ANNEX 14: Danube Regional Project Phase 1: APR 2003
UNDP ANNUAL PROJECT REPORT (APR)
UNDP/GEF PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION REPORT (PIR)
2003

OFFICIAL TITLE:
Strengthening the Implementation Capacities for Nutrient Reduction and

Transboundary Cooperation in the Danube River Basin

(Short name: Danube Regional Project Phase 1)
UNDP PROJECT NUMBER:
RER/01/G32/A/1G/31 GEF PROJECT NUMBER:
DATE OF REPORT:
31 / 01 / 2003
Date of Last APR:

1. BASIC PROJECT IDENTIFIERS- Please enter all date (DD/MMM/YEAR)
COUNTRY
Bosnia & Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary,
Moldova, Romania, Serbia & Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine
FOCAL AREA
International Waters
OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME
GEF Operational Strategy for International Waters/
Waterbody-Based Operational Programme (#8)
DATE OF ENTRY IN WP
May 11, 2001
PRODOC SIGNATURE DATE

DURATION (MONTHS)
Phase 1: 24 months
1.1 BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION -Please limit to maximum 100 words.
The long-term development objective of the DRP is to contribute to sustainable human development in the DRB
through reinforcing the capacities of participating countries to develop effective mechanisms for regional
cooperation in order to ensure protection of international waters, sustainable management of natural resources
and protection of biodiversity.
The overall objective of the DRP is to complement the activities of the ICPDR required to strengthen a regional
approach for solving transboundary problems. This includes the development of national policies and legislation,
the definition of priority actions for pollution control, especially nutrient reduction, as well as the achieving of
sustainable transboundary ecological conditions within the DRB and the Black Sea basin area.
1.2 BASIC FINANCIAL DATA Please present all financial values in millions (e.g. 3,502,000 = 3.502)
Funding Source
Institution Name (Acronym, if
Proposed
Actual
any)
Financing
Financing
A. GEF FUNDING

5.000
5.000
UNDP (TRAC)

UN AGENCY

GOVERNMENT (CASH)

GOVERNMENT (IN-KIND)
ICPDR
6.600
6.600
BILATERAL DONORS

-
FINANCING MULTILATERAL DONORS

O REGIONAL BANKS

B. C NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORG.

PRIVATE SECTOR

OTHER

TOTAL COFINANCING 6.600
6.600
TOTAL FUNDING (A+B) 11.500
11.500

2. PROJECT PERFORMANCE

SRF Goal (*):
Environmentally sustainable development to reduce human poverty
SRF Sub Goal (*)

Strategic Area of Support (*)
(*) The UNDP Country Office will fill out these fields

Rating:
HS Highly Satisfactory
S
Satisfactory
UPE Unsatisfactory, with some positive elements
U
Unsatisfactory
X
Not Applic0able
2.1 DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE- Please rate each objective, not each individual indicator.
Development Objective
Indicators
Actual Level Achieved
2002
2003
(Include Target Value & Time
(please provide brief description)
Rating Rating
Frame)
The overall objective of the Overall Project Objective: At the end of All project components have been thoroughly
HS
X
Danube Regional Project is to Phase 1 of the Project, methodologies discussed and agreed with the major stakeholders,

complement the activities of the and concepts have been developed under including the ICPDR and its Expert Groups. The
ICPDR required to provide a the DRPC to introduce and implement project team is participating in ICPDR Expert

regional approach and global legal and institutional mechanisms for Group Meetings, and the respective components are

significance to the development of efficient pollution control and reduction being implemented using a participatory approach.

national policies and legislation of nutrient loads to the Black Sea.
16 of 20 components are under full implementation
and to the definition of priority

while the remaining 4 will begin shortly assuring
actions for nutrient reduction and
that all expected outputs including the identified
pollution control with particular
concepts and methodologies will be finalized by
attention to achieving sustainable
November 2003 (end of Phase 1.)
transboundary ecological effects
within the DRB and the Black Sea
The Danube Regional Project (DRP) is cooperating
area.
with the Black Sea Environmental Recovery Project
(BSERP) in the frame of the Joint Working Group
together with the ICPDR and the ICPBS. This is
providing feedback to both projects and
commissions to coordinate the activities and assist
in reaching the overall goals.

2

2.1 DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE- Please rate each objective, not each individual indicator.
Development Objective
Indicators
Actual Level Achieved
2002
2003
(Include Target Value & Time
(please provide brief description)
Rating Rating
Frame)

The DRP has also established cooperation with the

World Bank/GEF Strategic Partnership and is
working together with project staff from individual
projects (Bulgarian Wetlands, Romania Agriculture
Pollution Control etc.) on related activities.
The specific objective of Phase 1
Concepts and methodologies for all project
HS
X
of the Project is to prepare and
components have been discussed and are being

initiate basin-wide capacity-
prepared in cooperation with the ICPDR and other
building activities with particular
key stakeholders.

attention to creation of inter-
Designated capacity building activities have been
ministerial committees, concept
initiated and the training needs assessment is
development for implementation
currently being conducted, as the basis for training
of policies, legal and economic
programmes to be prepared by the end of Phase 1
instruments, mechanisms for
and then be carried out in Phase 2.
monitoring and evaluation and
development of programmes for
Activities related to policies, legislation and
awareness raising and NGO
economic instruments and M & E are under
strengthening.
implementation and will be available according to
the implementation schedule.
Public participation and NGO capacity building, as
one of the main components of the GEF project has
been given a strong emphasis. The Danube
Environmental Forum (DEF) network is being
strengthened and expanded and a strategic plan has
been formulated, training activities have
beeninitiated. It is expected that the level
achievement will exceed expectations in the 1st
Phase.
2.1.1 DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE ASSUMPTIONS & RISKS
DO #
Assumption
Risk (measured as the probability that the assumption will not hold)
1.
All countries participate under the ICPDR in implementing In 2001 all Danube countries formally expressed their willingness to
legal and institutional mechanisms for pollution reduction and cooperate in fulfilling the obligations related to the EU WFD.
sustainable water management.

3

2.1 DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE- Please rate each objective, not each individual indicator.
Development Objective
Indicators
Actual Level Achieved
2002
2003
(Include Target Value & Time
(please provide brief description)
Rating Rating
Frame)
2. Objective 2:
Objective 2: Operational mechanisms for The main focus thus far has been to support the further
HS
X
Capacity building and
the monitoring of water pollution and development of the ICPDR Information System
reinforcement of
control of emissions from point and non- Danubis. A User Survey finalized in 2002 identified
transboundary
point sources and a reliable information necessary hardware upgrades of national systems as well
cooperation for the
system under the ICPDR are designed and as the scope of training programmes for users at national
improvement of water ready for implementation at the regional and regional level to be conducted. The hardware upgrade
quality and
and national level to assess improvement at national level will be finalized in spring 2003. The
environmental
of water quality and nutrient reduction in ICPDR responded by identifying national information
standards in the
the Black Sea.
facilitators in all DRB countries. The DRP conducted the
Danube River Basin
first training for the National and Expert Groups
Information Facilitators in Dec. 2002. The training
courses will be carried out in all 11 countries by June
2003 assuring a regionally consistent approach for
information management within the various activities of
the ICPDR.
Activities related to the TNMN (Danube Water Quality
Network), EMIS Inventory Harmonization (Danube
pollution inventories) and Accident Emergency Response
(Danube Accident and Early Warning System) were
launched in the last quarter of 2002 after the work
programs were fully harmonized with the relevant ICPDR
Expert Groups. Initial results are expected in Sept. 2003
as the basis for full implementation of improvements in
Phase 2.
The Joint Danube-Black Sea Technical Working Group
has been revitalized, Work Plan for 2002/3 was elaborated
with a focus on developing indicators, with an initial
emphasis on environmental status indicators (in relation to
GEF indicator guidelines.) The cooperation between the
two projects and commissions continues to be very
important for the overall coordination of activities in the
region and essential for reaching the goals of the GEF
Danube/Black Sea Programmatic Approach.

