INTERNATIONAL WATERS
EXPERIENCE NOTES
2
http://www.iwlearn.net/experience


2008-017
Leveraging Local Actions Through
Matched Small Grants and the Caspian
Concern Groups



Abstract: This note takes a glance at the Caspian Sea project's small grants programme. One of the
project's objectives was to achieve tangible environmental improvements in priority areas by
implementation of small-scale investments supported by a Small Matched Grants Programme (MSGP).
The project faced an issue of how to design a program that could assist in the identification, partial
finance and implementation of small investment projects that address a national priority, that have a
positive and transboundary impact or address a common problem within one of the four major areas of
environmental concern as indicated in the Strategic Action Programme (SAP), and are socially and
economically beneficial. Throughout the MSGP, grants worth almost US$1.3 million were disbursed to 28
projects, 16 in phase I and 12 in phase II. The region considers the MSGP a success; an initiative that
helps the needy communities and leaves a real impact on the ground. Further replication should consider
the following issues: grantee solvency, bureaucratic requirements, support to concern groups, thinner
matching requreiments and mixing grants with loans. The programme's significance lies in its being
action-targeted; mobilizing additional resources and engaging stakeholders in project work.

Hamid Ghaffarzadeh
hamid.ghaffarzadeh@undp.org
Caspian Sea Environment Programme
1

---

Leveraging Local Actions Through Matched Small Grants and
Caspian Concern Groups

Experience of the GEF sponsored

"Towards a Convention and Action Programme for the Protection of the
Caspian Sea Environment (CEPSAP)"
GEF Project ID: 1618

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
frameworks operating at the regional and the

national levels and where necessary improve
The CEPSAP represented the second phase of
implementation and compliance of those
the GEF support to the Caspian Environment
frameworks and finally, to achieve tangible
Programme (CEP). The CEP is an
environmental improvements in SAP priority
intergovernmental environment programme
areas by implementation of small-scale
which was established in 1998 by the five
investments supported by a Small Matched
Caspian littoral countries, namely Azerbaijan,
Grants Programme (MSGP). The CEPSAP is
Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia and Iran, with
now complete having completed delivered all it
substantive support from the Programme's
intended outputs in a satisfactory manner.
international partners namely the GEF,

European Union, World Bank, UNDP and
GEF support to the CEP in phases I and II
UNEP. The programme maintains the
amounted to US$14.5 million and leveraged an
overarching goal of `environmentally sustainable
additional $35.7 million in co-financing1.
development and management of the Caspian
Traditional national partners in the CEP have
environment for future generations'.
been the highest level of the environmental

ministries and agencies as supported by the
CEPSAP built on the achievements of the first
Ministries of Foreign Affairs. UNOPS
phase of the GEF's support to the CEP through
internationally executed both both phases. The
2004. These included establishing and fostering
CEP has been a showcase for international
a constructive environmental management and
agencies, highlighting cooperation where UNDP,
cooperation dialogue through the establishment
UNEP, World Bank and EU have seen eye to
of a regional management structure (with its
eye on most issues.
linchpin the Framework Convention for the

Protection of the Marine Environment of the
The GEF has now positively considered a third
Caspian Sea (Tehran Convention)); the
and final tranche of support to the Caspian Sea,
diagnostic analytical work manifested by the
which will see full ownership of the regional
Caspian Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis
environmental cooperation and management
(TDA), National Caspian Action Plans (NCAPs)
being assumed by the countries through a
and the Strategic Action Programme (SAP), built
Convention Secretariat delivering on the country
on considerable scientific and analytical work,
priorities as reflected in the Convention Strategic
and finally by resource mobilization actions.
Action Plan.
These actions occurred through development of

fundable investment project ideas as well as by
THE EXPERIENCE
the Matched Small Grants Programme (MSGP).


The Issue
The CEPSAP's objectives were to commence

implementation of the SAP in three priority areas
The project faced an issue of how to design a
(Biodiversity, Invasive Species and Persistent
program that could assist in the identification,
Toxic Substances); to continue with specific
partial finance and implementation of small
capacity building measures to ensure a
investment projects that address a national
regionally owed CEP coordination mechanism
priority as identified in the NCAPs, that have a
capable of full implementation of the SAP and
positive and transboundary impact or address a
regional coordination of the NCAPs; to
strengthen the environmental legal and policy

1 www.gefonline.org
2

---

common problem within one of the four major
The MSGP was complemented by a Micro-
areas of environmental concern as indicated in
Environmental Grants Programme which
the SAP, and are socially and economically
awarded smaller grants of up to $5000 with no
beneficial.
matching requirement for environmental

education and sensitization and awareness
Addressing the Issue
raising and information dissemination


