation o f the new institutional framework has translated into the creation o f (a) a National Commission o f Public Procurement Regulation (CNRMP), entity independent o f procurement transactions and comprising the public and private sectors and c i v i l society, and responsible for policy, audit o f public procurement and dealing with complaints f rom bidders, (b) a National Directorate for Public Procurement (DNMP) responsible for controlling the quality o f procurement transactions, and (c) Public Procurement Units (CPMP) at Ministries level. The government is going to harmonize the legal and institutional procurement framework with WAEMU Procurement Directives adopted by its Council o f Ministers in December 2005.

B. Guidelines 3. Procurement for the proposed project would be carried out in accordance with the World Bank’s “Guidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits ” dated M a y 2004; and “Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers” dated October 2006, and the provisions stipulated in the Grant Agreement. The general’s descriptions o f various items under different expenditure category are described below. For each contract to be financed by the Grant, the different procurement methods or consultant selection methods, the need for prequalification, estimated costs, prior review requirements, and time-frame are agreed between the Borrower and the Bank project team in the Procurement Plan. The Procurement Plan wil l be updated at least annually or as required to reflect implementation progress and improvements in institutional capacity. The Communes and Communities wil l receive and manage small grants for Micro-projects. To that end, they wil l use, for procurement purposes, the Bank’s simpliJied Guidelines for procurement and disbursement for investments with community participation (February 1998) o f the Bank or any other procedures and documents considered acceptable by the Bank and included in the project implementing agency’s administrative procedures manual.

C. Procurement Documents

4. The procurement wil l be carried out using the Bank’s Standard Bidding Documents or Standard Request for Proposal (RFP) respectively for al l I C B for goods and works and recruitment o f consultants. For National Competition Bidding (NCB), the Borrower shall submit

58

a sample form o f bidding document to the Bank prior review and will use this type o f document throughout the project once agreed upon. The Sample Form o f Evaluation Reports developed by the Bank, wil l be used.

D. Advertising procedure

5. General Procurement Notice (GPN), Specific Procurement Notices (SPN), Requests for Expression o f Interest, results o f the evaluation and contracts award should be published in accordance with advertising provisions in the following guidelines : “Guidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits” dated M a y 2004; and “Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers ” dated October 2006.

E. Procurement methods

6. Procurement of Works: The total cost o f contracts o f works to be financed by IDA i s estimated at US$0.5 mi l l ion equivalent. Works would concern small c iv i l works for micro- projects relative to creation and management o f reserves and implementation o f conservation- friendly techniques and practices. Contracts estimated to cost less than US$50,000 equivalent per contract may be procured through shopping procedures. Contract will be awarded following evaluation o f bids received in writing from on the basis o f written solicitation issued to several qualified contractors (at least three). The award would be made to the supplier with the lowest price only after comparing a minimum o f three quotations open at the same time, provided he has the experience and resources to execute the contract successfully. The sole source could be use with prior agreement o f the Bank.

7. Procurement of Goods: The total amount o f contracts o f goods to be financed by IDA i s estimated at US$0.6 mi l l ion equivalent. Goods would include office supplies, transport equipments, Aerial photograph, cartography, communication material, etc.. Similar Goods would be grouped in at least annual bid packages and would be procured through International Competitive Bidding (ICB). Contracts estimated to cost less than US$200,000 equivalent may be procured through NCB. Goods estimated to cost less than US$20,000 may be procured through Shopping procedures; Contract will be awarded following evaluation o f bids received in writing form on the basis o f written solicitation issued to several qualified suppliers (at least three) who have a physical shop o f the concerned goods. The award would be made to the supplier with the lowest price only after comparing a minimum o f three quotations open at the same time, provided he has the experience and resources to execute the contract successfully. For shopping, the procurement specialist will keep a register o f suppliers updated at least six monthly.

8. Selection of Consultants: The project will finance Consultant Services such as studies, technical and financial audits, technical assistance, trainer and workshops. The total amount o f contracts to be financed by IDA is estimated at US$2.2 mi l l ion equivalent. Consultants wil l be selected through the following methods: (a) Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS) ; (b) Least Cost Selection (LCS) for audits and insurance that contract amount less than US$50,000 equivalent; (c) Selection under a Fixed Budget (FBS) for contract amount less than US$lO,OOO equivalent for recruitment o f NGOs to assist or advise the grassroots Communities ; (d) selection based on the Consultant’s qualification (CQS) for contracts which amount are less than US$50,000 equivalent and are relatives to exceptional studies or research which interventions required specialized f i r m s with a high specific expertise; (e) sole source with prior agreement o f

59

the Bank. Individual Consultant (IC) will be hired in accordance with paragraph 5.1 to 5.4 o f Bank Guidelines.

9. Short lists o f consultants for services estimated to cost less than US$lOO,OOO equivalent per contract may be composed entirely o f national consultants in accordance with the provisions o f paragraph 2.7 o f the Consultant Guidelines, provided that a sufficient number o f qualified individual or f i r m s are available. However, if foreign f i r m s have expressed interest, they would not be excluded from consideration.

10. Micro-projects procurement: The total amount o f sub-grant for sub-project is estimated at US$0.4 mi l l ion equivalent. Contracts for acquisition o f goods and execution o f works to be financed by IDA as sub project under the components 2 o f the project wil l be executed as per the procedures detailed in the project implementing agency’s administrative procedures manual. The Communities may use NGOs or Individuals Consultants for assistance. In these cases, the competitive method shall be use for consultant selection. The ABE will be responsible for the compliance with the procedures.

11. a Fixed Budget (FBS) could be used.

Procurement of non-consulting services: Least Cost Selection (LCS) or Selection under

12. Training, Workshops, Study Tours, and Conferences: The training (including training material and support), workshops, conference attendance and study tours, wil l be carried out on the basis o f approved annual training and similar activities programs. A detailed training program giving categories o f training, number o f trainees, duration o f training, staff months, timing and estimated cost wil l be submitted to IDA for review and approval prior to initiating the training process. The appropriate methods o f selection will be derived f i om the detailed schedule.

13. Operational Costs: Operating costs financed by the Project are incremental expenses, including office supplies, vehicles operation and maintenance, maintenance o f equipment, communication costs, rental expenses, utilities expenses, consumables, transport and accommodation, per diem, supervision costs and salaries o f locally contracted staff. They wil l be procured using the procurement procedures specified in the Project Administrative, Financial and Accounting Manual accepted by the Bank.

F. Assessment of the Agencies Capacity to Implement Procurement

14. Procurement activities wil l be carried out by “Agence BCninoise pour 1’Environnement (ABE)”. The agency is staffed by a Director and high level staffs and the Procurement i s managed by a Procurement Assistant. An assessment o f the capacity o f the ABE to implement procurement activities has been carried out by Benin Country Office Procurement Specialist on March 2004. The assessment reviewed the organizational structure for implementing the project and the interaction between the ABE and the Ministry’s relevant Procurement unit. We underline the ABE shall also fol low the national procurement procedures for prior review o f procurement documents.

15. Most o f the issuedrisks concerning the procurement implementation o f the project have been identified and include no public bids opening, inappropriate request for proposal using

60

negotiations o f contract amount (to decrease), quotations not open at the same time, weak experience with Bank’s procurement procedures. The corrective measures which have been agreed are : training for procurement assistant; procurement plan for the first eighteen month o f project; public opening o f bids; actualization o f the procurement provision o f ABE administrative procedures manual; annual procurement post reviews to identify and resolve eventual problems; systematic procurement training for micro-project Management Committees before releasing the finds to the beneficiaries. Due to weaknesses identified during the capacity assessment and the probable procurement inexperience o f most o f the micro-project grant recipients, the overall project risk for procurement i s rated high.

Task

16. following:

The main actions needed to improve the project implementation framework are the

Completion I Responsibility

Bank

assistant 3. Procurement training for procurement

i ABE I 1. Submit to IDA prior review the f i rst 18 month implementation procurement plan Before negotiations

ABE The first six months after effectiveness

I 2. Finalize the procurement section o f ABE I I

I ABE I Accounting, Financial and Administrative procedures manual, and submit i t s to the Before effectiveness

17. The completion o f these tasks is a condition o f negotiations and effectiveness.

Procurement implementation arrangements

18. The Procurement Assistant o f ABE wil l be responsible for the coordination o f a l l procurement activities including (a) preparation and updating o f the procurement plans (b) preparation, finalization and launching o f the Requests for Proposal and bidding documents; (c) drafting o f minutes o f opening o f the bids and preparation o f the bids evaluation reports; (d) preparation and submission o f contracts for signing; and (e) drafting o f procurement progress report. The procurement Assistant will be responsible o f the procurement supervision at the Communes and Communities level.

19. Communes and Communities will be responsible for the procurement o f works, goods or services necessary for the implementation o f their sub project agreed. Prior to the grant disbursement, they will receive systematically the required basic training on the Simplified Guidelines for Procurement and Disbursement for Community-Based Investments.

G. Procurement Plan

20. The Government developed a draft Procurement Plan for the project. This plan provides the basis for the procurement methods; the plan wil l cover the first eighteen months o f project implementation. The Procurement Plan will be updated annually in agreement with the Bank in

61

order to reflect the progress in project implementation and the improvements in technical capacity o f the implementing agency. All procurement will be carried out in accordance with the original or updated procurement plans.

6

Domestic Preferenc

e (y eslno)

H. Frequency of procurement supervision missions and Audits

7 8 9

Review Expected Comments by Bank Bid-Opening (Prior I Date Post)

21. In addition to the prior review supervision to be carried out from Bank offices, the capacity assessment o f the Procurement activities in ABE has recommended six-monthly supervision and at least an annual post procurement review. The post procurement review could be carried-out by a consultant committed by the Bank. The Project shall send out to the Bank, in Financial Monitoring Report (FMR), the quarterly procurement management report with details on implementation progress, problems and solution proposed.

205000

162 000

Attachment 1 Details o f the Procurement Arrangement involving international competition

I C B No No Prior April 2008

I C B Yes No Prior February 2008

Goods and Works and non consulting services

(a) L i s t o f contract Packages which will be procured following I C B and direct contracting:

1

Ref. No.

2

Contract (Descriptio

n)

1 - GOODS

e ui ments

hot0 a h

(b) Prior review: all Contracts estimated to cost above US$200,000, and the f i rst two (2) contracts o f each procurement method, irrespective o f the amount, wil l be subject to Bank prior review mandatory in paragraphs 2 and 3 o f Annex 1 o f the Bank’s procurement Guidelines.

(c) Post review: For each contracts for works and goods not submitted to the prior review, the procurement documents wil l be submitted to Bank post review in accordance with the provisions o f paragraph 4 o f Annex 1 o f the Bank’s procurement Guidelines. The post review will be based on a ratio o f at least 1 to 5 contracts.

62

1. Consulting Services.

(a) L i s t o f Consulting Assignments with short-list o f international firms.

There is no consulting assignment with international f i rms.

(b) Consultants Services : (z) each contract estimate to cost above US$lOO,OOO per contract for Firms and US$50,000 per contract for individuals consultants, (ii) al l single source selection for assignments; (iii) al l training; (vi) the f i rst two (2) contracts o f each procurement method o f selection irrespective o f the amount, (iv) al l Terms o f reference for contract above US$5,000 , and, (vi) all amendments o f contracts raising the init ial contract value by more than 15% o f original amount or above the prior review thresholds will be subject to the Bank prior review mandatory in paragraphs 2 and 3 o f Annex 1 o f the Bank’s procurement Guidelines.

(c) Short l is ts composed entirely of national consultants: Short lists o f consultants for services estimated to cost less than USD100,OOO equivalent per contract, may be composed entirely o f national consultants in accordance with the provisions o f paragraph 2.7 o f the Consultant Guidelines.