6

2.1 DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE- Please rate each objective, not each individual indicator.
Development Objective
Indicators
Actual Level Achieved
2002
2003
(Include Target Value & Time
(please provide brief description)
Rating Rating
Frame)
3. Objective 3:
Objective 3: At the end of Phase 1 of the Activities to strengthen public involvement in
HS
X
Strengthening of
Project the Secretariat of the Danube environmental decision-making are all being implemented
public involvement in
Environmental Forum (DEF) is fully with good initial results. The project together with the
environmental
operational and national representations Danube Environment Forum (DEF), the umbrella network
decision making and
exist in all Danube countries. National of Danube Basin NGOs, developed a strategy and a
reinforcement of
NGOs are involved in project preparation workplan for reinforcing the DEF which is now being
community actions for and have identified community-based implemented amongst NGOs in all Danube countries.
pollution reduction
nutrient reduction projects to be financed The DEF Secretariat, in cooperation with its National
and protection of
under the GEF Small Grants Programme Focal Points, prepared a leaflet and its first newsletter
ecosystems
and have prepared at least two national (now biannual), which were distributed in 11 countries.
awareness-raising campaigns.
The national versions of these publications were prepared
and they are also available at the DEF Web page
(www.de-forum.org). The first DEF General Assembly
was held in October, and 11 national DEF meetings will
be held between April-June 2003 including training on
nutrient reduction measures. The DEF network is now
fully operational, capacity building activities underway
and expected results of Phase 1 will be exceeded.
The Small Grants Programme (SGP) is being designed
together with the Regional Environmental Centre (REC),
the sub-contractor with involvement of regional NGOs,
DEF and the WWF.
The first call for proposals will be ready in March 2003.
By November 2003, the national and regional projects
will be selected and ready for full implementation in all 11
countries with funding that should be made available in
Phase 2. Efforts have been made to integrate the SGP with
the activities to strengthen the DEF as well as with the
DRP supported communication and public awareness
raising activities. For example, based on National
Training courses prepared and implemented by the DEF,
the NGO community will be well prepared to respond
effectively to the Small Grants Programe.

7

2.1 DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE- Please rate each objective, not each individual indicator.
Development Objective
Indicators
Actual Level Achieved
2002
2003
(Include Target Value & Time
(please provide brief description)
Rating Rating
Frame)

Based on discussion among all stakeholders, it has

become evident that a Development of a Danube River
Basin Communication Strategy is important to enhance
the information and communication flow in the Basin. By
the end of 2003 it is foreseen that a Strategy has been
agreed upon and during the second phase the Strategy will
be implemented in the whole Danube basin.
4. Objective 4:
Objective 4: At the end of Phase 1 of the Project support for the development of monitoring and
HS
X
Reinforcement of
Project, the ICPDR has conceptualized evaluation system and identification of indicators have
monitoring, evaluation
and developed its monitoring and been harmonized with the requirements of the EU Water
and information
evaluation system and has identified the Framework Directive (WFD) via the harmonization with
systems to control
indicators for pollution reduction and the ICPDR Work Plan for producing the Danube River
transboundary
environmental status; knowledge on Basin Management Plan.
pollution, and to
removal of nutrients and toxic substances Appropriate methodologies for the monitoring of nutrient
reduce nutrients and
is increased and economic instruments to reduction in wetlands is being assessed, guidelines
harmful substances
encourage investments for nutrient prepared as the basis for establishing pilot monitoring
reduction are developed at the national programmes in phase 2. Collaboration has been
and regional level.
established with the World Bank/GEF projects related to
wetlands (Bulgarian Wetlands Project, Romania
Agriculture Pollution Control Project and the Proposed
Hungarian Reduction of Nutrient Discharges project.)

OVERALL RATING
HS
X

8

2.2.1 IMMEDIATE OBJECTIVE ASSUMPTIONS & RISKS
IO #
Assumption
Risk (measured as the probability that the assumption will not hold)
1.
All countries participate under the ICPDR in the implementation

of EU WFD and other Directives for pollution reduction.

Common approach of countries in EU WFD implementation
The GEF project, in the frame of and together with the ICPDR, is providing
important technical and administrative assistance to DRB countries in fulfilling
their obligations for implementing the EU WFD. For non-accession countries, the
GEF project is one of the most important mechanisms to prepare for WFD
implementation. Therefore particular support is given to non-accession countries
to overcome administrative and technical constraints. Initial project activities
related to WFD are also identifying gaps in capacities and mechanisms which the
GEF project will work to address in Phase 2. Based on these efforts, the risk that
the common approach in EU WFD implementation will not be undertaken is
minimized. The countries are expressing their high appreciation for the provided
support.
Willingness of governments to accept new concepts for nutrient Administrative and technical constraints (e.g. delays in development and
reduction policies and legal instruments
implementation of reform and policies in specific sectors) are being addressed by
the Project and the ICPDR through the successful support provided to
stakeholders and other organizations at national and regional level. The
commonality of goals of nutrient reduction with the objectives of the WFD,
provides an excellent basis for minimizing the risk that countries will not be
willing to accept new, appropriate concepts for nutrient reduction.
Favorable economic conditions for introducing changes in Economic growth or economic recovery will not follow the projections in all
industry, agriculture and land use sectors
countries. Nevertheless, thus far during project implementation, economic growth
in most Non-EU countries in the DRB has exceeded the growth in EU countries.
Therefore the project efforts and resources will be focused, to the degree possible,
on assisting the non-accession countries to develop institutional capacities to
respond to economic and environmental challenges in the region.
Willingness and commitment of government and economic The GEF project has designed a thorough analytical framework for the assessment
authorities to introduce economic incentives
and design of water tariffs and fees, taking into account different national
conditions. This focus on economic soundness and social acceptance of the new
concept will create commitment of governments and initiate cooperation of
economic authorities.

