Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No.: 18033

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT

GOVERNMENT OF SEYCHELLES

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATIONAND

MARINE POLLUTION ABATEMENT PROJECT

(GEF GRANT No. 28627 SEY)

June 19, 1998

Water and Urban DivisionAfrica Region

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients Qnly in theperformance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed withoutWorld 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

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

Currency Seychelles Rupee (SR.)Exchange Rate $1.00 = SR 5.00

$0.20 = SRI .00

FISCAL YEAR OF GRANT RECIPIENT

January 1 - December 31

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

I hectare 2.47 acres1 kilometer 0.621 miles

I millimeter 0.039 inchI square kilometer (krn2) 0.386 square miles

1 kilogram 2.2 pounds1 metric ton 2,205 pounds

I cubic meter 1.307 cubic yards

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

CITES Convention on International Trade in EndangeredSpecies of Flora and Fauna

CODEVAR Compagnie pour le Developpement des ArtisanmEMPS Environment Management Plan of Seychelles

GEF Global Environment FacilityGOS Government of Seychelles

MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Follutionfrom Ships

MoFA Ministry of Foreign AffairsMoE Ministry of EnvironmentMol Ministry of Industry

MPA Marine Parks AuthorityMTT Ministry of Tourism and Transport

PMSD Ports and Marine Services DivisionPUC Public Utilities Co.

SAREC Swedish Agency for Research and Cooperation inDeveloping Countries

SFA Seychelles Fishing AuthoritySIF Seychelles Island Foundation

SWAC Solid Waste and Cleaning AgencyWIOMSA Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association

Vice President: Callisto MadavoCountry Director: Michael SarrisTechnical Manager: Jeffrey RackiTask Team Member: Mehrnaz Teymourian

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYSEYCHELLES

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATIONAND

MARINE POLLUTION ABATEMENT PROJECT(GEF GRANT NO. 28627 SEY)

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORTCONTENTS

PREFACE.i

EVALUATION SUMMARYIntroduction.1iProject Objectives and Components .................................................. iiImplementation Experience and Results .................................................. iiiSummary of Findings, Future Operations and Key Lessons Learned ..................................... iii

PART I: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATCION ASSESSMENTA. Statement/Evaluation of Objectives ................................................... 1B. Achievement of Project Objectives ................................................... 3C. Implementation Record and Major Factors Affecting the Project ........................................8D. Project Sustainability ................................................... 9E. Bank Performance .................................................. 10F. Grant Recipient Performance ..................... - 12G. Assessment of Outcomes ..................... 13H. Future Operations ..................... 15I. Key Lessons Learned ..................... 16

PART II: STATISTICAL TABLES AND ANNEX

Tables:

Table 1: Summary of AssessmentsTable 2: Related Bank Credits/LoansTable 3: Project TimetableTable 4: Grant DisbursementsTable 5-6: Key IndicatorsTable 7: Studies Included in the ProjectTable 8A: Project CostsTable 8B: Project FinancingTable 9: Economic Costs and BenefitsTable 10: Legal Covenants

Annex 1 Borrower comments on the ICRAnnex 2 ICR Mission Aide-Memoire

Map: IBRD No.23521R and 23522R

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in theperformance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed withoutWorld Bank authorization.

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORTSEYCHELLES

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATIONAND

MARINE POLLUTION ABATEMENT PROJECTGEF GRANT No. 28627 SEY

PREFACE

This is the Implementation Completion Report (ICR) for a Biodiversity Conservation andMarine Pollution Abatement Project in Seychelles, for which GEF Grant TF 28627 in an amountof SDR 1.3 million (US$1.8 million equivalent) was approved on January 15, 1993 and madeeffective on February 9, 1993.

The Grant closed on December 31, 1997, one year after the original closing date ofDecember 31, 1996. All funds under the project were fully disbursed by May 31, 1998.

A first draft of the ICR was prepared by an independent consultant with the assistance ofthe coordinator of the Environment Management Plan of Seychelles (EMPS), Mrs. Kerstin Henri.The final report has been prepared by the Task Team Member, Mehrnaz Teymourian, andreviewed by Carl Lundin, (ENV), Orville Grimes (LCODR), Robin Broadfield and Jan Post(ENVGC), the peer reviewers, and by Michael Sarris, the Country Director, and ManoramaGotur, the Country Operations Analyst for Seychelles. The report has also benefited from thecomments and observations of the staff of various implementing agencies in Seychelles.

Preparation of this ICR began during the Bank's final supervision/completion mission,from November 4 to November 22, 1997. It is based on material in the project file. The GrantRecipient contributed to the preparation of the ICR by providing documentation, exchangingviews and commenting on the draft ICR, as well by preparing a brief assessment on Grantimplementation experience.

ii

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORTSEYCHELLES

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATIONAND

MARINE POLLUTPION ABATEMENT PROJECT(GEF GRANT No 28627 SEY)

EVALUATION SUMMARY

Introduction

1. The project grew out of the Bank's involvement in the preparation of the EnvironmentalManagement Plan of Seychelles (EMPS). At the Government's request, certain projects in theEMPS were incorporated by the Bank into an integrated Envircnment and Transport Projectwhich included the GEF component. The GEF part which is reviewed in this report consisted ofactions to reduce marine pollution and several measures to protect biodiversity. This included therestoration and preservation of the ecosystem of Aldabra Atoll, the protection of endangered seaturtles and giant tortoises and the design of waste reception facilities at the Port of Victoria.Complementary financing for biodiversity conservation activities was provided through a DutchTrust Fund in 1994 which was also administered by the Bank.

Project Objectives and Components

2. The objectives of the GEF Project as defined in the Staff Appraisal Report were toprotect biodiversity and limit pollution of international waters around Seychelles. The projectcomprised three main components:

Component 1: Restoration and preservation of the Aldabra ecosystem. This was to beachieved by the rehabilitation of the scientific research station; strengthening of scientific andmanagerial personnel; and eradication of feral goats and preparation of a long term managementplan for Aldabra.

Component 2: Conservation of biodiversity. This was to be achieved by the preparation ofcomprehensive management plans to prohibit or restrict the exploitation of two species of marineturtles, a Green Turtle protection program and the Hawksbill Turtle protection program. Twoimportant modifications were made subsequent to the Appraisal Report, namely the removal of aturtle ranching component and the inclusion of a Giant Tortoise protection and Management Plancomponent.

Component 3: Actions to limit pollution of internationalwaters. This was to be achieved by afeasibility study and engineering designs for the construction of facilities to receive and disposeof waste from commercial and fishing vessels at the port of Victoria. The purchase of oil spilltracking and control equipment, subsequently added to this component, was made possible whenadditional funds were made available following exchange rate fluctuation between the SDR andUS dollar.

Overall the Project objectives were appropriate and realistic.

iii

Implementation Experience and Results

* Institutional Development: Institutional development has been satisfactory althoughfurther improvements are still necessary to develop the managerial capacity at theSeychelles Islands Foundation which manages Aldabra and Vallee de Mai WorldHeritage sites. The project has resulted in improvements in legislation, policy andscientific skills.

* Physical Objectives: Physical objectives of the project have all been achieved and insome cases have even been surpassed. The research facilities on Aldabra, whichoriginally were to be repaired only, have now been successfully reconstructed.Equipment for the laboratory, turtle monitoring, and oil spill tracking and control (notforeseen in the original plan) was purchased and delivered.

* Global Environmental Objectives: Global environmental objectives are deemed to havebeen achieved satisfactorily. The turtle shell industry is now illegal, and turtles andtortoises protected and monitored. While disposal of the turtle shells collected under theturtle protection component was not part of the agreements under the project, theexistence of some shells, even in sealed containers, could present a danger to thecontinued successful enactment of the legislation to ban turtle shell trade.

* Overall Implementation and Operation: Overall implementation and operation under theproject are considered to have been highly satisfactory. The National EnvironmentManagement Plan (EMPS) Coordinator has facilitated the process locally and theimplementing agencies have further improved their abilities to supervise implementationof various components.

* Costs and Implementation Timetable: The project closing date was extended fromDecember 31, 1996 to December 31, 1997 based on the availability of additional funds inthe budget from exchange rate fluctuations between the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) inwhich the Grant was made available, and US$ in which the Grant was disbursed.Additional activities were undertaken using these savings. All original projectcomponents were completed within the projected budget with the exception of the Studyof Waste reception facilities which had an actual cost overrun of 43 percent in dollarterms as compared to appraisal estimates. This cost overrun was due to underestimationof the scope of the study during project preparation and to exchange rate fluctuation(between US$ and NGL) during implementation and not caused by poor management.

* Performance of the Bank and the Grant Recipient: In spite of high staff turnover on bothsides (the Bank has had a turnover of three task managers during the first two years ofproject implementation and the Grant recipient has had three project coordinators) anddifficulties in supervising project implementation on Aldabra, the teams were successfulin implementing the project satisfactorily. The overall performance of the Bank and theGrant Recipient is deemed to have been highly satisfactory.

Summary of Findings, Future Operations and Key Lessons Learned

3. Overall, the outcome of the project is highly satisfactory. All of its objectives have beenachieved and in some cases (preparation of giant tortoise management plans, and reconstructionof the Aldabra research station) they have surpassed the original project expectations. Sectorpolicies, financial, physical and environmental objectives were all met. The project has benefitedthe international community, by addressing issues of global concern, and the Seychelles by

iv

assisting it to protect key components of its biodiversity.

4. The Aldabra component has been instrumental in establishing a working environmentthat is conducive to scientific work as well as long term management of the Aldabra WorldHeritage site. The new research station will permit future generations of scientists to build on thealready existing body of work that has been conducted in Aldabra. The implementation of themanagement plan will ensure that the long term objectives of preserving Aldabra for posteritywill be accomplished.

5. The restoration of the fragile ecosystem of Aldabra through the removal of one of themain introduced threats has been completed, although the eradication of goats on most of theatoll remains somewhat elusive due to the existence of a few remaining animals. Though strongsigns of inbreeding have been noted on the most recent goats eradicated, there remains a risk thatthe population rebuilds itself over time. The SIF recognizes the threat and has decided toundertake a continuous goat eradication campaign to address the problem. The goat eradicationcampaign is now combined with the effort to eradicate cats and rats on Aldabra.

6. Incremental cost analysis: The benefits generated through the GEF project have beenprimarily global in nature. The eradication of goats is almost entirely a global benefit. The otherbenefits include improvement of the management capacity on Aldabra and reconstruction of theresearch facility, with a view to facilitate international scientific research.

7. It was highly unlikely for the GoS to be able to allocate any of its own scarce resourcesto finance the Aldabra restoration program, or to secure any financing for this purpose withoutGEF assistance. To ensure sustainability of the achievements under the project and recognizingthat Aldabra is unlikely to become financially self-sufficient in the near future, the SIF hascommitted itself to continue subsidizing the operations and maintenance of the research stationfor the benefit of humanity as stipulated in the World Heritage Convention.

8. The sea turtle component has led to a dismantling of about 1% of the industry base ofSeychelles thus having some negative impact on the country's economy. The negative impacthas been offset through the artisan retraining program. All the artisans in the turtle shell businesshave been retrained and are now exercising other revenue earning professions. The goodwillgenerated and the increased tourism revenues from the turtle protection campaigns can besustained through maintenance of a healthy sea turtle population and are also considered positiveimpacts. Over the next few years the likely increase in turtle population could also have positiveglobal benefits and would market Seychelles as a unique place for sea turtle eco-tourism.

9. Future Operations and Recommendations: It is recommended that a project be designedto build the facilities recommended in the MARPOL study. Turtle and tortoise legislation can befurther improved by removing the inconsistencies in the existing laws and by enforcing a morerealistic level of fines. The institutional capacity of the SIF should be strengthened throughappointment of a high level executive officer with appropriate scientific and managerialexperience, and the position of National Coordinator should be enhanced to better reflect theimportance of its role.

Key Lessons Learned:* In countries with limited human capacity, a focal Government-appointed project

coordinator, in this case the EMPS Coordinator, with experience in project managementand a good understanding of the sectoral issues is key to timely implementation of the

v

project and can ensure smooth linkages between the implementing agencies and thedonor community.

* A high staff turnover during project implementation can be detrimental to the successfulimplementation of projects with a large number of technically different components.

* For project components involving strong socio-economic elements, such as eliminatingindustries based on endangered turtles, a socio-economist or environmental economistshould be involved in project design and implementation.

* For complex natural resources projects, adequate resources should be in place to ensureclose supervision of the project by a multi-disciplinary team.

* For projects which will be implemented in isolated areas, such as Aldabra, project designshould include measures (e.g. improved communication links, frequent staff turnaround)to alleviate human and environmental pressures on the project staff.