(d) Post review: For each contracts for services not submitted to the prior review, the procurement documents wi l l be submitted to Bank post review in accordance with the provisions o f paragraph 4 o f Annex 1 o f the Bank’s Consultant selection Guidelines. The post review wil l be based on a ratio o f at least 1 to 5 contracts.

63

Annex 9: Economic and Financial Analysis

Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

1. The Project i s not suitable for a standard economic cost-benefit analysis because the nature o f its activities (capacity building, strengthen legal, pol icy and institutional framework) wil l lead to non-quantifiable (in economic terms) benefits and results.

2. GEF are described in the incremental cost analysis in Annex 15.

The specific types o f incremental costs and the extent to which they will be covered by

64

Annex 10: Safeguard Policy Issues Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

Analysis of potential environmental effects

1. The potential environmental effects associated with the planned operations are related to component 2 o f the project: Community-Based Biodiversity Conservation. More specifically, these effects relate to the establishment o f the CBCAs.

2. The creation o f the community conservation areas (CBCAs) in inhabited areas will not require the resettlement o f the populations currently living in these areas. However, resource exploitation options may be regulated in order to encourage sustainable o f natural resources. These regulations that are necessary to prevent over-exploitation and to avoid the depletion o f the resource will apply in demarcated areas when necessary. These regulations may result in reduced levels o f resource use for some members o f the local communities. This situation may have adverse effects on the home consumption o f specific goods or income earning opportunities in local markets. The socio-economic studies conducted during the preparation o f the projects already identified the instances where such effects may arise. Such adverse economic impacts were considered in the project design and will be monitored during project implementation.

Instruments for managing environmental and social safeguards

3. The recipient also prepared a process framework (PF) that establishes a process by which the members o f the potentially affected communities participate in the design o f the measures required to ensure the sustainable management o f biodiversity, and the associated restrictions in access to natural resources. In particular, the process defines the way in which the affected communities are involved in identifying any adverse impacts, assessing the significance of these impacts, and establishing the criteria for the eligibility for any mitigating or compensating measures. Also, it describes the methods and procedures by which potential conflicts and grievances within or between affected communities wil l be resolved. Finally, the process framework describes the arrangement for monitoring the beneficial and adverse impacts o f the project activities on the members o f the communities, and for monitoring the effectiveness o f measures taken to improve or restore the living standards o f the affected members o f the local communities.

Implementation and monitoring of the environmental and social safeguard measures

4. The Benin Environment Agency ( B E ) which is the technical arm o f the govemment in overseeing compliance with the environmental assessment (EA) requirements is the implementing agency for the proposed project. ABE was also the implementing agency o f the IDA-financed Environmental Management Project (closed in 200 l), and is therefore familiar with the Bank environmental and social safeguard policies. The agency that was created in 1995 has developed a reliable capacity in environmental assessment, and has conducted many capacity building activities to support the introduction and enforcement o f EA in sectoral ministries and in municipalities. Moreover, the Environmental Management project supported investments in sub- projects. The execution o f these sub-projects followed both national and Bank EA requirements.

65

5. Overall, ABE, Le., the implementing agency will retain hll responsibility for ensuring compliance with the recommendations o f the PF and the ESMF through the (i) inclusion o f the relevant requirements in the implementation manual and the monitoring and evaluation manual, and (ii) the provision o f monitoring indicators for the social and environmental impacts o f the proposed investments. The quarterly progress reports o f the progress as wel l as the aide- mkmoires o f Bank supervision missions wil l include an assessment o f the compliance with the environmental and social safeguards requirements.

6. The training o f the municipality staff and the community CBCA management units wil l include modules dealing with environmental and social safeguards so that these partners for implementation are wel l equipped with the minimum ski l ls needed to apply the recommendations o f the environmental and social safeguards documents. Finally, the implementing agency wil l also be involved in supervising the compliance with the environment and social safeguard requirements o f the Community-Driven Development project and the Second Decentralized Ci ty Management Project that both have activities planned in the same areas as the proposed project. This will allow a more comprehensive and elaborate mitigation o f the potential cumulative effects.

66

Annex 11: Project Preparation and Supervision

Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

Planned Actual PCN review 02/0 1 /200 1 02/20/2001 Initial PID to PIC 02/24/2001 Init ial ISDS to PIC 02/24/200 1 Appraisal 04/05/2004 06/05/2006 Negotiations 05/03/2007 Board/RVP approval 02/19/2008 Planned date o f effectiveness 04/3 0/2008 Planned date o f mid-term review 12/1 5/2010 Planned closing date 06/3 0/20 13

Key institutions responsible for preparation o f the project: Benin Environment Agency

Bank staff and consultants who worked on the project included:

Name Title Unit Remi Kini Sr. Environmental Economist AFTEN Soulemane Fofana Operations Officer AFTAR Itchi Gnon Ayindo Procurement Specialist AFTPC Hugues Agossou Sr. Financial Specialist AFTFM Wolfgang Chadab Finance Officer LOAG2 Nathalie Munzberg/Daria Counsel LEGAF Go Ids t ein Marie Claudine Fundi Language Program Assistant AFTAR Sylvie Korotimi Traore Language Program Assistant AFTAR Lydie Ahodehou Program Assistant AFMB J Virginie Vaselopulos Language Program Assistant AFTEN Pacome Kossy Consultant AFTS3 Desire Coquillat Consultant AFTS3 Gabriele Rechbauer Consultant AFTS4 Patricia Gleason Consultant Jerome Gautier Environmental Specialist

Bank h d s expended to date on project preparation: 1. Bank resources:US$348,234 2. Trust funds: 3. Total:US$348,234

Estimated Approval and Supervision costs: 1. Remaining costs to approval: 2. Estimated annual supervision cost:US$25,000

67

Annex 12: Documents in the Project File Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

1. Programme National de Gestion de 1’Environnement (2000) 2. Plan cadre du Ministkre de 1 ‘Environnement, de 1‘Habitat et de 1’Urbanisme: 2004-2006 (2003) 3. Cadre de Gestion de Risques Environnementaux (Avril2005) 4. Processus et MCcanismes de Participation des Populations A la Gestion des Ressources Naturelles : cadre fonctionnel(2005) 5. Synthkse des Contraintes Foncikres RCelles et L ignes Directrice de 1’Avant-projet de la L o i sur l e Littoral (2001) 6. SchCma Directeur d’AmCnagement de la Zone Littorale (2001) 7. Mission Report : Project NC-IUCNKBDD, Baleines Jubartes (2001) 8. Profil des Potentialitts et ActivitCs de PCche dans la Zone Littorale au BCnin : situation et Perspectives d’amknagement (2001)

68

Annex 13: Statement of Loans and Credits BENIN: Coastal Zone Integrated Management program

Original Amount in US$ Millions

Difference between

expected and actual

disbursements

Project FY Purpose ICBCAD IDA SF GEF Cancel. Undisb. Orig. Frm. ID Rev’d PO72003 PO73 1 18

PO72503

PO70204

PO67329

PO39882

PO37580

PO35648

2004 2002

2002

2000

2000

2000

2000

1999

Benin PRSCl B J :HIV/AIDS M U L T I SECTOR B J: Cotton Sector Reform Project Labor Force Dev. Proj. BJ Distance Learning Project - LIL PRIVATE SECTOR Benin: N A T PARKS CONS.& MGT 1 ST DECEN.CITY MGMT.

0.00 20.00 0.00 23 .OO

0.00 18.00

0.00 5.00

0.00 1.83

0.00 30.40

0.00 0.00

0.00 25.50

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 6.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

19.75 19.39

17.49

3.54

0.23

13.65

2.29

2.56

0.00 0.00 4.30 0.00

6.76 0.00

2.57 0.00

12.99 0.10

8.46 17.23 -4.28 0.00

2.73 2.67

Total: 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.00 78.90 7.84 11.23 123.73

69

BENIN STATEMENT OF IFC’s

Held and Disbursed Portfolio In Millions o f US Dollars

Committed Disbursed

IFC IFC FY Company Loan Equity Quasi Partic. Loan Equity Quasi Partic. Approval 1991/93/95 AEFBOAB 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 1999 AEF Vision + 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000 FINADEV 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00

Totalportfilio: 0.19 0.34 0.01 0.00 0.19 0.34 0.01 0.00

Approvals Pending Commitment

FY Company Approval

~ ~~ ~ ~ ~

Loan Equity Quasi Partic.

Totalpending 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 commitment:

70

Annex 14: Country at a Glance

BENIN: Coastal Zone Integrated Management program Sub.

POVERTY and SOCIAL Saharan Low- Ben in

2002 Population, mid-year (millions) 6.6 GNI per capita (Atlas method, US$) 380 GNi(Atlasmethod, US$ billions) 2.5

Average annual growth, 1998-02

Population (%I 2 6 Labor force (%) 2.9

M o s t recent es t imate ( latest year avallabie, 1996-02)

Poverty (% of population belo wnationalpo vertyline) Urban population (%oftotalpopulation) 44 Life expectancy at birth (years) 53 Infant mortality(per l$OOlive births) 92 Child malnutrition (%ofchildrenunder5) 23 Access to an improved water source (Omofpopulation) 63 Uliteracy (%of population age 59 60

95 Male 10 Female 78

Gross primary enrollment (%of school-age population)

KEY ECONOMIC RATiOS and LONG-TERM TRENDS

1982 1992

GDP (US$ billions) 13 16 Gross domestic investmentlGDP 27.6 0 6 Exports of goods and services1GDP Q.8 14.8 Gross domestic savingslGDP 5 3 0.0 Gross natlonal savings/GDP 12.7 2.6

Current account balancelGDP -29.8 -45 Interest paymentslGDP 0.5 0.7 Total debtlGDP 55.8 845 Total debt servicelexports 0.0 4.3 Present value of debVGDP Present value of debVexports

(average annual gro uuth) 1882.92 1992-02 2001

GDP 2.3 5.0 5 0 GDP percapita -0.9 2 2 2.3

Afr ica Income

886 450 306

2.4 2 5

33 46 D5

58 37 86 92 80

2001

2.4 19.2 152 8.5

12.5

-3.1 0.6

70.5 0.4

35.4 227.1

2,495 430

1072

19 2.3

30 59 81

76 37 95 D3 87

2002

2.7 82 14 .3 6.8 10.7

0.8 68.6 6.8

2002 2002-06

5.3 2.6

STRUCTURE o f the ECONOMY

(%of GDP) Agriculture Industry

Services

Private consumption General government consumption Imports of goods and services

Manufacturing

(average annual grouuth) Agriculture Industry

Services

Private consumption General government consumption Gross domestic investment Imports of goods and services

Manufacturing

1982 1992

32.5 36.0 15.1 0 .3 9.1 8.3

52.4 50.7

842 89.2 D.5 D.7 40.1 28.6

1982-92 1992-02

5.8 5.7 17 4.5 4.1 5.7 0.3 4.6

2.7 4.7 4 .4 4.3 -14 7.0 -16 3.7

2001

35.5 14.4 9.2

50.0

8 19 116

27.9

2001

3.1 9.1 9.0 5.4

4.5 3.0 7.5 5.6

2002

35.5 14.4 9.1

50.1

80.5 P.7

26.7

2002

5.6 6.5 6 A 4.6

5.5 3.1 8 .O 7.0

)evelopment diamond.