9

2.2.1 IMMEDIATE OBJECTIVE ASSUMPTIONS & RISKS
IO #
Assumption
Risk (measured as the probability that the assumption will not hold)

Cooperation of stakeholders at national and regional level
This risk has been and will continue to be minimized by GEF project activities to
enhance public involvement in environmental decision-making, by greater efforts
to build public awareness of priority environmental problems in the DRB and
potential solutions.
Access to information and data in all Danube Countries
The technical support given by the Project and the ICPDR to harmonize collection
and dissemination of information on hydrological, social and environmental data
at the national level will assure availability and harmonized results. Intensive
training and assurance of broad involvement of all ICPDR structures in DRP
information management further minimize such risk of disparities and difference
in quality of information.
2.
National Experts are proactively participating in the

implementation of the DRPC and Governments have provided
sufficient funding for the operation of national Info System.

Cooperation among ministries at national levels and willingness Coordination, cooperation and information flow among ministries varies from
of governments to accept concept of Inter-ministerial country to country. The project activity will facilitate development of inter-
Coordinating Mechanisms
ministerial coordination mechanisms for nutrient reduction, as well as the
implementation of the EU WFD and other Directives.
Close cooperation of different ICPDR Expert Groups at national National commitment and national capacities to provide required data is being
and regional level and agreement on information, monitoring and reinforced by the technical assistance given to the respective ICPDR Expert
data harmonization
Groups, through active participation of national experts in the execution of the
project and through capacity-building activities of the DRP.
National data availability
Through close cooperation with national institutions and experts in the project
implementation and through technical assistance provided for data collection, in
particular supporting the non-accession countries, the risk of unequal quality,
comparability and compatibility of data will be reduced.
Commitment of all governments to give priority to accident Project support to improve the accident risk inventories will increase the
pollution issues and transboundary communication
awareness of governments on potential locations of accident pollution as well as
possible consequences, with the desired result of giving greater priority to
addressing these problems.
Willingness and commitment of stakeholders to make links to The project will enable all stakeholders to fully use the ICPDR Information
the ICPDR Information System Danubis
System (Danubis) through providing equipment at national and central level, and
through training programs to improve users skills.

10

2.2.1 IMMEDIATE OBJECTIVE ASSUMPTIONS & RISKS
IO #
Assumption
Risk (measured as the probability that the assumption will not hold)

Close cooperation of the Expert from the both commissions in Supporting the work of the Joint Danube-Black Sea working group and
the Joint D-BS WG
cooperation with the BSERP, the ICPBS and ICPDR respectively according to an
agreed work plan and expected outputs, is decreasing the risk of unequal
commitment and means of the ICPDR and Black Sea Commissions in
implementation of the MoU.
Willingness of Experts to participate and accept training Organizing efficient, effective and content "relevant" training for the EG
activities focused on developing management skills
members, based on a sound needs assessment (which is currently being conducted
by the project training specialist) will increase commitment and willingness from
the side of experts and the ICPDR to participate and accept training and
development of management skills.
3.
The DEF has the necessary personnel and commitment to play its
role efficiently in the DRB.

Willingness and commitment of national NGOs to participate in The strengthening of the DEF network, in particular DEF National Focal Points
the activities of the DEF
and the increase of DEF members as well as the improvement of the network
structures (webpage, newsletter, leaflet, email exchange networks etc.) in the
respective DRB countries will reinforce the information flow among the NGOs at
regional and national level thereby supporting their activities..
Professional knowledge of NGOs in pollution issues and Emphasis will not only be given to the "traditional" NGO agenda (nature
adequately trained staff available
protection, conservation) but technical issues related to nutrient reduction and
Acknowledgement of nutrients and toxics reduction objectives in toxic pollution will equally be addressed through the DEF's organization of 11
the Small Grants Programme by NGOs
national level training workshops for the training of NGOs at regional and national
level, with focus on nutrients reduction.
Interest of governments and other stakeholders in public The project is developing a comprehensive Communications strategy that will
participation and awareness raising issues and mutual effectively identify and prioritize activities to be organized by the DRP later in
cooperation of governmental bodies and NGOs
Phase 1 and throughout phase 2, that will lead to greater involvement of
governments and NGOs in pollution reduction activities. The project is further
supporting the ICPDR in developing a the public participation component of the
Danube River Basin Management Planning process required by the WFD at the
regional, national and local levels.

11

2.2.1 IMMEDIATE OBJECTIVE ASSUMPTIONS & RISKS
IO #
Assumption
Risk (measured as the probability that the assumption will not hold)
4.
Cooperation of all countries and organizations, in particular the
EU, in the development and application of indicators for project
monitoring and evaluation.

Introduction of EU environmental parameters and agreement of The risk of using different methodologies for interpretation of project results and
Countries on selected indicators
a system of indicators in countries is minimized due to commitment of countries
to undertake common approach in EU WFD implementation.
Understanding of the need to restore wetlands for pollution Scientific and economic conditions to improve nutrient removal capacities in
reduction
wetlands are being analysed by the project and methodologies and concepts for
use of wetlands for pollution reduction are being developed.
Support from the Danube Countries for innovative economic The risk that "Pollution trading" is for some contracting parties (EU) not an option
instruments in long-term perspective
to be considered will be minimized if the concept of pollution trading will be
broadly discussed and understood and by detailing the technical as well as
economic requirements of such proposed schemes.

12

3. IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES
Please list three main challenges experienced during implementation. Please describe adaptation approaches or
remedial action either already taken or planned to solve them
1) Harmonization of UNDP/GEF Project Activities with ICPDR activities (Secretariat, Expert Group Work
plans, respective national activities etc.)
Given the complexity and scope of ICPDR activities it is a challenge for the UNDP/GEF to harmonize GEF
project objectives and activities with those of the ICPDR. The harmonization of activities has however been
successfully coordinated. The project has, together with the Expert Groups, developed the Work-Programmes
and TORs for all project activities such that the respective efforts are being synchronized. Sub-contractors are
being involved in the work of the Expert groups at an early stage and all activities are being further developed
within this frame. The Stakeholders involved in the Project and the ICPDR have expressed highly appreciation
of this method of organizing the work.
2) How to Assure that non-EU Accession countries can and will participate in implementing the EU Water
Framework Directive (WFD).
Currently only 6 of the 11 non-EU members are officially EU Accession countries. Therefore it is a specific,
constant challenge for the project to work to assure that non-accession countries have the commitment and the
means to work towards WFD implementation.. Major efforts and resources from the Project and the ICPDR are
being focused on assisting the non-accession countries to develop institutional and administrative capacities
through financial and technical support.
The efforts of the project so far, have strengthened the synchronization of implementation efforts.
3) Capacity Building. A specific challenge is that capacity building needs in the DRB, and with key Danube
stakeholders far exceed the resources (and the scope) of the DRP. The project has sought to respond to this
challenge by first developing a comprehensive training needs assessment as the basis for setting priorities and
then developing and conducting appropriate training and capacity building activities.
4) Ensuring that the Capacities of NGOs are enhanced by the Implementation of the Small Grants Programme
(SGP.) It has been a challenge to design and structure the SGP such that it maximizes the potential to strengthen
DRB NGOs at both the national as well as the regional level in their capacity to address pollution reduction
issues. The project has placed a particular effort to integrate the Danube Environmental Forum (DEF) into SGP
implementation.
4. LESSONS LEARNED/GOOD PRACTICE
Please describe briefly the key lessons and examples of good practice that have resulted from project
implementation during the year.
1) Establishing Excellent Cooperation with the ICPDR and its structures (co-executing agency and primary
beneficiary) and Improving Administrative and Technical Capacities to Cooperate. The ICPDR was formed to
implement the Danube River Protection Convention (DRPC) and is since 2000 the platform for coordinating the
implementation of the EU WFD in the DRB.
The cooperation between the DRP and the ICPDR is excellent as the GEF project is proactively working
together with the ICPDR at various levels, the Secretariat, the respective ICPDR Expert Groups and respective
National Governments. The project participates, together with relevant contractors where appropriate, in all
Expert Groups Meetings organized by the ICPDR. In this way the GEF Project has the full overview and
understanding and can thereby provide the best assistance and input to the further development of the work.
Further, these commonly implemented activities serve to improve administrative and technical capacities at the
National level based on guidelines and requirements set by the ICPDR and the Project. In this way, the GEF
project plays a catalytic role in stimulating DRB countries to meet their commitments to the DRPC and
increasingly the WFD. This encourages national governments to develop appropriate structures for regional
cooperation which is facilitating the strengthening of good governance in the Danube River Basin.