SEYCHELLES

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATIONAND

MARINE POLLUTION ABATEMENT PROJECT(GEF GRANT No. 28627 SEY)

PART I: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT

A. STATEMENT/EVALUATION OF OBJECTIVES

1. Introduction: The project grew out of the Bank's involvement in the preparationof the Environmental Management Plan of Seychelles (EMPS). Of the EMPS programs,actions to protect biodiversity and to limit the pollution of the international waters aroundSeychelles were identified as the most consistent with the goals of the GlobalEnvironment Facility (GEF). These and certain other projects in the EMPS wereincorporated by the Bank into an integrated Environment and Transport Project approvedon December 2, 1992, and closing on June 30, 1999. The project cost was estimated atUS$7 million. The Environment and Transport project was financed by a Bank loan ofUS$4.5 million and by a Government of Seychelles (GOS) contribution of US$0.7million, in addition to a Global Environment Facility (GEF) grant of US$1.8 million.

2. The GEF-financed biodiversity measures included the restoration and preservationof the ecosystem of Aldabra Atoll, and the protection of endangered sea turtles. For themarine pollution reduction, the GEF would finance the design and feasibility study ofwaste reception facilities at the Port of Victoria. The project (the GEF portion) asdescribed in the Staff Appraisal Report of 1992 had the following components:

a) Aldabra Ecosystem Restoration Program. The objectives of this program were therestoration and preservation of the Aldabra ecosystem. This was to be achieved by:

* Rehabilitation of the scientific research station (it was subsequently decided to rebuildthe research station given the extent of deterioration);

* Strengthening of scientific and managerial personnel;* Eradication of feral goats;* Preparation of a long term management plan for Aldabra;* Preparation of a Giant Tortoise census and monitoring system (this was subsequently

added to the program).

b) Protection of endangered sea turtles. The objective was formulation ofcomprehensive management plans to prohibit or restrict the exploitation of marine turtles.This was to be achieved through:

2

* Green turtle protection program: stock assessment, and preparation of a plan for theachievement and maintenance of a sustainable yield of green turtles;

* Hawksbill turtle protection program: a turtle ranching feasibility study; a program(legislative measures, publicity campaigns, etc.) to control the supply and demand ofturtle shells; turtle shell compensation study; and a compensation, retraining andreinstallation program for turtle shell artisans;

* Three important modifications were made subsequent to the Appraisal Report namelythe removal of the turtle ranching component, the inclusion of a Giant TortoiseProtection and Management Plan component, and the removal of the maintenance andsustainable yield of green turtles in the Green Turtle protection program because itwas believed to be unrealistic and contrary to the conservation objectives of theproject.

c) Abatement of Marine Pollution. The objective was to support the study anddesign of facilities that would improve the capacity of the port to handle ship wastes.This was to be achieved by:

* A feasibility study and engineering designs for the construction of facilities to receiveand dispose of waste from commercial and fishing vessels at the Port of Victoria;

* The purchase of oil spill tracking and control equipment was added to this componentto be financed from extra funds acquired through currency fluctuations.

3. The design, production and launching of the IEMPS was the most significantenvironmental policy move of the Government of Seychelles since Independence. TheGEF Project components were all EMPS projects developed by the relevant Governmentagencies. The Government identified these projects as high priorities.

4. The GEF Project objectives supported the Seychelles commitment to biodiversityconservation and protection of marine environment. The Project allowed for theimplementation of a program that takes full account of socioeconomic, institutional andlegal aspects of the protection of endangered species. Accordingly the Project Objectivesare considered to be appropriate and realistic.

5. The Project has enabled important linkages to be established with other ongoingpriority programs, such as the Abatement of Marine Pollution, municipal solid wastecollection and the Solid Waste and Cleaning Agency (SWAC), the parastatal institutioncharged with solid waste collection.

6. Collaboration and linkages with NGOs and other organizations involved in theproject, as envisaged in the Staff Appraisal Report, resulted in a more comprehensivepicture of overall progress of environmental actions than any single agency, including theBank, could have produced.

3

B. ACHIEVEMENTS OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES

7. Achievement of Global Environmental Objectives. Achievement of themajority of the global environmental objectives of the Project can be considered to besubstantial (Table 1). This was the case for sector policies and financial, physical andenvironmental objectives. A research station has been constructed on Aldabra and isoperational, a draft Management Plan has been drawn up, and the atoll has been purged ofall but a few goats. The turtle and giant tortoise populations have been assessed andmanagement enhanced, personnel trained, artisans re-installed in new professions andturtle shell trade effectively terminated. Regarding abatement of marine pollution thecountry now possesses detailed proposals for waste disposal facilities that could beconstructed to comply with MARPOL. The global environmental objectives of biologicaldiversity protection and abatement of marine pollution were met through the enhancedcapacity of Seychelles to implement the provisions of the Biodiversity convention,CITES and MARPOL.

8. Institutional development was 'partially achieved. The management of SeychellesIslands Foundation (SIF), responsible for the management of Aldabra, could beimproved. In addition to filling the vacancy for the Executive Officer, who has now beenappointed, the need for a senior staff with appropriate management and scientific skillshas become apparent. The design of the project was not fully appropriate, as it did notforesee the implementation difficulties for components to be undertaken on Aldabra. Inparticular, this involved the goat eradication program, which had to be extended twice toallow a more realistic time frame to implement the objectives. The MARPOL componentwas strictly an engineering design, not providing funds for the actual construction ofwaste facilities or for training. Early difficulties in implementing turtle shell legislationand compensation of the turtle component were due to changes in local implementingstaff, as well as deep sociological patterns of behavior in Seychellois society.

9. Component 1. Restoration and Preservation of Aldabra Ecosystem. Thisprogram consisted of four parts: (i) rehabilitation of the scientific research facility onPicard island, Aldabra; (ii) provision of personnel to strengthen SIF research andconservation management; (iii) control of feral goats on islands of the atoll; and (iv)preparation of a long-term management plan for Aldabra. Tortoise census andmonitoring was added as a fifth objective subsequent to the Appraisal Report.

10. SIF was to manage all facets of the Aldabra program. To define roles andresponsibilities, a Memorandum of Understanding was concluded between thegovernment and SIF for implementation of the program. Signature of the Memorandumof Understanding was a condition of disbursement of the GEF grant. SIF was responsiblefor recruitment of the scientific and managerial personnel, and of consultants for the goatcontrol program. It was intended that the managerial and scientific personnel recruitedwould eventually be major contributors to the long-term management plan. This programwas also supposed to address other issues such as the number and frequency of visits to

4

Aldabra by non-scientists, area designation for conservation purposes, supervision ofvisitors while on the island, liaison with other reserves and national parks in Seychelles,and the prospects for ecotourism programs.

11. Originally the research station was to undergo refurbishment only. However, inthe interval that the station had been assessed and the project implemented, the facilitieshad completely deteriorated. Therefore it was mutually agreed between the Bank and theGrant Recipient that a new station should be built. The construction of the new researchstation was completed satisfactorily. The research station was built on already existingfoundations of the old buildings and this led to cost savings as well as preventingpotential environmental damage caused by earthworks if new foundations had to beinstalled. The log buildings made from treated imported timber are well suited to theenvironment of the atoll.

12. The Goat Eradication Program involved the so-called Judas Goat, a radio-taggednanny goat that would be released and would gregariously seek out other goats whichwere then hunted. Afterwards the nanny was released again to seek out more goats.There were certain initial difficulties in identifying suitable consultants who had practicalfield experience in this technique and who could live in isolated areas for substantial timeperiods. The Consultants who were recruited have conducted three campaigns and havenow effectively cleared the atoll of all the animals except a handful in inaccessible areas.T he risk of population expansion will remain until the last goat is removed. Althoughlocating and hunting these last ones is the most difficult part of the project, efforts arecontinuing on Aldabra to ensure complete eradication, using the rangers and the researchofficers on Aldabra to continue the hunt.

13. The Long Term Management and Scientific Plan for the atoll was completed bythe scientific officers recruited under the project and who had lived on Aldabra for a yearat each interval. However, the first draft of the documents was believed to be overlydetailed and voluminous, thus reducing their value as practical management tools. TheSIF pledged to edit and pare down the documents, and contracted two members of itsscientific committee to do this work. A draft of the newly revised version has been madeavailable recently and has been distributed for comments.

14. Disbursements lagged owing to SIF delaying contract signature anddisbursements at the beginning of project implementation. This was due to lack ofcapacity within SIF to adequately manage projects. The Executive Officer is the onlyexecutive employed by SIF and moreover does not have middle management staff at hisdisposal. He is further burdened with many tasks, which are multidisciplinary in nature.

15. Personnel difficulties on Aldabra continued to hinder project implementationthroughout. There has been a substantial turnover of staff on the atoll and difficultieswith staff discipline and productivity. This was partially resolved in 1997 when SIFwithdrew the Logistics Manager from the atoll. Additional efforts are being made tocreate a more professional working environment on Aldabra. Access is still difficult as it

5

involves air travel in small planes to Assumption, a nearby island and then travel in asmall boat through what can be difficult sea conditions to Aldabra.

16. Due to the high cost of travel and transportation constraints, the Bank was able tofield only two missions to visit Aldabra, one prior to project launch and another aftercompletion of the Research station. A more frequent supervision of the projectcomponents on Aldabra would have alleviated some of the staff and managerial issuesthat arose during implementation.

17. Component 2. Protection of Sea Turtles. The two species of marine turtles inSeychelles, the Green (Chelonia mydas) and Hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), areboth Globally Threatened species. The Sea Turtle Protection Program was designed toimplement a comprehensive set of actions to restrict or prohibit marine turtle exploitation.The green turtle protection program was designed to define the sustainable level ofexploitation for the species in order to accommodate domestic consumption. However,the original program design was found to be of little value for conservation and withoutdoubt unsustainable taking into account the large historical catches of these species. Thefocus was therefore modified to be oriented more towards monitoring and conservation.

18. The Hawksbill turtle protection program included a feasibility study of Hawksbillturtle ranching, a turtle compensation study, retraining and compensation for artisanspresently working turtle shells, and educational materials to Seychellois and tourists onthe consequences of trade in and purchase of turtle products. The ranching proposal hadbeen introduced during project preparation because some proponents of the projectbelieved it was essential to farm turtles so as to continue their consumption, and also toincrease the wild population by releasing captive bred juveniles, so-called headstarting.This sub-component was subsequently dropped because a ranching operation wouldclearly not be accepted by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Speciesof Flora and Fauna (CITES); because there were no similar ecologically sound andeconomically viable operations anywhere in the world; and because there was no proofthat headstarted turtles survived or bred successfully.

19. The Turtle Protection Program was to be managed by what was then theConservation and National Parks Section of the Environment Division. The SeychellesFishing Authority (SFA), with long experience of trying to manage sea turtle stocks, wasto become involved in implementation of the program. SFA was also to be called upon toenforce the Green turtle quota regulations that were likely to form part of themanagement plan. With the creation of the Marine Parks Authority (MPA) in 1996, themanagement of the component was divided between the MPA (where turtles nested andwere found in Marine Parks) and what became the Conservation Division in the presentMinistry of Environment. SFA's involvement was withdrawn since turtle conservationwas thought to be more in line with the objectives of the two previously mentionedorganizations. Government removed management of turtles from the Fisheries

6

Regulations and new Regulations were enacted under the Wild Birds and other AnimalsProtection Act.

20. For the Hawksbill program and as a condition of disbursement of the GEF grant, aMemorandum of Understanding was concluded between the former Ministry ofEnvironment, Planning and External Relations (MEPER) and the Department of Industry(DOI) in collaboration with CODEVAR, the artisan development company. Thisagreement outlined the responsibilities of DOI/CODEVAR for undertaking the turtletrade compensation study and the re-training and compensation of artisans. Legislationwas to be put in place prior to December 31, 1993 but in reality it was only effective inmid-1995.

21. The legislation entailed banning the sale of turtle shell and a cessation of thecommercialization of turtle meat and associated products. Because of the socio-economicbackground of the Seychelles and strong feelings regarding continuing utilization ofturtles by certain sections of society, it was extremely difficult for the Grant Recipient toimplement these sub-components within the deadlines defined by the project. While thelegislation for banning the use of turtle shells did become effective, the stock collectedfrom the artisans has not been disposed of completely and the stock has been sealed in acontainer since its collection. It should be mentioned that disposal of the turtle shells wasnot part of agreements under the GEF.

22. The turtle shell compensation program was implemented successfully. Alllicensed turtle shell artisans were included in this program. Six artisans were paidretirement compensation; eleven artisans were paid cash compensation; and fourteenwere paid credit compensation for the purposes of training, purchase of equipment andmaterials and to initiate alternative businesses.

23. Subsequent to the Staff Appraisal Report, a Giant Tortoise Protection Programwas added at the request of the Grant recipient and mutually agreed with the Bank. Dueto the ranching proposal having been dropped, there was now added funding flexibilitythat allowed for this program to be easily introduced in the project portfolio.