Life expectancy

T Gross

I primary ;NI er I :apita

I

Access to improvedwater source

-Benin - Low-income group

Economic rat ios '

Trade

T Investment Domestic

savings

Indebtedness

- B enin ~ Lowincome group

Growth o f investment and GDP (%)

87 88 88 00 01 02

I -GDI -GDP

Growth o f exports and Impor ts (%)

157

87 88 88 00 01 02 -5 -

71

Benin PRICES and GOVERNMENT FINANCE

Domes t i c p r ices (%change) Consumer prices Implicit GDP deflator 16.1

Government f inance (%of GDP, includes current grants) Current revenue Current budget balance Overall surplusldeficit

1982

TRADE

(US$ millions) Total exports (fob)

Ginned cotton Crude oil Manufactures

Total imports (cif) Food Fuel and energy Capital goods

Export price index (1995-WO) Import price index (1995=WO) Terms of trade (895=WO)

BALANCE o f PAYMENTS

(US$ millions) Exports of goods and services Imports of goods and services Resource balance

Net income Net current transfers

1982

1982

214 700

-486

-6 B O

Current account balance -377

Financing items (net) Changes in net reserves

227 250

Memo: Reserves including gold (US$ millions) Conversion rate (DEC, iocaVUS$) 328.6

EXTERNAL DEBT and RESOURCE FLOWS

(US$ millions) Total debt outstanding and disbursed

1982

708 IBRD 0 IDA 73

Total debt service IBRD IDA

Composition of net resource flows Official grants Official creditors Private creditors Foreign direct investment Portfolio equity

World Bank program Commitments Disbursements Principal repayments

25 0 1

26 79

177 0 0

23 11 0

1992

5.9 3.4

119 -4.5 -8.9

1992

0 2 x14

16

364 Il7 40

215

3a 47 79

1992

5% 7 8

-205

-60 125

-73

165 -92

350.6

1992

1,373 0

389

2a 0 5

166 65 0

78 0

40 33

2

2001

4.0 3.1

l7.3 4.8

-2.9

2001

484 8 1

661 202 P O 371

Bl 116 a7

2001

362 665

-303

-21 165

-74

94 -8

733.0

2001

1671 0

598

50 0 6

8 2 91 0

0 1 0

0

4 4a

2002

3.3 2.4

16.8 3.3

-4.9

2002

518 20 1

7x1 2 7 129 398

84 114 73

2002

368 668

-320

-24 8 1

-20

697.0

2002

1,845 0

654

63 0 7

41 0

41 23

3

In f la t ion (%)

9

I5

97 98 99 00 01 02 ‘Y ---GDPdeflator -CPI

Export and impor t levels (US$ mill.)

96 97 98 99 00 01

Exports m Inports

Current account balance to GDP (%)

:ompos i t ion o f 2002 debt (US$ mill.

G: 80 F: 3

D: 494

i. iBRD E - Bilateral I - I D A D-Othernultilateral F-Rivate : - IMF G- Short-teri

72

Annex 15: Incremental Cost Analysis Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

I. Overview

Coastal Zone Context Benin’s coastal zone, surrounded by i t s neighboring countries Togo and Nigeria, consists o f a 125 km long sea front, and an area stretching 50-60 km inland from the Atlantic Ocean. It covers only 8 % o f the country’s land area, but harbors about 50 % o f the population. The coastal zone and i t s infrastructure (in particular the harbor in Cotonou) are o f great economic importance to Benin and contribute about 70 % o f i t s GDP.

Environment and Biodiversity The ecological functions and the natural and biological processes taking place at the interface between the rivers, lagoons, lakes and swamps on the one hand, and the marine areas on the other, make the Benin coastal zone one o f the most productive o f the Gulf o f Guinea. Overall, the coastal wetlands, swamps, lagoons, lakes and rivers provide every year 33,000 tons o f fish, shrimps, and crabs (as opposed to 7,000 tons from the sea). Wetlands, lagoons, and rivers cover 40% Benin coastal zone, and these water bodies encompass eight different ecosystems that provide irreplaceable ecological functions, and breeding, feeding and nurturing grounds for a wide variety o f fish and other aquatic organisms. The coastal zone is also the provider o f key agricultural products including export crops such as pineapples, palm oil, and banana. A large number o f local food and non-food products that are collected from wetlands and other permanent and seasonal water bodies play important roles in home consumption and income generation for rural households, especially, the poor. The variety o f geological, topographic, and hydrological conditions o f the coastal zone combined create a wide variety o f ecosystems and habitats for globally important biodiversity.

Threats The main environmental factors threatening globally significant coastal and marine biodiversity include coastal erosion, sedimentation o f the coastal rivers and lakes (due to removal o f vegetative cover), over-fishing and environmentally darnaging fishing practices, deregulated hunting practices and poaching, proliferation o f water hyacinth, deforestation, environmentally damaging fishing practices and urban industrial pollution o f rivers and coastal waters. The related institutional and technical constraints are inadequate regulations including for conservation o f biodiversity-rich areas, weak enforcement o f existing regulations, inadequate information on status and functioning o f critical ecosystems, l ow level o f environmental awareness, lack o f integrated management planning, and low technical capacity within national and local institutions in developing sustainable natural resource management schemes, including conservation mechanisms. Social constraints leading to further degradation include the limited degree o f local community participation in coast-related planning and decision making related to the use o f natural resources, high population pressure on the coast and thus overall limited opportunities for alternative sustainable livelihoods.

73

Status of Government’s Commitment to Integrated Coastal Zone Management

Following years with inadequate attention to integration o f environmental aspects into development policies and insufficient progress with their implementation, the Government has taken concrete actions to make the sustainable management o f the coastal zone resources a key priority. Integrated coastal zone management has been one o f the seven sub-programs o f the National Environmental Management Program and features prominently in former MEHU’s - now MEPN - Strategic Plan and the country’s N B S A P . Investments related to the sustainable management o f the coastal zone such as engineering and feasibility studies for the control o f coastal erosion, financing o f local environmental management plans for municipalities, enforcement and compliance activities and thematic studies aimed at increasing knowledge o f the resource base have been included in the program budgets and MTEF o f the Ministry o f Environment. However, effective mainstreaming o f biodiversity into national and local development strategies and sector policies and coordination thereof as well as devolution and delegation o f property r ights and resource control mechanism to local government have remained unsearched targets to date.

The new governmental alignment that has put forest resources and environment under the same Ministry (Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection), and led to a creation o f a new ministry in charge o f urban affairs, housing, land reform and coastal erosion suggests renewed political wil l and stronger momentum for sustainable development in the costal zone.

11. Baseline Scenario

General Scope In the absence o f GEF assistance, i t i s expected that the Government would pursue some activities related to coastal wetlands and marine biodiversity management and coastal erosion to meet i t s set development and environmental objectives with limited support from other donors and national resources.

costs Over a five year period, the total expenditures associated with the Baseline Scenario are estimated to be U S $ 5.3 million. These are summarized in the table 2 at the end o f this annex.

Baseline Scenario and Activities The degradation o f coastal zone ecosystems i s one o f many environmental problems facing Benin. The Government approach to controlling environmental degradation in the coastal zone i s developed in the National Environmental Management Program (PNGE), the draft Master Plan for Coastal Zone Management’ and the draft National Wetlands Strategy6. PNGE investments which amount to U S $ 5.3 mi l l ion focus on coastal erosion, solid waste management in the main costal cities, transport-related air pollution, environmental compliance and enforcement activities, and support to local environmental management. These investments cover most o f the municipalities targeted by the project, and play an important role in creating the enabling conditions for effective local environmental management. As a result, the financings associated with PNGE activities (US$5.3 million) are accounted for as baseline hnding.

The draft Master Plan for Coastal Zone Management (all 3 volumes) will be revised, finalized and adopted within project year 1. The draft National Wetlands Strategy wil l be adopted prior or during the f i rst semester o f the project implementation.

74

The current medium-term expenditure framework (MTEF) o f the Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection includes several activities working to reduce the pressure on the coastal zone, mainly through better enforcement o f the existing environmental regulations (e.g. environmental impact assessment, environmental audits) and by improving the drainage and sewage network o f the two largest cities (Cotonou and Porto-Novo) that contribute the most to pollution o f the coastal waters and wetlands. The resource envelope o f the expenditure framework also includes resource allocation to support the completion o f technical studies for the control o f coastal erosion and to pave the way for urgently needed investments to reduce erosion. Such activities wil l ultimately lead to better protection o f the natural resource base through the reduction o f pollution loads in rivers, lakes, and coastal water.

In addition to national budget allocations, external funding supports activities that are closely related to coastal resource management. (i) The regional Sustainable Fisheries Livelihood Program financed by DFID supports coastal communities for the development o f sustainable fisheries management. Total resources allocated to Benin (among 25 participating African countries) amount to approximately U S $ 1.5 mil l ion for 3 years. (ii) The Ministry o f Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries implements a national Traditional Fisheries Support program. This US$ 25 mil l ion program (for 8 years) supports the traditional fisheries industry mainly through institution and capacity building, access to micro-funding, restoration o f vegetation and fish population in watersheds, promotion o f alternative livelihood strategies and the modernization o f the industry. The project intervention area i s the whole country, but given the importance o f the coastal wetlands, rivers, and lakes in fisheries production, one could venture to say that at least two-third o f the project budget (US$ 3-4 milliodyear) are expected to be invested in the area covered by the proposed project. The project wil l coordinate strongly with this complementary operation on lessons related to M&E, capacity building and institutional strengthening.

Benefits Providing support to the management o f the coastal resources, the above interventions do fall short o f developing a coherent policy, legal and institutional framework for the sustainable management o f the coastal zone resources. In particular, the baseline activities do not specifically provide a viable option for conserving the fragile and critical ecosystems located in the coastal wetlands. In fact, with the current level o f budget allocation, the government wil l be able to provide limited technical assistance to municipalities in the preparation o f local environmental action plans and support basic operational costs o f local environmental management. There will not be any attempt to invest in the preservation o f biodiversity-rich niches in the coastal wetlands and in the protection o f the fragile habitats that support these biodiversity resources. The lack o f adequate finding may prevent the establishment o f coordination mechanisms at national and local needed to ensure compatibility o f the large number o f institutions that are involved in activities that threaten directly or indirectly the integrity o f critical ecological services, the (use and non-use) values and the biodiversity o f coastal wetlands and marine ecosystems.

In sum, the current resource and capacity constraints and the externally funded activities related to coastal zone management are not adequate to ensure the protection o f globally significant biodiversity resources at the target Ramsar sites. I t is unlikely that the l imited expenditures wil l

75

have a noticeable and lasting impact in preventing encroachment into the fragile ecosystems that support the bulk o f the Benin coastal zone biodiversity resources. In fact, the current trend toward accelerated degradation and loss o f genetic resources and habitat diversity may continue under the baseline scenario.

111. Global Environmental Objectives of the GEF Alternative

The global environmental objective o f the proposed GEF alternative i s to establish and support viable coastal zone management systems in priority sites o f global biodiversity, so-called community-based biodiversity conservation areas (CBCAs) through an interlinked m i x o f support for intersectoral coordination at various levels, enabling policy, legal and institutional framework, bottom-up participation in planning and management and mainstreaming in local development plans. The priority activities o f the proposed project are consistent with the country’s NBSAP, and focus on the conservation o f biodiversity-rich niches located in sites designated as globally significant by several organizations: Ramsar, WWF, and IUCN. These objectives wil l be achieved through the development o f an innovative approach to coastal zone management that supports and empowers local communities to establish four CBCAs, covering together with their eco- development zones approximately 10,000 ha, within the Ramsar sites. These community conservation areas include key biodiversity resources specific to the southern and coastal ecosystems o f Benin. Along with the national parks o f the northern savannah zone, these conservation areas wil l provide the opportunity to conserve and protect the biodiversity resources o f the two main ecosystems o f the country.

Scope and cost of the proposed GEF Alternative (US$I I I 6 million) With GEF assistance for addressing the global environmental objective outlined above, the GOB would be able to undertake a more ambitious approach that would generate both national and global benefits. The GEF Alternative would comprise the baseline scenario described earlier as well as a conservation and sustainable use project in the coastal zone: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project. This project would comprise four components:

Coordination, Institution and Capacity Building for Integrated Coastal Zone Management (estimated cost: US$6.5 million);

0 Community-Based Coastal Biodiversity Conservation Areas (estimated cost: US$2.8 million); Monitoring & Evaluation o f Coastal and Marine Biodiversity (estimated cost: US$1.4 million);

0 Project Management (estimated cost: US$O.9 million).

The combined cost o f the GEF Alternative (baseline scenario made up PNGE investments plus Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project) i s estimated at US$ 11.6 million.