13

2) Linking Global Environment issues to EU Water Framework Directive. A key lesson learned is the benefit of
a close link between global environmental objectives and an appropriate legislative framework. The EU WFD
represents, perhaps, the most comprehensive water legislation in the world. It provides an excellent basis for the
implementation of the DRP given commonly shared principles such as a basin-wide holistic approach,
ecosystem management etc. By linking project activities closely with the WFD and its implementation, the DRP
is both increasing the ability to meet global environmental objectives in the frame of the project, but also
establishing the basis for the sustainability of project results as well as the mechanisms for ongoing
improvements after the life of the project.
3) Appropriate Level of Public Participation. The DRP has put a large emphasis on supporting increased public
participation in DRB cooperation. An important lesson learned is that it is critical to focus on developing
appropriate public participation mechanisms and strategies given specific level of activity (regional, national,
sub-basin, local.) The DRP is developing grassroots level (bottoms-up) activities via the Small Grants
Programme, as well as is supporting the development of the Danube Environmental Forum (DEF) which, as a
regional network is capable of working at all levels, sub-basin, national or local levels through its constituent
members. The provisions of the WFD provide an opportunity, based on legislative requirements, to enhance
public participation within the frame of the ICPDR and its parties for the first time. This will occur concretely
by incorporating adequate public participation activities and mechanisms into the process for developing the
Danube River Basin Management Plan. Emphasis here will be first at the regional (ICPDR or top) level.
However, guidance will also be developed, to assist national governments to incorporate public participation in
river basin management at the sub-basin, national and local levels. In addition to the above-mentioned activities,
there are considerations to develop a specific project component to improve access to information for key
stakeholders and to enhance their abilities to address priority sources of pollution (hot spots) in the DRB.
4) Developing Appropriate Training Activities. By first undertaking a training needs assessment, the DRP
learned that training activities need to build institutional capacities (ICPDR, DEF etc.) as well as to build
technical capacities (nutrient reduction, wetland rehabilitation, reduction of toxic substances etc.) to assure
increase of knowledge and capacity to act for water management and pollution control. The training needs
assessment also serves as the basis to prioritze training needs given limited resources (human and financial.)
5. SYNERGIES, DEMONSTRATION AND CATALYTIC EFFECTS
5.1 Have there been any interactions/synergies with similar projects in the country/region during project
preparation and/or implementation?
The DRP in cooperation with the BSERP, has revitalized the Joint Danube Black Sea Working Group to
coordinate the implementation of the MoU with the cooperation and guidance of the Danube and the Black Sea
Commissions.
The DRP has also established good cooperation with respective projects in the World Bank/GEF Partnership
Programme related to specific technical issues (e.g. Bulgarian Wetlands project, Romanian Agriculture
Pollution Control project, Hungarian Nutrient Reduction project, Moldova Agriculture project etc.)
The DRP, in cooperation wit the ICPDR and the ICPDR representatives in the 4 Sava countries (Slovenia,
Croatia, Bosnia-Hercegovina and Serbia &Montenegro), has successfully worked to integrate activities being
supported within the Stability Pact Sava Basin Initiative. Based on these intensive efforts, these activities
should be coordinated within the frame of the DRP supported pilot river basin management plan for the Sava in
the future. DRP activities in support of the implementation of the EU WFD, are being coordinated with the work
of the respective EU level expert groups who have been charged with providing guidance on how to implement
respective elements of the WFD in relation to the EU Common Implementation Strategy for the EU WFD.
The Danube-Black Sea Task Force (DABLAS), supported by the EU, is working to identify and then prioritise
investment projects for the municipal sector with a focus on nutrient reduction in the Danube and Black Sea
basins representing an important synergy to the DRP.
The DRP has begun consultations with the GEF IW Learn project about potential collaboration with initial focus
on the support of the information technology capacities of NGOs (DEF) in the region.

14

5.2 Describe efforts to disseminate lessons and transferring knowledge that have had or are expected to have
demonstration and replication effects.*
The project web page has been established in early stage of the project, in order to disseminate existing available
documentation related to the project, as well as to inform the stakeholders and the public on the context of the
project and progress of implementation. In addition to that the project web page facilitate exchange of
information among consultants and other project stakeholders through its working area.
Further qualitative step in developing the ICPDR Information System was initiating the process of creating new
national and EG structures information facilitators, who will be responsible in the future for managing the
content of the information area at national level and Expert Groups level. In this context the first training of
facilitators was organized in December 2002, with participation of the national facilitators from 12 Danube
countries and all ICPDR EGs.
The training courses at national level are starting in March 2003 to strengthen the Danubis user skills and
capacities of the ICPDR EG members at national level.
5.3 How has the project contributed to bringing about policy or legislation changes in the country, changes in
the Implementing Agency or other donor strategies- or private business practices- to give stronger emphasis to
global environment issues?
This project, as a "mature" GEF International Waters (IW) project, builds on the successes of earlier GEF
project activities (1994-1999) including key GEF IW requirements such as the Transboundary Analysis,
Strategic Action Plan and Pollution Reduction Programme (which later served as a key inputs into developing
the ICPDR's 1st Joint Action Programme 2001-2005). Based on the results of the latest Pollution Reduction
Programme (1997-1999) the Project, in assisting the ICPDR provides support in developing new regional
policies and facilitating legislative and policy changes in the participating DRB countries.
Furthermore GEF project activities support the EU Accession process and the implementation of key EU
legislation such as the WFD, Nitrates Directive, IPPC etc. In this sense the GEF project provides a vehicle for
non-ascession countries to prepare for implementation of the EU WFD. It also provides the mechanism for the
harmonization of efforts to implement the EU WFD throughout the DRB.
Based, to a significant degree on the results of previous GEF interventions in the Danube (and the Black Sea)
there is currently an EU initiative to prioritize investment projects in the Danube and Black Sea areas known as
DABLAS which has, as a key objective, the reduction of nutrient pollution in the Danube and the Black Sea.