24. The performance of the consultant recruited to implement the Turtle and TortoiseProtection Program has been highly satisfactory. The Consultant has interpreted her TORin the broadest sense and in certain instances such as DNA analysis, brought the latestscientific methods to bear upon her work. Furthermore, the Consultant's previous workexperience within the Seychelles, especially remote islands with insular humanpopulations, enabled the successful execution of sub-components that could have beenpotentially problematic or troublesome. The addition of the Giant Tortoise componenthas not detracted from the original objectives but in fact further complementedimplementation success.

7

25. The long-term sustainability of this component is secure. The Ministry ofEnvironment has assigned tertiary level staff such as Park Rangers to follow up on theactivities. Currently missing is a senior officer who has a dedicated role in taking overfrom the Consultant. This is largely due to staffing constraints within the ConservationDivision. There are at present only two college graduates in this Division, only one beinga national. This person is responsible for follow up on all threatened species.

26. A major outstanding issue to date is the disposal of the turtle shell stock. Severalmutually agreed on dates for disposal have passed with a minor amount of shell beingdumped at sea during the Regional Integrated Coastal Zone Seminar in October 1996.While disposal of the shells was not one of GEF covenants or conditionalities, the Bankstrongly encouraged the Recipient to dispose of these shells as soon as possible. But theefforts have been only partially successful. The Grant Recipient has been made aware ofthe risk involved with respect to credibility with the Bank and other donor agencies if thestockpile is not disposed of in a suitable manner.

27. Component 3. Abatement of Marine Pollution. This component consisted of astudy to design and evaluate the waste reception and disposal facilities at the Port ofVictoria that are needed to comply with the requirements of the International Conventionfor the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL). Actual construction of thefacilities was to take place in a subsequent phase, beyond the scope of the current project.

28. The local counterpart functions were handled successfully by the Ports andMarine Services Division (PMSD), which liaised with all concerned parties including theprivate sector. The Consultants for the project were in direct contact with the DirectorGeneral of the PMSD who ensured that this component was on line at all times.

29. The recommendations of the consultants to build a marine oil waste treatmentfacility and solid waste incinerator, while appropriate for the amount of waste produced atthe Port of Victoria, are nevertheless too costly for the Government to feasibly finance inthe short term and under Government Budget; the cost is about US$3 million to build andabout US$500,000 to operate annually. Project funds, coming out of savings owing tocurrency fluctuations, were sufficient to purchase some oil spill tracking and controlequipment. Therefore, it now falls upon Government to decide whether to seekadditional funding to implement the recommendations.

30. Performance Indicators. Progress towards project objectives as measured bykey indicators is an integral part of progress reporting. Key indicators were identified inthe Staff Appraisal Report. Monitoring of Key indicators has been the responsibility ofthe National Coordinator.

31. All performance indicators have been fully met except for the goat eradicationprogram where a few goats remain in inaccessible areas. These can be removed by a longterm control effort that is underway on Aldabra. The Aldabra Research Station is filly

8

completed and all laboratory and communication equipment has been delivered. Thescientific and managerial staffs have been successfully recruited. A draft of the long-termmanagement plan is completed. Nevertheless, this voluminous document requires furtherediting. The tortoise monitoring programs have now resumed.

32. The turtle ranching study was found to be inappropriate and was dropped from theproject. The Turtle Shell Compensation Study was completed in time and under thebudget. All registered turtle shell artisans have either been compensated for ceasing theiractivity or been rehabilitated in new jobs. Training, as described in the Turtle ShellCompensation Study, and artisans compensation has been completed. The StockAssessment has been completed. Turtle legislation banning the trade has beenpromulgated and is being enforced and the Turtle Management Plan completed. Thirty-eight persons have been trained in turtle monitoring techniques. Introduction of newtagging systems were completed. The giant tortoise monitoring and assessment iscompleted. Five persons have been trained in monitoring techniques. The study of thewaste reception facilities is completed. Oil spill tracking and control equipment has beenbought.

33. Procurement and Disbursement. For a period of two years, the NationalCoordinator in-post had inadequate experience with procurement and disbursementprocedures of the Bank. This had a negative effect on the speed and efficiency of projectimplementation. The performance of the present National Coordinator has beensatisfactory throughout the project and this has facilitated project execution. Certaindelays in disbursement occurred owing to personnel constraints and turnover in two keyimplementing institutions, the Ministry of Environment and the SIF. With the exceptionof the SIF, Seychellois counterparts in implementing institutions were by and largeexpeditious in solving bottlenecks once Bank staff or the National Coordinator hadidentified them. Towards the end of the project, Seychellois counterparts have improvedtheir skills in following procurement and disbursement procedures of the Bank,preparation of Terms of Reference (TORs), tender documents and contracts. This was aninvestment cost on the side of the Grant Recipient, but is considered to be a positivebenefit for further GEF involvement. The principal constraints in this regard continue tobe lack or turnover of trained staff in key institutions, in particular the SIF.

C. IMPLEMENTATION RECORD ANDMAJOR FACTORS AFFECTING THE PROJECT

34. Factors not generally subject to government control. The project closing datewas extended by one year from December 31, 1996 to December 31, 1997. Theextension was possible due to the availability of additional funds in the budget, in partbecause the project benefited from exchange rate fluctuations between the SpecialDrawing Rights (SDR), in which the Grant was made available, and US dollars, in whichthe Grant was disbursed. Additional funds were also made available after the turtleranching study was dropped. The extension was mutually agreed upon in order to allowfor implementation of additional project activities such as the oil spill tracking and

9

control equipment and the tortoise monitoring on Aldabra. This had no negative impacton project implementation.

35. Factors generally subject to government control. The Grant Recipient did nothave a National Coordinator with adequate experience in procurement and disbursementprocedures for a period of two years and this delayed communication and certainprocedural operations. There was also a high staff turnover at the Ministry level for thefirst few years of project implementation. This resulted in slow implementation anddisbursement lags during the initial years. The appointment of a qualified Nationalcoordinator and reduction in staff turnover during the last three years of projectimplementation resolved the problem.

36. Disbursement bottlenecks between the Ministry of Finance and the implementingagencies have also had some adverse effects on project progress, i.e. the inactivity of thespecial account at the Nouvo Banque. The Project Accountant and the NationalCoordinator experienced difficulties in receiving monthly statement of accounts from theBank. These were resolved when the Bank met with the Ministry of Finance andrequested that these statements be sent directly to the project unit. The achievement ofproject objectives was negligibly affected.

37. In some instances, audit reports from the SIF did not follow the standard terms ofreference agreed and presented in the Project Implementation Handbook. Discussionsbetween the Bank and the Grant Recipient ensured that further reports were in line withthe accepted format. This had a negligible impact on the Project.

38. Factors generally subject to implementing agency control. Delays indisbursement by certain national agencies, in particular the SIF, led to delays incompleting certain project activities. In various instances in the early stages of projectimplementation, the SIF could not complete TORs, contracts, and disbursements on time,the responsibility of which had to be taken over by the Project Accountant and theNational Coordina.tor. This partially affected the project achievements. The appointmentof an Executive Officer at the SIF resolved this problem.

D. PROJECT SUSTAINABILITY

39. Overview. Overall, it is likely that the Grant Recipient will sustain generalproject achievements. Despite certain capacity constraints, typical of small island states,all the implementing agencies are committed to sustaining and furthering projectcomponents. Since the project has resulted in progress in infrastructure development,scientific knowledge and skills, institutional building, policy and legislation, and publicawareness, as well as in project planning, management, and monitoring skills in keyorganizations, Grant Recipient interest in sustaining the project is high. In fact, relevantactivities under the turtle and Aldabra components have already been incorporated in the

10

work program and recurrent budget of the respective implementing agencies. Turtle andtortoise monitoring, for example, have become routine activities undertaken by staff ofSIF, the Ministry of Environment, the Marine Park Authority and islands such as Cousin,Cousine and Aride.

40. The sustainability of marine pollution abatement is uncertain at the moment.While this project component has been successfully completed, the actual construction ofreception facilities, which was outside the original project scope, is still uncertain as it isnot clear how the Government can initiate construction within the short term unless itreceives external assistance to do so.

E. BANK PERFORMANCE

41. Introduction. The Bank played a pivotal role in the overall success of the projectand its role in assisting the Seychelles with the preparation of the EMPS led to linkageswith other donors involved in implementing EMPS projects. Project identification andpreparation took place prior to and after the launch of the EMPS in 1991. The signing ofthe agreement was on January 15, 1993. Midterm review was in November 1994. Staffturnover on the Bank side during the initial project implementation period had someadverse effects on supervision of the project.

42. Identification and preparation. The identification and preparation of the projectgrew out of Bank involvement in the preparation of the EMPS. During this period, as aSeychelles team of staff and consultants prepared the EMPS, the Bank's advice wassought on specific topics, such as protection of sea turtles and waste management.Together with other donors, the Bank analyzed the EMPS at the donors meeting inFebruary 1991 and indicated its priorities for support. Of the EMPS programs, actions toprotect biodiversity and to limit the pollution of international waters were identified asthe most compatible of the goals of the GEF.

43. Appraisal. The Appraisal Mission visited Seychelles in July 1992 and consistedof three Bank staff. The mission worked closely with the Ministry of Economic Planningand External Relations as well as the staff of the former Division of Environment.

44. Resource Mobilization. The Project design was such that all activities wereprovided with what was believed to be adequate funding for implementation. Resourcesproved to be largely adequate for all project components except for the Waste ReceptionFacilities which had a cost overrun of about 40 percent. Overall, due to cost saving undersome project components (the turtle artisan compensation program and the turtle ranchingstudy) and due to exchange rate fluctuations the funds available under the project weresufficient to cover cost overruns and to allow for extra activities to be undertaken(reconstruction of the Aldabra research station instead of mere rehabilitation, preparationof the Giant Tortoise Management Plan).

I

45. Working Documents. Detailed documentation was prepared and distributed tothe Grant Recipient during Appraisal including information on Bank policies and on theGEF. An Implementation Handbook was produced and the National Coordinator trainedin its use. Copies of a guide for preparation of accounts and audits were also presented tothe Project Accountant.

46. Supervision. The Bank devoted some 80 staff weeks to the supervision of theEnvirorunent and Transport Loan, the Dutch Trust Fund, and the GEF program through1997. During the first three years of operations from 1993 to 1995, supervision focusedmainly on progress toward achieving specific objectives, such as completion of works,the studies, and on monitoring the performance of implementing agencies. Towards 1996and 1997, the emphasis shifted more fully toward evaluation of results and follow-up.The Bank continued a policy of open, two-way exchange of information with allenvironmentally related agencies in, Seychelles. Limited budget availability madeadequate supervision of the many project sub-components difficult as it was not possibleto send a multidisciplinary team on all supervision missions.

47. There was a high staff turnover during the first two years of projectimplementation which had some negative impact on project implementation. It is alsonoted that the alternating system of the Task Managers did not always respond to theGrant Recipient's needs. In certain cases when the Task Manager was not in-office inWa'shington, the Grant Recipient had difficulties in communicating with the Bankregarding project-specific issues. Overall, however, smooth and excellent liaisonbetween the present National Coordinator and the Task Manager has been the normthroughout the project.

48. There was adequate flexibility in implementing the objectives of the projectthroughout. Previous working experience between Bank staff and the personnelrepresenting the Grant Recipient ensured easy communication thus leading to rapididentification and approval of changes in either project scope or design. When writingthe TOR for the Turtle Consultant, for example, it was mutually agreed that an additionalobjective of the Consultant should be Giant Tortoise Protection Program includingManagement Plans. Modifications were also made during project implementation largelythrough changes in implementation schedules due to logistical and personnel constraintsand also to allow a more realistic time schedule for one of the project components.

49. Mid Term Review. A mid term review focusing on EMPS implementation as awhole was carried out in November 1994. The review was carried out jointly by theBank and the Grant Recipient. Resources for Bank participation were included in thesupervision schedule, as well as in the Bank's economic and sector work program for1995. This exchange of views resullted in the mutual evaluation of the success at mid-term of project elements and agreements on remedial actions and certain modifications.The review also covered the overall managerial efficiency and performance of SIF, theprogress in the sea turtle protection program and the tortoise monitoring. The Grant

12

Recipient prepared a report on the progress of impleimentation with emphasis on theabove-mentioned issues for purposes of the mid term review.

F. GRANT RECIPIENT PERFORMANCE

50. Project Preparation. Project preparation was satisfactory. As mentionedpreviously, the projects were prepared for the EMPS, an exercise which was facilitatedand encouraged by the Bank as part of the National Environment Action Plan (NEAP)process ongoing in many parts of the world. The relevant sectors' views were sought onthe different priorities and gaps within their respective mandates and projects wereformulated to implement these priorities and bridge the gaps. A team composed ofSeychellois staff and consultants prepared the projects with advice from the Bank, otherdonors and technical agencies. The document was finalized at a pre-donors' conferenceand technical seminar where working groups analyzed and refined the project proposals.