The GEF alternative intends to achieve major outputs and outcomes at a total incremental cost o f US$6.3 mi l l ion o f which US$ 4.3 mi l l ion are financed by GEF and a co-financing o f US$2.0 mi l l ion from the Government o f Benin. In fact, three o f the four components o f the GEF Alternative are h l l y aligned with the on-going activities o f the implementing agency (Benin Environmental Agency) with financing from the national budget.

76

The GEF Alternative wil l provide the means (above and beyond the baseline scenario) for creating the institutional, technical, and socio-economic conditions for enabling the sustainable conservation o f globally significant biodiversity resources o f the coastal zone. Resources are required not only to carry out direct protection and conservation o f biodiversity but also to invest in the systemic changes that are required to sustain conservation outcomes in the long term (in particular the activities o f community and local authority reinforcement and putting in place a system o f I C Z M at national). In addition to the baseline investments described above, the GEF alternative will include a wide set o f activities organized under i t s four components:

Component I : Coordination, Institution and Capacity Building for Integrated Coastal Zone Management (US$6.5 mill ion: GEF US$0.8 mill ion)

This component o f the proposed GEF alternative will provide much needed assistance to enable the Government o f Benin to achieve integration o f biodiversity into their pol icy and regulatory work. GEF financing under this component wil l focus on creating an enabling environment in Benin to allow for sectoral policies and a legal framework which is conducive to sustainable resource use and sound management o f coastal biodiversity assets. The GEF Alternative wil l lead to (i) an establishment o f a National Commission for Coastal Zone Protection and Management to harmonize various sector policies and programs that affect coastal resources in order to ensure consistency with the prescription o f the Coastal Zone Master Plan, the National Wetlands Strategy, and the Integrated Water Resources Management Plan (GIRE); (ii) an active and empowered Inter-Communal Council for Eco-Development (CIED) to coordinate economic development and the management o f critical natural resources, including biodiversity hot spots that span over several municipalities, and to oversee the implementation o f the management plans o f the community-based conservation areas; (iii) preparation and adoption o f application decrees o f the framework law on coastal zone management; (iv) development o f pol icy directives and regulatory measures supporting the respective roles, responsibilities o f central and local governments including the proposed National Commission for Coastal Zone Protection and Management in the management, conservation, and use o f coastal ecosystems (in particular related to pollution control, land use zoning, fishing and aqua-, mariculture techniques); (v) development and adoption o f legal provision for establishment o f CBCAs; (vi) strengthened municipalities and inter-communal coordination bodies (CIED) to develop and implement a compliance and enforcement plan in order to control the main sources o f threats; and lastly (vii) local development plans for coastal municipalities with inclusion o f biodiversity and I C Z M principles.

Component 2: Community-Based Coastal Biodiversity Conservation Areas (US$2.80 mill ion: GEF US$2.2 million)

This component will focus on the development o f four priori ty CBCAs and on the implementation o f their related management plans. CBCAs wil l require highest level o f participation and ownership from local communities and municipalities in planning, management and monitoring and evaluation. The principles for establishment and management o f a CBCA are detailed in annex 4 and annex 17. GEF funds wil l be used to finance the establishment o f CBCA; the development o f participatory site-specific management plans in line with local development plans and objectives; the establishment o f a functional site-adapted CBCA management unit; the implementation o f management plan activities such as conservation

77

measures (restoration, rehabilitation o f habitats and species), education and awareness building, training for CBCA management unit staff, targeted biodiversity conservation research, local level monitoring and evaluation using METT. The concept o f CBCA i s a novelty in Benin and lessons learned are expected to be used to refine further national conservation policies and instruments.

Component 3: Monitoring & Evaluation o f Coastal and Marine Biodiversity (US$1.4 million: GEF US$l. 0 million) The objective o f this component i s to develop an M & E system that wil l track the status o f biodiversity resources as wel l as the changes in threats and the effectiveness o f the activities in mitigating these threats. Special emphasis wil l be on water quality, productivity o f fisheries, coastal erosion, biodiversity status, and change in socio-economic o f status o f households in the project areas. GEF funding for this component will be used to finance the incremental costs o f adding a coastal and marine biodiversity monitoring component to the existing environmental information and monitoring system managed by the Benin Environmental Agency. Additionally, GEF funds will facilitate integration o f a l l biodiversity information in the country, forging a direct link the other associated projects and programs in the coastal zone.

Component 4: Project Management (US$O.9 mill ion: GEF US$O.3 million) This component wil l ensure effective management o f the project through the project’s implementing agency (ABE) by procuring goods and services required for the operations, assuring financial management and reporting, activity planning and coordination, project performance monitoring and evaluation (including use o f the coastal and marine information and monitoring system), mobilizing and providing assistance and advisory services to the technical partners o f the project as described in the project implementation manual. ABE will be capacitated through additional staff and training to manage the implementation o f a coastal and marine information and monitoring system and provide the secretary o f the temporary project steering committee.

Benefits The implementation o f the GEF Alternative wil l provide the means for (i) coordinating sectoral policies and enhancing capacities at national and local level for a better management o f the coastal zone, (ii) mainstreaming coastal biodiversity conservation into sectoral policies and programs, and into regional and local development plans, and (iii) establishing sustainable community-based biodiversity conservation and management areas (CBCAs) and thereby reducing pressure o n these critical ecosystems, habitats and species. These activities will yield both domestic and global benefits.

Several categories o f benefits are worth considering at the national level. The first category consists o f increased conservation and sustainable use benefits in the future as the development and promotion o f community-based biodiversity reserves within eco-development zones provide for an improved resource base. Both rural and urban populations would benefit from a steady stream o f a variety o f goods including fisheries, biomass fuel, medicinal plants, and other products for home use or for sale. The second category o f potential benefits could result from reduced pollution in coastal waters, rivers and lakes. In addition to ecosystem and human health- related benefits, reduced pollution could enhance the development o f scenic resources on the coast, thus increasing their aesthetic value (potential for tourism industry development). Finally,

78

the uniqueness o f the biodiversity stock and the fact that many o f the biodiversity hot spots in the project area are also sacred sites for local communities, create appropriate conditions for enhanced learning experience with high scientific and educational value.

The global benefits o f the GEF Alternative would include the restoration and preservation o f habitats that harbor endemic and threatened species o f fauna and flora, and their recovery. The promotion o f local knowledge and regional cooperation in coastal biodiversity conservation also constitute important benefits o f global value. Finally, the protection o f migratory water birds and their habitats wil l yield substantial global benefits.

Table 1 : Summary of GEF financinp and co-financing

GEF Total Project cost by component and source of funding (US$ million) Component 1 : Institution and Capacity building for 5.7 0.8 6.50

Govern men t

Coastal Zone Management

Component 2: Community-Based Biodiversity 0.6 2.2 2.80 Conservation

Component 3: M&E o f coastal and marine 0.4 1 .o 1.4 biodiversity

Component 4: Project Management, Monitoring 0.6 0.3 0.9 and Evaluation and Coordination Total Financing Required 7.30 4.3 11.6

Table 2: Incremental Cost Matrix

Project Components Component 1 : Coordination and Institutional Capacity Building for Integrated Coastal Zone Management

Cost Category

Baseline

GEF Alternative

cost US$mil 5.3

6.5

Domestic Benefits

Increased capacity and awareness o f sectoral ministries leading to better coordination o f their interventions in the coastal zone and to more sustainable use o f resources. Establishment o f coordinating mechanisms (National Commission for Coastal Zone Protection and Management and CIED), enforcement o f coastal framework law, and increased capacity at central and local level to guide the development,

Global Benefits

Limited improvement in management o f globally significant biodiversity.

Effective coordination o f mechanisms, enactment o f implementation decrees o f coastal framework law, enforcement o f these decrees, and increased capacity and empowerment o f local institutions will lead to increased biodiversity value and benefits through better

79

I

Incremental

Component 2: Community- based Biodiversity Conservation

Baseline

Areas. GEF Alternative

I Incremental

Component 3: Monitoring and evaluation of coastal and marine biodiversity

Baseline

GEF Alternative 1

1. 2

0

2.8

2.8

0

1.4

1.4

exploitation, and protection and sustainable protection o f coastal use o f globally important resources. I biodiversity resources. Note: Consists o f GEF (US$ 0.6 M) and GOB (0.4 M) contributions Increased but limited awareness and incentives o f municipalities and local populations to protect biodiversity resources.

Significant technical capacity, empowerment, awareness, and incentives for municipalities and local communities developed to plan, implement and monitor sustainable natural resource and biodiversity management activities. Note: Consists o f GEF (US contributions Some environmental indicators are generally available and used to prepare periodic state o f the environment reports.

Data and information describing the baseline conditions, and indicators to guide environmental and conservation policy formulation and implementation, and to help assess the conditions o f ecosystems are available.

Monitoring information and data i s used by municipalities and local communities use to promote good practices and resource stewardship at the local level.

Note: Consists o f GEF (US

Some reduction o f threats to coastal and marine ecosystems containing globally significant biodiversity.

Four globally significant biodiversity hotspots o f he coastal zone are legally protected and co-managed effectively by municipalities and local communities.

2.2 M) and GOB (0.6 M)

Information on the state o f the environment in Benin i s available but does not provide information on and analysis o f biodiversity status o f coastal and marine resources. Availability and use o f up-to- date data and indicators o f environmental conditions, and the status o f coastal o f ecosystems and resources w i l l provide a means to (i) generate more effective policy-oriented actions aimed to mainstream biodiversity into the development o f the coastal zone, and (ii) monitor the effectiveness o f these actions. Increased global benefits in terms o f increased biodiversity value (due to improved management effectiveness) and benefits (increased stock o f knowledge about globally important resources).

1 M) and GOB (0.4 M) contributions

80

Project Management

GEF Alternative !

k Incremental

Baseline Totals*

GEF Alternative Incremental

0

0.9

0.9

5.3

11.6 6.3

Efficient and capable staff in place to disseminate knowledge and manage issues related to integrated coastal zone management on local, national and regionaYgloba1 level.

Note: Consists o f GEF (US

Publication and dissemination o f best practice in community-based wetland and marine biodiversity conservation at national and sub-regional level. Integrated coastal zone management on local, national and regionaYgloba1 level facilitated leading to significant global environmental benefits. 0.3 M) and GOB (0.6 M)

contributions.

Note: Consists o f GEF (US$ 4.3 M) and GOB (2.00 M) contributions

Notes: I t should be noted that ‘associated’ funding i s not reflected in the above. The activities o f the associated projects will feed into and complement the proposed alternative. The total cost and name o f these associated projects are as follow:

ADB/IFAD Traditional Fishery Project US$15,500,000

Government/EU/Bilateral Coastal Erosion Control US$38,000,000 Total US$63,500,000

Government4DA CDD Project us$10,000,000

81

Annex 16: STAP Roster Review Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

Overview:

I t i s appreciated that the Project brief i s under development and the following comments based on the standard format used to assess project proposals are intended to help the team preparing the Project Proposal.

The Project br ief is wel l written and comprehensive. However, there are two basic points that need clarification. The first concerns the conservation o f the two RAMSAR Sites as the focus o f the project when the project is much broader in i t s concept and detailed activities. It appears that the use o f the two sites is a mechanism for demonstrating to the GEF that the project wil l address their program area 2. I s this really necessary? Fundamentally, the project is about sustainable development and wetlands conservation forms an important focus that represents an integral part o f the Integrated Coastal Zone Management effort.

The second point concerns erosion o f the coast. The causes o f the erosion are reasonably well articulated and demonstrate the wide area where complex sets o f activities contribute to the erosion along the coast. However, there i s no critical review o f the concept o f specific proposals for "erosion control". If, as in many other developing nations, expensive and non-sustainable "solutions" are used- such as major hard engineering interventions- without addressing the root causes, then the Bank could be seen as supporting inappropriate investment.