The MSGP was a multi- purpose initiative: first
The MSGP was a key component of both
and foremost it was designed as a grant
phases of GEF support to the CEP. The design
programme that aimed to address collectively
described here was mostly adopted in the
identified major transboundary issues of the
second GEF supported project which was
Caspian Sea, i.e. the fast declining commercial
implemented fully by UNDP. The major change
bioresources; eroding biodiversity & invasive
in the programme was to have the PCU rather
species; decline in environmental quality and
than the World Bank assume managerial
unsustainable coastal development. These
decision making. The PPAs were assigned
grants were awarded to small scale investment
higher degrees of authority and responsibility
ideas and pilot projects that make a practical
with regard to grants management and were
impact on the ground and are replicable in the
renamed as Matched Grants and Public
region. In other word the programme moved
Participation Assistants (MPPA). The new
beyond the realm of research and investigation
MGSP maintained the CCGs. In view of the
into tackling real life issues. Last and certainly
programme's popularity in the region, it is
not least, under the MSGP only those ideas
proposed for inclusion in the final GEF support
brought in `matching' funding from the proponent
to the CEP.
of the idea and/or its sponsoring partners, were

entertained. In other words it also became an
RESULTS AND LEARNING
instrument to leverage additional funding.


Throughout the MSGP, grants worth almost
Under the first GEF supported project, the
US$1.3 million were disbursed to 28 projects
MSGP was managed by the World Bank, first
with 16 in Phase I and 12 disbursed in Phase II.
through an international NGO. Later on, a locally
In size the projects ranged from US$10,000 to
recruited staff unit, placed within the Programme
US$100,000. Co-financing amounted to just
Coordination Unit (UNEP), managed the MGSP,
over US$1.6 million, half of which was in-kind.
supported by a network of Public Participation
The twelve grants supported the following
Assistants (PPAs) located in coastal areas of
projects:
each of the five Caspian littoral countries.

Counterpart governments were invited to join in
Clean up of oil contaminated Soil
the evaluation process through scoring

Sustainable Development in Local
proposals and selecting grantees through a well
Communities through Alternative Sources of
defined procedure. The formal MSGP structure,
Energy
that is the coordinating task force at the PCU
Artificial Spawning of Rutilus Kutom
and the PPAs, was in turn assisted in its work by
Sustainable Agro-ecosystem Management
the Caspian Concern Groups (CCGs).
through Participatory Integrated Rice Crop

Protection & Production
The CCG's were decentralized informal groups
Sperm Bank for Sturgeon Breeders in
in the coastal areas consisting of local
Southern Caspian
authorities, costal communities, NGOs and
Conservation and restoration of Caspian
CBOs. While the formal structure was tasked
Sturgeon Stocks
with launching the MGSP through an information
Cleaning the Bottom of Ural River
campaign, collecting proposals, evaluation,
Sewage Purification In Floating Hotels on
selection and monitoring implementation of
Volga river
approved grants, the CCGs were the informal
Innovative Technology for Marketable Fish
arm that assisted the programme's launch and
production in the Tumak Village
its information campaign, volunteered views on
Breeding Artemia Salina in Ponds
collected ideas and helped with implementation
Potable Water for Inhabitants of Goyudijik
monitoring.
Settlement

3

---

Collection, sorting and processing of Plastic
Fertilization capacity was 27.4% after 4 hours
Waste in Turkmenbashi
and 14.3% after 24 hours indicating that the

semen could be successfully stored with the
As an example, one of the small grants that was
given method. Semen stored for five years was
approved supported the creation of a sperm
also used to fertilize fresh eggs harvested from
bank for sturgeon breeders. The decline of the
A. persicus (a type of sturgeon) which yielded
Caspian Sea Sturgeon results from the various
58.2% fertilization after 4 hours and 43.7%
anthropogenic activities in the last decades
fertilization after 24 hours also indicating that the
which include deterioration of natural habitats
semen was successfully stored using the
and spawning grounds of these species in
method. The technique has helped to create a
rivers, dam construction across rivers,
storage stock of cryopreserved gametes which
overfishing and lack of fishing regulations,
enable the use of cryopreserved sperms at any
increase in the pollution load in the river and the
time even in the absence of suitable male
increasing demand for caviar.
spawners during the breeding season. The

establishment of cryobanks for the long-term
According to data available, legal catch figures
storage of suitable sperms from potentially
for sturgeon catch in the Caspian Sea dropped
suitable sturgeon spawners could play a crucial
from 28,500 tons in 1985 to 1345 tons in 2005.
role in the genetic management and
In recent years, the number of spawners caught
conservation of sturgeon resources. This
in the Caspian Sea is small and the hatcheries
technique provides a new management tool to
suffer from their shortage for brood stock. This
fisheries management authorities to make better
has seriously affected release of juveniles from
use of the reproduction potential.
hatcheries for stock enhancement purposes.