6. PARTNERSHIP STRATERGIES
Please mention any partnerships/strategic collaboration agreements established with other
institutions, civil society organizations or the business community in order to achieve project
objectives. If the project works with a private for profit- organization , please also respond to
questions on Annex I at the end of this questionnaire.
The DRB has been focusing on working with existing regional institutions, the ICPDR, and of course, the
European Union and its relevant structures, as well as regional NGO networks (Danube Environmental Forum,
WWF-Danube-Carpathian Programme, Global Water Partnership for Central and Eastern Europe, etc.) that can
work at the regional, sub-basin, national as well as, often, local levels in the DRB.
The DRP has developed cooperation with some NGOs such that they are either responsible for the
implementation of specific project components or have significant roles to play in their implementation e.g. the
wetland components (WWF), public participation (Global Water Partnership for Central and Eastern Europe),
DEF (involvement in the Small Grants Programme.

15

7. RESOURCES LEVERAGED
Apart from the co-financing contributions reflected in the budget, how has the project mobilized
additional financial resources for either addressing global environmental concerns or financing
baseline activities during implementation? Please indicate the amounts and sources of leveraged
resources.

NOT APPLICABLE

8. SOFT ASSISTANCE
Soft assistance contributes to the outcome and/or outputs. This section aims to identify activities or
issues conducted not envisaged in the workplan yet with concrete results ensuring progress towards
the outcome. This section of the PIR/APR contribute to the CO reporting section on "advocacy and
policy dialogue"and allows the country office and the project to work in the same direction in
advocacy and dialogue. If soft assistance is not an issue for the project or too sensitive to address,
this section can be left empty

NOT APPLICABLE

9. MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Type of Report
Date (DD-MMM-YR)
Report Available/comments
Field Visits

Annual Project 21-02-03
Yes
Review
Tripartite Review
21-02-03
Yes
Mid-Term Evaluation

Final Evaluation

10. FINANCIAL INFORMATION- From project start-up to date of this report.
Cumulative planned disbursement ($millions)
US$ 5,0
Cumulative actual disbursement ($millions)
US$ 2,1 (including contracted obligations)
Timing of disbursements
60% vs. 40%
(percentage of planned vs. actual expenditures)
Date/Period of First Disbursement
December 2001

16

11. PROCUREMENT DATA

Note : For projects or project components executed by UNOPS this section must not be filled
in - data will be provided by UNOPS headquarters-.

Please report the US$ value (in Thousands) of UNDP/GEF Payments to Supplying Countries
for Procurement in GEF Donor Countries. Please enter Project expenditure from project start up
to the date of this report into the matrix against the donor country supplying the personnel,
sub-contract, equipment and training to the project. Please report only on contracts over US$
2000.

Supplying Country
Personnel
Sub-contracts Equipment
Training
Total
(only donor countries)
(in US$)
(in US$)
(in US$)
(in US$)
(in US$)

12. AUDIT REQUIREMENTS FOR GOVERNMENT AND NGO EXECUTED PROJECTS

NOT APPLICABLE

The UN Board of Auditors has established that an annual audit is necessary for all Nationally
Executed and NGO Executed GEF projects, whose expenditures for the calendar year (January -
December ) exceed $20,000. Expenditures below that amount are subject to normal UNDP audit
procedures, which is once in the project's lifetime.

According to the above regulations, please indicate:

Ø For which calendar year's expenditures, an audited financial statements have been issued;

Ø Which will be next calendar year for which an audit will next occur:

Ø Date of Submission to HQ UNDP Office of Audit
and Performance Review, National Execution Audit Section:

Ø If the report has not been received from the Government or NGO, please comment on
actions taken by the Country Office to ensure compliance.

Ø If the Audit Report contains negative comments, please indicate what actions have been
taken by the Government or NGO.

17

13. NGO INVOLVEMENT

PLEASE ENTER THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION INTO THE TABLE BELOW FOR EACH NGO INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT:

Full Name:
Please list the full name of the NGO.
Acronym:
The official initials of the NGO's name.
Type:
Please refer to PIR instructions for "Type" classification.
Role:
Please refer to PIR instructions for "Role" classifications.
Activity:
Brief description of services provided by NGO.
$ Value:
USD $ value (in Thousands) of contracted project services assigned to NGO (if applicable).

Full Name
Acronym
Type
Project
Role
Activity
$ Value of
(Do not give acronym only!)
Stage
contracted
services
Danube Environmental Forum
DEF
IGO
Full
Provider of Project · NGO Network
US$ 220,000
Services
Development and
Capacity Building
World Wildlife Foundation
WWF
IGO
Full
Provider of Project · Wetlands
US$ 266,000
Services
· Communication
Strategy
· Land Use
Regional Environmental Center for REC
IGO
Full
Provider of Project · Small Grants
US$122,000
Central and Eastern Europe
Services
Programme design and
implementation

PLEASE INDICATE FACTORS THAT HAVE FACILITATED OR CONTRIBUTED TO NGO INVOLVEMENT:

High level of commitment from organisations and key persons involved.

PLEASE INDICATE FACTORS THAT HAVE CONSTRAINED NGO INVOLVEMENT:

No major contains during the first year of the project

18

Annex 1
Private Sector Involvement in UNDP-GEF Projects under
Implementation

NOT APPLICABLE

As part of the PIR process it is important to ascertain the degree to which UNDP-GEF
projects work with private (for-profit) companies beyond that of the traditional sub-contracting
relationship. This refers to companies, which contribute to a project as opposed to receive
financing from it.

A. If the project is benefiting from such private sector resources please answer the
following five questions for each company involved in the project.

1. What is the name and type of company (local, national, multi-national)?

2. What economic sector does the company work in (e.g. tourism, fisheries, forestry,
agriculture)?

3. What resources/benefits is the company bringing to the project and how do they help
achieve the project objectives? This could include:

- Reduce industrial impact on the environment such as pollution, deforestation and
habitat loss and exhausting natural resources through adopting best practices and
working more closely with governments and local communities.
- Advice on viability of a sustainable livelihood particularly during the early stages of
project implementation.
- Support for community development through the provision of industry unique
technical and commercial (marketing, financial planning) expertise, transfer of
technology such as old equipment, investment in infrastructure to assist micro-
enterprise development, access to existing markets and provision of new ones
through offering to purchase goods from project beneficiaries
- Engage in national policy dialogue with governments to inform on sector planning
which will facilitate development
- Provide small to medium grants as co-financing either specific activities as agreed in
the project document or for general project budget.

4. How is the company being involved in project implementation (being consulted as
part of project activities, working jointly on project activities, participating in steering
committees, carrying out parallel activities with project beneficiaries)?

5. What benefit is the company deriving from contributing to the project?

B. If the project has not involved companies but could benefit from their resources please
explain, given sufficient resources, what could be potentially done within the project to
develop such partnerships.