Both points need to be clarified before the project is submitted.

Scientific and technical soundness of the project

There i s strong evidence o f careful assessment o f the underlying problems associated with the conservation o f the biological diversity o f the wetlands and other resource systems associated with the Benin coast. The main threats to the two RAMSAR sites and other coastal ecosystems and have been assessed. Other than the issues surrounding the management o f coastal erosion identified above, there i s sufficient ecological and technical information available to give the project a reasonably sound scientific base. Some important questions remain that wil l affect the design and possible success o f project activities intended to conserve biodiversity. One example is whether the two RAMSAR sites can be conserved if major issues affecting hydrology and sediment budgets upstream from the coast are not effectively dealt with under the project.

In this respect, the Project Design should ensure that issues such as deforestation in watersheds and mitigation o f the impacts o f major coastal infrastructure developments are addressed in the Integrated Coastal Management initiatives. This wil l require further indicators to be identified to support the management plans and to help achieve the objectives. The monitoring schemes have been incorporated into the design will also reed to reflect these broader issues.

The participative approach taken in the Project br ief should help ensure the achievement o f the objectives o f conserving biodiversity, promoting more sustainable forms o f resources use and the successful identification and development o f alternative livelihoods for local communities. The

82

design recognizes the importance o f developing both awareness o f conservation issues and active participation o f communities and other local. stakeholders in the development o f effective biodiversity conservation initiatives. However there are specific issues that need to be clarified concerning the role o f the private sector in the development and implementation o f the biodiversity management strategies, plans and management measures set out. Br ie f mention is made o f the "private sector", however the active participation o f important stakeholders, such as hotel operators and other tourism related interests needs to be given a higher profile in the project design. Experience elsewhere has demonstrated the importance o f getting the active involvement and support o f the private sector in biodiversity conservation. Tourism development is identified in the project background as a driver o f coastal habitat change, i t is therefore very important to ensure these interests and potential capacities to support biodiversity conservation are incorporated. If this is not done, there i s scope for resistance to and even and blocking o f proposals by private sector bodies that believe their interests are not being given the attention they deserve. The apparent weakness in the project design in respect to the under-emphasis on the role o f the private sector and other interests that are active outside government agencies could lead to a risk o f weak support for policies, plans and management interventions.

The success o f the proposed approach also depends heavily upon the effective cooperation o f l ine agencies with the Benin Environment Agency as the Lead Agency. Lack o f cooperation and coordination among government agencies is a common problem in the management o f coastal and marine areas and resources throughout the world. The measures to promote stronger cooperation among agencies could be further clarified and even reinforced in respect to how cooperation and coordination will be developed and reinforced beyond the use o f a Multi- disciplinary Technical Committee. Consideration could also be given to developing a sense o f partnership between the government agencies and the private sector and other stakeholders in supporting the development o f the project. This would help reduce the risk o f poor coordination among agencies and would help to strengthen the sustainability o f the project outcomes.

There do not appear to be any controversial aspects about the project.

The project does not introduce incentives that may lead to over-harvesting o f resources and contains measures designed to improve conservation o f habitats and the sustainable use of renewable resources.

The project design could be strengthened by making i t more clear how any adverse effects on fishers and other natural resources dependent stakeholders resulting fkom any conservation measures proposed might be dealt witWcompensated for. The same issue may affect tourism developers and other private sector interests.

The project does addresses weaknesses in the enforcement o f existing national laws and regulations, and the measures proposed would help to ensure better use o f these legal instruments. The legal instrument aspects in respect to international conventions, treaties and protocols could be more clearly spelt out in the Project Brief.

There is no specific model o f sustainable use outlined in the project. The subject is mentioned, but not sufficiently elaborated to assess at this point. It would be helpful to set out how sustainable use outlined in the project will be tested and amended where appropriate. I t would also be helpful to elaborate the plans to use pi lot management studies in the two RAMSAR sites

83

as a means o f learning from and replicating the management model in other locations. The success o f any pilots wil l depend heavily on support from stakeholders and the measures designed to improve cooperation and coordination among government agencies. These issues are addressed in the project design and the comments above suggest areas in which the design could be strengthened.

There i s evidence that the project encompasses well thought through technical and socio- economic measures that should help the Benin Environment Agency and other agencies o f the Government o f Benin to develop long-tern and sustainable solutions to the issues adversely affecting biological diversity.

Identification o f global environmental benefits

The section on the Global Development Objective directly addresses the goals o f the GEF Operational Program no. 2 and the international commitments under the RAMSAR Convention. The Project design aims to strengthen measures being implemented by the Government o f Benin to reduce the impact o f coastal development and over-exploitation o f natural resources.

The global benefits for the conservation o f biodiversity that wil l result from the planned interventions are primarily related to the improved management o f the two RAMSAR sites. I t i s inferred that there wil l be corresponding benefits to other coastal ecosystems. The planned interventions in the two RAMSAR Sites should have a beneficial impact in terms o f the importance o f these ecosystems and species o f global importance.

The project therefore f i t s wel l within the context o f the global goals o f GEF.

RePional Context

The project addresses issues o f importance to biological diversity conservation within the surrounding region by focusing o n sites that are o f representative o f other parts o f the West Africa and contribute to the overall biodiversity o f the region

I t would be helpful to link the conservation o f the two RAMSAR sites with benefits to other ecosystems and natural resources o f the coastal zone. It would be helpful if the project design incorporated measures to examine the potential for establishing management links with other countries where there may be a trans-boundary effect and the measures adopted in Benin could be extended to the wider coastal region o f this part o f West Africa. Conversely, i t would be beneficial to explore ways in which improved management o f watersheds in other countries could enhance/add value to the effect o f the biological diversity conservation and erosion control measures proposed for Benin.

Replicability o f the proiect

There i s good scope for the replication o f the planned activities in other parts o f Benin and potentially in other African countries based on the experience gained and lessons learned during the l i fe o f the project. In this context, it would be useful to give more emphasis to the exchange o f information and experience gained through the project with other countries in the region.

84

Perhaps the UNEP supported Action Plans for Afr ica may offer a vehicle for broader communication and sharing o f results

Sustainabilitv o f the proiect

There appears to be good potential for continuation o f the changes the project aims to introduce as the project design incorporates measures for both local participation and for human resources development and institutional strengthening which complement the Government's policies and management priorities.

Secondary issues

Linkage to other focal areas

The project design appears to be consistent with the stated operational strategies o f the other GEF, Bank and other donor focal areas, and avoids negative impacts in focal areas outside the focus o f the project. The proposed project activities appear feasible and cost-effective, and should contribute to global environmental benefits in other focal areas and in the cross-sectoral area o f coastal land and water management.

The one weakness in this respect i s the lack o f critical review o f the coastal erosion control measures. Although these measures are not a specific subject o f investment within the project, inappropriate interventions in erosion processes could have an adverse effect on the RAMSAR sites and the natural resources they sustain. Similarly, if watershed management and other cross- sectoral activities are not wel l handled, there could be adverse effects on the R 4 M S A R sites that would undermine the integrity o f the proposed project activities and investment.

Linkage to other programmes and action plans at the regional or sub-regional level

The project seeks to build upon past, ongoing and prospective GEF activities. The project design could be strengthened by making more explicit mention o f how the planned activities would be coordinated with work o f other GEF projects and their respective Implementing Agencies and other bodies. This should include how l i n k s would be established with relevant ongoing regional or sub-regional programs and action plans.

Other beneficial environmental effects

The project seeks to improve the management o f wetland ecosystems o f importance to more than one sector o f the Benin economy. The planned measure should help reduce conflicts among agencies and economic entities seeking to maximize their respective use o f the coastal and marine resources base. Improved management o f the RAMSAR sites should yield other ecosystem services and social and economic benefits to local communities and those in the wider region.

Degee o f involvement o f stakeholders in the project

Stakeholder involvement i s incorporated as part o f the "participative" nature o f the planned activities. This addresses GEF emphasis on the development o f activities to promote community-

85

based management o f biodiversity. Giving greater emphasis to the role o f the private sector, specifically tourism, recreation and commercial fisheries could strengthen the project design as mentioned above. The project could also elaborate o n the use o f concepts such as the co- management o f resources, or contracts or negotiations with governments that define each category o f stakeholders responsibility in managing the resource, and the eventual devolution o f biodiversity management measure to local groups and NGOs. Note i s made in the DRAFT text that specific names o f NGOs need to be set out.

Capacity building aspects

The project design does give a clear exposition o f measures to strengthen awareness and basic expertise to support biological diversity conservation. However, the project design would benefit from further clarification o f the measures to promote and maintain cooperation between the various groups o f stakeholders, and transparent mechanisms to ensure the active participation o f relevant stakeholders in the development, implementation and monitoring o f project activities.

86

Response to STAP Technical Review

The STAP Review is supportive o f the project design and approach to addressing the many environmental threats and biodiversity conservation issues in the coastal zone o f Benin. However, the Review raised some issues that would need further clarification for the sake o f strengthening the overall implementation framework o f the proposed project. The following elaboration aims at providing answers to the issues raised in the Review.

Overview 1. Scope o f project and proposed conservation activities. The primary concern raised by the review was the focus on creation o f reserves and conservation o f biodiversity within the two Ramsar sites. The project is much broader in concept, and the Project brief has been revised to demonstrate that the objective is, f i rst and foremost, to maintain the biological diversity and ecological functions o f coastal wetlands and other ecosystems in the coastal zone, while supporting the livelihood and economic opportunities o f the communities living in these areas. The project wil l take an integrated approach to achieving this aim, using capacity building for pol icy reform, monitoring and evaluation o f coastal wetlands and marine biodiversity, and community-based conservation activities in specific sites as a starting point for implementation. These sites are indicative o f the globally significant biodiversity in the area and represent pi lot sites for future scaling-up and replication.

2. The two RAMSAR sites as the focus o f the proiect when the project i s much broaderin i t s concept and detailed activities. The Reviewer i s correct in his assessment that the project is much broader in i t s concept and scope than simply on the ground activities within the Ramsar sites. I t i s important to note that the global objective o f the project i s the implementation o f priority conservation activities and pol icy reform within the coastal zone. These priority activities are consistent with the country’s NBSAP, and wil l focus o n the conservation o f biodiversity-rich niches located in sites designated as globally significant. Accordingly, the two Ramsar sites within Benin comprise almost the entirety o f Benin’s coastal zone and present the logical choice for areas for intervention. The biodiversity present in these areas has been identified as globally significant by several other organizations, in addition to Ramsar.

The project will not only implement on-the ground, community-based conservation activities within the Ramsar sites, i t wil l also work to facilitate the development and implementation o f management plans for the coastal zone and the Ramsar sites, creating an enabling environment for conservation activities, and working toward mainstreaming environment and biodiversity conservation measures into the national pol icy and legal frameworks.

3. Coastal erosion. The Review mentioned that while the brief provides a good description o f the causes o f coastal erosion, i t does not provide a critical review o f coastal erosion control measures. The control o f coastal erosion i s not part o f the proposed alternative, but the impacts o f coastal erosion are a source o f great concern to the Government, and have been for many years. In recent years, the Government has commissioned studies to examine the causes, extent, consequences, impacts and possible solutions to control coastal erosion and shoreline recession. Among these initiatives was a two-volume feasibility study for coastal erosion control, completed in 1992. The f i rst volume analyzed several technical options among which nine were retained for further review and

87

analysis. The second volume provided an economic assessment o f each o f these options. Due to a lack o f financing and corresponding lack o f capacity to develop these assessments into concrete plans, no immediate investments followed these studies.