51. The intended beneficiaries participated in project design and preparation inseveral specific ways. Turtle shell artisans were consulted on the approach taken in theturtle management program to facilitate their re-absorption into the labor force in anotheroccupation, as was the parastatal artisanal company CODEVAR, the implementingagency for this sub-component. Scientists associated with the Royal Society and theSmithsonian Institution who have worked on Aldabra have been closely involved withthe proposals for restoration and preservation of the atoll at all times. The Ministry ofTourism and Transport (MTT) through the Ports and Marine Services Division (PMSD)was involved in the marine pollution component at all stages.

52. Project Implementation. The project was demanding for the Grant Recipient.A substantial component of the project involved remote locations where certain quitedemanding works had to be realized. With Aldabra, for example, the remoteness of theAtoll, the difficult sea conditions and the constraints in communication posed a definitechallenge for the transport of construction material and workers and the actual building ofthe structures.

53. The normal manager-worker relationship on Aldabra, typical of islands in theSeychelles, needed to be modified to provide an enabling environment for scientific andconservation officers working and living permanently on the island. This wascompounded by difficulties in recruiting educated and competent nationals to staff keyfunctions on Aldabra. The remoteness and limited communication and access have hadadverse cost implications on conducting scientific research.

54. The appointment of a National Coordinator and Project Accountant has greatlyfacilitated the project implementation process. The implementing agencies have alsoimproved their implementation and operational capacity as the project progressed. Therehas been a strong learning element in the project and all the implementing agencies haveseized the opportunity to better their project management skills with time.

13

55. Reporting. The Grant Recipient has prepared quarterly reports describing theprogress of each program element from the standpoint of its physical, financial, andsocio-economic elements. These reports have reviewed the performance of implementingagencies, monitored the key indicators of progress in fulfillment of program goals, andidentified major key indicators of progress.

56. Covenant Compliance. Financial covenants have been complied with. Allrecords and accounts including those of the Special Account have been audited andfurnished to the Bank on a timely basis. All expenditures with respect to withdrawalshave been maintained in accordance with Bank procedures and made available to theBank.

57. Project Complexity and Risk. The project was complex and risky for the GrantRecipient. In the case of the Turtle Shell Compensation Study conducted by CODEVAR,the risk involved both convincing turtle shell artisans and policy makers of the necessityof the phasing-out of the industry, as well as the design and initiation of a retraining andre-installation program. This came at a time when Government had begun tentativemoves to promote free enterprise and more democratization. For the country as a whole,the banning and complete removal of an activity that had been one of the few traditionalcrafts in the island, as well as the cessation of turtle meat sale, was difficult to implementinto law and comply with.

58. Counterpart Funds. Counterpart funds have been managed in a satisfactorymanner. There have been no instances of mismanagement or misallocation of counterpartfunding.

G. ASSESSMENT OF OUTCOMES

59. Overview. Overall, the outcome of the project is highly satisfactory. All itsoriginal objectives have been achieved and in certainr cases surpassed. Sector policy andfinancial, physical, and environmental objectives have been met. The project hasbenefited the Seychelles by assisting it to protect key components of its biodiversity, thusfulfilling national objectives for nature conservation as well as sustainable developmentlaid out in the EMPS. The project has also benefited the international community byaddressing issues of global concern, in particular abatement of marine pollution ininternational waters, protection of a World Heritage Site and protection of globallythreatened marine turtles. The endangered turtles component has become ademonstration project for meeting the challenges of conservation through win-winsituations; alternative forms of livelihoods and compensation have been provided for theforegone benefits of turtle harvesting to local populations. The Aldabra program beingsolution-oriented did not only arrest degradation but achieved restoration and scientificmanagement of the ecosystem as well. As the Seychelles was the first Western IndianOcean Nation to have signed the MARPOL Convention, the design of port waste

14

reception and disposal has clearly demonstrated the willingness of the international donorcommunity to assist developing countries in complying with international conventions.

60. Institutional Development. Institutional development has been satisfactory.Several steps have been taken to strengthen the coordination and management role of theproject team and key implementing agencies. The project has resulted in improvementsin turtle legislation, policy and scientific skills at all levels. Enforcement of legislationhas also been improved in the case of the turtles. In a move not related to the project, theDivision of Environment was upgraded to a Ministry in 1997. There are still efforts to bemade in institutional development within the SIF to better prepare it to manage Aldabra.One step would be the appointment of a highly motivated and experienced seniorexecutive officer with relevant scientific background and managerial expertise to manageand promote international scientific research on Aldabra.

61. The appointment and continuing role of the National Coordinator has been madepossible due to the strong recommendations of the Bank. Due to staff turnover, fourpersons have served in this capacity to date. Despite a substantial period wherecoordination was weak, the overall objective of having one focal point with theresponsibility of supervising the progress of EMPS execution, providing advice toimplementing agencies, and exchanging information has been a success. Thedevelopment of certain skills of participating staff in the MoE, CODEVAR and the SIFhas been an important achievement of the project.

62. Physical Objectives. Achievement of physical objectives of the project have beenfully satisfactory. The renovation and repair of buildings and facilities on Aldabra havebeen successfully completed and are currently being utilized by the SIF. The researchstation has also been equipped with laboratory and other field and managementequipment. Equipment for goat control has also been delivered and has been used in thegoat eradication campaign. Materials for turtle and tortoise monitoring, and tagging havebeen purchased and used in the appropriate manner. Emergency oil spill tracking andcontrol equipment have been financed and delivered.

63. Achievement of Global Environmental Objectives. Achievement of globalenvironmental objectives are deemed to, have been fully satisfactory. The turtle shellindustry is now illegal but also importantly, virtually moribund. Training, information,resources and linkages provided under the project has led to augmentation in protectionof turtles in the field. Owing to the long term monitoring now in place, the knowledgebase for conservation of turtles has been increased. The Giant Tortoise sub-componenthas led to knowledge for the first time in Seychelles of the numbers of captive tortoisesand the trade in the animals. Draft Management Plans for Turtles, Tortoises and AldabraSpecial Reserve will serve as benchmarks for future conservation work.

64. Incrementallity of GEF Financing. The project was primarily focused in areaswith limited national benefits like the rehabilitation of Aldabra World Heritage Site andthe protection of Seaturtles; both constitute resources that can not be used for

15

consumption anymore. Consequently most of the financing can be assessed as globallyincremental and only a minor part would be primarily of national benefit. Obviously theexistence of seaturtles in Seychelles is of value to the tourism industry and so will a bettermanagement capacity of the Aldabra. The project also generated further private andofficial investments in conservation and helped catalyze the governments efforts inconservation and marine pollution pre vention.

H. FUTURE OPERATIONS

65. Recommendations. It is recommended that the Government of Seychellesimplement the following in order to maximize project benefits and ensure itssustainability:

a) Project for construction of waste facilities. To enable the Seychelles to complywith MARPOL, it is suggested that a project be implemented to build the facilitiesrecommended in the study for design of facilities for reception and disposal of waste.This project should include measures to make operations of the facility moreeconomically viable.

b) Improve turtle and tortoise legislation. Certain loopholes still remain in the turtlelegislation. This concerns for example the possession of worked shell by artisans. Inaddition, the current fines and sanctions in the legislation are far too low compared tothe potential revenues to be earned by violating certain aspects of the law. Regardingthe Tortoise legislation, this was promulgated in 1976. The legislation needs to becompletely updated and modified. Local matching commitments to CITES must alsobe included in the legislation to enable the country to comply to this internationalagreement to which it is a Party.

c) Strengthen the institutional capacity of SIF. Difficulties with project implementa-tion indicate that the post of executive officer may be too demanding for one person.The holder of the post is expected to have experience in personnel management,administrative and financial matters, project design and implementation, logistics,scientific and technology issues, public awareness, protected areas management, andconservation of biodiversity in general. Such a multidisciplinary person may bedifficult to come upon, and if located may not find the salary structure attractive. It isrecommended that an additional position be created at a more senior level i.e. chiefexecutive officer to take up the demanding technical and managementresponsibilities.

d) Review the composition of the SIF Board. The difficulties in management of theproject, the personnel on Aldabra, logistics and operations make the review of the SIFBoard necessary. Problems experienced during the project are systemic and ongoing.It may mean that persons with recent practical and proven experience in capacitybuilding, environmental project implementation and biodiversity management should

16

be appointed to provide better oversight and advice for the overall management ofAldabra and to ensure sustainability of the project components put in place there. Asthe guiding force of two World Heritage Sites, the Board must reflect currentexpertise and approaches in the world of biodiversity conservation and sustainableuse of its components. Related to the above, it is further recommended that the SIFforge links and formal partnerships with organizations having experience inbiodiversity program management within the country and in the region to augment itsexpertise, build synergy and increase awareness. Such organizations include forexample the Marine Parks Authority and BirdLife International in Seychelles, and inthe region the Mauritius Wildlife Appeal Trust, the IUCN Eastern African RegionalOffice, the Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association (WIOMSA) and theSAREC marine and coastal program for Eastern Africa. Participatory approaches arenow known to be crucial to the long-term success of biodiversity conservation.

e) Enhance the National Coordinator position. Lessons learned during projectexecution lead to the conclusion that a motivated National Coordinator is the cornerstone of successful project management. Nevertheless, this is presently a relativelylow position in the administrative hierarchy and does not allow for meaningfulinteractions and interventions on various levels. It is recommended therefore that theGovernment enhance the position of the National Coordinator to more fully reflect theimportance of the role.

66. Recommended Bank follow-up. The Bank's Mission of June 1997 reviewedwith the Government a series of operations and projects that could be considered under anew GEF. These projects have been identified and project proposals drawn up andsubmitted. They are:

e Implementation of Turtle Management Plans for Seychelles;- Conservation of Avian Ecosystem;* Seychelles Whale Shark Program - Telemetric Tracking Proposal;* Restoration and Preservation of World Heritage Sites;* Control of Freshwater Aquatic Weeds in Seychelles;* Establishment and Implementation of a Critical Marine Protected Area; and* The Bank and the Government of Seychelles are currently discussing the possibility

of initiating a 'second EMPS'.

I. KEY LESSONS LEARNED

67. Overall, staffing constraints have been a strong limiting factor. Local staff inimplementing agencies were burdened with many demanding and conflicting activities.In addition, management skills, which are a center part of implementation success, werefound to be weak in many cases. In most cases delays and bottlenecks in the projectimplementation were caused by lack of competent staff. To ensure smooth projectimplementation, motivated and qualified staff with management skills and sector-specificknowledge should be appointed as Project coordinators.

17

68. For project components in'volving strong socio-economic elements, such asturtles, a socio-economist or environmental economist should be involved in projectdesign and implementation for the purpose of quantifying benefits and costs of naturalresource management and use options. This may also ease general populist claims of thecreation of economic disadvantaged classes and social inequalities by internationalagency programs.

69. Projects involving remote islands such as Aldabra should be approached with careand thorough inquiry into the logistics, and management capabilities of the implementingagencies. During this project, the distance and obstacles in communication with Aldabraposed a problem.

70. Overall, waste facility projects should consist not only of design components butshould be more proactive and incorporate implementation modalities as well. The studyfor designing of waste reception and disposal facilities was intended as a means to buildconsensus on the need for building cost efficient reception and disposal facilities at theport of Victoria. The project has achieved this objective but it is still difficult to identifyfunding requirements for the actual construction.

71. Additional budgetary resources for adequate funding for supervision by the Bank,especially for projects involving complex natural resource components, has provednecessary. However resources were only provided for one supervision mission a year.The multidisciplinary nature of the GEF program made it difficult to adequatelysupervise and monitor all the sub-components within the time and resources allocated.