19

ANNEX 15
Danube Regional Project Phase 1: Objectives / Success
Criteria / Progress

20

Annex 15: Danube Regional Project: Tranche 1 Objectives / Success Criteria / Progress
Objectives
Success Criteria (Objectively Verifiable Expected outputs at the end of phase 1 (Sources of Verification)
Indicators)
1. Long-term Development Objective:
Overall Project Objective: At the end of All 20 components have been fully implemented (and/or ready to be further
Phase 1 of the Project, methodologies and implemented in phase 2 of the project) All expected outputs including the identified
The long-term development objective of the concepts have been developed under the concepts and methodologies have been finalized.
proposed Regional Project is to contribute to DRPC to introduce and implement legal and
sustainable human development in the DRB institutional mechanisms for efficient All progress reports and evaluation reports as well as summary reports of ICPDR
through reinforcing the capacities of the pollution control and reduction of nutrient meetings and resolutions are available. As well as National reports on the process of
participating countries in developing effective loads to the Black Sea.
implementation of legal and institutional instruments.
mechanisms for regional cooperation and
coordination in order to ensure protection of
international waters, sustainable management of
natural resources and biodiversity.
2. Overall Objective:
The overall objective of the Danube Regional
Project is to complement the activities of the
ICPDR required to provide a regional approach
and global significance to the development of
national policies and legislation and to the
definition of priority actions for nutrient
reduction and pollution control with part icular
attention to achieving sustainable transboundary
ecological effects within the DRB and the Black
Sea area.
The specific objective of Phase 1 of the Project
is to prepare and initiate basin-wide capacity-
building activities with particular attention to
creation of inter-ministerial committees, concept
development for implementation of policies,
legal and economic instruments, mechanisms for
monitoring and evaluation and development of
programmes for awareness raising and NGO
strengthening.

21

Objectives
Success Criteria (Objectively Verifiable Expected outputs at the end of phase 1 (Sources of Verification)
Indicators)
3. Purpose of the Project:
Objective 1: At the end of the Project Phase Policy guidelines for River Basin Management have been developed and fully
1, all Danube River Basin countries have harmonized with the ICPDR Work Plan The production of the Danube River Basin
Further, the Danube Regional Project shall reviewed policies and legal instruments in Management Plan and activities on economic analysis, typology, ecological
facilitate project implementation by providing a relation to ecological land use (River Basin classification, GIS, groundwater assessment and public participation have been
framework for coordination, dissemination and Management) and water management and finalized.
replication of successful demonstration that will have prepared mechanisms to adapt their
be developed through the implementation of national legislation to international and EU Concepts and methodologies related to polices and legal instruments for agriculture,
investment projects.
standards.
industry and wetlands restoration have been developed and harmonized in the ICPDR
Expert Groups and their Work-Programmes.
By fall 2003, the water tariffs and charges study have been finalized and discussed with
all major stakeholders as the basis for capacity building activities in the second phase of
the project.
Project progress and evaluation reports will be available, as well as National reports on
existing and proposed policies, legal instruments and measures for compliance.
Objective 2: Operational mechanisms for the The ICPDR Information System has been successfully developed, national and regional
monitoring of water pollution and control of trainings have been organized to assure a regionally consistent approach for information
emissions from point and non-point sources management within the various activities of the ICPDR.
and a reliable information system under the Activities related to the TNMN (Danube Water Quality Network), EMIS Inventory
ICPDR are designed and ready for
implementation at the regional and national Harmonization (Danube pollution inventories) and Accident Emergency Response
level to assess improvement of water quality (Danube Accident and Early Warning System) have been fully harmonized with the
relevant ICPDR Expert Groups. Initial results are expected in Sept. 2003 as the basis for
and nutrient reduction in the Black Sea.
full implementation of improvements in Phase 2.
The Joint Danube-Black Sea Technical Working Group has been revitalized, indicators
have been developed (in relation to GEF indicator guidelines.)
Working area of the ICPDR Information System showing concepts and design of
monitoring systems for water quality, emissions and emergency warning are available,
in addition to Reports from the MLIM and EMIS Expert Groups

22

Objectives
Success Criteria (Objectively Verifiable Expected outputs at the end of phase 1 (Sources of Verification)
Indicators)

Objective 3: At the end of Phase 1 of the The Work Programme and the Strategy of the DEF have been implemented in all
Project the Secretariat of the Danube
Danube countries. Training courses have been organized to prepare and assist the
Environmental Forum (DEF) is fully NGOs for participation in the Small Grants Programme.
operational and national representations exist
in all Danube countries. National NGOs are
Reports on staffing and operation of the DEF Secretariat as well as List of national
NGOs adhering to the DEF and of National DEF Focal Points will be available.
involved in project preparation and have
identified community-based nutrient reduction The Small Grants Programme has been designed and based on the first call for
projects to be financed under the GEF Small proposals(March 2003), national and regional projects will be ready to be implemented.
Grants Programme and have prepared at least
two national awareness-raising campaigns.
National lists of projects to be financed in the frame of the GEF Small Grants
Programme (second phase) will be available.
A Communication Strategy have been prepared for the Danube Basin, this will be ready
for implementation in the second phase of the project.
Objective 4: At the end of Phase 1 of the Project support for the development of monitoring and evaluation system, and
Project, the ICPDR has conceptualized and identification of indicators have been harmonized with the requirements of the EU
developed its monitoring and evaluation Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the ICPDR Work Plan for producing the
system and has identified the indicators for Danube River Basin Management Plan.
pollution reduction and environmental status;
knowledge on removal of nutrients and toxic Appropriate methodologies for the monitoring of nutrient reduction in wetlands have
been assessed, guidelines have been prepared as the basis for establishing pilot
substances is increased and economic
instruments to encourage investments for monitoring programmes in phase 2. Collaboration has been established with the World
nutrient reduction are developed at the Bank/GEF projects related to wetlands (Bulgarian Wetlands Project, Romania
Agriculture Pollution Control Project and the Proposed Hungarian Reduction of
national and regional level.
Nutrient Discharges project.)
The Pollution Trading study has been developed.
The Concept of M&E system indicators (process stress, status) developed and
accessible in DANUBIS working area will be available as well as;
§ Report on methodological approach and programmes to assess nutrient -
retention capacities of wetlands;
§ Report on economic instruments to facilitate investments in nutrient reduction
projects;
§ Pollution Trading Study.