The number of male caught during the breeding
For its part, the MEG programme financed over
season is higher than that required to fertilize
50 micro projects. MSGP projects covered such
the eggs harvested and as a result the male
areas as oil contaminated soil cleansing, small
genetic resources in some males are not used.
fish hatcheries, artificial spawning of
This decreases the sperm yielding potential in
endangered species, river dredging, artemia
male spawners. On the other hand sometimes
production, sustainable livelihood & alternative
female spawners are not available at the
sources of energy for coastal communities, a
sturgeon hatchery when there are potential male
fish sperm bank, small sewage treatment plants,
spawners and this again decreases the use of
plastic waste recycling and alternative livelihood
genetic resources from males in fertilization
initiatives. All of these, to various degrees
activities.
addressed transboundary issues. All projects

were planned to be of short-term duration, i.e.
The matched-small grant supported work,
less than a year, although some of them faced
conducted by the Iranian Fisheries Research
delays, incurring an additional year.
Organization (IFRO) and the International

Sturgeon Research Institute (ISRI), aimed at
The region considers the MSGP a success; an
creating a center for the long-term preservation
initiative that helps the needy communities and
of sturgeon sperms to be used in the future as a
leaves a real impact on the ground. They see a
suitable gene bank resource at sturgeon
programme that has brought communities
hatcheries. The significant finding of this study
drinking water; has revived certain endangered
was that the semen of all sturgeon species in
species; cleaned the soil; dredged the river and
the south Caspian Sea can be cryopreserved in
so on and so forth. It is also a programme that
straws using extender solution specific for
does not involve `money spent on research by
sturgeons to be made available at times when
outsiders" In almost all CESPSAP steering
there is a shortage of potential spawners.
committee meetings, most of the countries

pressed for funding to be channeled to the
Estimation of sperm quality and quantity was
MSGP. This assessment however, is not shared
carried out on semen samples collected from a
by all. Some critics consider it as a programme
total of 34 male sturgeon spawners. Semen was
that left little impact beyond its immediate
collected from 18 spawners that exhibited good
geographical locality and a programme that was
quality of sperms with more than 70% motility.
accessible only for those in the know and with
About 1290 ml of semen from four sturgeon
the money to match.
species was collected and cryopreserved.


4

---

REPLICATION
KEYWORDS


An attempt at an objective assessment of MSGP
Small
Grants
Programme
suggests that further replication should consider
Caspian
Sea
the following issues:


The Global Environment Facility (GEF)
Impact was limited and not sustainable in a
International Waters Experience Notes series
few cases where the needed support was
helps the transboundary water management
not assured by the grantee, government or
(TWM) community share its practical
sponsor. In future applications it will be a
experiences to promote better TWM.
must to insure broader impact and
Experiences include successful practices,
sustainability through careful evaluation of
approaches, strategies, lessons, methodologies,
the grantee's resources and etc., that emerge in the context of TWM.
resourcefulness.

The Programme was perceived by some to
To obtain current IW Experience Notes or to
be laden with bureaucratic requirements,
contribute your own, please visit
especially cumbersome reporting http://www.iwlearn.net/experience or email
procedures that will need to be simplified.
info@iwlearn.net.
The CCGs could not provide much
assistance as they were not financially or
formally supported by the governments
and/or the CEP. Coastal communities will
need to be institutionally helped to
participate effectively.
The matching requirement excluded those
with less financial muscle, i.e. the most
needy. Furthermore only those in the know,
such as the experienced governmental
authorities could obtain the right information
including knowledge on how to develop,
submit and pursue project ideas. In future
applications a more intensive outreach
campaign is essential to disseminate
information on the programme.
Grants, being considered free money, do not
always provide cost-efficiency incentives.
Grants could be mixed with loans and
similar instruments.

SIGNIFICANCE

This initiative can be considered as a measure
to enhance and expedite the impact on the
ground of the GEF projects. The programme's
significance also lies in its being action-targeted;
mobilizing additional resources and engaging
stakeholders in project work.

REFERENCES

http://www.caspianenvironment.org
For information on each of the small grants
please visit:
http://www.caspianenvironment.org/newsite/
Grants-MSGP.htm

5

---