In 2002, the Government hired another international consulting firm to take a fresh look at the issues, including proposing updated and effective solutions for halting the accelerating erosion o f the eastern coastline. The final results o f this study proposed a number o f alternative ways to control coastal erosion. The Government i s in the process o f mobilizing external resources to complement its own resources in order to implement the most cost-effective o f the proposed technical options. The creation o f a new Ministry in charge o f coastal erosion raises the profile o f coastal erosion as a key national environmental problem. This situation wil l increase the momentum for starting the investment for control erosion control.

Issues related to the technical and scientific soundness of the project

4. Scope o f conservation investments One concern raised by the Review i s whether the conservation efforts targeting the two RAMSAR alone would be effective in ensuring biodiversity conservation in the coastal zone. I t is true that some o f the environmental threats facing the coastal ecosystems and water bodies, in particular bank erosion and sedimentation can only be effectively addressed by controlling the main causes these threats located upstream. While aiming at in situ conservation, the community-based Conservation plans wil l include off-site collective investments for environmental restoration purposes.

Tree plantation on river and lake banks, restoration o f degraded mangroves, and construction of anti-erosion dikes on degraded and erosion-prone areas are some o f the investments that wil l take place. A portion o f the community development hnd wil l support these environmental support investments. The priority areas for interventions have already been identified and some o f them are mentioned in local environmental management plans developed before the proposed project. Scaling up these investments to cover the entirety o f the watershed would require resources that are beyond the capacity o f the current project.

5. Cooperation with the private sector The private sector wi l l be involved in the implementation o f the project in two ways: (i) as subjects to awareness raising activities, and (ii) as potential investors for recreation and tourism industry development. Awareness raising activities toward private sector operators wil l be based on the new coastal zone land use planning and zoning, as described in the Coastal Zone Master Plan. In fact, private sector representatives participated in the thematic workshops that provided inputs into the preparation o f the Master Plan. Private sector operators wil l be made aware o f the restrictions and other regulations (e.g., environmental impact assessment) guiding development and commercial interventions in the coastal zone. The project will develop guidelines to accommodate the needs local private agents to use the environment in a sustainable manner, while ensuring that nature conservation interests are given due consideration.

For example, the local environmental management plans o f the major coastal cities wil l include contingency procedures for tackling pollution (land-based and seashore) incidents, and the project will assist local operators in preparing their own disaster preparedness plan. The second area in which the private sector may play a role in the project implementation i s in the

88

development o f local recreation and tourism activities. The project wil l facilitate the development o f partnership between local communities and willing private operators in order to exploit opportunities for developing attractive recreation and tourism sites when feasible.

6. Cooperation and coordination among Government agencies Cooperation and coordination among Government agencies during project implementation wil l be assured through the implementing agency, i t executive board (that includes most o f the key government agencies dealing with the environment, and the coastal zone), and the Multi- disciplinary Technical Committee. . The Multi-disciplinary Technical Committee i s chaired by the Ministry o f Environment and Nature Protection and will provide guidance on pol icy and technical issues to M E during project implementation. Most importantly, the committee wil l maintain close collaboration with the National Commission for Coastal Zone Protection and Management that determines and defines substantive pol icy issues affecting the coastal zone. The National Commission that wil l be put in place following the adoption o f the Coastal Zone Framework law by the national assembly i s the key coordination mechanism after the end o f the proposed project.

7. Model o f sustainable use The sustainable management o f coastal resources within and outside the targeted community- based conservation sites i s key objective o f the proposed project. O f the many environmental problems facing the coastal zone, the degradation o f fisheries, the depletion o f mangrove forests, and the disappearance o f certain species o f game constitute a high priority issue. The measures needed to ensure the sustainable management o f these resources wil l vary depending on the current level o f threat and the specific characteristics o f each resource.

By supporting tree plantation and through collective action by local resource users, and putting in place new rules for access to specific forest stands and for the use o f forest products (Le., change in the structure o f property and use rights), the project may succeed in restoring the vegetative and tree stock o f degraded mangroves in the project sites. Through local environmental NGOs, the project wi l l help establish the new organizational structure needed for ensuring effective collective action by the communities involved in the management o f the mangrove forests under consideration. A portion o f the community development fund wil l support the financial investment cost associated with the tree nurseries and the equipment needed for replanting. The sustainable use o f the forest resource will require that the removal o f the wood and other products from the forests be limited to the meal annual increment o f the tree growth, so that the renewable resource base can be protected for regeneration. With the help o f the forest service, the allowable volume o f tree can be determined relatively easily.

Defining sustainable use for fisheries and game would present a greater challenge. From the point o f view o f human needs, fisheries, game, and forests are just a resource stock (Le., a form o f capital) that can either be consumed or conserved. However, unlike the mangrove forests whose boundaries and tree stock is easily determined, accurate identification and analysis o f optimal resource management models for fisheries and game resource is difficult due to lack o f information and knowledge about these specific resources. Indeed, little i s known about the biological resource stock o f fish and game other than in certain areas the population size has been driven to a point where the recovery i s comprised. Because the sustainable yield depends on the stock level, i t may not be determined if the latter i s not known.

89

The project wil l team up with the Ministry o f Agriculture, Livestock, and Fisheries, and the AfDB/IFAD project on traditional fisheries to support action-oriented and adaptive research aiming at generating the knowledge and information needed to formulate accurate science-based optimal resource management policies for fisheries and game resource in the proposed project area. Pooled resources wil l be granted to the national university o f Benin (institute o f tropical ecology) to conduct the research. The key output o f this research wil l be the determination o f the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) for specific fisheries and game resources. The M S Y will be used as a constraint to guide the formulation o f sustainable use models. The final results o f such research may not be available until late in the project life, but they wil l help to design a sound and sustainable system o f resource exploitation afienvards.

8. Replicabilitv There is a good scope for replicability o f the proposed activities, not only in other parts o f Benin, but also in other Gulf o f Guinea countries where integrated coastal zone management activities are st i l l to take place (namely Togo and Cote d’Ivoire). Through the exchange o f information and experience, the project could also contribute to and benefit from the on-going regional initiatives, such as the African Process, and the Environment Chapter o f the N e w Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD). Furthermore, ABE, the implementing agency, i s member o f the Administrative Council o f the new Center for Wetlands in Accra, Ghana. The Center offers training and a platform for exchange o f experiences in the sub-region. I t i s expected that lessons learned will be disseminated to neighboring countries through the Center.

Secondary issues

9. Capacity building and cooperation among stakeholders The Review suggested that in addition to “measures to strengthen awareness and basic expertise to support biological diversity conservation, the project would benefit from further clarification o f measures to promote cooperation among, and participation o f various groups o f stakeholders in the implementation o f the project”. The approach used by the project to maintain the participation o f a l l the stakeholders, and to ensure cooperation among them i s no different from that o f any successhl project. That is, i t i s based on the shared understanding roles and responsibilities o f each group o f stakeholders. The main stakeholders include the central Government represented by the implementing agency, the local Governments (Le., municipalities), the CBCA management unit (of the participating villages and local communities), the NGOs, and the private sector. Each stakeholder group has their own interest and responsibility in the project, and their role and level o f willing participation will depend ultimately on the potential benefits (in economic jargon, expected utility) o f participation. In reality, the measures to ensure participation and cooperation among the various groups o f stakeholders consist in establishing compatible incentive schemes that meet the specific needs o f the stakeholders. I t i s the strength o f these incentives, i.e., the expected benefits that wil l induce and maintain genuine and durable participation o f the interested parties. All stakeholders, or at least their representatives participated in the broad-based consultations that took place during the preparation o f the project, and they will be part o f the decision-making (ie., the process as well as the act o f deciding) in the preparation, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation of the planned activities. The institutional arrangements for implementation provide the framework for such a strong collaboration.

90

Annex 17: Description of CBCA sites and map Benin: Community-Based Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Management Project

The Project will support the final designation and management o f four CBCAs in the two coastal Ramsar 1017 and 1018 sites, selected during the preparation process and described in detail below. The four sites selected are:

(a) Biinyns (b) Togbin (c) Vodounto (d) Bouche du Roy.

1. Criteria for CBCA selection Based on the results o f the studies during PDF-B phase (e.g. feasibility study on site identification, studies on threatened species and workshops with local stakeholders as wel l as analysis o f land tenure constraints), the following criteria determined the init ial selection o f 8 potential CBCAs (Gbhvozoun, Kodjizoun, Gnanhouizoun, Bamhzoun, Bimyns, Togbin, Vodount8, Bouche du Roy) within the two Ramsar sites :

1) Presence o f flora and fauna species o f global environmental relevance; 2) Degree o f habitat preservation to date; 3) Conservation and management status and actions o f area (sacrified, private,

classified); 4) Potential for ecotourism and other sustainable resource uses; 5) Local stakeholder commitment to s i g n Memorandum o f Understanding with ABE on

principles and rules o f C B C A designation and management.

2. Monitoring and Evaluation The “Tracking Tools for GEF Biodiversity Focal Area” SP1 and SP 2 have been used to provide an initial baseline assessment for a l l sites. However, the SP1 (METT) and SP2 assessment needs to be reviewed and complemented during year one. Both tracking tools wil l be up-dated annually and feed back into the monitoring and evaluation system.

3 / Description of Ramsar sites and related CBCA sites

3.1. Eastern Sites - RAMSAR SITE 1018: Basse VallCe de l’OuCmC, Lagune de Porto-Novo, Lac NokouC - 91,600 ha

General information on the Ramsar site: The site consists o f three separate units along and near the coast o f south Benin, between Cotonou and the capital Port0 Novo. The site includes a mangrove area, which i s an under- represented wetland type in Ramsar Sites. Marine turtles visit the site, and i t is used for nesting by many bird and waterbird species. Migratory waterbird species also use the area. An outstanding variety o f 78 species o f fish has been recorded. The site i s important for mammals and reptiles.

91

The flooded forests consist o f Mitragyna inermis and Raphia hookeri. The seasonally flooded forests are dominated by Berlinia grandiflora and Dialium guineense. The seasonally flooded grasslands consist mainly o f Paspalum vaginatum and Typha australis, and the floating vegetation i s dominated by Eichhornia crassipes and Pistia stratiotes. The most prominent fish family i s Cichlidae with seven species o f tilapia within the site. The most important species are Sarotherodon melanotheron and Tilapia guineensis. Two species o f python, land tortoises and several other reptile species are numerous too. There i s also a large variety o f mammal species. Birds are represented by a great many species o f herons, waders, birds o f prey, ducks o f the genus Dendrocygna and terns. Some 233 birds' species were recorded in 1998 and 2001.

Some portions o f the sites are permanently flooded, while others are seasonally inundated. The inland parts contain freshwater, on the coastal side the water is brackish. The hydrological system contributes to flood control, ground water recharge and allows recession agriculture.

There i s a mixture o f state ownership (which includes protected areas), community ownership and individual ownership. The traditional land tenure system i s based on collective ownership o f land and water (owned by the communities). In addition, the state-owned land i s managed according to the modem legislative framework.

Approximately 21,000 tons o f fish, crabs and shrimp are produced from this ecosystem per year, employing about 24,000 fishermen and 13,000 seasonal workers (subsistence and commercial fishing). This activity indirectly supports more than 200,000 persons, including people l i ke market-garden farmers and pirogue (=canoe) builders. The main agricultural products are manioc, maize, sugar cane, sweet potato and market garden products. Different crops are grown during the flood and dry seasons. There are also o i l palm and coconut plantations. Women undertake gathering activities. This primarily means the gathering o f reeds and Typha sp. for weaving mats and the collection o f Thalia sp. leaves. These are used for wrapping "akassa" (a local food paste). Raphia hookeri i s used for roofs, structures, ceilings, fencing, poles and the making o f palm wine. Other social and cultural values o f the site include a very strong link between people and wetlands. Historically, wetlands were considered as a "safe haven" because people living in wetlands escaped from slavery. This explains the prevalence o f villages, such as Ganvie, set atop poles in wetlands.

Existing conservation includes traditional culturally sacred forests and hallowed species, as wel l as protected areas and protected species from modem legislation.