I

19

PART II: STATISTICAL TABLES

Tables:

Table 1: Summary of AssessmentsTable 2: Related Bank Loans/GrantsTable 3: Project TimetableTable 4: Grant DisbursementsTable 5 & 6: Key IndicatorsTable 7: Studies Included in the ProjectTable 8A: Project CostsTable 8B: Project FinancingTable 9A: Economic Costs and BenefitsTable 10: Legal Covenants

20

Table 1: Summary of AssessmentsA. Achievement of Project Objectives

Assessment 1 Substantial Partial f Negligible Not ApplicableCategories

Macro Policies X

Sector Policies X

Financial Objectives X

Institutional Xdevelopment

Physical objectives X

Poverty reduction X

Gender concerns X

Other social objectives XEnvironmental xobjectives

Public sector Xmanagement

Private sector management

Private sector Xdevelopment

Other X

B. Project Sustainability

Likely |Uncertain |Unlikely

x~~~~~~~~~~~

C. Bank Performance

Stage of Project Highly Satisfactory Satisfactory DeficientCycle

Identification X

Preparation X

Appraisal X

Supervision X

21

Table 1: Summary of Assessments (continued)

D. Borrower Performance

Stage of Project J Highly satisfactory Satisfactory | DeficientCycle

Preparation X

Implementation X

Covenant XCompliance

Operation X

E. Assessment of Outcome

Highly Satisfactory Marginally Unsatisfactory HighlySatisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

x

22

Table 2: Related Bank Loans/Grants

Loan/Grant/Title Purpose Year of StatusApproval

L 3551 Sey - Assist with implementation of 1995 Implementationthe Environmental Management

Seychelles Plan of Seychelles (EMPS)Environment and - Support environmental programsTransport Project in resource management,

Biodiversity conservation, andmarine pollution control

- Improve the basis for sustainedtourism growth by facilitatingtourist access, while preservingor restoring environmentallysensitive areas

TF 23465 Sey - Preservation and maintenance of 1994 ClosedSeychelles unique Eco-system

Dutch Trust Fund- Preservation of biologicaldiversity

Medium Sized GEF - Avian Ecosystem Conservation 1998 Appraisal

Conservation of - Establishment and Protection ofBiological Diversity a critical marine protected area

- Restoration of the WorldHeritage Sites

Institutional - Assist with revision of the 1998 PreparationDevelopment Fund existing and preparation of a(IDF) Environmental new EnvironmentalManagement and Management Plan forHazard Prevention Seychelles (EMPS)

- Capacity building on emergencyresponse to EnvironmentalHazards

23

Table 3: Project Timetable

Steps in Project Cycle Date planned 1 Date actual/estimate

Identification (Executive September 1991 September 1991Project Summary)

Preparation January 1992 January 1992

Appraisal June 1992 June 1992

Negotiations November 1992 November 1992

Board presentation December 1992 December 1992

Signing January 1993 15 January 1993

Effectiveness January 1993 9 February 1993

Midterm Review November 1994 November 1994

Project closing Date' 31 December 1996 31 December 1997

Source: Project Files and Bank staff estimates.

Table 4: Grant Disbursements: Cumulative Estimated and Actual

IBRD Fiscal Year Appraisal Estimates Actual Disbursement Actual as(in '000 USD) (in '000 USD) Percentage of

Estimates (in %)FY 1993 300 0 0FY 1994 700 416 22FY 1995 600 615 54FY 1996 200 327 72FY 1997 __471 96FY 1998 __71 100

Total 1,800 1,900

The Project was extended based on the availability of additional funds in the budget. The projectbenefited from exchange rate fluctuations between SDR (Special Drawing Rights), in which the grantis made available and USD in which the grant is disbursed. The extension was agreed upon to allowfor implementation of additional project activities.

24

Table 5 & 6: Key Indicators for Project Implementation and Operation

Overall Project: Biodiversity Conservation and Marine Pollution Abatement

Project Objectives: 1. Assist with implementation of the Enviro.nental Management Plan of Seychelles (EMPS)2. Support environmental programs in Biodiversity conservation and marine pollution control3. Improve the basis for sustained tourism growth by facilitating tourist access, while preserving environmentally sensitive areas

Expected Cost USD 2.1 million with USD 1.8 million (SDR 1.3 million) GEF grant funding and USD 0.3 million Government fundingActual Expenditure: USD 2.2 million with USD 1.9 million (SDR 1.3 million) GEF grant funding and USD 0.3 million Government funding

Component 1: Restoration and Preservation of the Aldabra Eco-systemProject Objectives: 1. Renovation and Repair of Research Station

2. Strengthening of Managerial and Scientific Personnel3. Control of Goats4. Preparation of Long Term Management Plan5. Aldabran Giant Tortoise Census (additional: not defined in staff appraisal report)

Expected Cost: Total USD 645,000 with USD 595,000 GEF grant funding and USD 50,000 Government fundingActual Expenditure: Total USD 955,000 with USD 905,000 GEF grant funding and USD 50,000 Government fundingObjective and description Output expected Output achieved Impacts expected | Impacts achievedI. Renovation and0R epai 6ofAda Research StationRenovation and repair of Completion of research Research facilities on Aldabra * Rehabilitation of the 20 Improved research quality onbuildings & facilities facilities on Aldabra have been rehabilitated instead years old research station, Aldabra based on the

of repaired using log homes through financing of its rehabilitation of the 20 years oldinstalled on already existing second phase after research stationfoundations: completion of 1989 phase* Renovation of the

laboratory* Repairs to the

accommodation block* Construction of sanitation

system

25

Objective and description Output expected Output achieved Impacts expected Impacts achievedPurchase of laboratory & other Procurement of laboratory & * Equipment acquired: * To acquire necessary * More suitable facilitiesequipment other equipment tables, bookcases, water equipment to replace and for improving quality of

and gas supply, beds, supplement existing research on Aldabra arecamping equipment facilities in order to in place

* Rapid Reaction boat improve quality of researchpurchased on Aldabra

* Additional outboardengines purchased

* Laboratory equipmentpurchased

* Communication andComputing facilities

purchased and installed

2. 2.'.'gohening~f Manhagerald and Sct"fi cPersonnel

Employment of Scientific and Recruitment of Scientific and Two teams of two research * To ensure necessary * Necessary continuity ofManagerial Officers on Aldabra Managerial staff officers/warden (expatriates) continuity of action for action for conservation

have been recruited for a 4 year conservation programs programs ensuredperiod

Renovation of SIF head office Upgrading of SIF head office SIF Head office renovated, * To provide a better * Better environment forfacilities on Mahe (additional Mahe supplied with proper office environment for the day- day-to-day management ofactivity -not defined in staff equipment: to-day management of World heritage Sitesappraisal report) World Heritage sites affairs provided

* Provision of proper affairssignboards to attractvisitors

* Environmentally friendlydecoration of SIF window

* Purchase of officeequipment includingfurniture and computer

26

Objective and description | Output expected | Output achieved J Impacts expected 1 Impacts achieved

E=m==: _= ===1

Feral Goat Eradication Program Completion of Feral Goat Feral Goat Eradication was * To improve habitat * Habitat conditions toEradication Program completed with its last phase conditions to foster foster growth of Giant

financed under the Dutch Trust growth of Giant Tortoise Tortoise population haveFund population been improved* Goats do not destroy trees

and shrubs which thetortoises need for shade

* Goats do not compete forfood with Giant TortoisePopulation

* Goats do not disturbregeneration of vegetation

* Soil erosion minimized* Destruction of vegetation

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _sto p p ed _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

,,; <,=-ra, ,iFFE .... i .;, .. r. .l,,;DtiEiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii;iiiii.... ...........spe

Long Term Management Plan Completion of Long Term Draft of Long Term Management * To ensure long temi * Improved knowledge onManagement Plan Plan completed, final version planning for Aldabra Eco-tourism prospects

being edited locally by SIF * Improve knowledge onBoard Members institutional requirements

for SIF and managementsystem for Aldabra toensure long termsustainable managementof Aldabra

Completion of Aldabran Giant Completion of Aldabran Field report on Aldabran Giant * To ensure long term * Improved knowledge onTortoise Census and Vegetation Giant Tortoise Census and Tortoise Census and Vegetation management of Giant population dynamicsDynamics Study (additional Vegetation Dynamics Study Dynamics Study completed, final Tortoise Population on * Improved knowledge onactivity - not defned in staff report being edited Aldabra vegetation dynamicsappraisal report).

27

Component 2: Sea Turtle Protection ProgramExpected Cost: Total USD 1.26 million with USD 1.06 million GEF grant funding and USD 200,000 Government fundingActual Expenditure: Total USD 806,000 with 606,000 GEF grant funding and USD 200,000 Government funding

Project Objectives: 1. Green Turtle Management Program: to establish and maintain a sustainable harvesting regime2. Hawksbill Turtle Management Program: to enable Seychelles to comply with the stipulations of the CITES convention3. Giant Tortoise Management Plan (additional: not defned in staff appraisal report)

Objective and description (Output expected Output achieved Impacts expected Impacts achieved. , , . :, ' . ... .. -' ' ' :'.'::.';,' -........... ........................................ .. ... ... ... ... . .... .. ... ...... ... ... ... ... ... .

Stock Assessment ] Update of 10 years old data Stock assessment data base * Improved knowledge * Knowledge on number,completed: on number, size, size, gender and location

gender and location of of Green turtles has been* International Consultant Green turtles to ensure improved to ensure

hired better monitoring of its better monitoring of its* equipment purchased population growth and population growth and* Knowledge on species better preservation of better preservation of the

improved the species species* Data base established and

regularly updated* MOE capacity built and

local staff trained in stockassessment

Management Plan Preparation of Management Management Plan and * To improved MOE's * MOE capability inPlan including feasible monitoring programs for main capability in enforcing enforcing regulations hasmonitoring programs islands and some outer islands regulations been improved

completed: * To reduce numbers of * Number of turtles killed* Monitoring programs turtles killed for for consumption and trade

used on main and some consumption and trade between islands haveouter island by MOE and between islands been reducedother stakeholders

* Local staff trained andsensitized .

28

Objective and description J Output expected j Output achieved Impacts expected Impacts achieved

Feasibility study of Hawksbill Completed feasibility study shelved * To improve knowledge on * noneturtle farming on turtle farming full costs as well as

benefits of turtle farm

Turtle trade compensation study Completed turtle trade Study has been completed * To improve knowledge on Knowledge obtained as basiscompensation study stock of turtle which is for artisans compensation and

being sold, worked and trainingre-sold as finished productartisans possessing alicense

* To improve knowledge onartisans possessing alicense

Re-training of artisans involved Artisans trained in new * All artisans who * To provide artisans with * Artisans have beenin working Hawksbill turtle professions requested training have new business provided with newshell been trained opportunities in order to business opportunities in

form new livelihoods order to form newbesides turtle shell livelihoods besides turtleartisanary to stop killing shell artisanary to stopof turtles for this purpose killing of turtles for this

purpose

Provide revenue compensation * All artisans being * All artisans have been * Artisans provided with * Artisans provided withfor artisans for a period of up to compensated (cash or compensated (cash or start up facilities for new start up facilities for new.three years credit) as required credit) as required business or retirement business or retirement

* Work shell to be * Work shell was bought compensation compensation based onbought off artisans off artisans their requirements

Stock assessment Update of data * Stock assessment data * Improved knowledge on * Knowledge on number,base completed; number, size, gender and size, gender and location

* Intemational location of Hawksbills to of Hawksbills have been

29

Consultant hired ensure better monitoring improved to ensure* Equipment purchased of its population growth better monitoring of its* Knowledge on species and better preservation of population growth and

improved the species better preservation of the* Data base established species

and regularly updated* MOE Capacity built

and local staff trainedin stock assessment

Management Plan Preparation of Management Management Plan and * To improve MOE'S * MOE's capability inPlan including feasible monitoring programs for capability in enforcing enforcing regulationsmonitoring programs main islands and some outer regulations has been improved

islands completed: * To reduce numbers of * Number of turtles killed* Monitoring programs turtles killed for artisanal for artisanal purposes

used on main and some purposed and trade and trade between theouter island by MOE between the islands islands have beenand other stakeholders reduced

* Local staff trained andsensitized

3. Giant Tortoise Management Program (additional not defined in staff appraisal report)

Stock Assessment Update data * stock assessment data . To improve knowledge on * Knowledge on number,base completed: number, size, gender and size, gender and location

* International consultant location of Giant tortoise of Giant Tortoisehired population on main islands population on main

* Equipment purchased * MOE capacity building islands has been* Knowledge on species improved

improved * MOE capacity building* Data base established

and regularly updated. * MOE capacity built and

local staff trained instock assessment

30

Management Plan Preparation of Management Management Plan and * To improve knowledge on * Knowledge on speciesPlan including monitoring programs for species has been improvedfeasible monitoring main islands completed * To advise general public * General public has beenprograms on Giant tortoise keeping advised on giant tortoise

* To capacity built MOE's keepingstaff in enforcement of * Capacity building forregulation MOE's staff in

enforcement of____________________________ _______ __________________ _________________ ________ _________________________ _ regulation

31

Component 3: Abatement of Marine Pollution: The MARPOL Convention

Expected Cost: Total USD 203,000 WITH USD 153,000 GEF grant funding and USD 50,000 Government fundingActual Expenditure: Total USD 365,000 WITH USD 315,000 GEF grant funding and USD 50,000 Government funding

Project Objectives: 1. Study Phase 1 A: Identification of scope and nature of pollution problem in Port VictoriaRecommendation of adequate collection and disposal of waste for Port Victoria

2. Study Phase 1 B: Detailed engineering designs for proposed waste reception facilities3. Purchase of oil spill tracking and control equipment (additional: not defned in staff appraisal report)

Objective and description Output expected Output achieved Impacts expected Impacts achieved

1. Study Phase IA I:A : : : ::_::_._:_:_ ;_E_E

Scope & nature of pollution Study on pollution from ships in Study on scope and nature of * Provide improved * Knowledge improved

problem in Port Victoria Port Victoria pollution from ships in Port knowledge on pollution * Basis for further studyVictoria completed problem for better and design of waste

management of the Port reception facilities* Provide basis for design provided

of waste receptionfacilities for PortVictoria

Recommendation of adequate Preliminary design of waste Preliminary design of waste * Provide basis for Basis for detailed design of

collection and disposal facilities reception facilities in Port reception facilities in Port detailed design of waste waste reception facilities for

for Port Victoria Victoria Victoria completed reception facilities for Port Victoria has beenPort Victoria provided