23

Objective 1: Creation of sustainable ecological conditions for land use and water management
Output / Activity
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Expected outputs at the end of the phase 1 (Sources of verification)
Output 1.1:
1. River Basin Districts are defined
· Final Report including final overview map (incl. sub-basins and sub-units)
Development and implementation
2. River basin management practices are
· Needs Assessment for a Danube GIS
of policy guidelines for river basin
identified and gaps and needs in relation
· Conceptual Design for the Danube GIS and Hardware and Software Survey
and water resources management
of WFD requirements are clarified
· Final report including recommendations for next steps
3. Methodology for preparation of RBD
management plans is implemented in pilot
· Workshop report of "kick-off" Workshop, including guidelines , formats,
river basins
proposed methodologies, etc
4. Transboundary cooperation and
· National Reports and Status Report on availability / quality of economic data for
coordination is enhanced
water use, data gaps, and existing national capacities to carry out specific tasks of
the economic analysis

·

Synthesis Report
· Report on criteria for significant hydromorphological pressures and impacts and
overview report on hydromorphological stress and impact analysis of the Danube
River
· Report on proposal of typology for Danube River and on criteria and metrics for
the definition of reference conditions for the Danube
· Report on overviews of ecological status assessment and classification systems
existing in the DRB and on recommendations for harmonizing ecological
classification systems according to WFD, with special emphasis on benthic
invertebrates
· Workshop: preparation of agenda, workshop material and report
· Report: Analysis of the results of the groundwater questionnaires and a Concept
for the Groundwater workshop
· Report: workshop materials, agenda, background documentation
· Report: synthesis of workshop, findings, recommendations
· Recommendation for implementing available RBM plan guidelines in DRB pilot
basin

24

Objective 1: Creation of sustainable ecological conditions for land use and water management
Output / Activity
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Expected outputs at the end of the phase 1 (Sources of verification)
Output 1.2:
1. List of `hot spots' and assessment of
· Updated and completed inventory of pollution sources from agriculture in DRB
Reduction of nutrients and other
legislation on point and non-point sources
· Report on agricultural policies and state of enforcement in DRB
harmful substances from
of pollution are updated
·
agricultural point and non-point
2. Review of hazardous agrochemicals and
Pesticide and fertilisers market products inventory
sources through agricultural policy
their impacts is worked out
· Report on the use of the pesticide and fertilisers market products
changes
3. Conventional and alternative agricultural
· Study on deficiencies in land use and agriculture practices
practices and farming in line with EU
· Report on existing situation in policy development and implementation of BAP in
requirements for central and downstream
DRB
Danube countries are analyzed
· Draft BAP concept
4. National deficiencies in agricultural policy
are identified
· Workshop and workshop report
· Final draft BAP concept
Output 1.3:
1. Assessment of practical promotion of best · Analysis of existing programs and projects
Development of pilot projects on
agricultural practices and manure handling · List of identified potential new pilot projects
reduction of nutrients and other
is updated
· Concept for introduction of BAP
harmful substances from
2. Alternative concepts for farming and
agricultural point and non-point
manure handling in line with EU
· Guidelines for manure handling (also in national languages)
sources
requirements for central and downstream
· Mechanisms for national structures (extension services)

Danube countries are elaborated
· Proposal on criteria and selection procedure for pilot projects

3. Needs for pilot activities in best
agricultural practices are identified in UA, · Pilot projects proposal

MO, RO, BG, SM and B-H
· Consultation workshop and workshop documentation
4. Understanding of decision makers and
farmers on the need to introduce new
concepts for animal farming and manure
handling is addressed

25

Objective 1: Creation of sustainable ecological conditions for land use and water management
Output / Activity
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Expected outputs at the end of the phase 1 (Sources of verification)
Output 1.4:
1. Areas for land use planning in pilot river
· Inception report
Policy development for wetlands
basins are identified
· Protected Areas Inventory and Map
rehabilitation under the aspect of
2. Methodology and concepts for appropriate ·
appropriate land use
land use and wetland restoration are
Methodology for Integrated Land Use Assessment
developed
· Pilot Projects identified and selected
3. Inappropriate land use at wetland
· Case studies on land use in selected pilot areas completed
restoration is discussed with stakeholders
· Workshops in pilot areas
(workshop)
· Final Concepts for appropriate land use
· Information material on respective pilot areas (as defined in communication
strategy)
· Workshop with policy makers (as defined in communication strategy)
Output 1.5:
1. Updated list of `hot spots' and inventory
· Updated, complete basin-wide inventory
Industrial reform and development
on industries with outdated techniques and · Agreed methodology for determining "hot spots and SIAs"
of policies and legislation for
facilities (accidental risks), related to
application of BAT (best available
SIAs, are produced
· Updated List of Industrial hot spots and SIAs
techniques including cleaner
2. Existing policies and legislation at the
· A Report on:
technologies) towards reduction of
national level are collected and existing
- Outdated Techniques in up to 5 key industries,
nutrients (N and P) and dangerous
gaps with EU legislation are identified
- Legislative and policy measures and enforcement mechanisms,
substances
3. Workshop programmes for BAT
- Gaps between EU and national legislation
introduction are prepared
· DRB Report on relevant complementary measures for the introduction of BAT

· BAT network established and site visits completed
· Workshops, training programmes, training materials on harmonization of EU and
national policies and legislation on BAT prepared, target groups identified

26

Objective 1: Creation of sustainable ecological conditions for land use and water management
Output / Activity
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Expected outputs at the end of the phase 1 (Sources of verification)
Output 1.6:
1. Deficiencies in international comparison
· Recommendation and elaboration of an analytical framework for use in
Policy reform and legislation
related to tariffs, metering, types of
characterizing and assessing the advantage and disadvantages of using tariffs and
measures for the development of
collection etc. are identified
effluent charges to finance water and waste water services
cost-covering concepts for water
2. Most appropriate cost recovery models
and waste water tariffs, focusing on
and gradual tariffs reform are proposed for
nutrient reduction and control of
specific countries
dangerous substances
Output 1.7:
1. Present systems of charges, fines and
· Development of broad strategies for tariff and effluent charges introduction and
Implementation of effective systems
incentives is analyzed nationally and
reforms given the prevalent conditions in the various countries of the region and
of water pollution charges, fines and
DRB-wide.
taking into consideration the implementation plans of the EU accession countries
incentives, focusing on nutrients
2. Alternative concepts for the introduction
· Summary and country specific memo, draft and final reports of the tariff and
and dangerous substances
of incentive- based instruments for groups
charges activities
of DRB countries are identified
3. Institutional, economic and social
capabilities to implement economic
instruments are assessed
Output 1.8:
1. Analysis of legal and institutional
· Report on the existing legislation, policies and voluntary agreements
Recommendations for the reduction
possibilities for introducing restrictive
· Report summarizing and evaluating data received from detergents industry
of phosphorus in detergents
standards for detergents use in particular
DRB countries is performed
· Proposals for accomplishing a voluntary agreement between the ICPDR and
2. Proposals of severe standards and
detergents industry
implementation schedule for phosphorus
· Basin-wide conference for signing and implementation of voluntary agreement
reduction are developed
for P-free detergents prepared
3. Proposals for enforcement and compliance
are elaborated
4. Organization of workshops on phase out
of phosphorus in detergents

27

Objective 2: Capacity building and reinforcement of transboundary cooperation for the improvement of water quality and environmental standards in the
Danube River Basin
Output / Activity
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Expected outputs at the end of the phase 1 (Sources of verification)
Output 2.1:
1. Existing structures and mechanisms for
· Workplan and guidelines for analysis of existing inter-ministerial mechanisms
Setting up of "Inter-ministerial
implementation of environmental policies
for cooperation (national reports)
Committees" for development,
and legislation analyzed
· Summary of national report and analysis of findings
implementation and follow-up of
2. Adequate structures proposed in
national policies legislation and
cooperation with relevant ministerial
· Concept paper and proposal for national implementation
projects for nutrient reduction and
departments
· Final Report on national implementation of coordinating mechanisms
pollution control
3. Inter-ministerial Committees established
Output 2.2:
1. Water quality objectives and nutrient and
· Report on water quality objectives for nutrients and on water quality standards
Development of operational tools for
toxics quality conditions are developed
for toxic substances
monitoring, laboratory and
2. Statistics of emissions from point and non-
· Methodological concept for stress and impact analysis computerized application
information management and for
point sources for P and N are existing
emission analysis from point and
· Report on analysis of the EMIS inventory
3. Inventory of priority chemicals in line with
non-point sources of pollution with
EU is prepared
· Report on Danube list of Priority Substances
particular attention to nutrients and
· Report on proposals for TNMN upgrade and proposal for SOPs for new
toxic substances
4. Laboratory equipment in selected countries
is reinforced
determinands
5. Information system and network are
improved
Output 2.3:
1. National stations - PIACs for MD, UA,
· Study (concept for calibration options and selection of pilot areas)
Improvement of procedures and
BiH, SM are planned and programme for
· Workshop preparation, including relevant documentation
tools for accidental emergency
implementation prepared
·
response with particular attention to
Draft Project Brief and TORs for DBAM calibration
2. Inventory and assessment of high
transboundary emergency situations
accidental risks spots are produced in all
· Outline for the DBAM calibration manual
countries
· Recommendations for follow up activities to the ICPDR
3. DBAM is prepared for improvement to
respond to pollution transport issues

28

Objective 2: Capacity building and reinforcement of transboundary cooperation for the improvement of water quality and environmental standards in the
Danube River Basin
Output / Activity
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Expected outputs at the end of the phase 1 (Sources of verification)
Output 2.4:
1. ICPDR Information System is fully
· Information System at the central level upgraded integration of GIS and
Support for reinforcement of ICPDR
operational with internal working area and
Cartographic Software, AEWS Software and other applications
Information and Monitoring System
public accessible area
· Reporting format integrated into DANUBIS
(DANUBIS)
2. Networking within DANUBIS by all
·
ICPDR contracting parties is developing
Report on assessment of needs in terms of equipment and human capacities at
national level prepared, including recommendations and detailed specifications
3. Interactive DANUBIS web site is
for equipment
developing
· Linkages of GIS and other ICPDR Databases established and operational
4. Mechanisms for many users of having
access to information are available
· Use of Information System at the national level facilitated and appropriate
linkages established
· 1st phase training carried out and appropriate manuals (training materials)
available
· Concept for 2nd phase of training prepared
· Project web page developed and updated regularly
Output 2.5:
1. Joint work programme for MoU is
· TOR of the Joint Working Group and a work program for effective
Implementation of the
approved
implementation of the MOU;
"Memorandum of Understanding"
2. Agreement of status indicators is reached
· Status indicators to monitor nutrient and hazardous substances transport from
between the ICPDR and the ICPBS 3. Joint AQC system is defined and agreed
the Danube and change of ecosystems in the Black Sea defined and agreed upon
relating to discharges of nutrients
·
and hazardous substances to the
4. Rules of reporting are developed
Reporting procedure defined and agreed upon
Black Sea
5. Agreement on regular meetings is
· Joint actions discussed and approved
concluded
6. MoU is signed

29

Objective 3: Strengthening of public involvement in environmental decision making and reinforcement of community actions for pollution reduction and
protection of ecosystems
Output / Activity
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Expected outputs at the end of the phase 1 (Sources of verification)
Output 3.1:
1. Optimal operation of DEF secretariat is
· Operational DEF Secretariat
Support for institutional
achieved
· DEF board meetings and General assembly meeting
development of NGOs and
2. Training needs identified and programmes
· Strategic Development Plan and two year workplan
community involvement
on environmental issues developed
3. Publications and materials for awareness
· Half year progress reports
raising on nutrient and toxics are
· National workshop on nutrients and introduction small grants programme
conceptualized and prepared
· National publications on nutrient reduction
4. Training courses and materials to reinforce
· Workshop on public participation in the DRB
NGO cooperation are prepared
Output 3.2:
1. Conditions and implementation
· A platform of participating organizations established
Applied awareness raising through
mechanisms for Small Grants Programme
· Structure of the grant programme designed and discussed in a meeting
community based "Small Grants
prepared and disseminated (topics, criteria,
Programme"
timing)
· Workshop for National REC offices and national DEF representatives (national
NGOs)
2. Calls for a regional and two local grants
programmes
· Call for proposals prepared
· Grants projects selected
· Calls for Grants prepared and announced
· Small grants selected at national level
Output 3.3:
1. Realistic approach on organizing public
· Overview paper on EIC (Education-Information-Communication) strategy
Organization of public awareness
campaigns is developed
· Draft EIC strategy for DRB
raising campaigns on nutrient
2. Sufficient and reliable information for mass
·
reduction and control of toxic
media purposes are prepared and published
Workshop to discuss EIC strategy
substances
3. Basin-wide documents are periodically
· Adapted national strategies
published
· Public press and mass media materials on nutrients and toxic substances
produced
· Publication of scientific documents and regular journals or special issues on
water management to improved information on objectives and targets of JAP
and EGs Work Programmes

31

Objective 4: Reinforcement of monitoring, evaluation and information systems to control transboundary pollution, and to reduce nutrients and harmful
substances
Output / Activity
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Expected outputs at the end of the phase 1 (Sources of verification)
Output 4.1:
1. Monitoring and evaluation system for project
· List of indicators for monitoring and evaluation
Development of indicators for
implementation is developed
· Concept for project evaluation
project monitoring and impact
2. Indicators for emissions and water quality are
·
evaluation
reviewed to respond to nutrient concerns
Assessment report of the existing monitoring networks for surface waters
3. Progress indicators for monitoring project
· Recommendation formulated for an approach to adapt the monitoring
implementation are developed
programmes to requirements of EU WFD considering GEF indicators
4. Impact indicators to evaluate environmental
effects are defined
5. Environmental status indicators are developed
Output 4.3:
1. Criteria for wetlands classification and
· Map of riverine wetlands
Monitoring and assessment of
observation priorities are defined
· Methodology for assessment of nutrient removal capacity
nutrient removal capacities of
2. Methodological approach for assessment of
riverine wetlands
nutrient removal capacities is developed
· Workshop
taking into account results of other projects
· Report on results of pre-sampling
3. Observation programme to assess annual
· Observation program for nutrient removal
removal capacities is designed and approved
Output 4.4:
1. Economic instruments for nutrient reduction
· Analytical report on existing pollution trading concepts
Danube Basin study on pollution
analyzed elaborated
· Report on potential to establish pollution trading scheme in the DRB
trading and corresponding economic 2. Assessment on legal and policy issues related
instruments for nutrient reduction
to economic instruments in DRB countries
· Final report (including workshop summary)
3. Needs and barriers for "pollution trading"
studied

32