Development o f modem infrastructure, urban development and poaching are listed as adverse site factors.

Preparation for a management plan for the site has being launched in 2002. Local committees have been involved in the restoration and the management o f the site. There are environmental education facilities (small natural history museum, small botanical garden, small zoo) at the site.

92

3.2. O n e of four selected CBCAs i s located in R A M S A R 1018:

I 1 I Swamp forest of Bimyns N O Items Information

1. Location 06’24’51’’ - 06”27’19” N; 02”37’18” - 02”42’24” E

2. Administration Commune of Skmb (Dept. OuCmC)

3. Surrounding villages

4. Total population of 42 376 habitants

Djrkgbe, Ouinta WBkB, Ayokpo, Sogo, Ahlomk, Tohouk, Dja, Owodt et Kpoguidi

surrounding villages (estimated)

zone) 5. Size (actual habitat + estimated buffer 100 ha

6. Tenure rightdownership

7. General description

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

Biodiversity value and assets

Biodiversity threats

Site assets and baseline

Conservation status

MEIT score (June 2006)

Private wetland forest co-managed with the villagers of DjrkgbC, Ouinta WBkB, Ayokpo, Sogo, Ahlomk, TohouB, Dja, OwodC et Kpoguidi

Mainly swampy with water level that varies with the OuemC (river which mainly discharges into the Porto-Novo Lagoon). Physico-chemical properties are similar to the Lagoon of Port0 Novo. Diverse vegetation types including savanna, relict semi-deciduous humid forest dominated by Ceiba pentandra, Sterculia tragacantha, swamp forest of Ficus congensis, Anthocleista vogelii with an understorey dominated by Achrostichum aureum and Typha australis , an oil palm plantation and marshland prairies o f Paspalurn vaginatum depending on the distance from the lagoon (Akoegninou, 2000). Hydromorphic, humus-rich soils of pseudo-clay, constantly flooded.

The fish fauna comprises mainly Clariidae, Protopteridae and Channidae with other introduced species in fish ponds (Oreochromis niloticus and Sarotherodon melanotheron). The assemblage of ecosystems supports a remarkable mammal and reptile fauna of Sitatunga antelope (Tragelaphus speki), African clawless otter (Aonyx capensis), spot- tailed otter (Lutra rnaculicollis), bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus), Seba python and Ni le crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus). 55 species of birds have been recorded (Adjakpa 2001). In the zoological park are kept lion (Panthera leo), baboons (Eabouin doguera) and hyena (Crocuta crocuta).

Private site threatened by degradation by the activities of the surrounding population (deforestation and pollution of the associated lagoon), poaching of wildlife species).

The swamp forest of Bimyns i s located in the tourism priori@ zone of Bimyns. It i s part of an ecosystem assemblage that extends 9km along the southern edge of the lagoon of Porto- Novo. The managed part o f the zone includes a small zoological park, fish ponds, a hotel and a radio station, although the park and ponds are inadequately managed at present.

Private site threatened by degradation by the activities of the surrounding population. Owners seek a partnership including scientific support for monitoring and management. Important habitat for sitatunga antelope, reptiles, fish and migratory birds.

Management actions proposed include scientific support to fauna and flora species and conservation measures of forest through management of tourism center.

30 out of total XX

93

3.2. Western Sites : RAMSAR SITE 1017 - Basse Val l te du Couffo, Lagune CBtikre, Chenal Ahoy Lac AhCmC - 47,500 ha

General information on the Ramsar site : The site consists o f coastal lagoons and mangroves, an under-represented wetland type in Ramsar Sites. There i s a large variety o f reptiles and mammals present. Many waterbird species nest in the area, and i t i s also used by many Afrotropical and Palearctic migratory waterbird species. Within the area, an outstanding range o f 100 species o f f i sh have been recorded. Besides the mangroves, the site contains swamps, flooded grasslands and manmade wetlands with coconut groves and Acacia auriculiformis.

The mangroves consist o f Avicennia spp. and Rhizophora racemosa. The swamps are dominated by Andropogon gayanus. The flooded grasslands contain Paspalum vaginatum with scattered Phoenix reclinata. The most common fish species are from the Cichlidae family, with 7 species o f tilapia, o f which Sarotherodon melanotheron and Tilapia guineensis are the most numerous. The reptiles Yaranus niloticus and Python regius occur here, as do the mammals Thryonomys swinderianus (great cane rat, grasscutter), Chlorocebus aethiops (grivet, savanna monkey) and Hippopotamus amphibius. Many birds nest in habitats along the coastal lagoon Chenel Ah0 and in the lower valley o f the Mono. There are large populations o f herons, terns, waders, birds o f prey and ducks (mainly o f the genus Dendrocygna).

Parts o f the site are permanently flooded, others are seasonally inundated. The inland parts contain freshwater, on the coastal side the water i s CBCAackish. Groundwater recharge and flood control are also hydrological values o f the site. In addition, the flooding system provides suitable sediments and nutrients for recession agriculture.

There i s a mixture o f state ownership (which includes protected areas), community ownership and individual ownership. The traditional land tenure system is based on collective ownership o f land and water (owned by the communities). In addition, the state-owned land i s managed according to the modem legislative framework. The production o f fish, crabs and shrimp from this ecosystem i s about 5,000 tons per year and employs about 10,000 professional fishermen (subsistence and commercial fishing). Only women gather the crabs and oysters. In addition, salt i s extracted and an alcohol i s produced from the palm Phoenix reclinata. Agriculture i s dominated by the growing o f maize and market garden products. There are also coconut plantations and firewood is gathered. Other social and cultural values o f the site include a very strong linkage between people and wetlands. Historically, wetlands were considered as a "safe haven" because people living in wetlands escaped from slavery. There are traditional rules that provide strict protection to the fol lowing animal species: Tragelaphus scriptus (harnessed bushbuck), Python regius (royal python), Python sebae (African rock python) and Crocodylus niloticus (Nile crocodile).

Existing conservation includes traditional culturally sacred forests and hallowed species, as well as protected areas and protected species from modem legislation.

Development o f modem infrastructure, urban development and poaching are listed as adverse site factors.

94

Preparation o f a management plan for part o f this Ramsar site has been started in 2002. Local committees are involved in the restoration and the management o f the site.

3.3. Three out of the Eight potential CBCAs are located within the RAMSAR site 1017:

Site 1. Manprove Sites complex (Abomev - Calavi, Ouidah)

1 1 /Mangrove of Togbin N O Items Information

1. Location

2. Administration Commune of Abomey-Calavi (Department of Atlantique)

3. Surrounding villages Togbin Daho, Adounko-village, Togbin-Dhou

4. Total population of 90 000 habitants

06’21’24.9’’ N 002O18’47.22” E to 06’20’51.8’’ N 002”17’11.7” E

surrounding villages (estimated)

Size (actual habitat + estimated buffer zone)

5. 360 ha (60 + 300)

6. Tenure rightdownership

7. General description

8. Biodiversity assets

9. Biodiversity threats

10. Site assets and baseline

11. Conservation status

Mangrove community forests managed by the villagers o f Togbin and Adounko. Legally, the Togbin mangrove complex i s under public law and regulations control implying that local population has user rights on natural resources.

The mangrove forest of Togbin extends in a 200 m band along the lagoon near to the village of Togbin-Daho. The mangrove i s limited to the north by the village of Togbin Daho, in the south by dunes, in the east by Togbin-Dhou and Adounko beach and in the west by Adounko village. I t i s a Coastal lagoon, influenced by tides and occasional fresh water surges in the rainy season. Dominated by Rhizophora racemosa with Avicennia genninans at the fringes. Adjacent vegetation comprises a prairie of Paspalum vaginatum, Thypha australis and Echinochloa pyramidalys. In the marshes along the lagoon edge are mud banks. Soils are halomorphic, anoxic, black and rich in organic matter becoming sandy towards the dunes.

Reptile fauna including nile crocodile, varans and pythons.. Laleye (1997) reports 58 fish species in 3 1 families in the lagoon including Cichlidae, Claridae, Carangidae and Mugilidae. Avifauna i s composed of stems, turtle doves, white-faced tree duck, other ducks and green pigeon (Adjakpa, 2001).

Overproduction of salt and overfishing as well as increase in land prices leading to a unorganized occupation of adjacent landare main threats to this area.

Fishing, oyster collecting, vegetable crops and coconut product exploitation are the main sources of revenues for population living in this zone. Togbin mangrove complex i s part of the “Benin Fishing Route Tourist City” Zone; i t i s likely to benefit from management activities of this ongoing initiative due to its ecotourism values. As many poor rural areas of Benin, the surrounding villages are targeted by the actual Benin CDD project and other similar initiatives.

Dense and high (16 m) mangrove stands represent one of the best developed along the Benin coast although with signs o f cutting in the interior. Mangrove area needs protective management.

12. ME= score (June 2006) 33 out of total of 90

1 2 /Sacredportion of the coastal lagoon (Vodountd) N O Items Information

1. Location 6’21’07” N - 02’18’25’’ E

2. Administration Commune of Abomey-Calavi (department of Atlantique).

3. Surrounding villages Ahlobot, Hio, Avltkdtd

4. Total population of 12 004 habitants

surrounding villages (estimated)

95

5. Size (actual habitat + estimated buffer zone)

6. Tenure rightdownership

7. General description

8. Biodiversity value and assets

9. Biodiversity threats

10. Site assets and baseline

11. Conservation status

12. MElT score (June 2006)

47.5 ha (07.5 + 40)

The Vodounto i s under control o f Degbo Totcho, the chief traditional priest of AvlCkCtC village. Traditional regulation i s applied although all natural water surfaces remain open to public rights according to national law on natural resources.

The Vodount8 i s a stretch of coastal lagoon about 500 m long by 150 m). The zone i s entirely protected by traditional ru les as manifested by vegetational barriers at each end. The protected zone in effect operates as a fish nursery with sub-adults migrating out of the area when mature. Fish trapped in the barriers are retained as a source of food for the Chief Fetish AvlCkCtC.

The site supports a diverse aquatic fauna due to its conserved state. Ichthyofauna i s typical of the coastal lagoon and comprises mainly Cichlidae, Claridae, Carangidae and Mugilidae. InverteCBCAate marine fauna comprises crustaceans including swimming crabs (Callinectes amnicola and Portunus vallidus) and prawns (Penaeus notialis duorarum, Penaeus kerathurus). Surrounding mammal fauna comprises marsh cane-rat Tryonomis swinderianus, vervet monkey Cercopithecus pygerythms, red river hog and sitatunga antelope. Reported reptile fauna includes nile crocodile, N i l e varan Varanus niloticus, Seba python (P. sebae), royal python (Python regius) and coCBCAa (Naja nigricolis), all highly threatened in the area. Avifauna i s typical of the coastal lagoon.

Water pollution, over fishing, wood demand for house construction and acaja due to high population pressure, are the major threats to species of this area.

Traditional salt production using mangrove woods, fishing, oyster collecting and vegetable crops are the main sources of revenues for population living in this zone. The Vodounto i s also part of the “Benin Fishing Route Tourist City” Zone and will benefit form this opportunity as high value tourist site. As many poor rural areas of Benin, the surrounding villages are targeted by the actual Benin CDD project and other similar initiatives.

Protected as a sacred site when a clan was fleeing capture for the slave trade, it i s said that the clan member would have chosen drowning rather than slavery. The site i s in a preserved state for aquatic fauna and serves as an illustration of how no-take zones could be applied on a larger scale in Benin’s lagoons for the maintenance of fisheries.

22 out of total 90

I 3 / Bouche du Roy N O Items

1. Location

2. Administration

3. Surrounding villages

4. Total population of

surrounding villages (estimated)

Size (actual habitat + estimated buffer zone)

5.