2. Study Phase I BDetailed engineering design for Provision of detailed Detailed engineering design * Pilot project for waste * Pilot project for waste

waste reception facilities engineering designs for waste for waste reception facilities reception for a port in reception facilities for areception facilities provided the region port in the region

* No actual facilitieswere built (outside theTOR of the project)

32

Objective and description Output expected Output achieved Impacts expected Impacts achieved3. Purchase of oil spill tracking and control equipment (additional; not defned in staff appraisal report)Purchase of oil spill tracking Purchase of oil spill tracking Oil spill tracking and control * Supply Seychelles * Seychelles Coast Guardand control equipment and control equipment equipment purchased Coast Guard with has been supplied with

emergency equipment emergency equipmentto re-act to minor oil to react to minor oilspills spills

Oil spill emergency training and Improved capacity of Capacity of Seychelles Coast * To equip Coast Guard * Coast Guard has beencapacity building for Seychelles Seychelles Coast Guard Guard improved: better to deal with better equipped to dealCoast Guard * Coast Guard personnel minor oil spills with minor oil spills

trained (regionally,internationally

33

Table 7: Studies Included in the Project

Study Purpose as defined Status Impact of studyat appraisal/re-defined

1. Restoration andPreservation of AldabraEco-system

Assessments of change in the New project Field report Better knowledge of change in GiantGiant Tortoise Population and activity, not defined completed, Tortoise Population and VegetationVegetation Cover of Aldabra at appraisal fnal report Cover on Aldabra to allow forAtoll over the past two decades being monitoring of the vegetation and

prepared detecting deterioration at early stagesin the future

Aldabra Long Term Defined at appraisal Draft being Long Term Management FrameworkManagement Plan edited for Aldabra put in place to ensure long

term management of the World=______________________________ = __________________ H eritage Site

Reports on Feral Goat Control Defined at appraisal Completed Feral Goat Population controlled andProject their threats to Tortoise habitat

eliminated

2. Turtle Protection ProgramTurtles Shell Compensation Defned at appraisal Completed Provided Basis for ArtisanStudy Compensation and Training in order

to phase out turtle shell tradingTortoise Management Plan New project Draft being Policy and Management Frame work

activity, not defined edited providedat appraisal

Sea Turtle Management Plan Defined at appraisal Draft being Policy and Management Frame workedited provided

Sea Turtle Monitoring Programs Defined at appraisal Draft being Provides for collection of long termfor different islands edited data sets and population monitoringSea Turtle Ranching Study Canceled

3. Waste Reception Facilities(IMARPOL) study

Waste reception facilities for Defined at appraisal Completed Provided detailed designs for wastePort Victoria (Tebodin report) reception facilities for the Port ofPhase IA VictoriaWaste reception facilities for Defined at appraisal CompletedPort Victoria (Tebodin report)Phase 1B _

34

Table 8A: Project Costs

Item Appraisal Estimates (in SR '000) Actual Total (in SR '000)Local costs | Foreign | Total Local [ Foreign | Total

l Costs Costs Costs _

1. Restoration and 397 2,576 2,973 757 3,768 4,525Preservation ofAldabraEcosystem2. Protection of 3,029 2,284 5,313 1,344 1,686 3,030Sea TurtlesProgram .3. Waste 77 688 765 110 1,465 1,575Receptionfacilities(MARPOL) StudyTotal 3,503 5,548 9,051 2,211 6,919 9,130

Table 8A: Restoration and Preservation of Aldabra Ecosystem

Item Appraisal Estimates (in SR '900) Actual Total (in SR '000)Local costs Foreign Total Local Foreign 1 Total

Costs j Costs Costs1. Rehabilitation 208 678 886 552 2,208 2,760of ResearchStation _

2. Strengthening 74 923 997 40 500 540of Managerial andScientificPersonnel3. Control of 88 732 820 80 670 750Goats4. Preparation of 27 243 270 10 90 100Long TermManagement Plan _ _5. Tortoise Census -- -- -- 75 300 375Total 397 2,576 2,973 757 3,768 4,525

35

Table 8A: Sea Turtle Protection Program

Item Appraisal Estimates (in SR '000) Actual Total (in SR '000)Local costs J Foreign Total Local Foreign Total

Costs ICosts CostsI1. Green Turtle 332 1,306 1,638 360 1,440 1,800ManagementProgram2. Hawksbill 2,697 978 3,675 984 246 1,230TurtleManagementprogram _

Total 3,029 2,284 5,313 1,344 1,686 3,030

Table 8A: Waste Reception facilities (MARPOL) Study

Item Appraisal Estimates Actual Total(in SR '000) (in SR '000)

Local costs Foreign Total Local Foreign TotalCosts Costs Costs

1. Phase 1A 50 445 495 70 640 7102. Phase 1B 27 243 270 40 350 3903. Oil spill -- -- -- -- 475 475EmergencyResponseTotal 77 688 765 110 1,465 1,575

36

Table 8B: Project Financing

Item r Appraisal estimates 1 Actual Total(in '000 USD) (in '000 USD)

Local Foreign Total Local Foreign Totalcosts costs costs costs costs costs

GEF Grant 0.6 1.2 1.8 0.5 1.4 1.9

Govennment 0.3 -- 0.3 0.3 -- 0.3

Total 0.9 1.2 2.1 0.8 1.4 2.2

37

Table 9: Economic Costs and Benefits

During the appraisal of the project, a cost-benefit analysis was not prepared.

The following items are major benefits as projected in the appraisal report. All benefitshave been achieved:

In-country benefits:

1. Collection and maintenance of data;2. Careful monitoring of impact;3. Systematic use of environmental impact assessments for major investments;4. Provisions of alternative forms of livelihood for turtle harvesters;5. Restoration and preservation of World heritage Site Aldabra.

Regional benefits:

1. Pilot project for waste reception facilities in Port Victoria

International benefits:

1. Pilot project in preserving endemic biodiversity in isolated island community.

As stated in the staff appraisal report, it is a necessary exercise to review the EMPS(Environmental Management Plan of Seychelles 1990 - 2000) programs, including theGEF measures, to determine its impacts on the country's ability to manage its naturalresources efficiently on completion of the plan by the year 2000. Ideally, the impacts willbe quantified as costs and benefits and one or more valuation techniques will be appliedto them. The World Bank is presently appraising a mid sized GEF for Seychelles wherethis activity is likely to be included.

38

Table 10: Status of Legal Covenants

Agreementt Covenant Status Original Revised Description ofSection Type fulfillment date fulfillment date Covenant

GET Grant Financial C Six months after Accounts/Auditsthe end of each

No. 28627 SEY financial year

4.01 (June 30,______ ______ _______ _ 1994-1998) ___

39

Annex 1

Borrower comments on the ICR

40

REPUBLUC OF SEYCHELLESMinistry of Foreign AffairsMaison Queau de Quinssy Mont Fleuri P 0 Box 666, Victoria, Mahl SeychellesTel: (248) 22 46 88 - Fax (248) 22 48 46 - E mail: mfapesey2seychelles.netPlease address all correspondence to the Principal Secretary

Our Ref: ECON/ENV/5/10

Date: 8. June 1998-

Mrs. M. Teymouian SCANNED FILE CoPYTask Manager sin *N -

The World Eank , Oste&

FILE (CIa.IAIPWrmmOot #) *nfC? GRITf ES WCcPRg Adm Proc

Dear Mehrnaz,l

RE: Global Environmental Facility (GEF)Implementation Completion Report (ICR)

Reference is made to the above-cited Implementation Complefion Report.

We are pleased to enclose the comments on the ICR by Government of Seychelles (GOS) and

GOS' report on the implementation experience of the GEF.

We would like to take this opportunity to endorse the ICR prepared by the World Bank in its

present form.

But for good understanding of the document, § 6 on page IV should be corrected. This

paragraph makes reference to the disposal of turtle shell. The aim of the GEF was to eliminate

turtle shell circulation f trade. As you are aware, the shell has been safely despotised in a

container after being collected. We therefore feel, that the "outstanding disposal (buming /

dumping at sea)" is not an issue which undermines the overall success of this GEF component.

We hope, the above comment is useful to the overall ICR.

Please allow us to take this opportunity to thank the Bank and the task management team in

particular, for the excellent support and co-operation provided during implementation of the GEF.

We do hope to continue with this fruitful working relationship during the implementation of the

new MS - GEF's.

Thanks you for your usual co-operation.

Best regards,

Kerstin Henr (Mrs.)Project CoordinatorFor: PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

411

Government of Seychelles

B1otve-rstv Co rvcLa&wi, yA b)tenett of M ar6fle P&Ukttort'

ProjectImplementation Experience

Key lessons leamt

The project grew out of the Worldl Bank's involvement in the preparation of theEnvironmental Management Plan of Seychelles (EMPS). Out of the EMPS programs,actions to protect biodiversity and to limit the pollution of the international waters aroundSeychelles were identified as the most supportive of the goals of the GEF. These andcertain other projects in the EMPS were incorporated by the Bank into an integratedEnvironment and Transport Project. The project cost was estimated at a total cost ofUS$ 7 million. The Environment and Transport project was financed by a Bank loan ofUS$ 4.5 million and by a Govemment of Seychelles (GOS) contribution of US$ 0.7million, in addition to a Global Environment Facility (GEF) grant of US$ 2.2 million.

The GEF-financed biodiversity measures include the restoration and preservation of theecosystem of Aldabra Island, and the protection of endangered sea turtles. For themarine pollution reduction the GEF would finance the design and justification of wastereception facilities at the Port of Victoria.

General implementation experience:

The outcome of the project is satisfactory. All its objectives have been achieved and incertain cases surpassed through the implementation of additional activities, such aspurchase of oil spill preparedness equipment and tortoise census. Sector policies,financial objectives, physical objectives and environmental objectives have been met.The project has benefited the Seychelles by assisting it to protect key components of itsbiodiversity; thus fulfilling national objectives for nature conservation as well assustainable development laid out in the EMPS. The project has also benefited theinternational community by addressing issues of global concern, in particular abatementof marine pollution in intemational waters, protection of a World Heritage Site andprotection of globally threatened marine turtles.

The Aldabra program being solution-oriented did not only arrest degradation butachieved restoration and scientific management of the ecosystem as well. The projectwas demanding for GOS and the Bank. A substantial component of the project involvedremote locations where certain works had to be realised within a certain time frame. WithAldabra, for example, the remoteness of the Atoll, the sometimes difficult sea conditions

42

2

and the constraints in communication posed a definite challenge for the transport ofconstruction material and workers and the actual building of the structures. The researchstation has been constructed and is operational, a draft Management Plan has beendrawn up, and the atoll has been purged of all but a few goats.

As the Seychelles was the first Westem Indian Ocean Nation to have signed theMARPOL Convention, the design of port waste reception and disposal has clearlydemonstrated the willingness of the intemational donor community to assist developingcountries in complying with intemational conventions. Seychelles now possessesdetailed proposals for waste disposal facilities that could be constructed to comply withMARPOL. The component was strictly an engineering design, not providing funds for theactual construction of waste facilities or for training.

Another demanding part of the project was to do with turtle products. The projectentailed banning the sale of turtle shell and a cessation of the commercialisation of turtlemeat and associated products. Because of the socio-economic background of theSeychelles and strong feelings regarding continuing utilisation of turtles by certainsections of society, it was extremely difficult for GOS to implement these sub-components within the deadlines defined by the project The turtle and giant tortoisepopulations have been assessed and management enhanced, personnel trained,artisans re-installed in new professions and turtle shell trade effectively terminated. Earlydifficulties in implementing turtle shell legislation and compensation of the turtlecomponent were due to changes in local implementing staff, as well as deep sociologicalpattems of behaviour in Seychellois society. The endanaered turtles component hasbecome a demonstration project for meeting the challenges of conservation through win-win situations; altemative forms of livelihoods and compensation have been provided forthe foregone benefits of turtle harvesting to local populations.

Overall, it is very likely that GOS will sustain general proiect achievements. Despitecertain capacity constraints, typical of small island states, all the implementing agenciesare committed to sustaining and furthering project components. Since the project hasresulted in progress in infrastructure development, scientific knowledge and skills,institutional building including in policy and legislation, public awareness, projectplanning and monitoring, and management skills in key organisations, GOS interest insustaining the project is high. In fact, relevant activities under the turtle and Aldabracomponents have already been incorporated in the work program and recurrent budgetof the respective implementing agencies. Turtle and Tortoise monitoring for examplehave become routine activities undertaken by staff of SIF, the Ministry of Environment,the Marine Park Authority and islands such as Cousin, Cousine and Aride.

The sustainability of marine pollution abatement is uncertain at the moment. Althoughthis project component has been achieved successfully, the actual construction of thereception facilities, which was outside the project scope, is still pending. It is uncertainwhether Govemment can initiate construction within the short term unless it receivesassistance to do so.

433

Key lessons learnt

* The structure of the project team should be retained for the next GEF project. Anefficient National Co-ordinator (GOS) and Task Manager (Bank) have proven to be akey factor in ensuring project success and smooth linkage with the Bank.

* The alternating system of the Task Manager did not always respond GOS needs. Incertain cases when the Task Manager was not in-office in Washington, GOS haddifficulties in communicating with the Bank regarding project-specific issues. Overall,smooth and excellent liaison between the present National Co-ordinator and theTask Manager has been the norm throughout the project.

* Overall, staffing constraints have been a strong limiting factor. Local staffs inimplementing agencies were burdened with many other activities. In addition,management skills, which are a centre-part of implementation success, were foundto be weak in some cases. Also, the mere presence of adequate staff is essential. Inmost cases involving delays and bottlenecks in the project, staff competence andpresence (or lack of) was an important inhibitory factor.

* For project components involving strong socio-economic elements, such as turtles, asocio-economist or environmental economist should be involved in project designand implementation for the purpose of quantifying benefits and costs of naturalresource management and use options.

* Projects involving Aldabra and other remote islands should be approached with careand thorough inquiry into the logistics, and management capabilities of theimplementing agencies. During this project not only was the distance and obstaclesin communication with Aldabra a problem, but capacity constraints within SIFcompounded the difficulties.

* Waste facility projects should consist not only of design components but be moreproactive and incorporate implementation modalities. Whereas it may be difficult toidentify funding requirements prior to design, leaving this component out isimpractical since GOS is left with a situation where implementation becomes difficultand the project output regarded as yet another paper study.

* Budgetary resources should be available for adequate supervision by the Bank,especially for projects involving complex natural resource components. Resourceswere provided for only one supervision mission a year. The multi-disciplinary natureof the GEF program made it difficult to adequately supervise and monitor all the sub-components within the time and resources allocated.

444

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the Govemment of Seychelles implements the following on anindividual project level in order to maximise project benefits:

a) Project for construction of waste facilities. To prevent the abatement of marinepollution study from being yet another 'report on a shelf ', and to enable theSeychelles to comply with MARPOL, it is suggested that a project be implemented.In addition, this project should include components, which would recommendmeasures to make operating the facility economically viable.

b) Improve turtle and tortoise legislation. Certain loopholes still remain in the turtlelegislation. This concems for example the possession of worked shell by artisans. Inaddition, the current fines and sanctions in the legislation are far too low compared tothe potential revenues to be eamed by violating certain aspects of the law.Regarding the Tortoise legislation, this was promulgated in 1976. The legislationneeds to be completely updated and modified. Local matching commitments toCITES must also be included in the legislation to enable the country to comply withthis intemational agreement of which it is a Party.

c) Strengthen the Institutional Capacity of SIF. Difficulties with project implementationindicate that the post of executive officer may be too demanding for one person. Theholder of the post is expected to have experience in personnel management,administrative and financial matters, project design and implementation, logistics,scientific and technology issues, public awareness, protected areas management,and conservation of biodiversity in general. Such a multi-disciplinary person may bedifficult to come upon, and if located may not find the salary structure attractive. It isrecommended that an additional position be created at a more senior level (chiefexecutive officer?) to take up the demanding technical and managementresponsibilities.

The following recommendations are proposed for possible consideration by allconcemed:

1. Program objectives need to be clearly defined and pro-active, resulting in physicalproject implementation

2. Program activities should be all executed as far as possible and should allow forcertain flexibility in their original design.

3. Performance indicators should be introduced in all program design.

4. The total amount of funds involved in supervision should be adequate.

5. Future GEF's for Seychelles should rather be designed as smaller, individual grantscovering just one or two components in order to ease project supervision (such asthe new Mid Sized GEF initiative)

45

Annex 2

ICR Mission Aide-Memoire

46

Mission Aid-MemoirNovember 1997

Preparation of the Medium Sized GEF Projects forManagement of globally threatened Birds in Seychelles

And, Marine Biodiversity Conservation

ICR for Biodiversity Conservation and Marine PollutionControl GEF

A World Bank mission led by Mehrnaz Teymourian (Financial Analyst) andincluding Carl Gustaf Lundin (Environment Specialist) visited Seychelles betweenNovember 5 and November 20, 1997 to:

(I) assist in preparation of two medium sized Global Environmental Facilities for(i) Management of Globally threatened Birds in Seychelles and (ii) Marine BiodiversityConservation in the Seychelles (the draft project Briefs are attached, Annex 1).

(II) discuss possibility of preparation of an Institutional Development Facility(IDF) to assist in increasing Government capacity for (i) emergency preparedness andmitigation plan, (ii) basic project design and implementation.

(II) review and discuss with the Government the first draft of the ImplementationCompletion Report (ICR) for the GEF for Biodiversity Conservation and Abatement ofMarine Pollution (TF 28627).

The mission also took the opportunity to meet with the officials at the PublicUtility Company (PUC) and the Land Transport Division (LTD) to briefly discuss theprogress under the ongoing Environment and Transport Project (Ln 3551). The missionvisited the roads on Praslin where rehabilitation works have been stopped due to floodsand incessant rain since August 1997.

The sites of the Dutch Trust Fund (DTF) projects administered by the Bank, onthe Curieuse and Ile Coco were visited. It was agreed with the Government that aseparate Implementation Completion Report should be prepared for the DTF project thatis also due to close on December 31, 1997.

The mission is most grateful for the assistance and cooperation it received duringits meetings with officials at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Economic Planning(MFA). The Ministry of Environment (MoE), the Marine Parks Authority, the MarineConservation Society (MCSS), the Seychelles Islands Foundation (SIF), Bird LifeSeychelles, the Land Transport Division (LTD), the Disaster Relief Committee, and thePublic Utility Corporation (PUC).

A summary of main issues discussed and agreements reached with theGovernment of Seychelles during the mission is presented below. Detailed findings ofthe mission follows the summary.

47

... .- . -.. .-- . .- .- . --...- . . . .... . . .. . . . .. . . .. .. .. ... . .. .. . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . .. . .

... -.....Y :OFISES DISCUSSEDAND AGREEMENTS REACHEDM......... m............. ... ...

en. danger Birds:.The mission reviewed d commented on vanou p pect posasnd:it~as areedthatthe rojet bref~ ibew finalzd anssbite t teBak arqs thels~~~~~~~.... ..... ....1.fi- b'th6 EY

lem ing Acyfpr essnyDecmbr15 7. 1 it was dgrethat1th:eov :eraldmiistrationnd nancial man.e men:Laofthe to proposed medium sized GEFs (esfimated at:

.SS 740,000 each) will.be with th-eEMWS coodinato a sr pn t accountant atthieA. TheMinistryofFina ne the'requesiotfthie MFA:will facilitate opengof separte.

. . ~ ~ ~. ... ... .. ... . ... . - . . . .. . -accounts at dtheCentral lBank fr- each.of hie prLojcts with the EMPS and te snipu.jeet accowitanat the FA as coesignatores t:. .: the :u nt :

Govenme an th ohe implmeningAcies (i.e SU:, athe Artias lIe lies on the furstdra.of.the .IC.R ill.betransmittedto the Bnkbe-rethe end o.. vem er .- nide-tion.

utch Tr d ...... .mp..io Co..pleti. Rot .. o. nt .. nancespmaaitoft:h -Gs reotudrth i.Te ITFCompletion n-r ille sbmitte to teBank for its comments b te of November 1991 and will b rEvon theC

Boiv .i Coer io an nePoUtion C l .. .:.: . . .ono l. ...tt .to.a..e Facilty: .T.e ssion agreed.to subt t.Fi for :

on of the- B Thet F rquestwibe for i cty buling forproject .d . and m ent, ) capacity b for emergency preparedness and mitigatioplannig. ovrnmentwill submitits two proFsals for Bank considrtoer

3l>.l ........... . .... ::: ::: ::: .: -: p: t: -biu ri t toth

Envirornet an .Tranpr Pjet (ii 3551>;;:TeGovernents' requso exted te Loa closin dt for toyer fro ue 30, 199 tJun3,k 1999 was ap.toved in June 1997 and tm e Loan agreement:wasamended to allow forcopleton ixofwrs for the Baie Lazare Water. Supply Scheme, the Casce foot Path andPraslint Roads reabilitationu-The works for the Cascade foot Path and the w aslin roads havehowever not .yet start. due to heavy rains and:flodng since AUgUSt 19il. -

Aiix :~~~~~~~~~~~ :: -: : ::: ypearde

PUC: Audits o.£the. PublcUtility Company for the year ending December 31, 1996, which weredue.by June 30, 1i 997 hae not yet been prepared.. The miiission would .like to raise its concernsaot PUC';s contiued delays in preparnlg its acconts and having them audited. The missionwould like to req~t that the PUC and the Goverm entiproidet it-saccount ng divisone wtassijtance -it Wia r iJo improve its fi9ancidl management and aceoun g y . Te

' .ission wciul labilitathat the submission th udCts is -aeand coe t of the Proj ctAgeeent,sge beteen,s .t.he. Gvernment and the Worl-d Banik an4 failure to 'comply with thiscvan cl4 rult in suspension of disbusemients under this: comrponent of thie Loan. Themisiiircuaahth audte aconsallreport siuated in Atcle TV of the sad

awevert tbe .sub.ittedto the Bank as early as possible, and in any: event before December I

SW: The audit of the .SIF i accounts for f rY 1996 which .were due by June 30. 1997, have na yben received. .Sumissionw of the audit rport an the .Bank's approval of the proposed

Gwouliing Sreu i.th ePUCared with the Goverrnment thata aseparate audit will be

~~~~~. . .. .. ---. .. .-. .. .-.... .I .Complet a...io .. ...d..s 'been agree fdanca aaretadkcutn h

conducted on:the GEF and Dutch Trust Fund- afer they close onDecenbet. 3 ,h 197.

2

48

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF MISSION FINDINGS

I Preparation of the Medium Size GEF Projects in Seychelles

The mission reviewed and discussed all the initial concepts that were prepared in Mayand were subsequently developed with the project proposers and the MFA. Thefollowing are the two main proposals that were deemed to conform best with thespecified Project Brief Requirements.

(i) Proposed Medium sized GEF for Marine Biological Diversity Protection

After discussion with MFA the following components will be submitted by thegovernment of Seychelles to the World Bank for consideration by the GEF: (a) MooringInstallation Program; (b) Whale Shark Program; (c) Aldabra Group Marine BiodiversityManagement Program; (d) Sea Turtle and Coastal Habitat Management. Draft of theseproject Briefs is attached in Annex 1.

Overall tk.e proposed components form a well balanced project addressing most of thekey biological diversity issues of global concern facing Seychelles marine and coastalenvironment at this time. The proposed activities are all integral parts of the NationalBio-diversity Strategy and Action Program (NBSAP), and have excellent chances ofsuccessful implementation as well as full government backing and endorsement. All theabove components were reviewed by the mission and discussed with the key proposers aswell as other relevant actors. Detailed comments have been given directly to the maindrafters of each component.

The co-financing of the project looks very promising since both government and privateas well as NGOs have been closely involved in the preparation of the proposals. Themission would like to see further work particularly by SIF on securing researchcooperation with other donors or universities to provide additional resources forsuccessful implementation, particularly of component (c).

Overall the poor performance of SEF over the passed 8 months is the main concern facingthe implementation of this proposal. If a more functional administrative system can notbe put in place the implementation of the SIF components will be a serious concern. Acondition for approving the proposal as a whole should be the setting-up of a newefficient and adapted management structure in the SIF office. If this is not undertakenimmediately the mission believes that much of the efforts done under the previous GEFproject will have been in vain.

(ii) Proposed Medium sized GEF for Management of Globally Threatened Birds inSeychelles

The proposed project would consist of the following components: (a) Preparation and

3

49

initial implementation of Scops owl recovery plan; (b) Preparation and initialimplementation of Paradise flycatcher recovery plan; (c) Assessment and initialrestoration of habitat for globally threatened birds; (d) Preparation of action and recoveryplans for key threatened bird species; (e) Implementation of initial recommendation ofisland restoration plan; (f) Socio-economic model of island restoration and managementof birds. Draft of this project Brief is attached in Annex 1.

Overall the proposed components form a well-balanced project addressing many of thekey biological diversity issues of global concern facing Seychelles birds at this time. Theproposed activities are all integral parts of the National Bio-diversity Strategy and ActionProgram (NBSAP), and have excellent chances of successful implementation. All theabove components were reviewed by the mission and discussed with the key proposers aswell as other relevant actors. Detailed comments have been given directly to the maindrafters of the project brief

The co-financing by BirdLife Seychelles of the projects looks promising although themission believes that it could be larger than what is included in the proposal at this time.The active involvement of the Ministry of Environment and in particular the Division ofConservation would be anticipated, particularly since some of the proposed activitieshave been high on the governments agenda for quite some time. The mission would liketo see a firm amount of support, in kind or, in other forms of support from MoE,quantified in the final proposal sent to the World Bank. Without the partnership betweengovernment and BirdLife Seychelles as well as other NGOs, parastatals and privateinterests the implementation of the prepared action plans will be impossible. BirdLifeInternational's proven track record in this respect is an important factor in the missionsconfidence that this project will succeed, but further commitments particularly. from theGovernment would be extremely valuable.

Proiect Implementation Arrangements: The responsibility for administrativemanagement of the two medium sized grants will be with the EMPS Coordinator and theSenior Project Accountant at the MFA who will form the GEF Project Unit (GEFPU).Presently the EMPS coordinator is the GEF focal point in the Govermment and the maincoordinator of Bank related projects in Seychelles. Having successfully implementedthe Biodiversity Conservation GEF and the Environment and Transport Project over thepast years, it is the mission's belief that the EMPS coordinator with the assistance of theSenior Project Accountant has the capacity to undertake administration of the proposednew operations. The GEFPU will keep the record of all the accounts and disbursements.It will be the focal point for all correspondence from the Bank to the recipient of theGrant.

Financial Reporting: The mission has reviewed the financial reporting requirementsunder the proposed grants and has agreed on the following arrangements with theGovernment. The GEFPU will prepare separate quarterly reports for each of the newoperations, which it will submit to the Bank within a month after the end of each quarter.The report will include (i) a progress report on the status of each component referring tothe indicators as defined in the project brief and their status, (ii) a Financial statement

4

50

which includes a summary of sources and uses of funds, the updated six months forecast,the accounts reconciliation forecast and an expenditure by category statement. Whereapplicable a summary of the status of contract signatures should be included. Samples ofthe format for these reports have been submitted to the GEFPU.

Project Accounts: The mission has discussed the possibility of creating separateaccounts for each project at the Central Bank and to provide for the GEFPU to berecognized as the owner of the account. Accordingly the GEFPU will also be signatoryto the accounts and will able to request statements on more timely basis. The mission hasreceived the Ministry of Finance's approval in principal and will await formalconfirmation of the above as part of the proposal pac]kage to be sent to the Bank.

Audits The Grant accounts will be audited by independent auditors on a semi-annualbasis. The audits will be financed by the Government as part of its contribution to projectimplementation. The terms of reference of the audit, to be prepared by the GEFPU, willbe sent to the Bank for its review and comments.

The mission has been notified that the Bank is to receive a formal request from theGovernment including:

(i) two separate project briefs prepared by the GEFPU;(ii) a copy of the letter of with the Ministry of Finance on the

project account arrangement;(iii) confirmation of the administrative and financial management & reporting

arrangements as stated above;(iv) copies of memorandums of understanding between MFA and the various

project implementers (i.e. Ministry of Environment, SIF, Bird LifeSeychelles, Marine Conservation Society, and Marine Parks Authority).

II GEF Implementation Completion Report

The Implementation Completion Report for the first GEF project done in Seychelles hasbeen drafted by a consultant together with the EMPS coordinator with input from the keyimplementing agencies as well as the Bank mission. The draft has been accepted by thegrant recipient as reflecting the accomplishments under this project. The next step will bea review of the ICR by the World Bank and the GEF CounciUSecretariat.

Overall the project has been rated very successful and the sustainability of most of thecomponents seems good. The Bank mission would, Ihowever, like to highlight a couple ofcritical issues that remain to be addressed in the time before completion.

The first concern is the issues facing SIF and its capacity to manage projectimplementation. For example, while the technical drafting of the long term managementplan for Aldabra was completed by external consultants within the time frame allocated

5

51

to it, its final editing, under the responsibility of the SIF, has taken much longer thanoriginally envisaged and the process has been far from transparent. It is unfortunate thatso little attention and effort has been devoted by the SIF Board to use this opportunity tolay a proper foundation for the management of Aldabra. Recent discussions with key SIFBoard members do indicate that some progress can be made on these issues within thenext few weeks. If a proper management structure is not put in place the business asusual will see most of the accomplishments under this project disappear within the nextfew years. This would include the recovery of the feral goat population on Aldabra, thedeterioration of the largely unused research station on Aldabra and the resumption of badmanagement practices including poaching and other illegal activities constantlythreatening Aldabra's fragile ecosystems.

Restoration Component: The preliminary findings of the tortoise census indicate that thepopulations have seen a dramatic drop over the last 25 years. This could partly beexplained by the change of habitat caused by the goat population. A complete eradicationof the goats would need to be undertaken by SIF, probably using a low intensity huntingeffort. SIF needs to give a convincing explanation of how this will be accomplished.

Management Plan: A final version of the management plan should be a top priority forthe SIF board. The current draft materials available are technically sound enough topermit competent members of the Board to complete this task. If no such members are tobe found on the Board, then the idea of expanding the Board to include competent andforward looking persons from both the local private and public sectors should be stronglyconsidered. International institutions with an ability to provide relevant support to thelong-term management of Aldabra should be encouraged to participate in the Board.

Research Station: The completed research station is currently underused. The reasons forthis is primarily a poor marketing capacity by SIF linked with a rigid concept of whatkind of activities should be encouraged. It is also a reflection of the fact that the currentmanagement structure lacks the ability to logistically accommodate the institutions thatdo try to use the station. This needs to be addressed. Aldabra needs to be brought up tospeed with the capacity of a modem conservation organization.

m Dutch Trust Fund

The Dutch trust fund is due to close on December 31, 1997. The mission agreed with theGovernment on the need for a review of the performance of the projects funded under theGrant has suggested that a completion report be prepared for it. The report can beprepared along the lines of the Implementation Completion Report for the GEF and coverthe following topics: (i) Objectives, (ii) Achievements of the Objectives, (iii)implementation issues and sustainability, (iv) Trustee and Recipient performance and(v) Key lessons learnt.

As part of the supervision of the DTF, the mission visited Curieuse and Isle Coco as well

6

52

as Felicite. The following are the mission's observations of the implementation of thecomponents visited.

The Coco de mer plantation on Curieuse seems to have been partly successful with somepalms growing at about expected germination rates. The mission did, however, seeseveral completely submerged holes where the early phases of germinating nuts wouldrisk rotting. The previously used pre-germination, before planting on the slopes, shouldbe fully evaluated and the most beneficial system put in place.

The board walk through the mangroves seems to be in tact through continuedmaintenance efforts. It is likely that much of the wood will need to be replaced over thenext few years. When this is done a more suitable local wood should be chosen.

The implementation of the Isle Coco Marine Park leaves much to be desired. The currentpractice of leaving the rangers for 8 hours drifting in a small boat without possibility touse the nearby island of Felicite needs to be changed. According to a pervious agreementwith the Minister of Environment a small building on Felicite should be renovated for theuse of the rangers. MPA should take immediate action to change this situation. The delayin purchasing the boat is also due to insufficient project management capacity within theMarine Park Authority. The installation of mooring buoys should have been done beforethe park was opened to visitors. The park should also be zoned so that some of the moresensitive areas are out of bounds for tourists. It might also be advisable to discourage thepresence of poor swimmers in the park, due to the shallow nature of the reef Immediatesteep finds should be imposed on anyone breaking the rules, including breaking of coralsand illegal fishing activities.

IV Institutional Development Facility (E)F)

The Government of Seychelles has requested Bank's assistance in developing localcapacity in two main areas.

One area is the national preparedness for disaster relief While the country was able torepair the main damages caused by the flood and respond to the more urgent needsfollowing the heavy rains in August, the incident has revealed the country's vulnerabilityto natural disasters and its inability to deal with them in an efficient and urgent manner.Responding to the Government's request to assist in setting-up of a control unit, themission met with the members of the Disaster Relief Committee which was set-up at theonset of the August floods. The Committee's main concern is to ensure that the countryis well prepared in case a new disaster hits. In view of the continuous heavy rains sinceAugust and exceptionally high tides the Committee felt in needs to prepare itself for anydisaster being landslides, more flooding, or serious damaged to infrastructure such asroads and bridges.

The mission has agreed to consider an IDF request and submit it for the Bank'sconsideration with the objective of developing the local capacity to prepare mitigation

7

53

plans and public awareness. The total amount of the IDF will have to be calculated basedon the cost of technical assistance and training required. The details of the proposal willbe developed by the office of the President with the assistance of the MFA.

Another area where the Bank's assistance is requested is to develop local capacity inbasic project design, administration and management. The MoE handling one of themore diverse and demanding portfolios of the Government is most affected by theinadequate human capacity. The I1)F request that is being prepared by the Governmentwill seek Bank assistance in developing the Ministry's capacity to prepare proposals andmanage them. It is suggested that the preparation of the Environment Management Planof Seychelles (EMPS) for the years 2000-2010, be not only one of the main outputs ofthe IDF but also serve as case study for the staff that are being trained.

The mission has informed the Government that it will review and submit the twoproposals as soon as they are received by the Bank.

v Environment and Transport Project

The mission met briefly with the Land Transport Division (LTD), and the Public UtilityCompany (PUC) to discuss progress under the ongoing components of the project.

LTD The two components under the implementation responsibility of LTD, namely therehabilitation of Praslin Roads and the Cascade footpath have not started, due to theexceptionally high rainfalls and flooding since August. While the contractor is mobilizedand the works supervision contracts signed, the works cannot start until the rains stop.The damage to the roads have been specially acute on Praslin where the roads are mostlybuilt at low levels above the sea. The drainage problems that had caused the originalfailures on the resurfaced roads have intensified with the heavy rains and floods. In someinstances a whole section of the road had been immersed under the sea water for days.The mission believes that the repairs should only start after the drainage problem on thewhole area close to the roads is resolved. This would include not only the road drainagebut also the farms and fields around them.

In view of the recent road failures tlhe LTD is beginning to consider changing thespecifications for the repairs to include concrete covering instead of asphalt. The LTDwill submit its proposal to the Bank. for its review and comments.

PUC The mission was informed that advertisement for the pipes has been made in thelocal newspaper about the same time it was published in the Development Business. Thebids should come in by February 15'h. The bidding documents for filters andchemidosers are also ready and the advertisement for them will be published shortly.The mission was also notified about the damages caused by the floods on Praslin to theelectrical system of the pumping station on fonds B'Offay. This damages have nowbeen repaired.

8

54

The mission is conerned about the continuous delays in preparation of the PUC auditreports and requests that the necessary measures be taken for the audit to be prepared assoon as possible and before they result in the suspension of disbursements under the PUCcomponent.

For the World BankMehrnaz T o

<4X.November 20, 1997

9

]MAPECTI_

IBRD 23521R

46E15' 46'20' 46-25' 46-30'

SEYCHELLESGEF INVESTMENT: BIODIVERSITY PROTECTION

ALDABRA ISLAND 920

Poyonio Tile Malobar or Middle Island

il. Piwcd

W.vl 1,o1od

RESEARCH II 0Cr

STATION \

RkIOI Grande Terre

or

R. E.poi

f, :. S out Ih Island AlrmWip CCIr

01/ so t R46o30hq

0~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 4 b : : '' ' i5'SO

Terre or r. RESEARCH STATION KENYA

T r OTHER BUILDINGS KENYA

TRACKS OR FOOTPATHS N

MANGROVE SWAMPS I

CHANNELS 0onbli LPI. 0

SHALLOW AREAS WITHIN LAGOON 9 SEYCHELLESTANZANIA Alo- ..

--- iNTERNATiONAL BOUNDARIES

S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WKLOMETERS AIdobra I.. c ,"

O i i iS4 5 MILES '8U,.mp""1

4 a.0.5 1.MILES

COMOROS IE.I

ek., bo,, .'oopth dno m"of ,ooIK 00 A. oft 7h. VWord Boo'ksolrr

; m n' Iodgo..of =nr_ 4.0 M zooI .10 ofrl oop o,0*o, or 00,' MOZAMBIQUE

46e15' 46520' 46-25' MADAGASCAR

NOVEMBER 1

IBRD 23522R

S E Y C H E L L E S

GEF INVESTMENT:ABATEMENT OF MARINE POLLUTION

.0 F '^VICTORIA FISHING AND COMMERCIAL PORTS

* PROPOSED LOCATION OF PROJECTCOMPONENTS

. CM PORT FACILITIESI _______ ROADS

DREDGED AREAS

CORAL REEFS

ISOBATHS IN METERS

MER TURNING~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MIR, sAS N o rmBASI

\ \\ X IH A R 0 M ETER S I 0 5 --

IIEII RIIE~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*RdI

\ /- *S_EY C:A ' HELLES S, ;'

I-r~~~ …

\ / --ARBO F'd UURTIO

NOVERWTOI 1994