6. Tenure rightdownership

7. General description

8. Biodiversity value and assets

Information

06’17’49’’ N - Ol”54’42” E

Commune of Grand-Pop0 (Department o f Mono)

Avloh, Djondji, Hakoub, H M , Grand-Pop0

18 000 habitants

6000 ha (1000 + 5000)

Local populations have customary use rights but the area belongs to national natural heritage.

The zone of Bouche du Roy i s located between Djondji and Avloh and i s a zone of interface with the Atlantic Ocean and the coastal lagoon; influenced by the Atlantic ocean and rivers (Mono & Couffo). The waters of the Mono mix with those of the sea and the river Couffo in Lake Ah6mC with waters mainly salty to the east of Djondji Le. towards Ouidah and Togbin. The coastal lagoon i s split into several CBCAanches separated by chains of islets along the Grand-Pop0 lagoon between Avloh and Djondji and between Mbko and AvlCkCtC on the lagoon of Ouidah. The main channel widens to 1 km between DCgou6 and Djbgbadji and between Djondji et Hokoub. During flood season the lagoon i s extended, creating a vast array of meadows, marshes and ponds. The coastal lagoon comprises a wide expanse of shallow water (1 m), rising several meters in the rainy season. The zone i s characterized by several key habitats supporting a diverse fauna including i) beach and dunes providing sleeping and feeding areas for water birds and sea turtle nesting (leatherback, olive ridley); ii) lagoon mangrove important for palaearctic migrants, nursery for aquatic species and sanctuaries for numerous reptiles and mammals; iii) sacred forest of Hounkloun comprising a well conserved forest flora and fauna; and iv) wetland ecosystems of the complex Lake AhCmC.

Essentially reptiles including crocodile, Nile varans (Varanus niloticus), pythons (P. sebae, Pyrhon regius) and coCBCAa (Naja nigricolis). The mammals represented include the marsh

96

9. Biodiversity threats

10. Site assets and baseline

11. Conservation status

12. METT score (June 2006)

cane-rat Tryonomis swinderianus, vervet monkey Cercopithecus pygerythrus, red river hog and rarely Sitatunga antelope. Manatee and hippopotamus are also reported from the area. Avifauna i s rich with 57 species including white heron, weavers etc.

The mangroves are relatively diverse with four tree species (Rhizophora racemosa, Avicennia germinans, Laguncularia racemosa, Conocarpus erectus) with dense forest between Djondji and Bouche du Roy, despite high human pressures. On the south of the lagoon i s developed a bush of Dalbergia ecastaphyllum mixed with Drepanocarpus lunatus. On the north side meadows of Paspalum vaginatum just behind the band of mangrove are found. Soils consist of fine salty silts, very organic, anoxic and black. Soils of the cordon are coarse and sandy.

High population growth rate leads to alarming' exploitation of the mangrove stands with mangrove in some areas replaced by coconut plantation. Laguncularia racernosa and Conocarpus erectus are disappearing. Poaching of turtles and ducks are a major threat. Fishing i s done increasingly with nets and acadja, despite them being banned. Overfishing leads to declining fisheries yields, adding on negative impact following the construction of the dam at Nangbtto which has altered water quality (reduced salinity). Natural erosion and general rural poverty are further threats.

Yellow sand beach, mangrove complex, beautiful landscape constitute the principal wealth of the Bouche du Roy which i s currently one the most visited place by tourists. Fishing i s the main source of revenue though palms wine production and legume crop are also practiced.

Exploitation of the mangrove i s alarming with mangrove in some areas replaced by coconut plantation. Laguncularia racemosa and Conocarpus erectus are disappearing. Fishing i s practiced increasingly with nets and acadja, despite them being banned. Fisheries yields have declined, especially following the construction of the dam at Nangbtto which has altered water quality (reduced salinity) and decline of fish populations.

An environmental awareness program does exist in the area.

Management actions proposed include information and communication on legal framework related to fauna and flora, definition of Eastern and Western boundaries.

22 out of total xx

97

r--

0 . .

g !i a

W 0

3 8 R 3 g Z .

0 . 0 0 .

m U

& rE)

M .a E O

Key species

1) Red-bellied guenon Cercopithecus erythrogaster erythrogaster (IUCN Endangered)

Restricted to the Lama forest and patches o f forest on the OuCmC floodplain (Oates 1996, Grubb et a1 1999, Sinsin et a1 2000). The total population o f the red-bellied guenon is estimated at around 800 animals, o f which about 75% are located within the Forest o f Lama and the remainder in small forest patches o f the eastern complex. There i s significant eco-tourism potential and international conservation research potential.

Feasibilitv assessment: recovery o f small populations The following data form a subset o f data being collected in a study to assess the feasibility o f conservation o f the red-bellied guenon through the protection o f small sanctuaries in the OuCmC river basin. The data indicate that population numbers wil l increase even in small sites if hunting pressure i s reduced (although do not provide an indication o f carrying capacity for such sanctuaries or o f long term genetic health o f the populations).

2) African manatee Trichechus senegalensis (IUCN Vulnerable)

Occurs in both the OutmC and Couffo river basins, with the largest concentration being in the wetlands o f the OuCmC river. Although widely distributed in West African coastal wetlands, the African manatee is threatened by hunting throughout most o f i t s range. Furthermore, manatees commonly approach acadjas when fishers pull in drag nets, possibly because the disturbance o f mud releases an attractive odor. I t may be possible to exploit this behaviour for tourism. Alternatively, certain o f their rest areas are known and may be carefblly used for non- consumptive eco-tourism.

3) Hippopotamus Hippopotamus amphibius (IUCN Vulnerable)

Small populations survive around lakes in the northern part the Western Complex and are becoming a local eco-tourism attraction; they are nonetheless threatened by poaching.

4) Red river hog Potamochoerusporcus

Forest dependent on forest and rare outside the rainforest belt, being mainly restricted to protected areas. Widely prized for meat, i t is threatened with local extinction.

103

5) Aardvark Orycteropus afer Sole member o f an obscure mammal group the Tubulidentates whose natural habitat i s savanna or grassland which i s widespread but everywhere threatened by hunting and agricultural encroachment. Their burrows provide important habitat for many small mammals and reptiles.

S&m&

Cotonou

Ouidah

6) African clawless otter Anonyx capensis

k Saved 9 16 3 28 Killed 4 12 0 16 Saved 6 21 5 32 Ki l led 13 8 0 21 Saved 5 22 7 34

Widely hunted for their fur and in retaliation for raiding fish farms. Although widespread, the species i s becoming extinct or scarce in many localities.

- . - )

7)Sitatunga antelope Tragelaphus spekei

Ki l led 26 22 8 48 17 64 0 81 Saved

Ki l led 10 119 7 136

Widespread species intensively hunted throughout i t s now fragmented range. Wetland populations tend to be distinct and locally adapted to those ecosystems. The species may be used as a sustainable source o f bush meat provided i t s swamp habitat remains intact.

Potential annual nesting

8) Sea turtles of the Benin coast

90 284 30 404

Four species o f sea turtle are reported to nest along the Benin coast - Leatherback Dermochelys coriacea, Olive ridley Lepidochelys olivacea, Green turtle Chelonia mydas and Hawksbill Eretmochelys imCBCAicata. A total o f 15 nesting beaches have been identified along the 125 kim o f coast by the NGO Nature Tropicale. The peak nesting season i s October to March. Sea turtles are universally reported to be in decline at al l sites. In the 2000-2001season 175 turtles were saved from killing and 75% o f these nested successfully. All 175 were tagged and released.

Table - Sea turtles saved or k i l led October 2000 - March 2001 season (Source: Dossou- Bodjrenou 2001).

Zone 1 Status I Leatherbac I Olive ridley I Green 1 Hawksbill I Total

tirand-Yopc

DoDulation - 1 I I I I I The above table indicates that Benin’s coastline is o f significance for sea turtle nesting with 404 potential nestings on 125 km o f coast in the 2000-2001 season or about 3.25 nests / km per season. Olive ridley and leatherback are the most abundant species. Both o f these species are characterized by a relatively small number o f nesting sites around the world. Thus, Benin’s coast is o f particular significance for these species. Numbers o f green are low, indicating a low abundance in general in the region. Hawksbill is virtually absent, although has been reported from the Western area. Many other sites are much more important for these last two species.

104

Western beaches are the most important for sea turtles, but also the most threatened. Hunting pressure appears especially high in the Grand-Pop0 zone, the furthest site from Cotonou. Proposed elements for a future sea turtle conservation action plan are:

Awareness and education Monitoring o f nesting sites, research and tagging program and capture by fishermen and trawlers Training o f local agents and rangers Development o f turtle based ecotourism in key sites.

9) King Python i s a cultural species and has a value in international trade (CITES Appendix 2). (The crocodiles are now less intensively protected since they acquired integrally protected status.)

105

ZouZou

CouffoCouffo

Ouémé

OuéméM

onoM

ono

SotaSota

Tassi

néTa

ssiné

Okp

ara

Okp

ara

Alp

ouro

Alp

ouro

Mék

rou

Mék

rou

AliboriAlibori

Mékro

u

Mékro

u

Panja

riPa

njari

NIGER RIVER

NIGER RIVER

BIGHT OF BENINBIGHT OF BENIN

LakeLakeVoltaVolta

LakeLakeKainjiKainji

OOuuéémm

éé

M O N OM O N O

COUFFOCOUFFO

B O R G O UB O R G O U

A L I B O R IA L I B O R I

ATA K O R AATA K O R A

C O L L I N E SC O L L I N E S

D O N G AD O N G A

Z O UZ O U

ATLANTIQUEATLANTIQUE

LITTORALLITTORAL

OU

EME

OU

EME

PLATEAUPLATEAU

PobéPobé

BohiconBohicon

AplahouéAplahoué

CovéCové

MalanvilleMalanville

Dassa-Dassa-ZouméZoumé

BembérékéBembéréké

AbomeyAbomey

CotonouCotonou

SakétéSakété

LokossaLokossa

DogboDogbo

ParakouParakou

NatitingouNatitingou

KandiKandi

OuidahOuidah

SavalouSavalou

DjougouDjougou

PORTO NOVOPORTO NOVO

AAtt aa kk oo rr aa MM

oo uu nn tt aa ii nn ss

M O N O

COUFFO

B O R G O U

A L I B O R I

ATA K O R A

C O L L I N E S

D O N G A

Z O U

ATLANTIQUE

LITTORAL

OU

EME

PLATEAU

Pobé

Bohicon

Aplahoué

Cové

Malanville

Dassa-Zoumé

Bembéréké

Abomey

Cotonou

Sakété

Lokossa

Dogbo

Parakou

Natitingou

Kandi

Ouidah

Savalou

Djougou

PORTO NOVO

TOGO

GHANA

NIGERIA

NIGER

BURKINAFASO

Zou

CouffoOuémé

Mono

Sota

Tassi

né

Okp

ara

Alp

ouro

Pendjari

Mék

rou

Alibori

Mékro

u

Panja

ri

NIGER RIVER

BIGHT OF BENIN

LakeVolta

LakeKainji

Koumongou Oué

mé

Gulf of Guinea

At a k o r a M

o u n t a i n s

To Dapaong

To Sokoto

To Dosso

To Kaiama

To Kabou

To Lomé

To Notsé

To Ibadan

0

0

1E

1E

2E

2E

3E

1E

3E 4E

7N

8N 8N

7N

9N 9N

10N 10N

11N 11N

12N

BENIN

This map was produced by the Map Design Unit of The World Bank. The boundaries, colors, denominations and any other informationshown on this map do not imply, on the part of The World BankGroup, any judgment on the legal status of any territory, or anyendorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.

0 604020 80

0 20 40 60 Miles

100 Kilometers

IBRD 33372

DECEMBER 2005

BENINSELECTED CITIES AND TOWNS

DEPARTMENT CAPITALS

NATIONAL CAPITAL

RIVERS

MAIN ROADS

RAILROADS

DEPARTMENT BOUNDARIES

INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES