Document of
The World Bank
Report No:
PROJECT BRIEF
ON A
PROPOSED GRANT FROM THE
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY TRUST FUND
IN THE AMOUNT OF US$ 4.55 MILLION
TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF ALBANIA
AND THE GOVERNMENT OF MONTENEGRO
FOR A
LAKE SKADAR-SHKODER INTEGRATED ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT PROJECT
May 8, 2007
Sustainable Development Unit
Europe and Central Asia Region (ECSSD)
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
(Exchange Rate Effective {Date})
Currency Unit
= Serbian Dinar (CSD)
70.33 CSD
= USD 1
FISCAL YEAR
January 1
December 31
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
BLMC
Bilateral Lake Management Committee (Albania and Montenegro)
CAS
Country Assistance Strategy
CETI
Center for Ecotoxicological Research (Montenegro)
EAR
European Agency for Reconstruction
EIA Environmental
Impact
Assessment
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency (Montenegro)
EU European
Union
FAO
Food and Agriculture Organization (United Nations)
GEF
Global Environment Facility
GoA
Government of Republic of Albania
GoM
Government of Republic of Montenegro
GTZ
Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (Germany)
IBRD
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
IDA
International Development Association
IUCN
World Conservation Union
KAP Kombinat
Aluminijuma
Podgorica
KFW
Kredit fur Wiederaufbau (Germany)
MEFWA
Ministry of Environment, Forests and Water Administration (Albania)
MESTAP
Montenegro Environmentally Sensitive Tourism Areas Project (World
Bank)
MTEP
Ministry of Tourism and Environmental Protection (Montenegro)
MOU Memorandum
of
Understanding
NIVA
Norwegian Institute for Water Research
NGO Non-governmental
Organization
OP
Operational Policy (World Bank)
PAD
Project Appraisal Document
PDF-B
Preparation Development Facility B grant (GEF)
PENP
Public Enterprise for National Parks (Montenegro)
PA Protected
Area
PAH Polynuclear
Aromatic
Hydrocarbons
PCB Polychlorinated
Biphenyls
REC
Regional Environment Center
SAP
Strategic Action Plan
SNV
Netherlands Development Organization
SLMNR
Shkoder Lake Managed Natural Reserve
SLNP
Skadar Lake National Park
TDA
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis
TA Technical
Assistance
UNDP
United Nations Development Program
UNESCO
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
USAID
United States Agency for International Development
Vice President:
Shigeo Katsu
Country Director:
Orsalia Kalantzopoulos
Country Manager:
Carolyn Jungr
Sector Manager
Marjory-Anne Bromhead
Task Team Leader:
Agi Kiss
ALBANIA AND MONTENEGRO
Lake Skadar-Shkoder Integrated Ecosystem Management Project
CONTENTS
Page
I.
STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE ............................................................. 6
A. Country and sector issues.................................................................................................... 6
B. Rationale for Bank involvement ......................................................................................... 9
C. Higher level objectives to which the project contributes.................................................. 10
II. PROJECT
DESCRIPTION
.......................................................................................... 10
A. Lending
instrument ........................................................................................................... 12
B. [If Applicable] Program objective and Phases.................................................................. 12
C. Project development objective and key indicators............................................................ 12
D. Project
components........................................................................................................... 12
E. Lessons learned and reflected in the project design.......................................................... 17
F. Alternatives
considered
and reasons for rejection ............................................................ 18
III. IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................................................... 19
A. Partnership arrangements (if applicable) .......................................................................... 19
B. Institutional and implementation arrangements................................................................ 20
C. Monitoring and evaluation of outcomes/results................................................................ 22
D. Sustainability..................................................................................................................... 23
E. Critical risks and possible controversial aspects............................................................... 24
F. Loan/credit conditions and covenants............................................................................... 25
1V. APPRAISAL
SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 25
A. Economic and financial analyses...................................................................................... 25
B. Technical........................................................................................................................... 25
C. Fiduciary ........................................................................................................................... 25
D. Social................................................................................................................................. 26
E. Environment...................................................................................................................... 27
F. Safeguard
policies............................................................................................................. 28
G. Policy Exceptions and Readiness...................................................................................... 29
Annex 1: Country and Sector or Program Background ......................................................... 30
Annex 2: Major Related Projects Financed by the Bank and/or other Agencies ................. 42
Annex 3: Results Framework and Monitoring ........................................................................ 44
Annex 4: Detailed Project Description...................................................................................... 51
Annex 5: Project Costs ............................................................................................................... 60
Annex 6: Implementation Arrangements ................................................................................. 62
Annex 7: Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements..................................... 63
Annex 8: Procurement Arrangements ...................................................................................... 64
Annex 9: Economic and Financial Analysis ............................................................................. 67
Annex 10: Safeguard Policy Issues............................................................................................ 68
Annex 11: Project Preparation and Supervision ..................................................................... 69
Annex 12: Documents in the Project File ................................................................................. 70
Annex 13: Statement of Loans and Credits.............................................................................. 71
Annex 14: Country at a Glance ................................................................................................. 72
Annex 15: Incremental Cost Analysis ....................................................................................... 72
Annex 16: STAP Review ............................................................................................................85
Annex 17: Maps............................................................................................................................94
Annex 18: Strategic Action Plan Summary Action Table........................................................95
I. STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE
A. Country and sector issues
1.
Lake Skadar-Shkoder, the largest lake on the Balkan peninsula, is located on the border
between Montenegro and Albania, south of the Dinaric Alps. The lake measures 60 km by 15
km at its longest and widest points and has an average surface area of 475 km2. It is a
particularly fragile water body due to its shallowness and the karstic geology of its basin: the
lake's water quality and ecology are highly sensitive to the quality and volume of inflow from
numerous rivers/streams and groundwater. The lake's outlet is to the Adriatic Sea through the
Buna-Bojana River. Due to the flat topography and shallowness of both lake and river, when the
river is particularly high as a result of heavy rains the flow reverses temporarily and it becomes
an inlet rather than outlet of the lake. Numerous springs located around the periphery of the
lake and hydrologically connected to it are used for drinking water and irrigation in surrounding
areas.
2.
The proposed project area consists of the lake itself and adjacent areas directly served by
the lake and its associated springs. The total population of the project area in Albania is about
170,000, living in seven municipalities and rural communes, within three Regions of the Shkodra
District. In Montenegro the project area falls within three municipalities with a population of
about 12,500 people distributed among 40 small settlements (the larger watershed of the Lake in
Montenegro has a population of about 250,000). The lake is part of a large, geographically and
ecologically connected complex of wetlands (together with the Velipoja Reserve, Domni
marshes, Buna-Bojana River delta and Veluni Lagoon) and has been identified as one of the 24
transboundary wetland sites of international importance known as "Ecological Bricks Sites"1.
Both sides of the lake have been declared as wetlands of international importance under the
Ramsar Convention and there are proposals to establish a transboundary Biosphere Reserve in
view of the lake's significance as a refuge for migratory birds among other values. Both the
Albanian and Montenegrin sides of the lake and immediately surrounding land areas fall within
legally designated Protected Areas (PAs): the Shkoder Lake Managed Natural Reserve
(SLMNR) in Albania and the Skadar Lake National Park (SLNP) in Montenegro. These factors
indicate both the importance of, and the bilateral commitment to, making environmental
protection and sustainable natural resource use core development and management objectives for
the lake.
3.
The recent economic history in the project area reflects that of the two countries as
whole, with severe economic decline during the 1990s accompanied by the collapse of many
industries and large agricultural enterprises within the Lake Skadar-Shkoder watershed. While
creating hardships for the population, this has had a positive impact on the lake ecology through
decreased industrial pollution, as demonstrated by water quality monitoring data. Both
governments are now seeking to revive the economic base in the area. Tourism is proposed as a
major economic driver but there are also active efforts on both sides of the border to attract
private investment to restore the industrial and agricultural enterprises. In Albania there is also
rapid population growth, accompanied by illegal construction in lakeside areas. In Montenegro
there have been recent sales of lakeshore land by the Municipality to private buyers despite the
1 (Europe's Environment, Dobris Assessment, 1995
6
fact that new construction is currently legally prohibited inside the boundaries of the National
Park. .
4.
There is at present an important window of opportunity to put in place strategic,
coordinated planning for the Lake Skadar-Shkoder basin, to set it on a path of ecological and
economic sustainability. Both governments are striving to harmonize their policies, legislation
and practices with European Union instruments, such as the Water Framework Directive which
sets standards for water quality and calls for integrated watershed management and
transboundary cooperation. A Memorandum of Understanding between the two Ministries of
Environment was signed in 20032. The MoU calls for joint monitoring of air, water and soil
quality and pollution, cooperation in environmental impact assessment, common strategies for
clean industrial and energy development, cooperation for protection of the natural environment,
creation of joint regulation for controlling international commerce of industrial and toxic wastes,
other dangerous substances and endangered flora and fauna, joint educational and training
activities, and creation of working groups and an Action Plan for implementation of the MoU. In
early 2007 work began on a more concrete bilateral Agreement3 which will serve as the legal
instrument for bilateral cooperation for protection and management of the lake, including
implementation of the joint Strategic Action Plan described below.
5.
A Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (TDA) was carried out during project preparation
to identify major trends and factors affecting the water quality and ecology of the lake as well as
the status of its natural and economic resources. The TDA notes that there are many gaps and
inconsistencies in the available data, underscoring the need for more systematic and targeted
monitoring as a basis for making key management decisions concerning the lake, the surface and
groundwater sources that maintain it and its valuable natural resources. However, the existing
data do clearly indicate some problems and significant threats to the lake's water quality and
hydrology. The main findings of the TDA concerning water quality and use can be summarized
as follows (see Annex 1 for additional details):
· Records prior to the 1990s show excessive levels of heavy metals, PCBs and other
pollutants at a number of locations within Lake Skadar. By contrast the lakewide water
quality at present is generally good, probably resulting from a sharp reduction in
inflowing industrial effluents and agricultural run-off (owing to collapse of industries and
large agricultural enterprises in the basin), coupled with the rapid flushing of the lake
through the Buna-Bojana River to the Adriatic Sea;
· There are, however, localized pollution "hotspots," for example near inflowing river
mouths, concentrations of residences and businesses, and inlets which are not as regularly
and efficiently flushed as the rest of the lake. Of these, the greatest negative impacts are
likely to be from contaminated sediments and an unlined, open waste dump (mixed
2 Memorandum of Understanding for Cooperation in the Field of Environment Protection and Sustainable
Development Principle Between the Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Albania and the Ministry of
Environment Protection and Physical Planning of the Republic of Montenegro
3 Agreement Between the Government of the Republic of Montenegro and the Council of Ministers of the Republic
of Albania for the Protection and Sustainable Development of the Lake of Shkodra (Skadar) and its Watershed.
7
hazardous and non-hazardous materials) associated with the KAP aluminum plant near
Podgorica; effluents from the steelworks at Niksic; untreated wastewater and solid waste
from cities and towns on inflowing rivers and from lakeside municipalities and villages;
and runoff and leaching of agrochemicals from some surrounding agricultural areas. The
agricultural runoff is likely aggravated by loss of buffering natural vegetation along the
lakeshore.
· Economic development proposals in both countries which involve alternative uses of the
waters of the lake basin present major potential threats to the lake ecosystem. These
include proposals for hydropower development on the Moraca River in Montenegro and
for dredging the Buna-Bojana River to increase its navigability. Both of these projects
could seriously affect the lake level and hydrology, including its characteristic rapid
flushing, which would undermine its ecological integrity and water quality. In addition,
economic revitalization and growth in the lake basin (industrial, agricultural, tourism
development) can be expected to lead to a substantial increase in these pollutants,
returning to the pre-1990's condition and beyond;
· Preventive action is needed to counter these existing and iminent threats and maintain the
hydrology of the lake (including maintaining water levels needed to ensure continued
rapid outflow through the Buna-Bojana), and to protect the lake from a likely increase in
pollution and other environmental degradation in the context of expected future economic
renewal and physical development in surrounding areas.
6.
The TDA also summarizes evidence suggesting that populations of some fish species,
including commercially valuable migratory species, are declining. This may be due in part to a
large increase in the number of active fishermen, particularly on the Albanian side, since 1990
(many of them using illegal methods such as electrical shock and fish traps), and partly to
impacts of localized pollution and habitat destruction. There are also concerns over declines in
resident and migratory waterfowl on the lake.
7.
Based primarily on the TDA, a joint (bilateral) Strategic Action Plan (SAP)4 has been
prepared through a participatory process involving a wide range of stakeholders in both
countries. The SAP establishes a long-term vision for management and sustgainable
development of the lake, focusing on five core strategic objectives:
· reduction and prevention of pollution of the lake water, and pollution control systems to
maintain EU water quality standards;
· strengthening of the legal and institutional framework for environmental protection,
sustainable natural resource management and transboundary cooperation and exchange.
establish a joint monitoring system covering key elements of the ecosystem;
· establish effective systems for sustainable management and local use of natural and
cultural resources, through effective management of the two Protected Areas;
· promoting joint sustainable tourism development;
4 Available on Government of Albania, Government of Montenegro, and GEF/International Waters websites
8
8.
The SAP outlines a 10-year plan of action which includes both ongoing activities
financed by the central and municipal governments and others (bilateral and multilateral
financing institutions, NGOs) and activities which the governments intend to undertake through
a combination of budgetary resources and external assistance.
9.
The project aims to deal with current and imminent threats to the lake's water and
ecosystem in two key ways: first, by building political commitment for sustainable management
at national and local levels, and second, through direct interventions to reduce pollution from
point and non-point sources. In both cases, the project will build upon and supplement existing
initiatives of the two governments and other donors, primarily by strengthening the
transboundary dimension.
B.
Rationale for Bank involvement
10.
The project builds on and complements existing World Bank programs in both countries
to support environmental protection and economic development based on sustainable
management of water and related natural resources, at national and transboundary levels. In
Albania this includes the recently completed GEF-financed Lake Ohrid Conservation Project
which supported the establishment of cooperation between Albania and Macedonia for joint
environmental management of the Lake Ohrid watershed. This included developing the
institutional, legal and regulatory framework for environmental management, establishing a
monitoring program and public awareness-raising. The Integrated Water and Ecosystems
Management project and Coastal Zone Management Project are supporting innovative
wastewater treatment approaches and promoting integrated ecosystem management for coastal
areas in Albania, which are in many ways very similar to the extensive Lake Skadar-Shkoder
coast. The Fishery Development project is supporting increased local participation in the
management of fish resources in Lake Skadar-Shkoder, and the Natural Resources Development
project aims to reduce erosion in the lake's upper watershed areas to reduce downstream
sedimentation. In Montenegro, ongoing activities and projects under preparation include the
Sustainable Tourism Development project, which will support use of water from Lake Skadar
and wastewater management at the coast, and the Tara and Lim River Basin Management
project, which will introduce integrated watershed management in the northern and central part
of the country. A Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Montenegro draft Energy Sector
Development Strategy (funded by a grant from the Bank-Netherlands Water Partnership
Program) will be focusing on the implications of proposed hydropower development on the
Moraca River and evaluating the trade-offs involved in hydropower vs. other uses of this river,
which is one of Lake Skadar-Shkoder's main tibutaries. The Bank also brings the benefit of
experience in implementation of projects for protection of transboundary waters and cooperation
in tourism development and natural resource management the ECA Region and elsewhere in the
world. At the same time, the Bank can transfer experience gained in this project to other
countries and regions.
11.
The project contributes to the objectives of the Country Assistance Strategies (CAS) in
both countries by strengthening public institutions responsible for the protection and
management of Lake Skadar-Shkoder and providing an enabling environment for private sector
development in the tourism sector. The CAS for Montenegro also calls strengthening regional
9
cooperation and Montenegro's constitutional commitment to be an ecological state. The Albania
CAS focuses on governance, and identifies the need to build institutional capacity for law
enforcement among other elements. The project will help to strengthen regulation of water, land
and natural resource uses which affect the water quality and economic value of the lake and
contribute to improvement of environmental public services in relation to wastewater treatment.
The project also represents part of a broader Bank effort to assist Montenegro and Albania move
towards harmonization of their environmental and natural resource management regulations and
practices with the EU environmental acquis.
12.
At a regional level, the project supports implementation of the joint World Bank/German
Government "Petersberg Process," which aims to facilitate debate on the problems of
transboundary water management and the development of an integrated approach to resolving
them. Phase II of the Petersberg Process (launched in December 2005) focuses on operationally
oriented cooperative activities, particularly in the smaller catchment basins of southeastern
Europe.
C. Higher level objectives to which the project contributes
13.
Both Montenegro and Albania have identified the Lake Skadar-Shkoder area as a priority
for environmental protection, sustainable natural resource management and nature/culture-based
tourism development, in a number of national and local strategies and plans (e.g., in Montenegro
the Environmental Action Plan, the Strategy for Sustainable Development, the draft National
Spatial Plan, the Master Plan for Tourism; in Albania the National Environmental Action Plan,
the National Strategy for Socio-Economic Development (2003), the National Biodiversity
Strategy and Action Plan, the Shkodra Region Area Based Development Program, and the Law
on the Protection of Transboundary Lakes). They have also recognized the need for
transboundary coordination to achieve these objectives, as reflected in the 2003 Memorandum of
Understanding between the respective Ministries responsible for environment and the bilateral
legal Agreement currently being finalized, which will be signed by both governments. The
information to be generated under Component 1 will be essential for prioritizing threats to the
lake's waters and ecosystems, including both Government policies (e.g. regarding hydropower
development) and development trends in the greater lake basin. The transboundary institutional
structures to be established and strengthened will provide an essential mechanism for ensuring
that the implications of these policies and trends are explored and addressed at a coordinated,
lake-wide level.
14.
Both sides of the lake have been designated by the respective governments as wetlands of
international importance under the Ramsar Convention, and both countries are signatories to a
number of relevant international agreements and conventions (see above). This project directly
supports the realization of these national strategies and plans and fulfillment of these
international obligations as well as implementation of the 2003 MoU. The project also
contributes to the countries' common objective of harmonizing policy, legislation and practice
with the European Union environmental acquis, particularly the Water Framework Directive,
which calls for cooperation in managing transboundary water bodies and resources through a
coordinated, integrated watershed level approach.
10
Fit to GEF Focal Area and Operational Program:
The project is presented under OP 9, to assist Albania and Montenegro in accelerating the
implementation of the Strategic Action Program for the protection of Lake Shkodra, which the
two countries have recently adopted. As such, the project is fully consistent with Strategic
Objective 1 of the IW 2007-2010 Interim Strategy: to catalyze implementation of agreed
reforms and on-the-ground stress reduction investments to address transboundary water
concerns. The project can also be considered on the whole consistent with the draft IW Strategy
for GEF 4, in particular with Strategic Objective 2 (SO-2: To play a catalytic role in addressing
transboundary water concerns by assisting countries to utilize the full range of technical
assistance, economic, financial, regulatory and institutional reforms that are needed), and the IW
Strategic Program 3 (Balancing over-use and conflicting uses of water resources in
transboundary surface and groundwater basins). The project in fact attempts to introduce
ecosystem-based approaches and Integrated Water Resources Management to help reconcile
development needs (e.g.: increased tourism, hydropower) with ecosystem sustainability. Large
freshwater lakes such as Lake Skadar-Shkoder deliver a large number of environmental services
which are dependent upon sufficient "environmental flow" of water, in terms of both quality and
quantity. Both excessive withdrawal and pollution of surface and groundwater sources which
feed the lake represent conflicting uses of the water because they undermine the potential for
delivering these environmental services. Lake Shkodra, because of its shallowness and of the
karstic geology of its basin, is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of conflicting uses of the
surrounding land (recharge areas of the karstic aquifers feeding the Lake), and of the waters
flowing into the Lake.
Countries' Eligibility for GEF:
Albania and Montenegro are both members of the GEF and the World Bank. Both countries are
signatories to key international conventions relating to coordination and cooperation for
protection and management of transboundary waterbodies and watersheds, including the
Barcelona Convention and its protocols and have developed programs within the framework of
the Mediterranean Action Plan (relevant because Lake Skadar-Shkoder drains directly into the
Adriatic Sea through the Buna-Bojana River) and the Espoo Convention on Environmental
Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context and the Helsinki Convention on the Protection
and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes. (Again, in the case of
Montenegro, the signatory was the Union of Serbia and Montenegro). A 2003 Memorandum of
Understanding signed by the respective Ministries responsible for environmental protection
provides a specific framework for cooperation for protection and sustainable development of
Lake Skadar-Shkoder. The next step, finalization and approval of a formal bilateral Agreement
is in process. A Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (TDA) completed during project preparation
identified objectives and high priority issues on a lake-wide basis, and a joint Strategic Action
Plan based on the TDA has been approved by both Governments.
11
II.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Lending instrument
GEF Grant
B. [If Applicable] Program objective and Phases
N/A
C. Project development objective and key indicators
Project Development Objective:
15.
To maintain and enhance the long-term economic value of Lake Skadar-Shkoder and its
natural resources
Global Objective:
16. To enhance transboundary cooperation for managing the sources and impacts of
potentially conflicting development objectives and activities affecting the waters of the Lake
Skadar-Shkoder basin.
Key Indicators:
· Bilateral Lake Management Committee and Working Groups are established and
operating, with costs increasing met by Governments
· Predictive hydrological model of Lake Skadar-Shkoder is completed and being used by
decision-makers in both countries to analyze likely impacts of policies and proposed
investments;
· Coordinated monitoring underway, providing information into a publicly accessible
database
· Successful completion/water quality impacts of priority interventions to reduce surface
and groundwater sources of pollution in the lake (specifics to be confirmed at Appraisal)
· Four pilot projects for ecological restoration of lake buffer areas successfully completed
· At least a 20% increase in the number of project area residents earning $ 1000 or
more/year from lake-based tourism enterprises
D. Project components
17.
The project aims to deal with current and imminent threats to the lake's water and
ecosystem in two key ways: by building the political commitment, institutional mechanisms and
technical knowledge required for sustainable management; and through direct interventions to
reduce pollution from point and non-point sources. In both cases, the project will build upon and
supplement existing initiatives of the two governments and other donors, primarily by
strengthening the transboundary dimension. The project approach is based on four pillars:
12
· Improving information and understanding of the lake's ecosystem, and of the current and
potential impacts of developments in the lake basin which on the quality and quantity of
inflowing ground and surface waters;
· Strengthening institutional mechanisms for coordination and cooperation among
stakeholders/water users at all levels, with a particular emphasis on transboundary
linkages;
· Reducing existing pollution sources through direct investment and by providing
demonstrations and incentives as well as strengthening regulatory capacity; and
· Promoting sustainable use of the lake and its natural resources, as a preferred alternative
to existing non-sustainable practices and to help counter pressures for incompatible
development.
18.
The project is based upon the joint Strategic Action Plan (SAP) for Lake Skadar-Shkoder,
which represents a long-term program of ongoing and proposed activities financed by the two
governments and by external donors. Some of the activities to be financed by the project will be
implemented jointly by the two countries through a bilateral Lake Management Committee
(BLMC) and associated Working Groups. Other activities will be carried out by and in only one
country, but have lake-wide benefits. A breakdown of the proposed project activities indicating
GEF and other financing is provided in Annex 5. Annex 17 presents the summary action table of
the SAP, indicating governments' and other donors' financing for other SAP activities (i.e., not
included in this project).
Component 1: Understanding and Managing the Lake Skadar Ecosystem (Total: US$ 3.36;
GEF: US$ 2.04 million)
Subcomponent (i) Strengthening institutional structures for cooperation
19. The bilateral Agreement calls for establishment of a high level bilateral Lake
Management Committee (BLMC), including Government and civil society members to serve as
the main steering mechanism for implementation of the SAP and a forum for reaching concrete
agreements on lake management issues. The BLMC will convene Bilateral Working Groups to
facilitate coordination and action on specific issues. Initially, six Working Group s are
envisaged, based on priorities identified in the Strategic Action Plan: Planning, Legal,
Monitoring & Research, Communications/Outreach, Tourism and Water Management. The
BLMC and Working Groups will be served by a small Secretariat (based in Albania), and a one-
person technical support unit for each country which will be responsible for implementation of
joint activities and will also assist the respective government agencies in implementation of
GEF-financed activities. The two governments will be responsible for establishing the BLMC
and Working Groups and will provide in-kind (personnel) and some cash contributions for their
operation. GEF funds will support long term and short term Technical Assistance, equipment and
materials, and incremental operational costs on a declining basis during the life of the project.
13
Subcomponent (ii) Transboundary Research and monitoring:
20.
The two Governments already undertake routine water and ecological monitoring and
research in the lake, in accordance with national policy and legislation, and they are in the
process of enhancing their monitoring programs to harmonize with the EU Water Framework
Directive. GEF support is sought for incremental activities to bring in new approaches and to
build a transboundary dimension. This includes: (a) creating a predictive hydrological model of
the whole lake basin; (b) incremental research and monitoring aimed at improving understanding
of the impacts of changes in inflowing water quantity and quality; and (c) coordinating and
harmonizing monitoring on both sides of the lake, including establishment of a publicly
accessible joint database. Albania is targeted to get somewhat more support than Montenegro, in
order to help close the capacity gap and facilitate more effective technical collaboration between
the two countries.
Subcomponent (iii) Implementation of activities commissioned by BLMC and Working Groups:
21.
This subcomponent will support a number of joint activities identified in the SAP, under
the guidance and coordination of the bilateral Working Groups and BLMC. In addition to the
joint research and monitoring described above, these include preparation of a lake-wide zoning
and management plan, a public awareness-raising/education program, coordinated tourism
planning and marketing, etc. Lead responsibility for implementation of these joint activities will
be assigned to either Albania or Montenegro (the basic division to be decided during Appraisal)
and the funds involved will be included in the respective GEF grants to the two countries.
Jointly prepared lake-wide plans (zoning, tourism, etc.) will be implemented by integrating them
into national-level spatial and sectoral plans which serve as the technical and legal basis for
development decisions, government budgetary allocations and permitting. GEF funding under
this subcomponent will be used mainly for local and international technical assistance and for
stakeholder consultation processes.
Component 2: Enhancing Sustainable Use of the Lake Ecosystem (Total: US$ 5.14 ; GEF
US$ 0.86 million)
22.
This component aims to promote the adoption of more sustainable approaches to
economic development of the lake and its natural resources. It focuses primarily on two aspects
(tourism and fishing) where there is a high potential for economically significant sustainable use,
but current unsustainable practices are threatening the ecological integrity and long-term
economic value of the lake and the livelihoods of local communities. Ensuring the economic
viability of environmentally sustainable uses of the lake is essential to counterbalance pressure
for incompatible development in the lake basin and watershed.
.
Subcomponent (i) Sustainable tourism development:
23.
National and local governments and local residents in both countries look towards
tourism as the main engine for economic development of the Lake Skadar-Shkoder area, and
national spatial and sectoral strategies identify it as a priority "special interest" area for
development of nature, culture, and recreation-based tourism. A growing proportion of the local
14
population is also involved in tourism-related enterprises. These are positive factors for building
support and commitment for environmental protection, as such this type of tourism depends on
environmental quality as a key part of the tourism "product." Properly planned and regulated
tourism is therefore a preferable alternative to many other economic activities. At present,
however, tourism is growing rapidly in the Lake Skadar-Shkoder area in an unplanned and
unregulated way which makes it an increasingly serious threat to the lake, through inappropriate
construction, untreated wastewater, poor solid waste management, etc. The project will support
development of more environmentally and socially sustainable tourism by improving nature-
and culture-based facilities and attractions (e.g. hiking trails, cultural sites); public awareness-
raising and providing information and Technical Assistance to local residents to help them
engage in appropriate tourism enterprises; and strengthening regulatory capacity to stop illegal
construction and other negative practices. GEF will help to build an enabling environment for
development of sustainable tourism by supporting small scale infrastructure development and
rehabilitation (e.g., hiking trails and signage, birdwatching towers, rehabilitation of cultural and
historical sites, etc.). The GEF funds will complement other, mainly nationally-focused funded
projects (see Annex 2) by emphasizing support for transboundary coordination and joint action,
based on the lake-wide tourism plan (see Component 1).
Subcomponent (ii) Natural resource management:
24.
Fish are by far the lake's most significant natural resource in terms of contribution to
local economies and employment. Their mobility also makes transboundary cooperation
essential for sustainable management. Some of the lake's most valuable fish species are
currently threatened by over-exploitation and habitat degradation. Both Governments have
institutions and personnel in place to regulate fishing, but there is a lack of information,
mechanisms and capacity to manage the fisheries on a lake-wide basis. As in the case of tourism,
the project will complement other government and donor-funded initiatives for sustainable
fisheries management at the national level (see Annex 2), by providing the information and
means for better bilateral coordination. This includes integrating the results and
recommendations of the lake-wide stock assessment and fisheries management plan (Component
1) into national plans, regulations and programs. The project will also provide support and
incentives for fishermen who are currently operating illegally to become licensed and to stop
using illegal fishing methods. At the same time, it will help to strengthen the governments'
regulatory and enforcement capacity to stop unlicensed boats and the use of illegal fishing
methods. If the stock assessment and monitoring confirm that the present level of fishing is
excessive and unsustainable, the governments may need to place some currently used fishing
areas off-limits and/or to reduce the number of boats and fishermen. Annex 10 discusses the
Resource Access Restriction Process Frameworks which have been prepared to address the
potential negative socio-economic impacts of such restrictions.
Component 3: Investments to Protect Water Quality (Total: US$ 7.21 million; GEF: US$
1.65 million)
25.
This component will support on-the-ground investments to help address existing sources
of pollution identified in the TDA. GEF funds will complement investments by the two
15
governments and other donors (see Annex 15), addressing transboundary issues and
demonstrating innovative approaches. The component includes three subcomponents:
(i)
Small scale, innovative wastewater treatment for lakeside villages and tourist
facilities (Albania and Montenegro)
(ii)
Shielding groundwater from hazardous wastes at the KAP Aluminum plant
(Montenegro)
(iii)
Pilot ecological restoration of lakeside vegetation buffer areas (mainly Albania)
Subcomponent (i) Small scale wastewater treatment:
26.
Several donor-funded programs are supporting construction or upgrading of sewage
collection and wastewater treatment facilities in large urban areas connected in the lake basin
(e.g., Shkodra Municipality, Podgorica). The GEF project will target the problem of wastewater
from small villages, residences, restaurants, etc. which present a growing source of pollution.
The objective is to demonstrate practical, environmentally friendly solutions for such situations
which can be replicated at other sites. On the Montenegro side, a pilot project for wastewater
treatment, possibly based on constructed wetlands, is proposed for the village of Vranjina. On
the Albania side GEF funds are proposed to provide incentives and assistance for installation of
individual wastewater treatment facilities at more than 30 lakeside restaurants.
Subcomponent (ii) KAP hazardous waste containment:
27. Improperly
stored
wastes
at the Kombinat Aluminijuma Podgorica (KAP) aluminum
plant (along the Moraca River) has been identified as one of the main threats to the lake,
specifically as a source of heavy metals, PCBs and other toxic pollutants which have been
detected in the lake water and adjacent springs and wells, as well as in some fish. Data from
monitoring wells suggest these materials are leaching from the site through groundwater to the
Moraca River. The likely source is a large, unlined and uncovered dump site containing a
mixture of non-hazardous and hazardous wastes which have been accumulating since the early
1970's. The GoM intends to construct an EU-compliant landfill for the hazardous waste5 and
has budgeted an initial USD 5 million for this purpose. However, the full cost can only be
determined once the waste has been properly inventoried and a feasibility study and design for
the landfill have been completed. GEF funds will support TA for the inventory and feasibility
study, and contribute to on-the-ground implementation of the proposed solution. The precise
nature of the GEF contribution will be determined after the feasibility study is completed, but
will in principle be targeted to preventing leaching of hazardous and toxic materials into the
groundwater. This may take the form of co-financing of the landfill or associated investments
(e.g., monitoring/pumping wells at the perimeter where groundwater from the site enters the
Moraca River).
Subcomponent (iii) Pilot buffer vegetation restoration:
5 Probably for all the waste, as separation may not be possible. In this case, Government and the KAP owner would
share the cost of construction
16
28. Excessive tree cutting, over-grazing and destructive construction practices have
eliminated or degraded the vegetative buffer that helps to protect Lake Skadar-Shkoder from
non-point-source pollution and siltation from adjacent and upstream agricultural areas. The SAP
identifies priority areas for pilot ecological restoration activities, including (in Albania) erosion
control measures on inflowing streams of Taraboshi Mountain and strips of wetland vegetation
around key fish nursery sites in Kamic and Shiroke, and (in Montenegro) controlled grazing in
lakeside grasslands around Virpazar. The project will support Technical Assistance, equipment
and operating costs for pilot/demonstration restoration projects.
E. Lessons learned and reflected in the project design
29.
Project preparation is benefiting from the experience of several recent Bank-financed
projects and other programs for coordination of transboundary water bodies and other natural
areas. There are numerous parallels between the proposed project and the recently completed,
GEF-financed Macedonia/Albania Lake Ohrid Management project, which established a bilateral
Watershed Management Committee and Secretariat, and a bilateral Agreement for protection and
sustainable development of Lake Ohrid and its watershed. Some specific lessons from Lake
Ohrid that are being applied to the present project include:
· The need to identify critical data needs early, to tailor ecological monitoring around
them, to use concrete performance-based indicators that are clearly linked with desired
outcomes, and to use a partnership approach taking advantage of existing capacity and
activity in the local scientific community. According to the project Implementation
Completion Report, closer attention to these aspects would have helped the Lake Ohrid
project establish a more practical and sustainable monitoring program and avoid
financing infrastructure and equipment that was not essential or duplicated existing
facilities. In the present project, GEF-funded monitoring of specific lake-wide water
quality and associated ecosystem parameters will complement routine ecological
monitoring carried out in both countries. Both Albania and Montenegro ultimately aim
for a comprehensive ecological monitoring program as called for in the EU Water
Framework Directive and Ramsar Convention, but this will need to be achieved in a
phased manner as capacity is developed.
· The importance of early, intensive efforts in public awareness and education, which can
pay off in stronger stakeholder involvement and active participation in project activities.
· The collaboration, compromise and consensus-building necessary for joint decision
making depends upon open dialogue, goodwill and trust among the main stakeholders,
and this takes time to develop. However, the project can facilitate this process by
supporting joint activities, exchange visits, etc. The present project includes a
substantial budget for bilateral meetings, events, study tours, etc., and for jointly designed
and implemented public communications and outreach (through the Communications/
Outreach Working Group.
· GEF support can play an important catalytic role in leveraging spin-off projects (e.g.,
financing of major infrastructure investments), which greatly enhance project impact.
17
Even modest GEF grant funds can raise visibility, and robust analyses and concrete
action plans developed during project preparation can help bring other donors to the
table. The Strategic Action Plan, which was developed as part of project preparation is
expected to play this role for Lake Skadar-Shkoder. The SAP reflects that there are
already considerable funds being provided by other donors, particularly for planning and
wastewater/solid waste management, but there remain important gaps which the GEF
funds will help to fill through pilot projects to demonstrate appropriate technologies and
approaches.
30.
Other GEF and WB projects involving international waters (e.g., Baltic Sea; Caspian Sea,
Serbia Danube Enterprise Reduction) also provide important lessons, such as the importance of
combining "bottom-up" planning and implementation (as well as local economic benefits) with
"top-down" (e.g., policy level) support; and the value of high-visibility transboundary
agreements, institutions, and programs for creating an enabling environment for national
authorities to carry out their regulatory responsibilities. The Albania Coastal Zone Management,
Fisheries Development, and Natural Resources Development projects provide a source of
directly relevant experience relating to the importance of, and mechanisms for involvement of
local communities in planning and sustainable natural resource management.
31.
During project preparation, a study tour to the transboundary Lake Neusiedl-Ferto
(shared between Austria and Hungary) generated useful ideas and potential models for
incorporation in to project design. For example, it demonstrated the possibility of achieving
effective cooperation despite substantial differences in the institutional structures for protected
area management in the two countries. It also highlighted the importance of creating a
supportive environment for local economic development, suggested innovative mechanisms for
involving people from nearby communities in day-to-day management of the lake, and illustrated
the value of restoring nearby terrestrial habitats to help maintain aquatic ecosystems.
International consultants involved in the Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis and project
preparation were also able to expose the national project teams to a variety of other institutional
structures and models for cooperative management of transboundary lakes (e.g., the International
Commission for the Protection of Lake Geneva; the Lake Constance Environmental Council;
Estonian-Russion Transboundary Water Commission, etc.).
F. Alternatives considered and reasons for rejection
32.
A project covering much or all the watershed of Lake Skadar-Shkoder (and perhaps
extending along the Buna-Bojana River to the Adriatic Sea) was considered because both
Montenegro and Albania have policies to implement a River Basin approach as called for by the
EU Water Framework Directive. However, with such a large geographic area, the level of
resources available would not allow for meaningful investments on the ground. The TDA and
SAP do cover the larger watershed area, providing a framework for attracting and coordinating
other donors and programs.
33.
Initially it was anticipated that the project would focus even more of its resources on
direct investments to clean up the lake and eliminate sources of pollution. However, the TDA
indicated that at present water quality is generally good and that the focus should be on putting in
18
place institutional structures and systems to preserve water quality and ecosystem health in the
face of anticipated economic revitalization and development in the near future. The project will
include investments to address some localized pollution sources and "hotspots" which the TDA
identified as being high priority, including the open waste dump at KAP. The TDA also
highlighted uncontrolled construction and unsustainable natural resource use (particularly
excessive and illegal fishing) as issues which present an immediate threat to the economic value
of the lake. This highlighted the importance of strengthening the capacity of authorities
responsible for management of the lake to address these issues, both through outreach and
education and through improved vigilance and enforcement.
34. Project
preparation
teams in both countries expressed a strong interest in including direct
financial support (small grants or micro-credit program) to local communities to help them
establish or expand small economic enterprises involving sustainable use of the lake and its
natural resources, including tourism. However, this would inevitably add greatly to the
complexity of a project. Furthermore, a number of socio-economic factors (e.g., lack of social
cohesion and organization, weak local institutons, high immigration rates) would make it
particularly difficult to implement such a program in this area. Given the short time frame of the
project, it is very unlikely that the participatory processes and management structures that would
be needed for success could be put in place. Therefore, it was agreed that this project would not
include a micro-credit or small grants program but would instead focus on awareness raising, TA
and specific skills training to assist interested local community members to enter into sustainable
use types of activities. It will also provide incentives for unlicensed fishermen to obtain licenses
and participate in local user associations.
III. IMPLEMENTATION
A. Partnership arrangements (if applicable)
35.
In addition to GEF/World Bank, a number of other donors and NGOs have programs to
support environmental protection, sustainable natural resource management, and sustainable
tourism in the Lake Skadar-Shkoder area (see Annexes 2 and 15). The joint Strategic Action
Plan for the lake being prepared under the GEF PDF-B Grant will serve as a framework to
enhance coordination, collaboration and partnership among these initiatives and parties. This is
expected to include substantial co-financing of some specific activities included in the proposed
GEF project.
36.
The Netherlands Government (SNV) directly supported project preparation by providing
technical, logistical and financial assistance to the national teams preparing the Strategic Action
Plan, in close coordination with the WB. It is anticipated that this partnership will continue into
the implementation phase in the form of ongoing on-the-ground facilitation and co-financing for
some activities under Component 1. At this time, only this SNV support is being considered as
project co-financing per se, as it is directly leveraged by the GEF grant. However, many of the
other donor-funded activities described in Annexes 2 and 15 contribute directly to the project
objectives and therefore could be considered co-financing. For example, GTZ is supporting the
preparation of detailed urban plans for some lakeside towns (an essential step towards bringing
order to the current plague of unregulated construction), and for development of small scale
19
economic enterprises in the lake basin. GTZ also supported preparation of the Master Plan for
Tourism in Montenegro which defined nature- and culture-based tourism as the main
development objective for the Lake Skadar basin. The project will cooperate closely with an
ongoing Regional Environment Center (REC) project to promote cross-border communication
and cooperation. REC has also been actively involved in some aspects of project preparation,
such as providing data and background documents for the Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis
and organizing and co-financing public awareness-raising activities such as the first
transboundary "Lake Skadar Day." While UNDP is not directly engaged in activities relating to
Lake Skadar-Shkoder, UNDP support for preparation of a Strategy for Sustainable Tourism
Development in Northern and Central Montenegro (including Lake Skadar), a national
Sustainable Development Strategy and a country-wide GIS mapping and capacity building have
contributed greatly to an enabling environment for this project.
37.
The estimated US$ 30 million of "Associated Financing" for the project also includes
programs funded by the World Bank (IDA), KFW, the European Agency for Reconstruction,
USAID, Austria, Italy, and the Norwegian Research Council. An estimated $10 million will
come from RUSAL, the owner of the KAP aluminium plant, representing about half of the
estimated cost of its program to clean up the KAP site and improve environmental performance
(some of the program addresses air pollution, energy efficiency, etc. and is not counted as
associated financing). Other less direct but important sector-level support (not counted as
associated financing for the project) includes a European Union project which is helping to
establish the new Environmental Protection Agency in Montenegro, and several initiatives
financed by the World Bank and others to promote sustainable tourism development and
ecosystem-based management in Montenegro and Albania. As noted above, a Strategic
Environmental Assessment of the draft Energy Sector Strategy, with direct implications for use
of waters feeding Lake Skadar-Shkoder, is being prepared under the Bank-Netherlands Water
Partnership Program.
38.
More broadly, the Bank has partnered with the German government (Ministry for the
Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety) to launch and support the "Petersberg
Process." This initiative stems from the 1998 "Petersberg Round Table on Trans-boundary
Waters." During Phase I, four Round Tables were organized to facilitate an open debate on the
problems of transboundary water management and the development of an integrated approach to
resolving them. Participants have included ministers, senior policy makers, academics,
representatives of international organizations and NGOs. Phase II, which was launched in
December 2005 will focus on cooperative operationally oriented activities concerning
transboundary water management, concentrating on smaller catchment basins of Southeastern
Europe (including Lake Skadar-Shkoder). Phase II of the Petersberg Process will complement
the Stabilization and Association process of the European Union (EU) and other ongoing
initiatives in the region, such as the Athens Declaration, the Global Water Partnership -
Mediterranean (GWP-MED) and European Union Water Initiative/Mediterranean Component.
B. Institutional and implementation arrangements
39.
The Albanian Ministry of Environment, Forests and Water Administration (MEFWA)
and the Montenegrin Ministry of Tourism and Environmental Protection (MTEP) will have
overall responsibility for implementation of the project, in coordination with partners including
20
sectoral Ministries, local governments and Universities. MTEP and MEFWA are directly
responsible for on-the-ground management of the lake and immediately surrounding areas,
because the entire area on both sides of the border falls within formally established Protected
Areas (PAs). In Albania, MEFWA is also the Ministry responsible for water management and
for fisheries. In Montenegro, water management in general falls under the Ministry of
Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management, but Lake Skadar-Shkoder represents a special
case due to its PA status. MTEP and MEFWA will each assign a Project Manager and
representatives to serve on the bilateral Lake Management Committee and Working Groups.
40.
In Albania, day-to-day implementation will be the responsibility of the Secretariat for the
Bilateral Lake Management Committee (for activities under Component 1), the Management
Unit for the Shkoder Lake Managed Nature Reserve (Component 2 activities) and the SLMNR
Management Unit together with Shkodra Municipality (Component 3 activities). The SLMNR
Management Unit is newly created and not yet complete: appointment of appropriate senior
management for the Unit will be a condition of disbursement for activities falling under the
Unit's responsibility. In Montenegro, the implementing agencies will be the MTEP with
technical and administrative support from the BLMC Secretariat (Component 1), the Public
Enterprise for National Parks --specifically by the management and staff of the Skadar Lake
Skadar National Park, under the direction of the SLNP Director-- (Component 2) and the
Environmental Protection Agency which is in the process of being established under MTEP
(Component 3). The joint Secretariat for the Bilateral Lake Management Committee (comprised
of one person, with office and operating budget) will be based in Albania and funded through the
GEF grant to Albania, and will report for administrative purposes to MEFWA. The Secretariat
will be supported by two project-financed Technical Specialists (one in Albania, one in
Montenegro), and will have funds to engage specialized consultants to meet specific
implementation needs (e.g. procurement, financial accounting, database and website
management, etc.) on a part-time basis. Monitoring and research activities under Component 1
will be contracted to well-established local institutions such as the Center for Eco-toxicological
Research, the Republican Hydro-Meteorological Institute, Institute for Protection of Cultural
Monuments, Nature Protection Institute and the University of Montenegro (Montenegro), and the
Hydro-meteorological Institute, Natural Sciences Museum and Fishery Research Institute and
University of Shkodra (Albania), among others. Where other government departments, agencies
or organizations (e.g. Municipalities, NGOs) are involved in implementing project activities,
they will do so under the terms of Memoranda of Understanding signed with MTEP or MEFWA.
41.
The GEF funds will be divided based on the breakdown of activities and associated costs,
with separate GEF grants to each country. Implementation responsibility for joint activities
under Component 1 will be agreed upon during Appraisal (assigned to Montenegro or to
Albania) and the associated funds will be included in the respective GEF grants accordingly.
42.
A project Operational Manual, to be completed prior to project effectiveness, will provide
details of implementation and reporting processes and responsibilities. This will include details
regarding implementation and monitoring of project- and activity-level Environmental
Management Plans and the Resource Access Restriction Process Framework. All activities will
be carried out with an emphasis on regular and substantial involvement of stakeholders,
particularly local communities and NGOs.
21
43.
MEFWA and MTEP will also coordinate with a number of other institutions which will
not have a direct role in implementation but are important actors and stakeholders. For example
the Drin Bunë River Basin Administration (chaired by the Prefect of Shkodra) covers the entire
Lake Shkoder watershed in Albania, and under the new water law in Montenegro the Water
Administration Agency will have a lead role in implementing integrated water management in
line with the EU Water Framework Directive. The specific division of responsibilities among
these various institutions will be clarified through an institutional analysis to be completed
during project preparation.
C. Monitoring and evaluation of outcomes/results
44. Monitoring of project implementation will be the responsibility of the Project
Coordinators in MTEP and MEFWA and of the Secretariat for the bilateral Lake Management
Committee (for joint activities under Component 1). As the core objective of the project is to
establish mechanisms and build commitment for preventing pollution and degradation of the lake
ecosystem, standard water quality parameters will be tracked on a lakewide basis to determine
whether they show signs of falling below current (acceptable) levels. Data collection will largely
be done by existing scientific institutions in each country, such as the Center for Eco-
toxicological Research, the Republican Hydro-Meteorological Institute, Institute for Protection
of Cultural Monuments, Nature Protection Institute and the University of Montenegro
(Montenegro), and the Hydro-meteorological Institute, Natural Sciences Museum and Fishery
Research Institute and University of Shkodra (Albania), among others. However, significant
changes in these parameters would not really be expected to occur during the short period of
project implementation except in the immediate vicinity of pilot water clean-up projects (see
below). Therefore, Component 1 outcomes focus on the establishment and activities of new
bilateral institutional structures, mainly the Lake Management Committee, its Secretariat and its
associated Working Groups.
45.
The effectiveness of the Committee will be measured by its proactivity in establishing
Working Groups and in approving reports and proposals submitted to it, and by the two
Governments' approval of its outputs and their integration into national policies and programs.
For example, the lake-wide management plan should be prepared in consultation with all
significant stakeholders and then incorporated into urban plans and Protected Area management
plans on both sides of the lake. The effectiveness of the Committee and Working Groups will
also be reflected in the extent to which the Governments make use of these bodies to assess and
resolve transboundary issues or conflicts that may arise; however, it is difficult to set advance
targets for this. Sustainability of the Committee will be measured by the willingness of the
Governments to cover an increasing proportion of its basic costs (meetings and communications)
over the life of the project.
46. For Component 2, annual work plans/procurement plans agreed between the
Governments and the Bank will set targets for physical elements such as completion of small-
scale tourism infrastructure and total areas re-vegetated in ecological restoration pilots. Progress
in non-physical elements such as public outreach and communications, reduction in illegal
fishing and building, and socio-economic impacts will be measured through surveys whose
22
results will be compared with those of baseline studies carried out during project preparation or
the first year of implementation. Data collection will be carried out by the staff of the respective
PA management units and by contracted third parties.
47.
For Component 3, the impacts of pilot small-scale waste-water treatment installations
will be measured by improvement of water quality at those sites. Impacts of groundwater
protection measures at the KAP site will also be monitored through sampling wells, although it is
not certain whether they will be completed in time to make an impact by the end of the project.
Ecological restoration of buffer vegetation should also help protect water quality in the long term
but impacts are not expected to be measurable in the time frame of the project; therefore,
monitoring will focus on physical progress of restoration work.
48.
A Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for the project, reflecting the above elements, will be
included in the Project Operational Manual, including specific responsibilities, timeframes and
reporting formats. Project supervision will monitor implementation of mitigation measures
identified in the Environmental Assessment/Environmental Mitigation Plan.
D. Sustainability
49.
The project derives sustainability from the fact that it will support Government priorities.
Both Albania and Montenegro have policies and recently adopted/enacted laws which directly
support the objectives of this project, as well as national strategies and spatial/development plans
which identify environmental preservation and sustainable development as the primary
management objectives for Lake Skadar-Shkoder. They have also made international
commitments, such as designating both sides of the lake as Ramsar sites. Both countries are also
actively working to harmonize their legal and institutional frameworks with the EU
environmental acquis and Directives, including adoption of a coordinated, integrated watershed
approach to managing transboundary water bodies. Finally, both countries are committing
substantial budgetary resources and assistance from other donors for activities that directly or
indirectly support the project's activities and objectives.
50. The institutions responsible for implementation are either existing organizations
(Government Ministries and agencies; national research institutes) or bodies that the
Governments are committed to maintaining over the long term (the BLMC). The bilateral
Working Groups are not necessarily intended to be permanent institutions, so at the close of the
project they may continue, terminate or be changed to focus on other priorities depending on the
Governments' priorities and available resources. Component 1 will help to set up these
institutional structures and will cover associated costs on a declining basis in order to enhance
sustainability. One frequent issue for projects involving environmental protection and
management is whether monitoring activities carried out under the project will continue over the
longer term, when incremental project support ends. In this case, the project will support the
inclusion of specific parameters which are particularly significant in a transboundary context,
but the annual costs of carrying out monitoring will continue at approximately the current levels
rather than being artificially increased for the life of the project. Component 2 aims to promote
more sustainable tourism and natural resource use, in contrast to current unsustainable practices.
Component 3 will help the Government of Montengro to find a permanent solution for the
23
problem of KAP legacy wastes, will demonstrate economically and environmentally sustainable
small scale stewater treatment approaches, and restore degraded buffer habitats which will then
be self-sustaining. For all these reasons, the likelihood of project outputs and outcomes
continuing beyond the life of the project is high.
51.
There are a growing number of examples around the world of international cooperation
for managing transboundary water bodies and their watersheds. While each situation has its own
particular features, there is a great deal of interest and value in testing new models and
exchanging experiences. For example, Albania's experience with initiating cooperation with
Macedonia for Lake Ohrid, ongoing initiatives to develop integrated management of the Adriatic
coast, and a brief study tour during project preparation to Lake Neusiedl-Ferto (Austria/Hungary
border) provided important lessons and ideas for this project. Lake Skadar-Shkoder in turn will
provide useful lessons for others.
E. Critical risks and possible controversial aspects
RISK MITIGATION
Insufficient government
Both governments have made international commitments to
commitment to preserve
preservation and sustainable management of the lake and have
the lake ecosystem in the approved development strategies and spatial plans which identify
face of pressure for non-
the lake as an area to be maintained for natural values, sustainable
compatible economic
natural resource use and nature- and culture-based tourism.
development, and/or to
While there are some proposals for development projects which
cooperation for lake
could have serious negative impacts on the lake, both countries
management
have up to date Environmental Impact Assessment legislation
requires the identification and mitigation of potential ecological
impacts as well as public disclosure and debate. The high
visibility of Lake Skadar-Shkoder as a nationally, regionally and
internationally important natural area (further enhanced by the
present project) should help to guarantee that any such proposal
would attract strong international criticism and resistance. The
present project's support for public awareness raising and
sustainable use should help to build such resistance at the local
level as well. The Government of Montenegro's recent rejection of
the proposed Buk Bijela hydroelectric dam (which threatened a
part of the Tara River Canyon) is an encouraging example of the
influence carried by local and international opinion.
The two governments have demonstrated interest in cooperating
with one another and with other neighbors in the area of
transboundary environmental protection and management. The
bilateral Agreement is expected to be approved by both
Governments at high level, will soon be appro, and both have
prioritized Lake Skadar-Shkoder for this purpose. The recent
creation of the Managed Nature Reserve and Ramsar site on the
Albanian side was due in part to the Government of Albania's
interest in harmonizing management objectives with Montenegro.
24
Rate of tourism growth at Tourism is a priority sector for both Governments and growth has
national and/or local
been strong in both countries over the past few years. Both
levels less than expected, governments have identified the Lake Skadar-Shkoder as a priority
thereby reducing political both because of its tourism development potential and as
and local support for
economically depressed areas requiring development support.
maintaining the lake.
Tourism development in and around natural areas is always a
Alternatively, tourism
mixed blessing, with strong potential positive linkages but also
growth is rapid but does
serious risks. Strengthening planning and regulation, putting in
not follow a sustainable
place monitoring systems to identify potential problems at an early
path.
stage, and raising public awareness and working with rather than
against private sector partners are key elements of a strategy to
manage and steer tourism development into sustainable and
productive directions.
Weak implementation
The project mainly supports existing actors to improve, expand or
capacity in relevant
reorient activities they already are undertaking. The project will
institutions in both
provide incremental technical and administrative assistance to
countries
support the Project Managers within the respective Ministries in
implementation of project activities (e.g. procurement, planning,
M&E). In Montenegro the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) is being newly established but will be made up primarily of
experienced staff from the MTEP. In Albania the newly created
SLMNR Management Unit will be strengthened at the senior
management level as a condition of disbursement, and it will
benefit from working in collaboration with the well-established
SLNP Management Unit.
F. Loan/credit conditions and covenants
TO BE COMPLETED AT APPRAISAL
IV. APPRAISAL SUMMARY
A. Economic and financial analyses
52.
Incremental Cost Assessment is provided in Annex 15. An economic assessment of the
project focused on non-GEF funded elements will be completed during appraisal.
B. Technical,
[TO BE COMPLETED AT APPRAISAL]
C. Fiduciary
[TO BE COMPLETED AT APPRAISAL]
25
D. Social
53.
Two social assessments were conducted for the project, one in Montenegro and one in
Albania. In addition, the project Environmental Assessment covered some social aspects as did
other preparation studies such as the survey on fishing practices. The various studies involved a
number of local workshops as well as the use of questionnaires, focus groups and individual
interviews with an extensive sample of communities on both sides of the lake. The social
assessments included stakeholder analysis which encompassed central government, local
government, regional associations, user groups and NGOs active in the project area. The
environmental NGO sector is weak in both countries, although some groups do exist (e.g.,
Greens of Montenegro; ecological clubs in Albania) and could be strengthened through
participation in the project. The joint public outreach/communication/education program under
Component 1 of the project will make use of the extensive information collected on the identities
and circumstances of these different stakeholder groups.
54. In
Albania,
local authorities were identified as key stakeholders because they are
responsible for preparing and implementing local level urban, economic, environmental and
social plans in the context of national strategies. Other stakeholder groups include Regional
associations (e.g., Water Boards), Hunters and Fishermens' associations, an association of
organic agriculture (OKSFAM), groups involved with collection and sale of medicinal plants, the
Albanian Association for Environmental Education, individual restaurant and hotel owners,
tourism operators and other businessmen/women, and religious authorities.
55.
The population of the areas surrounding the lake on the Montenegro side is much smaller,
consisting mainly of widely dispersed, small settlements. The main stakeholders were listed as
central government (MTEP and several other sectoral ministries with local offices), municipal
governments, municipal level tourist organizations, the SLNP Administration, and one
fishermen's association and some loosely organized local fishermen's groups. The Montenegro
social assessment noted a general lack of local level organizations (those of the socialist era
having been dissolved and not replaced).
56.
The social assessments identified patterns of demographic change in the vicinity of the
lake. On both sides of the border social organization is constrained by social and demographic
trends such as depopulation (and aging) of villages on the one hand and a substantial recent
influx of immigrants (in some cases refugees) to urban areas (particularly Shkodra) on the other.
Recent immigrants to the Shkodra municipal area are generally poorly integrated into social
networks, creating a significant divide between newcomers and long-time residents. On the
other hand, the social assessments reported little evidence of conflicts based on ethnicity despite
the fact that the area is populated by Montenegrins, Serbs, and Albanians.
57.
Information from the various studies are somewhat conflicting on the subject of fishing
as a local economic activity (including commercial fishing, fishing for household use and sport
fishing as a recreational activity for both locals and tourists). The two country social
26
assessments indicate that fishing has declined as main source of livelihood activity; with
agriculture supplanting it as a primary activity. By contrast, the survey on fishing practices on
the Albanian side reported much greater reliance on fishing for own use and for sale. At this
time it is not known whether or to what extent fishing pressure will need to be reduced for
sustainability of the resource, this will require obtaining much better information about fish
populations and distributions. However, a more in-depth socio-economic survey will be
conducted during the first year of the project to determine the extent of possible negative impacts
should tighter restrictions on fishing need to be put in place.
E. Environment
58.
Environment Category: The project currently falls under Category B, as the activities
are expected to have limited impacts, which are for the most part either environmentally neutral
(e.g., establishing transboundary institutions, research and monitoring) or positive (wastewater
treatment, ecological restoration, improved enforcement of regulations). If the feasibility study
for the KAP waste dump mitigation (to be carried out in Year 1) indicates that it would be
appropriate for the project to contribute to construction of a hazardous waste landfill or any other
investment involving the handling, moving, treatment or containment of hazardous or toxic
materials, a full (Category A) EIA will be carried out for that activity.
59. Both Montenegro and Albania have been actively revising sectoral policies and
legislation with the objective of harmonizing with EU policies and Directives (e.g.,
environmental acquis; Water Framework Directive). This includes recently updated legislation
on Environmental Impact Assessment (including Strategic Environmental Assessment),
environmental protection, Protected Areas, and protection and management of water and living
natural resources. National and local government sin both countries have also made considerable
progress in re-establishing a regulatory presence after the chaotic period at the beginning of the
1990's. However, enforcement of laws relating to land and resource use remains weak due in
part to institutional constraints (small and often inadequately trained staff) and in part to a lack of
political will (including pandering to local interests to gain political support in an unstable and
conflictual political environment. Uncontrolled and unregulated construction is a major threat,
particularly on the Albanian side (although there are a growing number of examples on the
Montengrin side as well). There are also issues of conflicting and overlapping mandates of
different sectoral agencies and between central and local government levels. An additional
concern is lack of support from the judicial system, with local courts reportedly reluctant to
prosecute or convict violators for offenses such as fishing without a license or with illegal
methods.
27
F. Safeguard policies
Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project
Yes
No
Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01)
[x]
[ ]
Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04)
[x] [
]
Pest Management (OP 4.09)
[ ]
[x]
Cultural Property (OPN 11.03, being revised as OP 4.11)
[x] [
]
Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12)
[x] [
]
Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10)
[ ]
[x]
Forests (OP/BP 4.36)
[ ]
[x]
Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37)
[ ]
[x]
Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60)*
[ ]
[x]
Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50)
[x] [
]
60.
Environmental Impact Assessment: An Environmental Impact Assessment has been
carried out and a draft will be publicly disclosed prior to Appraisal. It is in the form of a
Framework EIA because the on-the-ground investments have not been specifically identified
(e.g., locations and technologies for small-scale wastewater treatment; disposal/containment
solution for hazardous wastes at KAP). The EIA will describe the potential activities and outline
the process by which environmental screening and assessment for such investments will be
undertaken in accordance with Government and World Bank policies and procedures. The EIA
will: review the relevant legislative and regulatory frameworks and implementation/enforcement
capacity in each country and assess the extent to which these are compatible with and sufficient
to meet WB requirements; evaluate the project's potential environmental risks and impacts in its
area of influence, including transboundary aspects and international obligations; examine the
project alternatives; identify the ways to improve project selection, sitting, planning, design and
implementation by preventing, minimizing, mitigating or compensating for adverse
environmental impacts and enhancing positive impacts; include the process of mitigating and
managing adverse impacts by developing environmental monitoring and mitigation plans (EMP),
which will be implemented as a part of the project execution. The EIA will be incorporated into
the project Operational Manual which will also spell out review processes and responsibilities.
All project activities will be designed in such a way to incorporate (i) relevant EU standards; (ii)
standards of good engineering practice, and (iii) EU guidebooks on Best Available Techniques
(BAT) where these exist.
61.
Natural Habitats: this OP is triggered because the project area is comprised of legally
designated PAs and Ramsar sites, and because some on-the-ground works will be financed (e.g.,
hiking trails, birdwatching platforms) and the overall objectives include increasing tourist
numbers. Project impacts are expected to be positive, through improved monitoring of lake
conditions and strengthened capacity on the part of the agencies responsible for managing the
lake (the management units of the two Protected Areas). The lake-wide zoning and management
* By supporting the proposed project, the Bank does not intend to prejudice the final determination of the parties' claims on the
disputed areas
28
plan will be integrated with, and add an essential transboundary element to, the two PA-level
management plans.
62.
Cultural Property: this OP is triggered because there are legally designated cultural
heritage sites within the project area (e.g., old monasteries), some of which will be rehabilitated
for touristic and educational purposes. The risk of negative impacts of increased tourism on
cultural sites, and measures to mitigate this risk, are being addressed in the EIA.
63.
Involuntary resettlement: the project will not finance or be associated with any taking of
land or physical relocation of people. However, the TDA indicated that over-fishing and fishing
in inappropriate areas or with inappropriate methods probably represents a significant threat to
the sustainable use of this very valuable element of the lake ecosystem. This remains to be
confirmed through a more detailed study of the fish resources during the first year of the project.
If it is confirmed that fishing pressure needs to be reduced, this could result in economic
hardship for some of the current users. Anticipating this possibility, Resource Access Restriction
Process Frameworks were prepared for both countries during project preparation in accordance
with WB OP/BP 4.12. The Process Frameworks will be publicly disclosed together with the
draft EIA.
64.
International Waterways: Lake Skadar-Shkoder empties into the Adriatic Sea via the
transboundary Buna-Bojana River. There will be no abstraction of water and the only
interventions will be environmentally positive (reducing pollution inputs to the lake). However,
in accordance with Bank policy and practice, this OP is triggered because investment in new
wastewater treatment infrastructure is envisioned. Notification of the Adriatic states will be done
through UNEP, which serves as the Secretariat for the Barcelona Convention for the Protection
of the Mediterranean Sea Against Pollution.
G. Policy Exceptions and Readiness
TO BE COMPLETED AT APPRAISAL
29
Annex 1: Country and Sector or Program Background
Project Area, Economic and Social Trends
Description of the lake and project area
Lake Skadar-Shkoder is located on the border between Montenegro and Albania, south of
the Dinaric Alps. The lake is oriented lengthwise from northwest to southeast, paralleling the
Adriatic coast from which it is separated by a 10 km wide span of the Tarabos and Rubia
mountains. Skadar-Shkoder s the largest lake on the Balkan peninsula, in terms of surface area,
averaging 475 km2 (varying between about 370 km2 in summer and 540 km2 in winter). It is a
relatively shallow lake, with an average depth of 8 m, but with some deeper funnel-shape
depressions ("oko") where groundwater wells up. The coastline is 168 km (110.5 km in
Montenegro and 57.5 km in Albania) and numerous elongated islands are found along the coast.
The physical-chemical characteristics of the lake water are the result of inflow from its
tributaries (particularly the Moraca and Crnojevica Rivers), inflow from karstic springs,
exchange between the sediments and overlying waters, and chemical exchange between the
waters and the extensive beds of aquatic macrophytes. Water circulation and mixing in the lake
are high due to high in/out flow. The average water residence time is about 120 days. There is
no stratification and therefore little habitat differentiation within the lake except around the
shoreline. Average water temperatures are high due to the mild climate and the lake's low
elevation and shallowness. This results in high rates of decomposition as well as an important
refuge for birds in winter (no freezing).
The lake's most important tributaries enter from the north: the Moraca, Crnojevica,
Orahovstica, Karatuna and Baragurska Rivers in Montenegro, and the Rjolska and Vraka Rivers
in Albania. . River deposits and the lower edge of plain have created a wide marsh belt that is
regularly flooded. The lake's level is particularly strongly related to inflow from the Moraca
River. Many small streams enter on the western site. The lake area is tilted to southeast, and the
lake drains through Buna-Bojana River to Adriatic Sea. Floods in the mid 1800s diverted the
Drin River in Albania westward into the Buna-Bojana River, a few hundred meters from the lake
outlet, with a large deposition of sediments that raised the river bed. The outward flow of the
lake is impeded when there is high flow in the Drin river, usually in the period from December to
February, depending on water released from three hydropower dams constructed in the
1960s/1970s upstream on the Buna-Bojana River. This raises water level in the lake temporarily.
The river has a low transport capacity for sediment due to the low gradient of its channel, and
sediments accumulate around the intake leading to frequent flooding of nearby land. The outlet
has also been narrowed in recent years due to landfilling for new construction.
Precipitation and groundwater from the Zeta plain Quaternary aquifer in the
north/northeast, karstic springs particularly on the southwestern side, and the "oko" groundwater
upwellings also contribute significantly to the water inflow to the lake. Most of the springs are at
or below the surface level of the lake. The groundwater depth on the Zeta plain near the lake are
at about 8-10 m below the ground, with a flow gradient from northeast to southwest. Recharge
30
(normally around 5 m3/s) is mainly through infiltration from rainwater, river water (particularly
the Moraca, Cijevna and Ribnica Rivers) and karstic aquifers. The Zeta plain aquifer, karstic
springs at the edge of the plain and the lake water are all hydraulically connected. Groundwater
in the lake area is used for drinking, irrigation and industry. Karstic spring, some of which
comes from karstic aquifers up to 60 m deep, is of particularly good quality and is used for
drinking.
Table XX: Tentative water balance of Lake Skadar-Shkoder
Lake Inflow:
Lake outflow:
109m3/year
109m3/year
Rainfall
0.9
Moraca River
6.3
Other Rivers
1.0
Groundwater
2 (?)
0.2 (?)
Evaporation 0.5
Buna-Bojana River
9.5
TOTAL 10.2
10.2
Source: Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis, 2006 (Royal Haskoning)
Socio-economic and demographic factors
There are approximately 500,000 people living in the greater Lake Skadar-Shkoder
watershed, with two thirds in Montenegro and one third in Albania. Sixty percent of the
population is urban and lives in a few cities: Shkodra in Albania and Podgorica, Niksic,
Danilovgrad and Cetinje in Montenegro. The rural population is thinly spread in small villages
and communes. The proposed project area is considerably smaller, consisting of the lake itself
and immediately surrounding areas. In Albania, it falls within three Regions of the Shkodra
District (Shkodra, Malesia e Madhe and Puka), although the territory of Puka Region does not
directly contact the lake. The total population of the project area in Albania is about 170,000,
living in seven municipalities and rural communes (72% of the population rural, 28% urban).
The Albania poverty profile identifies the Shkodra prefecture as among the four in the country
with the highest poverty headcount, with over one third of the population living below the
poverty line. The population also suffers from a lack of access to basic public services. In
Montenegro, the lake and surrounding areas fall entirely within the Lake Skadar National Park,
which includes parts of the territories of three municipalities (Podgorica, Bar and Cetinje). The
total population of 40 settlements inside or at the edge of the park in Montenegro is about
12,500. Of these, only about 550 (4% of the total population) live in the relatively urbanized
settlements of Virpazar and Rijeka Crnojevica, while the remainder (96%) live in rural areas.
Unemployment rate in this region is about 40% higher than in 1991, and is increasing (e.g. since
2003 the number of unemployed in Krjina and Crmnica has increased by 25% and 40%
respectively).
31
Migration is changing the demographic profile of settlements in the area on both sides of
the border. The trend is reduction and aging of populations in rural villages as young people
migrate to urban areas. Pensioners account for about 15% of the population in rural settlements
in Montenegro, with figures over 30% in some villages. While most of the project area shows a
decline, the population in the agricultural Zeta plain (one of the most intensively cultivated areas
of Montenegro) has increased by 2.5 since 1990. In Albania the rural village population has
declined by 18 percent over the same period, while small towns and urban areas have increased
by 8.7 percent.
The recent economic history in the project area reflects that of the two countries as
whole, with severe economic decline during the 1990's with associated collapse of many
industries within the watershed. While creating hardships for the population, this has had a
positive impact on the lake ecology through decreased industrial pollution. Both governments
are now seeking to revive the economic base in the area. A wave of housing construction,
particularly on the Albanian side in the areas surrounding Shkodra city, reflects the influx of
money from remittances (and in some cases smuggling).
Tourism is proposed to be a major economic driver. For example, the Montenegro
Master Plan for Tourism Development designates Lake Skadar as a tourism development zone,
with cultural tourism and sailing, walking and fishing as the main potential attractions.
Similarly, the Strategy and Action Plan for the Development of the Albanian Tourism Sector
Based on Cultural and Environmental Tourism (2005) outlines a new orientation towards cultural
and environmental tourism with an emphasis on nature and cultural heritage. The Strategy of
Economic Development of Shkodra Municipality (2005) identifies tourism development as a
priority strategic objective and sets out action plans for eco-tourism development based on the
lake and cultural attractions. However, to achieve these objectives the current trend of
uncontrolled construction of residences, restaurants and other facilities along the lake shore will
have to be replaced by well planned development and effective regulation. The challenges are
similar to those of the coastal areas in both countries, but at a less advanced and perhaps more
manageable stage.
Policy and Institutional factors
Both Montenegro and Albania have updated or are in the process of updating policies and
laws relating to natural resources (water, forests), nature protection and Protected Areas,
environmental assessment and environmental management. While there have not been explicit
efforts to harmonize the laws on either side of the border, there is convergence as both are trying
to harmonize with EU policies and regulations. There is also a strong similarity in that
enforcement of these laws remains relatively weak due in part to constraints of institutional
capacity. Political issues also intervene as political structures and agendas remain somewhat
unsettled in both countries, as reflected for example in regular shifts of power among parties in
local and national elections. The need to capture support among volatile local voters can make
it difficult for politicians to take a hard line on illegal activities.
The entire lake together with immediately surrounding areas falls within Protected Areas
(PAs)on both sides of the border. In Montenegro, the Lake Skadar National Park (LSNP) was
32
established in 1983 and declared a wetland of international significance under the Ramsar
Convention in 1995. In Albania, the Shkoder Lake Managed Nature Reserve6 (SLMNR) was
designated in November 2005, and declared a Ramsar site in February 2006. Altogether, the
combined protected area covers 900 km2 of which about half is the lake itself. Both PAs are
multiple-use areas rather than exclusive nature reserves. They contain substantial settlements
and privately owned as well as public lands, and their resources (fish, gravel, pastures, etc.) are
exploited for both subsistence and commercial purposes. As noted above, tourism is already a
well established use of the area and expected to grow rapidly.
The PA status confers a number of advantages. At the policy level it establishes nature
conservation and sustainable use of natural resources as the core management objectives and
provides a legal framework for the government (MTEP and Public Enterprise for National Parks
in Montenegro; Directorate for Nature Protection under MEFWA in Albania) to establish and
enforce regulations for access and for land, water and natural resource use. In both countries the
PAs are designated as special planning areas for which detailed spatial plans are to be developed,
which are approved by Government and can supercede local/municipal level plans. The PA laws
also call for the preparation of PA management plans, but these are approved internally and do
not have the same legal standing. The PAs have designated Management Units with the mandate
to enforce regulations and to approve or disapprove development proposals, land purchases, etc.
based on their spatial and management plans and the PA legislation. Given the nature of their
responsibilities, these are the logical implementing agencies for many of the project activities
(particularly under Component 2, also some Component 1 activities). The Management Unit of
the LSNP in Montenegro is well established and experienced, with a modern Headquarters
building, management team of XX [Director, others] and XX staff. The Management Unit of
the SLMNR in Albania has been legally established but at present consists only of 10 fisheries
rangers, one of whom has been designated as the acting Head of the Unit. Strengthening this
Unit is a high priority both for realizing the objectives of the PA and for project implementation.
The designation of both halves of the lake as wetlands of international importance under the
Ramsar convention adds another dimension of protection by acknowledging the area as a global
asset in which the international community (not only local residents or citizens of the two
countries) has a legitimate interest.
Trans-boundary Diagnostic Analysis
A TDA was carried out during project preparation to identify major trends and underlying
causes in the ecology of the lake and its natural and economic resources. It provided the basis
for the Strategic Action Plan which in turn provided the basis for the components and activities
of the proposed GEF project. The findings of the TDA are recognized to be indicative rather
than conclusive, given the significant gaps and inconsistency in data both within and between the
two countries. In addition, trends in physical and chemical parameters of water quality show a
high degree of seasonal variation, as well as swings over time reflecting major economic,
political and social changes in surrounding areas. It was clear from the TDA exercise that a
broad-based and systematic trans-boundary monitoring program needs to be established as soon
as possible, and that many key management decisions concerninig the lake and its resources can
6 IUCN Category IV
33
only be made once key baseline studies have been updated or undertaken. Bearing these
constraints in mind, some key findings of the TDA were:
· The water quality of Lake Skadar-Shkoder is generally good (in most cases meeting EU
standards for drinking water), and is better today than in previous decades. This is most
likely due mainly to reduced industrial and agricultural pollution inflows following the
collapse of most industries in the early 1990s, together with rapid turnover of the water
(the entire contents of the lake being replaced about every 120 days on average). The
main challenge therefore is not cleaning up existing pollution, but protecting the lake
from a likely increase in pollution and other environmental degradation in the context of
expected future economic renewal and development, both in the immediate area and in
upstream urban centers.
· There are however some localized pollution "hotspots" which present ecological and
health hazards and should be remediated as soon as possible. These include both areas
of the lake itself (e.g., at mouths of the main inflowing rivers and adjacent to main
agricultural areas) and groundwater which is hydrologically connected to the lake.
· There is some evidence of decline in populations of some fish species, particularly
commercially valuable migratory species, and possibly in the numbers of resident and
migratory waterfowl.
· There is little history of coordination or cooperation between Montenegro and Albania
for managing the lake and its resources.
The following sections elaborate on findings of the TDA which are particularly relevant to
the proposed project.
Lake Skadar-Shkoder Description and Hydrology
Lake Skadar-Shkoder is the largest lake on the Balkan Peninsula in terms of water
surface, varying (in dry vs. wet periods) between 353 km2 and 500 km2, with total water
volumes varying between 1.7 Km3 and 4 km3. The lake's surface varies from 5-10 m above sea
level. At its maximum dimensions it is 44 Km long and 13 km wide and up to 8 m deep, with.
Lake Water Quality
Note on data sources: While data for the period prior to 1990 are limited and
fragmentary in both countries, various studies and reports suggest that the lake and surrounding
areas have experienced significant pollution in past decades, mainly from industrial sources and
untreated wastewater discharges from lakeside and upstream cities and towns7. The Moraca
River is identified as the main source of pollution. Since 1990 on the Montengro side the
Hydrometeorology Institute and Center for Ecotoxicological Research (CETI) carry out fairly
systematic monitoring of a wide range of chemical and physical parameters (surface and
7 The most comprehensive pre-1990 analysis of the lake water and its tributaries is in Karaman and Beeton, 1981.
The TDA used data from that study as a basis for evaluation and comparison.
34
groundwater samples 8 times/year). This began with a fairly comprehensive baseline study
during 1990-1991 which included soil and groundwater samples at various locations around the
Kombinat Aluminjuma Podgorica (KAP) aluminum plant (see below), the mouth of the Moraca
River and lake sediments, as well as fish and lake vegetation. In 1992-1996, an environmental
study of the Zeta Plain examined groundwater, river waters, soil, lake sediments and air quality,
with an emphasis on areas likely to be affected by the KAP. In Albania the Hydrometeorolgical
Institute also carries out regular sampling and analysis at several stations approximately twice a
year, complemented by various studies by the Institute and by the University of Shkodra. Due to
limited facilities, the analysis covers only basic physical and chemical parameters (e.g.
temperature, pH, conductivity, transparency, dissolved oxygen, ammonia, nitrites, nitrates,
phosphates, total phosphorus). Since 2000, a multi-national consortium of Universities
(Universities of Heidelberg, Graz, Shkodra, Tirana and Montenegro) have been carrying out
environmental studies within the framework of the "Integrated Monitoring of Shkodra Lake
project. In the past few years, the Universities of Shkodra and Montenegro have been using
innovative technologies such as semi-permeable Membrane Devices to test for the presence of
toxic hydrophobic organic pollutants such as poly nuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) as well as other pollutants such as fluorine, naphthalene, etc.
While the lack of continuous data makes it difficult to establish long-term trends, the
TDA formulated certain conclusions regarding lake water quality and pollution sources. In the
1970's the lake's water quality (in some samples) had unacceptable levels of a number of
parameters, including heavy metals, PCBs, and PAHs, and concentrations were above detection
limits between 1990 and 1995. In the most recent samples (2000-2005) water quality in most
of the lake was greatly improved, with these and other contaminants now below detection levels
or well within international standards for drinking water (but see below regarding groundwater
and sediments). Most lake water samples show heavy metals (As, Cd, Cr, Ni, Pb, Zn and Hg)
values to be at low concentration (Class 2), with moderate to high concentration (Class 3) at a
few sites. However, the concentration of pollutants such as ammonia and nitrites/nitrates is
higher in the north/northwestern part of the lake and near the mouth of the Moraca River and the
Zeta plain. Eutrophication is not yet an issue, due to the high turn-over rate of the water, but
stagnant corners near the Moraca delta and Zeta plain are at risk. The Moraca delta also
continues to show elevated levels of mercury and other heavy metals. There is also seasonal
variation, such as lower dissolved oxygen levels during the summer.
The following monitoring parameters are proposed to be used for the purpose of the
project (see Monitoring Table, Annex 3), as they are good indicators of pollution from KAP and
municipal wastewater. The overall target is to maintain these parameters within acceptable
limits (drinking water standard) lake-wide (center of lake sampling), and to improve specific
indicators at pilot project sites.
35
[NOTE: TABLE TO BE COMPLETED AT APPRAISAL, WITH DATA FROM PROPOSED
WWT PILOT PROJECT SITES]
Parameter
Location: Vranjina
Location: Center of
Comparison Standards
Lake
1998-
2005
1998-
2005
USEPA
WHO
Other
2002
2002
BOD
1.0
2.1
1-2
Cd (mg/l)
0.002
0.002
0.005
0.003
CR (total)
0.002
0.005
0.1
0.05
(mg/l)
CN (free)
0.000
0.000
0.2
0.07
(mg/l)
Pb (mg/l)
0.002
0.011
0.015
0.01
Fluoride (mg/l)
4
1.5
Hg (Mg/l)
<0.05
<0.05
0.002
0.001
Zn (Mg/l)
0.09
0.01
5
(Canada)
Nitrate (mg/l)
0.89
0.002
10 (as nitrogen)
50 (as
NO3-)
Nitrite (mg/l)
0.21
0.007
1 (as nitrogen)
3
(as
NO2)
PCB (mg/l)
0.000
0.000
0.0005
.0002
(EU)
PAH (mg/l)
0.000
0.000
0.0007
.0002
(Benzo(a)pyrene)
(EU)
Aromatic
0.0007
(Toluene) 1
(BTEX,
hydrocarbons
0.01 (Benzene)
Swiss)
Aliphatic
1-2
mg/l
hydrocarbons
Mineral oils
0.011-
0.0
0.247
Phenols
0.0025-
0.001-
0.003
0.003
USEPA National Primary Drinking Water Standards
WHO Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality
BTEX = Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene (4 major aromatic compounds usually analyzed as proxy for
all aromatic hydrocarbons)
Swiss = Schweizerishces Lebensmittelbuch, 2005
BOD 1-2 mg/l = general value for very clean water
Lake Sediments
Contamination of lake sediments presents a direct and lasting threat to the aquatic
ecosystem, particularly the benthic flora and fauna. Many toxic and persistant pollutants become
adsorbed to sediments and soils and can become incorporated into aquatic food webs. Data on
sediments in Lake Skadar-Shkoder are limited and fragmentary, but indicate the presence of
trace elements, metals, PCBs, PAHs and organochlorine pesticides. Sediment sampling carried
out in 2005 showed that in Montengro, PB was <5.0 mg/kg, while Hg reached 1.77 mg/kg
(exceeding EU standards at four of the eight sampled locations). Ni exceeded EU standards at
36
two of the eight locations. On the Albanian side, Pb was somewhat higher (maximum value 27.3
mg/kg) while Hg was lower (< 0.5 mg/kg). Levels of Pb were somewhat higher on the Albanian
side of the lake, and Ni exceeded EU standards at seven out of ten locations, while Hg levels
were lower than on the Montenegrin side. In 1993-1995 samples, PCBs and PAHs in the
sediments were higher at the entry points of the Moraca River (0.3-0.5 µ/kg and 0.8-100.7 µ/kg
respectively). However, these values were reduced in 2005 (0.09 µ/kg PAH; < 0.01 µ/kg PCB),
again possibly due to containment measures taken at the KAP site.
Lake Pollution Sources
The main pollution sources discussed in the TDA are: the KAP upstream on the Moraca
River; steelworks in Niksic, untreated or inadequately treated wastewater from cities and towns,
municipal (solid) wastes from cities and towns, mineral waste oils in the Zeta plain, and
agriculture in the Zeta plain. Of these, the KAP and untreated wastewater are the main target of
the present project.
KAP Aluminum Plant:
The TDA identified the KAP Aluminum Plant, located about 2 km from the Moraca
River, about XX km upstream of Lake Skadar, as a major source of pollutant inputs into the lake,
and specifically as the most likely source of most PCBs, PAHs and heavy metals found in the
lake. The plant has been operating since the early 1970's. It constitutes an environmental hazard
due to a combination of its production technology (which generate a variety of toxic and
hazardous substances as waste products), the inadequate manner in which it has dealt with these
waste products since it began operation in the early 1970's; and the geographic,
hydro(geo)logical and hydrographic setting of the plant site. The electrolytic process and anode
production of the plant causes significant air pollution (fluoride, phenols, SO2, NOx,
particulates), and solid/liquid wastes including phenolic compounds, PAHs, and mercury (PCBs
are also generated as a waste product from the operations, though not specifically from the
aluminum production process). The factory is situated on a floodplain made up by fluvial
sediments, about 2 km from the Moraca. Both in the KAP area and between KAP and the
Moraca River the prevalent substrate is coarse grained, sandy gravel. It is highly permeable,
with K values estimated in the 10-3 to 10-4 m/s range. The entire area is karstic in nature with
numerous interconnecting water systems. Groundwater is found 12.5 m below ground and
gravel pits at the level of the river contain standing water. There is likely a groundwater gradient
from the KAP site to the river, with groundwater flowing south/southeast is clearly
communicating with the river. Overall, an efficient pathway for pollutant transport from the
KAP site to River Moraca River must be assumed.
Two facilities at the KAP site have raised particular concern: (i) the red mud basins8,
which contain the reside of the bauxite raw material following extraction of alumina; and (ii) a
large uncovered, unlined, solid waste dump site (estimated 500,000 m3 of material, covering an
area of over 100,000 m2 ), containing an unsorted mix of non-hazardous wastes (construction
rubble, scrap metal, etc.) and hazardous wastes (cathode residue/spent pot linings, anode scrap,
slags...). Of the two, the red mud basins are lower priority as a potential threat to the lake. The
8 One unlined, the other lined but the liner believed to be leaking
37
red mud itself is not toxic (mainly residue from bauxite beneficiation). The main issue is high
pH due to the residual leaching agent (NaOH), which, however, is toxicologically relatively
harmless. In addition, there is probably little seepage of water-borne chemicals into the
groundwater, due to the fine grain size and low permeability of the mud. This is supported by
the groundwater analyses from boreholes locate south and southeast of the red mud ponds. It
should also be noted that under the privatization contract, upgrading the red mud basins for
greater capacity and safety is the responsibility of United Company RUSAL (the new KAP
owner). The Government would be responsible for addressing past environmental issues
associated with the red mud basins, but these are unlikely under the circumstances.
By contrast, the waste dump raises serious concerns. The facility lacks a base liner,
lateral barriers, a cover system and a drainage and water treatment system. This results in
exposure to precipitation, percolation of rainwater through the waste, mobilization and transport
of contaminants into the underlying and adjacent soils and into the groundwater. Water samples
from two boreholes located directly downstream from the waste dump also showed elevated pH
and toxins:
Parameter/substance Borehole
samples
Drinking water guideline value
pH 11.86
6.5-8.5
(USEPA)
Fluorides
6.2 mg/l
1.5 mg/l (WHO)
Lead
0.05 mg/l
0.01 mg/l (WHO)
Mercury
0.007 mg/l
0.001 mg/l (WHO)
An analysis of soil samples taken immediately to the south (downstream/downhill) of the
dumpsite also showed elevated pH values and high concentrations of F-, Hg, CN-, PAH, NH3 and
PCB. Investigations in 1991-1996 showed significant PCB and PAH contamination of
groundwater in the Zeta plain and in the Plavnica, Gostiljska Rijeka, Velika i Mala Mrka Rivers
and Podgdhumin Hum Bay. However, groundwater samples taken at the same sites between
1998-2004 showed almost no traces of PCBs. The difference has been ascribed to the removal
and containment of some polluted soil and old barrels of Pyralen on the KAP site, coupled with
rapid washing of the soil given the prevailing conditions of very permeable (sand and gravel)
substrate and heavy rains.
The Government and RUSAL are jointly responsible for addressing the problem of the
waste dump (Government for hazardous wastes and UC RUSAL for non-hazardous, but the
materials are highly mixed and it is unlikely that they can be separated. Therefore, the entire
volume will likely have to be treated as hazardous waste). The proposal is to construct an EU-
standard hazardous waste landfill on the site of the current dump, of sufficient size to
accommodate both the legacy material and the future disposal needs of the plant (newly
produced hazardous and non-hazardous wastes are now being separated). A waste inventory
and categorization exercise, followed by a feasibility study, will indicate the technical feasibility
and estimated costs of this proposed solution (which would have to involve transport of large
amounts of clay to the site as the ground is too porous). Based on the study, the best use of the
approximately $500,000 of GEF funds tentatively allocated for mitigating the dump site problem
will be determined. This may be co-financing of the proposed secure landfill, or other measures
38
such as installation of combined monitoring/pumping wells to detect and interrupt the
groundwater transport pathway for materials leaching from the site into the river and lake.
The presence of a number of metal scrap yards near the dumpsite are also potentially a
cause for concern; however groundwater data do not presently indicate a significant presence of
mineral oil compounds in the local aquifer.
Municipal Wastewater
Millions of cubic meters of untreated or poorly treated municipal wastewater are
discharged into the inflowing rivers (particularly the Moraca and Crnojevica Rivers) and (in the
case of Shkodra city, and lakeside villages and communes) the lake itself annually, contributing
to contamination of the water with suspended matters, bacteria and oxygen depleting substances,
nitrates, nitrites, mineral oils, sulphides, phenols and phosphates9. Wastewater treatment
facilities are gradually being improved for the larger urban areas (e.g., Podgorica; Shkodra
Municipality) with assistance from the EU and bilateral donors, but at present nothing is being
done about effluents from smaller villages and the scattered but increasingly numerous
restaurants and private residences located directly on the lake shore.
Upstream Water Development Proposals10
Montenegro: The draft National Spatial Plan, the Water Resources Master Plan and the
draft Energy Sector Strategy all include proposals for hydropower development on the Moraca
River, with one proposal involving transfer of water from the Tara River into the Moraca River.
The project is highly controversial both within Montenegro and internationally and at present is
not moving forward but has also not been abandoned. The potential impacts on the hydrology
and ecology of Lake Skadar-Shkoder are not well understood, and urgently need to be clarified
in order to inform the debate. The predictive hydrological model to be prepared under
Component 1 should provide the technical basis for this analysis.
Albania: The Bushati hydropower project involving the Drin River, under preparation
since 2002 (intake already built, but construction presently ceased), is equally controversial. The
water of the Drin would be almost completely diverted southwest to the powerplant to be
constructed on the Zadrima plain, and then redirected to the Buna-Bojana River or directly to the
Adriatic Sea. A portion of the Drin river bed would be left almost empty, with linked effects that
would result in a substantial lowering of the lake level. An associated proposal is to dredge the
Buna-Bojana River, lowering the lake even further (up to 1.5 m), converting a substantial portion
of the lake on the Montenegrin side into dry (proposed agricultural) land. This dredging would
also potentially open up the river as a passageway for larger boats to pass from the Adriatic to
the lake. Again, the hydrological and ecological impacts of these changes (e.g. on the
groundwater regime and the sublacustrine springs (and biological communities linked to them),
9 Annex 5 of the TDA provides the available data
10 A third proposal discussed in the TDA extraction of water from the Bolje sestre spring on the northwestern side
of the lake to supply towns on the Adriatic coast, is moving forward with financing from the World Bank among
others. The Environmental Impact Assessment for the project determined that the amount of water offtake will have
a negligible effect on the lake level.
39
lake flushing, pollution buffering, water temperatures, fish migrations, etc.) need to be much
better understood by decision makers and local stakeholders.
Flora and Fauna (Fisheries)
Available information on the flora and fauna of Lake Skadar-Shkoder and surrounding
areas are summarized in the TDA. In the present document the focus is on fish, both as a
potential indicator of changes in the lake's water quality and hydrology and because fish are the
principle commercially used natural resources of the lake ecosystem. For a relatively warm
lake, the number of fish species is unusually large. About 10 species are commercially
exploited, with carp, bleak and eel the most valuable. Both primary and secondary productivity
of the lake are good (sufficient food supply).
The history of fishing on the lake can be divided into three periods:
· Up to 1990, fishing was organized and tightly controlled by a State enterprise, with (on
the Albanian side) about 150 fishermen organized into 9 groups and assigned to fishing
grounds. All fish species were exploited, with low value species used for cattle fuel.
Fyke nets, light seiners and bottom trawling were banned in 1989 after a sharp decline in
the catches of Twaide shad. There was very little illegal fishing.
· 1991-2001: with the sudden collapse of state authority, uncontrolled and irresponsible
fishing grew rapidly as did the number of fishermen (due to high levels of unemployment
arising from closing of industries and agricultural enterprises). High value species (carp,
shad, etc.) were over-exploited, as reflected in changes in catch composition.
· 2001 present: In Albania: the Government began to intervene in 2001. A Fisheries
Development Project (World Bank, FAO and Cooperazione Internzionale-Italy) was
initiated to organize and strengthen Fishery Management Organizations (presently there
are two, involving 540 fishermen and 260 boats operating in 24 areas of the lake). There
are two fishing inspectors. However, the number of fishermen continues to grow (now
about 800, of which about 40% are unlicensed). In Montenegro, the number of fishermen
is far lower (as is the overall population). There is one local organization but many
fishermen do not belong to it. A new licensing law will soon distinguish between
profession and leisure fishing.
As in the case of water quality, data on fish populations and distributions are limited and
discontinuous. For the Albania side, data on fish (populations of migratory, autochthonous and
exotic species) are relatively reliable for the period 1961-1990, because catch, production and
distribution of fish was centrally organized and well controlled during the socialist era. From
1990 onwards the data are not reliable. In Montenegro, fish data are reliable up to 1987, but only
estimates are available after that. Within the limits of the available data, and based on interviews
with Albanian fishermen, the TDA made the following tentative observations:
· a significant decline in catch of migratory fish in recent years (particularly a sharp decline
since 1980 in Twaide shad (Alosa alosa), and a less dramatic decline in Mugilidae spp.;
40
· a decline of autochthonous fish (e.g., carp, bleak) in the 1980's, possibly with some
recovery since then;
· an increase in populations of exotic species particularly after 1980.
The declines are generally attributed to over-fishing, and destructive fishing methods
(fishing during reproductive seasons and in spawning grounds, use of large stationary nets all
along the Buna-Bojana River to capture migrating fish, small net mesh sizes, use of electricity
and other illegal methods). Selective fishing for more valuable species may be responsible for
observed changes in the composition of the catches (e.g., proportionate decline of salmonids and
bleak). Damage to spawning grounds is also considered to be a factor, particularly for sturgeon.
There are no hatcheries at the lake to supplement natural reproduction.
Tourism status and development
[TO BE ADDED AT APPRAISAL]
41
Annex 2: Major Related Projects Financed by the Bank and/or other Agencies
[Guideline:
(Recommended length 1 page.)
This annex should summarize recent projects supported by the Bank and other international
agencies in the country in the same sector or related sectors. For each project listed, indicate
which of the sector issues discussed in A.1 have been or would be addressed. For Bank-financed
projects completed in the last five years, OED's rating should be provided. For ongoing Bank-
financed projects, the IP and DO ratings from the latest Project Status Report should be shown.]
[TO BE UPDATED AND COMPLETED AT APPRAISAL]
Regional Environment Center (2000 - ) ($0.6 million): activities include: (i) institutional capacity
building to promote cross-border communication and collaboration (especially for communities and
NGOs), (ii) public awareness activities, including preparation of promotional materials for ecotourism,
(iii) a small amount of equipment for Skadar Lake NP
Norwegian Research Council (NIVA) DRIMON project: Total cost = ?; estimated proportion
for Lake Skadar = Euro 70,000. Project objective: Establish nutrient budgets and address
siltation challenges for the lake basins, and assess the status of the lakes through dose-response
relationships between nutrients and sediment inputs and their effects in the lakes; Suggest
environmental goals for lakes Prespa and Skadar, based on information on their trophic status
and evidence of their reference (or natural) conditions, in dialogue with stakeholders. First
year's work: conduct baseline studies and identify monitoring indicators based on EU Water
Framework Directive. Implemented by each country's Hydrometeorological Institute
GTZ:
(1) "Physical Planning and Transboundary Management": covers both MN and AL.
E 500,000 over 18 months. Approved and soon to begin. Includes preparation of detailed urban
plans for 6 pilot lakeside villages (needed to reduce illegal building, support well regulated
residential and tourism development), some small ecotourism-related infrastructure, TA to help
develop a framework strategy for preparation of Lake-wide Management Plan (we propose to
count the latter as co-financing for GEF, since GEF project will support preparation of the Lake
Mgmt. Plan itself).
(2) "Improving Touristic Offer of LSNP" finances small tourism-related infrastructure such as
signs, trails etc. inside the NP; promotional materials. Under implementation, but unknown
what will be total funding because it's based on GTZ approval of proposals submitted. In first 6
months of 3 year project, LSNP got E 30,000 so we multiplied by 6 to get estimated total of E
180,000.
GTZ and ADA (Austria): E 250,000 approval expected this month. Finance small/medium
infrastructure to make area more tourist-friendly, e.g. rehabilitation of Virpazar market.
USAID: Under country-wide program to support democratization through local development
(implemented in Lake Skadar area by IRD). USAID funds always get matched with some
42
Govt/local community contribution. 2 projects approved, 3rd project proposed and likely to be
approved:
(1) Support for birdwatching tourism (4 bird observation towers, buoys to mark off
ornithological reserves within Lake, promotional materials) E 55,000 of which E 40,000 from
USAID)
(2) Lake Clean-up project (various types of support for local trash collection E 55,000 of which
E 10,000 from USAID
(3) Construction of thematic visitor centers at Bar and Cetinje: E 100,000 of which E 60,000
from USAID
Heidelberg University: $150,000 Montenegro and Albania: joint research project to evaluate
methodologies for testing toxicity of polluted sediments to fish
UNDP: No on-ground activities at Lake Skadar, but 2 relevant activities which might count as
baseline:
(1) preparation of Sustainable Tourism Development Strategy for Northern and Central
Montenegro (includes Lake Skadar; project completed in 2006). Total cost E 50,000
(2) Capacity building for GIS for natural resource management covers whole country. 3
phases totaling E 410,000. First phase soon to finish, next 2 phases likely to be completed
within next 4-5 years.
European Agency for Reconstruction has ongoing project of $ 200,000 to rehabilitate existing
wastewater plant for Podgorica
Austria: $ (Euros?) 8 million (possible additional $ 8 million) for drinking water supply and
wastewater treatment in Shkodra city.
KFW: $ 7 (Euros?) million for wastewater treatment in Shkodra city
WB:
Albania Fisheries Development Project (IDA/IBRD?) $5.6 million
Albania Natural Resources Development Project (IDA/IBRD?) $12 million/GEF $ 5 million
Albania Integrated Water and Ecosystem Management Project GEF $ 4.87 million
Albania Water Resources Management Project (IDA/IBRD?) $ 35 million/ GEF $ 15 million
Albania Integrated Coastal Zone Management Project Phase 1: (IDA/IBRD $37 millon; $ 1 m
Montenegro Environmentally Sensitive Tourism Areas Project (IDA/IBRD?) $ ???
Montenegro and Albania Capacity Building for Strategic Environmental Assessment (Bank-
Netherlands Partnership Program): $ ???
43
Annex 3: Results Framework and Monitoring
Results Framework
PDO
Project Outcome Indicators
Use of Project Outcome
Information
To maintain and enhance the
Lake water quality and
Data from national-level and
long-term economic value and ecological indicators are
maintained or improve in
joint lake monitoring will
environmental services of
the context of continued
indicate whether project-
Lake Skadar-Shkoder and its
economic development
financed and complimentary
natural resources
investments are on track to
succeed in protecting lake
waters and natural resources
from contamination and over-
utilization. Data and analyses
will be presented to the
bilateral Lake Management
Committee, which will report
to the respective
Governments, and will be
made publicly available
through the Committee
website.
Indications of continuing
decline in key parameters will
trigger renewed efforts to
identify causes and build
commitment for resolving
them.
GO
To enhance transboundary
Development and water use
The Joint Strategic Action
cooperation for managing the
decisions and actions affecting Plan, Bilateral Agreement
sources and impacts of
Lake Skadar-Shkoder
specifying Governments'
potentially conflicting
ecosystem are guided by
responsibilities and
development objectives and
bilateral objectives,
Commitments, lake-wide
activities affecting the waters
agreements and institutional
management plans and other
of the Lake Skadar-Shkoder
structures
key documents will be
basin.
available to the public through
website and other media,
increasing the accountability
of decision makers to a wide
range of stakeholders in both
countries and internationally
44
Intermediate Outcomes
Intermediate Outcome
Use of Intermediate
Indicators
Outcome Monitoring
Component 1: Bilateral Lake
Predictive hydrological model The hydrological model of the
Management Committee and
of Lake Skadar-Shkoder
lake will be used to analyze
Working Groups are
completed
the likely impacts of various
operational and implementing
proposed development
priority joint activities
Lake-wide monitoring data
projects and investments in the
identified in SA).
base established, operational
lake basin, making it possible
and readily accessible to all
to engage in informed debate
stakeholders
about trade-offs at both
national and
Lake-wide zoning and
transboundary/regional levels
management plan approved by
both Governments according
Publicly accessible monitoring
to their respective laws
data will enable all
Joint tourism development
stakeholders to track progress
plan approved by both
and impacts of
Governments
implementation of the
Strategic Action Plan and to
identify and raise issues. It
will also indicate willingness
on the part of the
Governments and
research/monitoring
institutions to place
transboundary cooperation
above short-term commercial
interests.
Lake-wide zoning and
management plan will provide
the legal basis for controlling
and regulating development,
natural resource use and
pollution sources in and
around the lake; bilateral
approval of the plan by local
and national authorities will
demonstrate their commitment
to long-term protection and
sustainable use.
Component 2. Infrastructure, Targeted tourism
Data on numbers of new
regulatory capacity and
infrastructure renovations and illegal construction sites will
community awareness in place construction completed
demonstrate whether public
45
to support sustainable tourism (visitor centers, cultural sites,
awareness/outreach activities
development and natural
trails, etc.)
and enhanced enforcement are
resource utilization
succeeding in creating support
Reduction in new illegal
for SAP objectives and an
lakeside construction starts,
enhanced "culture of
and any new starts halted at
compliance."
early stage
A good record in stopping
Reduction in numbers of
illegal construction at an early
unlicensed fishermen and use
stage, reduction in unlicensed
of illegal fishing methods
and illegal fishing, and
increased local participation in
Socio-economic/attitude
sustainable tourism
surveys indicate increased
development will be
local understanding of, and
important indicators of the
engagement in, sustainable
effectiveness of the capacity
tourism and natural resource
building element of the
management
project. Failure to achieve
these goals would highlight
the need to re-assess the
capacity building strategy.
Component 3: Decrease in
Reduction in concentrations of GEF-supported monitoring
toxic and non-toxic pollutants heavy metals, PCB, PAH in
activities will be designed to
entering into Lake Skadar-
ground water at KAP site
determine whether project
Shkoder
interventions are effective in
Reduction in BOD, NO2 and
improving quality of water
NO3 in lake water at pilot
entering the lake through
wastewater treatment sites
surface and underground
routes and in alleviating
Area of water
specific problems and
protection/buffer vegetation
"hotspots" identified in the
restored in pilot areas
SAP. If the problems persist
despite implementation of
Component 3 activities, it
would indicate the need for
further research to identify
priority pollution sources.
46
Arrangements for results monitoring
Data Collection and Reporting
Project Outcome
Baseline
YR1
YR2
YR3
YR4
Frequency
Data
Responsibility for
Indicators
and
Collection
Data Collection
Reports
Instruments
Lake water quality Key water
All indicators at baseline
All indicators at baseline
All indicators at
All indicators at
Annual Water
METP/MEFWA;
and ecological
quality
levels or better
levels or better
baseline levels
baseline levels or
quality
Designated
indicators
indicators
or better
better
monitoring
national scientific
maintained and
(BOD,
and analysis
institutions
Ammonia,
improved
Nitrite, Nitrate,
equipment
CN, Zn,
Pb,Cr,Hg,
PAH, PCB) at
multiple
sampling sites
all below
detection or
within Class 1A
water quality
parameters (see
Annex 4); Key
Ecological
indicators To
Be Determined
Development and
2003 MOU
Bilateral Lake
Working Groups submit to
BLMC approval
SAP updated
Semi-
Project
METP/MEFWA;
water use
signed;
Management Committee
BLMC drafts of bilateral
of bilateral plans based on bilateral annual
progress
BLMC Joint
decisions/actions
and 6 Working Groups
plans called for in SAP
plans
reports;
Secretariat;
are guided by
formally established;
(tourism, communications/
Specific policy
public
bilateral
Bilateral
outreach, monitoring)
and action
Annual
objectives,
measures for
Agreement
Reports of
agreements and
Draft
10% of costs of Bilateral
bilateral
updated based on
BLMC;
structures
Bilateral
Working Groups complete
Lake Management
adoption
Working
BLMC
Agreement
vision statements and draft
Committee covered by
identified
Group/BLMC
website
in process of work plans
Government Budgets
recommendations
Government
30% of costs of
approval
Bilateral Lake
Management
50% of BLMC
No bilateral
Committee
costs covered by
govt. budgets
structures in
covered by
Government
place
Budgets
Intermediate Outcome Indicators
47
Component 1 Understanding and managing the Lake Skadar Ecosystem
Predictive
None
TORs and consultant
Draft hydrological model
Final
Hydrological
Project
BLMC Joint
hydrological
selection completed
completed
hydrological
model used to
progress
Secretariat
model of Lake
model
analyze
reports;
completed
completed
impacts of at
BLMC
least 2
website
proposed
water-related
developments
in lake basin
Joint Lake-wide
None Bilateral
monitoring
Database operational;
Database
Database
Project
MTEP/MEFWA;
monitoring
program design
historical data entered
regularly
regularly
progress
BLMC Joint
database
developed/approved;
updated with
updated with
reports;
Secretariat and
operational
database hardware and
monitoring
monitoring data
BLMC
Research &
software purchased
data from both from both
website
Monitoring
countries
countries
Working Group
Project
MTEP/MEFWA;
Lake-wide
None
Planning Working Group Draft zoning/
Zoning/mgt
progress
BLMC Joint
zoning and
approves TOR for plan
management plan
plan approved
reports;
Secretariat and
management
preparation
completed
by BLCM
BLMC
Planning
plan completed
following
website
Working Group
stakeholder
consultations
Component 2: Enhancing the economic value of the Lake ecosystem through sustainable use
Targeted
N/A Designs
completed
25% of
75% of work
100% of work
Annual Project MTEP/MEFWA;
tourism
(visitor centers, hiking
rehabilitation/construction completed
completed
progress
joint BLMC
infrastructure
trails, cultural sites)
work completed
reports
Secretariat
completed
Reduction in
Info to be
Existing illegal lakeside
All illegal
Regular SLNP
and MTEP/MEFWA
illegal lakeside
provided at
construction mapped in
construction
SLMNR
construction
appraisal
both countries
starts identified
reports
activity
(average
and stopped
annual
Public awareness
within 2 weeks
increase in
campaign initiated
of initiation
illegal
48
buildings)
Reduction in
Estim. 350
Unlicensed fishermen not
Unlicensed
Every 2
Field
MTEP/MEFWA
numbers of
unlicensed
exceeding 30% of total
fishermen not
years
survey
unlicensed
(43% of
exceeding 10%
(repeat of
fishermen/illegal total);
of total
survey
fishing methods
Not more than 400 cases
undertaken
814 cases of
of illegal methods
Not more than
during
illegal
observed during 1 week
100 cases of
preparation)
methods
survey period
illegal methods
reported in 1
observed
week survey
during 1 week
survey period
Increased
Insufficient
Completion of survey,
Attitude
20% increase in Year 1
Socio-
MTEP/MEFWA
engagement of
data
providing: (i) baseline
survey shows
proportion of
and Year
economic
local community regarding
figure for % of total
at least 30%
households
3/4
survey
members in
households
households sampled
increase in
sampled
sustainable
engaged in
which earn minimum
index
earning
tourism
tourism
$1000/year from
measuring
minimum
tourism-related
local
$1000/year
enterprises;
understanding
from tourism-
(ii) index reflecting local
of
related
communities'
concepts/issues enterprises
understanding of concept
of sustainable
and issues of sustainable
tourism
tourism
Component 3: Investments to Protect Water Quality
Reduction in
Elevated
Waste categorization and Waste
Hg, Pb, CN,
Quarterly Water
MTEP/MEFWA;
toxic materials
levels of
feasibility study
containment/groundwater
NH3, PAH,
quality
contracted
in KAP site
Hg, Pb, CN, completed; waste
protection measures
PCB levels in
monitoring
institutions;
groundwater
NH3, PAH,
containment/groundwater implemented
groundwater
reports
BLMC
PCB in
protection measures
exiting KAP
Secretariat
groundwater identified
site within
and soil
acceptable
samples (see
limits by
Annex 4)
Montenegrin
law
Reduction in
To be
Baseline water quality
Pilot WWT measures
Pilot WWT
BOD, NO2,
Quarterly Water
MTEP/MEFWA;
BOD, NO2,
determined,
parameters recorded at
under implementation
measures
NO3 at
quality
contracted
NO3 levels in
following
pilot sites; feasibility
completed
discharge sites
monitoring
institutions;
49
water entering
confirmation studies and designs for
within
reports BLMC
lake at pilot
of pilot sites small scale WWT pilots
acceptable
Secretariat
WWT sites
completed
limits by
Montenegrin
law
Water
Areas and
25% of restoration work
100%
of
Annual
Project
MTEP/MEFWA
protection/buffer specific
completed
restoration
Progress
vegetation
indicators
work
Reports
restored in pilot
for
completed
areas
restoration
to be
determined
50
Annex 4: Detailed Project Description
The Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis of Lake Skadar-Shkoder indicated that
the lake has experienced significant pollution in the recent past, but water quality has
generally improved since the early 1990's as a result of reduced industrial and
agricultural activity in the lake basin (and therefore reduced pollution inflows) coupled
with rapid turn-over of the water. It stressed the need for better information to
understand the lake's hydrology and ecology and the potential impacts of revitalized
economic development that is envisaged for the region, including recovery of some
industries and agriculture, but with a strong push towards tourism as a major economic
activity. It also highlighted the need to address some continuing pollution sources and to
improve regulation of activities such as construction, waste disposal, fishing and hunting.
A joint Strategic Action Plan (SAP) for Lake Skadar-Shkoder, based on the TDA
has been prepared and approved by both Governments. Some of the principles
underlying the SAP are:
· Lake Skadar-Shkodra is a single, uninterrupted and unified ecosystem which
requires a holistic approach for its conservation and development;
· The greatest challenge is to find the appropriate balance between the legitimate
requirements of local people for development and better living conditions and the
conservation and enhancement of environmental conditions.
· The support of local people is crucial for the successful implementation of the
activities. Local communities must be involved in all the decision-making
process for development of the area. There is also a need for immediate visible
measures and tangible results, so people can see the difference and understand the
importance of nature conservation.
· Several institutions/agencies have (sometimes overlapping or unclear) roles in
managing the natural resources and development activities in the area, and it is
necessary to clarify their functions and responsibilties.
The SAP defines four Strategic Goals: (i) joint lake planning and management;
(ii) monitoring and research; (iii) improved management of the lake and its natural
resources at a national level through strengthening the two level Protected Areas which
together encompass the lake and its surrounding area; and (iv) realization of urgent
environmental investments. It lays out a long-term program of ongoing and proposed
activities financed by the two governments and by external donors. Some of the
activities to be financed by the project (mainly under Component 1) are considered to be
joint activities, while others will be carried out by and in only one country, but provide
lake-wide benefits. Joint activities will be directed and overseen by the Bilateral Lake
Management Committee through its Secretariat, usually with one or the other country
having lead responsibility for implementation (GEF funds will be allocated accordingly
between the two grants). A breakdown of the proposed project activities by joint vs.
51
"unilateral" and indicating GEF and other financing is provided in Annex 5. Annex 18
presents the summary action table of the SAP, indicating governments' and other donors'
financing for other SAP activities (i.e., not included in this project). All project activities
are drawn from the SAP, although there is not always a one-to-one correspondence: for
example, several related SAP activities have sometimes been combined into a single
project activity.
The project addresses key SAP priorities through support for four pillars:
· Improving information and understanding of the lake's ecosystem and of the
current and potential impacts of developments in the lake basin which can affect
the quality and quantity of inflowing ground and surface waters;
· Strengthening institutional mechanisms for coordination and cooperation among
all stakeholders/water users, particularly for transboundary linkages;
· Promoting sustainable use of the lake and its natural resources, as a preferred
alternative to existing non-sustainable practices and to potential incompatible
development; and
· Reducing existing pollution sources through direct investment by providing
demonstrations and incentives and by strengthening regulation.
Through these interventions, the project aims to deal with current and imminent
threats to the lake's water and ecosystem in two key ways: first, by building political
commitment for sustainable management at national and local levels, and second,
through direct interventions to reduce pollution from point and non-point sources. In
both cases, the project will build upon and supplement existing initiatives of the two
governments and other donors, primarily by strengthening the transboundary dimension
The long-term quality and sustainability of the Lake Skadar-Shkoder ecosystem
depends on there being sufficient interest and commitment at both national and local
levels to invest in protective measures and to counter-act pressures for incompatible
development. In order to build this commitment, the environmental services provided by
a healthy lake ecosystem must be well understood and must be seen to generate concrete
and meaningful benefits for local and national stakeholders. It is also important for the
lake to be recognized as a bilateral and regional asset, whose status and management are
issues that supercede local and national interests, making decision-makers accountable to
a wider constituency. In order for the commitment to be translated into effective action,
institutional mechanisms must be put in place to enable the diverse water
users/stakeholders in both countries to coordinate and cooperate to manage the water
resources in the most widely beneficial and sustainable way.
52
Component 1: Understanding and Managing the Lake Skadar Ecosystem (Total:
US$ 3.36; GEF: US$ 2.04 million)
Subcomponent (i) Strengthening institutional structures for cooperation:
The bilateral Agreement which is in the process of being finalized and approved
by both Governments, calls for the establishment of a high level Bilateral Lake
Management Committee (BLMC), which will serve as the main steering mechanism for
implementation of the SAP as well as the key forum for discussing and reaching
agreements on issues affecting the management and use of the lake and its resources.
The BLMC will be comprised of the following members from each country: a
representative of central government, a representative of local government, and a
representative of civil society. In view of the international significance of Lake Skadar-
Shkoder (e.g., as a refuge for migratory birds), one non-voting member representing the
international community (e.g., Ramsar Convention or UNESCO) is also envisaged.
The Committee will convene bilateral Working Groups to facilitate discussions on
specific issues and to steer implementation of joint programs. Initially, six Working
Groups are envisaged: Planning, Legal, Monitoring & Research, Communications/
Outreach, Tourism and Water Management. These Working Groups will agree on
objectives and work programs in their respective areas of responsibility. They will
directly oversee the design and implementation of joint activities (see Subcomponent
(iii)), and influence "unilateral" national-level project-funded activities. It is expected
that they will also provide a mechanism for exchange of technical information and
coordination outside the parameters of the project.
The two Governments will be responsible for appointing the members of the
BLMC and Working Groups. Members who are civil servants will not be paid for their
participation (receiving only expenses for meetings, etc.). Non-civil servants asked to
serve on these bodies may receive honoraria for specific services provided such as
attending scheduled meetings and reviewing documents. The Committee and Working
Groups will be served by a small Secretariat (based in Albania), and a one-person
technical support unit for each country which will assist the Governments in
implementation of GEF-financed activities. To facilitate the establishment and operation
of these new bodies, the GEF funds will support long term and short term Technical
Assistance, equipment and materials, and incremental operational costs (e.g. travel and
subsistence costs for meetings, office facilities, communications, etc.) on a declining
basis during the life of the project.
Subcomponent (ii) Transboundary Research and monitoring: A lack of reliable
and continuous data on water quality parameters, flora and fauna and use of lake
resources presents a serious problem to understanding the lake ecosystem and identifying
trends of either degradation or recovery. Data which were collected with some regularity
prior to 1990 are now difficult to find, with the exception of a few published compendia,
and there was little regular monitoring in the early and mid 1990's particularly in
Albania. This has now changed, and both Governments have restored some basic water
53
quality and ecological monitoring, which is implemented through contracts with local
research institutions. The eventual objective is harmonize with EU water and ecological
monitoring practices. However, each country monitors and studies only its own side of
the lake and there is little coordination between them either in terms of types of data
collected or research conducted, except in the context of some short-term projects which
are externally funded and led by external partners which bring in institutions from both
countries (e.g. University of Heidelberg; NIVA). This makes analysis of ongoing lake-
wide parameters and trends difficult. Furthermore, there is very little information
exchange as the data collected by the research institutes is often treated as proprietary and
is either not made available at all to external users (including transboundary counterparts)
or is available only at a high cost.
Under the project, basic, routine monitoring will continue to be the responsibility
of the two governments and their institutional partners, in some cases with support from
other donors. GEF support is sought for incremental monitoring activities to establish
effective transboundary cooperation and to improve understanding of the nature and
impacts of specific sources of ecological stress, as identified in the TDA. The GEF grant
will support Technical Assistance, equipment (e.g., automatic and inter-connected water
quality monitoring stations; computer hardware and software) and operating costs (e.g.,
for database management and reporting). The types and levels of support provided to
each country will depend on the responsibilities it undertakes for implementation of joint
activities, and on its particular capacity-building needs (one objective of the project is to
help reduce differences in technical capacity in order to facilitate effective cooperation
between the two countries):
(i)
Creating a predictive hydrological model of the lake and lake basin, which
can be used to analyze existing and expected impacts of different development
activities and proposals. This model will need to take into account the
complexities of the multiple sources of water and potential transport routes for
pollutants into the lake, including the complex underlying karstic systems and the
interconnections among the lake, its tributaries and groundwater. The model is
expected to be mainly a computer simulation but may also have a physical
element. (The Monitoring and Research Working Group will be given an
opportunity to become familiar with such models from different countries in order
to choose what is best suited for this purpose).
(ii)
Establishing a coordinated, collaborative lake-wide monitoring system for
key chemical and physical parameters that are important for management
purposes. The objective is to use the same technology, sampling regimes and
reporting formats in both countries. The project will also support the
establishment of a joint database which is publicly accessible. This will facilitate
information exchange between Montenegrin and Albanian researchers and
resource managers, as well as giving other stakeholders (e.g. local NGOs) the
information they need to contribute knowledgeably and effectively in decision-
making processes concerning the lake.
54
(iii)
Incremental research and studies to clarify specific issues and questions
identified by the Bilateral Lake Management Committee and its Working Groups.
This includes, in the first year, a detailed socio-economic study to improve
baseline information regarding local communities' use of and reliance on the
lake's resources.
Subcomponent (iii) Implementation of activities commissioned by BLMC and
Working Groups: The SAP identifies a number of joint activities which are to be
coordinated and steered by the Working Groups under the overall direction of the BLMC.
In addition to the joint research and monitoring described above, these include
preparation of a lake-wide management plan (which will be integrated into the relevant
national level spatial and Protected Area management plans which form the legal basis
for regulating land, water and natural resource use in Lake Skadar and its surroundings;
maintenance of a common database, development and implementation of public
awareness-raising and tourism marketing campaigns, etc. GEF funding is sought for
implementation of these activities. Lead responsibility for implementation of these
activities will be assigned to either Albania or Montenegro (basic division to be decided
during Appraisal) and the funds involved will be included in the respective GEF grants to
the two countries. In both countries the project will contribute, along with several other
World Bank-financed projects, to the cost of providing a small team of consultants to
assist the Governments with specific aspects of implementation (e.g. procurement;
financial management of the GEF grants).
Component 2: Enhancing sustainable use of the Lake ecosystem (Total: US$ 5.14 ;
GEF US$ 0.86 million)
This component aims to promote the adoption of more sustainable approaches to
economic development of the lake and its natural resources. It focuses primarily on two
aspects (tourism and fishing) where there is a high potential for economically significant
sustainable use, but current unsustainable practices are threatening the ecological
integrity and long-term economic value of the lake and the livelihoods of local
communities. Ensuring the economic viability of environmentally sustainable uses of the
lake is essential to counterbalance pressure for incompatible development in the lake
basin and watershed.
.
(i) Sustainable tourism development: Lake Skadar-Shkoder is located close to
the Adriatic coast, which is already popular with both local and international tourists, and
offers a number of unique attractions. National and local governments and local
residents in both countries look towards tourism as the main engine for economic
development of the Lake Skadar-Shkoder area,and national spatial and sectoral strategies
identify it as a priority "special interest" area for development of nature, culture, and
recreation-based tourism. In addition, a growing part of the local population is engaging
in tourism-related activities to supplement income from agriculture and/or fishing. These
are positive factors for building support and commitment for environmental protection, as
such this type of tourism depends on environmental quality as a key part of the tourism
"product." Properly planned and regulated tourism can therefore be both economically
55
rewarding and environmentally sustainable, having much lower impacts on the lake
ecosystem than many alternative economic activities. At present, however, tourism is
growing rapidly in the Lake Skadar-Shkoder area in an unplanned and unregulated way
which makes it an increasingly serious threat to the lake, through inappropriate
construction, untreated wastewater, poor solid waste management, etc.
The project will support development of more environmentally and socially
sustainable tourism by: improving nature- and culture-based facilities and attractions
(e.g., hiking trails, cultural sites); public awareness-raising and providing information
and Technical Assistance to local residents to help them engage in appropriate tourism
enterprises; and strengthening regulatory capacity to stop illegal construction and other
negative practices. Investments under this sub-component will be guided by joint
tourism development planning coordinated by the Working Groups on Planning and
Tourism. There are a number of existing and planned government and donor-funded
projects to support tourism development in the area at a national level (see Annex 2).
The GEF funds will complement these projects by emphasizing support for
transboundary coordination and joint action, based on the lake-wide tourism plan (see
Component 1). GEF will support small scale infrastructure development and
rehabilitation (e.g. hiking trails and signage that link the two sides of the lake,
birdwatching towers, rehabilitation of cultural and historical sites to create a
transboundary circuit, etc.). The overall objective is to support public investment to
provide an enabling environment and attraction to catalyze private sector enterprises.
GEF funds will also support TA for effective marketing of the crossborder Lake Skadar
area as a tourism destination, and to help prospective entrepreneurs identify and develop
appropriate, compatible business ideas. The project will not provide direct financing for
private entrepreneurs but may assist them to access funds from government and donor
programs.
(ii) Natural resource management: while local communities traditionally use
and market (locally) a number of natural resources from Lake Skadar-Shkoder (e.g.
willows for basketry, medicinal plants, wild fruits), fish are by far the most significant in
terms of local economies and employment. Their mobility also makes transboundary
cooperation essential for sustainable management. Some of the lake's most valuable fish
species are also currently threatened by over-exploitation and habitat degradation (the
number of fishermen on the Albanian side of the lake has increased from 160 prior to
1990, to about 800 today). Both Governments have institutions and personnel in place to
regulate fishing, but there is a lack of information, mechanisms and capacity to manage
the fisheries on a lake-wide basis. As in the case of tourism, there are a number of
government and donor-funded initiatives supporting various aspects of fish management
on the national level (see Annex 2), and this project will complement them by filling gaps
and by providing the means for better bilateral coordination. A lake-wide stock
assessment and fisheries management plan will be a key first year activity under
Component 1. This subcomponent will help support the integration of these outputs into
national plans and regulations and implementation of some aspects. It will also provide
support and incentives for fishermen who are currently operating illegally to become
licensed and to stop using illegal fishing methods. At the same time, it will help to
56
strengthen the governments' regulatory and enforcement capacity to stop unlicensed
boats and the use of illegal fishing methods.
The stock assessment and monitoring activities will help to establish whether the
present level of fishing is excessive and unsustainable. If so, there may be a need to
place some currently used fishing areas off-limits and/or to reduce the number of boats
and fishermen. Two Resource Access Restriction Process Frameworks (one for each
country) have been prepared to address the potential for economic displacement (see
Annex 10).
Component 3: Investments to Protect Water Quality (Total: US$ 7.21 million;
GEF: US$ 1.65 million)
This component will support on-the-ground investments to help address existing
sources of pollution which were identified in the TDA. GEF funds will complement
investments by the two governments and other donors (see Annex 15), addressing
transboundary issues and demonstrating innovative approaches. The component includes
three subcomponents:
(iv)
Small scale, innovative wastewater treatment for lakeside villages and tourist
facilities (Albania and Montenegro)
(v)
Shielding groundwater from hazardous wastes at the KAP Aluminum plant
(Montenegro)
(vi)
Pilot ecological restoration of lakeside vegetation buffer areas (mainly
Albania)
(i) Small scale wastewater treatment: Several large donor-funded programs are
supporting construction or upgrading of sewage collection and wastewater treatment
facilities in large urban areas with positive impacts on Lake Skadar-Shkoder (e.g.,
Shkodra Municipality, Podgorica). The GEF project will target the problem of
wastewater from small villages, residences, restaurants, etc., which are too widely
scattered for a collector-based approach. At present, untreated sewage from these
settlements and facilities flows directly into the lake, causing localized eutrophication and
unsightly and unsafe conditions. The objective is to demonstrate practical,
environmentally friendly solutions for such situations. On the Montenegro side, a pilot
project for wastewater treatment, possibly based on constructed wetlands, is proposed for
the village of Vranjina, on the northern shore of the lake. On the Albania side GEF funds
would fill an important gap by providing incentives and assistance for the owners of more
than 30 lakeside restaurants to construct individual wastewater treatment solutions.
[NOTE: FURTHER INFORMATION ON THE PILOTS E.G. SCALE, POSSIBLE
TECHNOLOGIES, TO BE ADDED DURING APPRAISAL]
(ii) KAP hazardous waste containment: As described in Section and Annex 1,
the Kombinat Aluminijuma Podgorica (KAP) aluminum plant on the Moraca River is
considered to be one of the major point sources of pollution affecting the lake, mainly
57
through contamination of groundwater by a large volume of various toxic materials
(heavy metals, PCBs, etc.) inappropriately stored on the plant site. This unlined, open-
air dump site, covering about ha, contains all the hazardous and non-hazardous wastes
from aluminum processing generated by the plant since it began operations in the early
1970's. Under the 2005 privatization contract, the GoM is responsible for disposing of
the hazardous wastes and the new owner (RUSAL) the non-hazardous wastes11.
However, the materials are so fully mixed together that it is unlikely they can be
separated. Instead, the GoM and RUSAL are likely to collaborate on and co-finance a
solution that deals with all the waste together. This is expected to be a secure (EU-
standard) hazardous waste landfill to be constructed on the present dump site. While the
location is far from ideal for a hazardous waste landfill (highly permeable substrate,
directly upstream of Lake Skadar-Shkoder, etc.) constructing the landfill elsewhere and
transporting the waste to it is not regarded as practical. Transporting such a large
volume of hazardous waste material would be expensive and dangerous, particularly
given the poor quality of much of the country's road network. In addition, based on
experience in trying to establish even non-hazardous municipal landfills, public
resistance (the NIMBY12 phenomenon) will probably make it impossible to locate such a
facility on any site other than the existing one (which is located on land owned by
KAP/RUSAL, and where construction of a secure landfill can be presented as an
improvement of the current situation).
The Government has tentatively budgeted USD 5.16 million for the construction
of this landfill, to be supplemented by an as-yet-undetermined contribution from RUSAL
and a proposed contribution of USD 500,000 from GEF. However, the actual cost and
timetable for constructing the facility can only be estimated once the waste pile has been
properly inventoried and a feasibility study and technical design for the landfill have been
completed. For example, given the nature of the terrain and substrate at the KAP site, it
is likely that a thick layer of clay will have to be put in place, adding considerably to
construction costs (there is no clay in the immediate vicinity, so it would have to be
brought in by truck or train from elsewhere in the country).
GEF funds will facilitate expeditious action to address this urgent threat to the
lake. As a first step, the project will support TA for the waste inventory and feasibility
study. Funds (USD 400,000) are also allocated in principle for making a contribution to
implementing the recommended solution, but the precise nature of the GEF contribution
can only be determined after the feasibility study is completed. As a matter of principle
the GEF support will be targeted specifically for preventing the leaching of hazardous
and toxic materials into the groundwater. At present this is anticipated to be through a
direct contribution to the construction of the landfill. However, if the feasibility study
shows that a permanent solution will require a very large investment which can not be
implemented in the short to medium term, the allocated GEF funds could be used to put
in place interim measures to reduce and monitor groundwater contamination. This may
11 RUSAL has already begun a process of moving the material to an immediately adjacent area where
concrete flooring and walls have been constructed as a containment measure. However, this is only a very
temporary solution as the concrete is not an effective barrier to the leaching of water-soluble materials.
12 Not in My Backyard
58
include, for example, establishment of a first cell of the landfill to contain some
particularly toxic and mobile elements of the waste which can be separated out, or
constructing monitoring/pumping wells at the perimeter where groundwater from the
KAP site enters the Moraca River.
(iii) Pilot buffer vegetation restoration: Natural vegetation along the lake shore
and the banks of inflowing rivers provides an important buffer protecting Lake Skadar-
Shkoder from pollution and sedimentation from agricultural areas and inflowing river
deltas. Excessive tree cutting, over-grazing and destructive construction practices have
eliminated or degraded this vegetative buffer in many places. Ecological studies have
identified several areas where this has particularly important impacts, such as degrading
important spawning and nursery areas for fish. These include the banks of streams which
flow to the lake from Taraboshi Mountain and coastal areas around fish nursery sites in
Kamic and Shiroke (Albania) and grasslands around Virpazar (Montenegro). The
project will provide Technical Assistance, equipment and operational costs to support
pilot ecological restoration activities at several priority sites. [NOTE: FURTHER
DETAILS ON SITES, RESTORATION METHODS TO BE ADDED DURING
APPRAISAL]
59
Annex 5: Project Costs
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
Local
Foreign
Total
Project Cost By Component and/or Activity
US
US
US
$million
$million
$million
TO BE COMPLETED AT APPRAISAL
Total Baseline Cost
Physical
Contingencies
Price
Contingencies
Total Project Costs1
Interest during construction
Front-end
Fee
Total Financing Required
1Identifiable taxes and duties are US$m ___, and the total project cost, net of taxes, is
US$m___. Therefore, the share of project cost net of taxes is ___%.
60
GEF Grant Allocation by Component and Country
(US$ millions)
GEF for
GEF for
TOTAL
GEF for
Albania
Joint
Montenegro
Activities
COMPONENTS
Understanding/Managing Lake
.07
.20
1.78 2.04
Ecosystem
Enhancing Sustainable Use of
.38
.48
0.86
Lake Ecosystem
Water Protection Investments
1.21
.43
1.65
Total 1.66
1.11
1.78
4.55
*To be divided between Albania and Montenegro grants during Appraisal
Project Components by Source of Funds
(US$ millions)
TOTAL
Other
Project Cost By
Govt. of
Govt. of
GEF
Donors and
Component
Montenegro
Albania
Direct Co-
Financiers
Understanding/Managing
2.04
.86
.17
.29 3.36
Lake Ecosystem
Enhancing Sustainable
0.86
3.54*
.57*
.17 5.14
Use of Lake Ecosystem
Water Protection
1.65
5.16
0.4
0 7.21
Investments
Total 4.55
9.56
1.14
.46
15.71
*Includes cash and in-kind contributions
61
Annex 6: Implementation Arrangements
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
TO BE COMPLETED AT APPRAISAL
62
Annex 7: Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
1. [All sub-sections must have a continuous paragraph numbering for the entire
document per institutional standard.]
2.
63
Annex 8: Procurement Arrangements
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
[The following standard text should be used. Insert additional text as needed per the
instructions in brackets.] [All sub-sections must have a continuous paragraph numbering
for the entire document per institutional standard.]
A. General
1. Procurement for the proposed project would be carried out in accordance with the
World Bank's "Guidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits" dated May
2004; and "Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank
Borrowers" dated May 2004, and the provisions stipulated in the Legal Agreement. The
various items under different expenditure categories are described in general below. For
each contract to be financed by the Loan/Credit, the different procurement methods or
consultant selection methods, the need for pre-qualification, estimated costs, prior review
requirements, and time frame are agreed between the Borrower and the Bank in the
Procurement Plan. The Procurement Plan will be updated at least annually or as required
to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements in institutional
capacity.
2. Procurement of Works: Works procured under this project would include: [Describe
the types of works]. The procurement will be done using the Bank's Standard Bidding
Documents (SBD) for all ICB and National SBD agreed with or satisfactory to the Bank.
[Indicate any special requirements specific to the project.] [If the project involves
procurement carried out by communities, indicate where details can be found in the
Project Implementation Manual or similar documents.]
3. Procurement of Goods: Goods procured under this project would include :[
Describe the types of goods]. The procurement will be done using the Bank's SBD for
all ICB and National SBD agreed with or satisfactory to the Bank. [Indicate any special
requirements specific to the project.]
4. Procurement of non-consulting services: [ Provide a general description of non-
consulting services to be procured under the project and information on the bidding
documents to be used for the procurement.]
5. Selection of Consultants : [Provide a general description of the consulting services
from firms and individuals required for the project.] Short lists of consultants for
services estimated to cost less than $_______equivalent per contract may be composed
entirely of national consultants in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2.7 of the
Consultant Guidelines. [If applicable, provide any information regarding engaging
universities, government research institutions, public training institutions, NGOs, or any
special organizations.]
64
6. Operating Costs: [Describe the operating costs which would be financed by the
project and procured using the implementing agency's administrative procedures which
were reviewed and found acceptable to the Bank.]
7. Others: [Describe if any special arrangements for scholarships, grants etc.]
8. The procurement procedures and SBDs to be used for each procurement method, as
well as model contracts for works and goods procured, are presented in the [name the
Project Implementation Manual or the equivalent document.].
B. Assessment of the agency's capacity to implement procurement
9. Procurement activities will be carried out by [name of the Implementing Agency]. The
agency is staffed by [describe the key staff positions], and the procurement function is
staffed by [describe the staff who will handle procurement].
10. An assessment of the capacity of the Implementing Agency to implement
procurement actions for the project has been carried out by [name of the procurement
staff] on [date]. The assessment reviewed the organizational structure for implementing
the project and the interaction between the project's staff responsible for procurement
Officer and the Ministry's relevant central unit for administration and finance.
11. The key issues and risks concerning procurement for implementation of the project
have been identified and include [describe the risks/issues]. The corrective measures
which have been agreed are [Describe the corrective measures].
12. The overall project risk for procurement is [give the risk rating].
C. Procurement Plan
13. The Borrower, at appraisal, developed a procurement plan for project implementation
which provides the basis for the procurement methods. This plan has been agreed
between the Borrower and the Project Team on [date] and is available at [provide the
office name and location]. It will also be available in the project's database and in the
Bank's external website. The Procurement Plan will be updated in agreement with the
Project Team annually or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs
and improvements in institutional capacity.
D. Frequency of Procurement Supervision
14. In addition to the prior review supervision to be carried out from Bank offices, the
capacity assessment of the Implementing Agency has recommended [frequency]
supervision missions to visit the field to carry out post review of procurement actions.
E. Details of the Procurement Arrangements Involving International Competition
65
1. Goods, Works, and Non Consulting Services
(a) List of contract packages to be procured following ICB and direct contracting:
1
2 3
4 5
6
7 8 9
Ref.
Contract
Estimated
Procurement P-Q
Domestic
Review
Expected
Comments
No.
(Description) Cost
Method
Preference by Bank
Bid-
(yes/no)
(Prior / Post)
Opening
Date
(b) ICB contracts estimated to cost above [fill in threshold amount] per contract and all
direct contracting will be subject to prior review by the Bank.
2. Consulting Services
(a) List of consulting assignments with short-list of international firms.
1 2
3 4 5 6 7
Ref. No.
Description of Estimated
Selection
Review
Expected
Comments
Assignment
Cost
Method
by Bank
Proposals
(Prior /
Submission
Post)
Date
(b) Consultancy services estimated to cost above [fill in threshold amount] per contract
and single source selection of consultants (firms) for assignments estimated to cost above
[fill in threshold amount] will be subject to prior review by the Bank.
(c) Short lists composed entirely of national consultants: Short lists of consultants for
services estimated to cost less than [fill in threshold amount] equivalent per contract, may
be composed entirely of national consultants in accordance with the provisions of
paragraph 2.7 of the Consultant Guidelines.
66
Annex 9: Economic and Financial Analysis
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
1. [All sub-sections must have a continuous paragraph numbering for the entire
document per institutional standard.]
2.
67
Annex 10: Safeguard Policy Issues
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
1. [All sub-sections must have a continuous paragraph numbering for the entire
document per institutional standard.]
TO BE COMPLETED
68
Annex 11: Project Preparation and Supervision
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
1. [All sub-sections must have a continuous paragraph numbering for the entire
document per institutional standard.]
Planned
Acutal
PCN review
Initial PID to PIC
Initial ISDS to PIC
Appraisal
Negotiations
Board/RVP approval
Planned date of effectiveness
Planned date of mid-term review
Planned closing date
Key institutions responsible for preparation of the project:
Bank staff and consultants who worked on the project included:
Name Title
Unit
Bank funds expended to date on project preparation:
1. Bank resources:
2. Trust funds:
3. Total:
Estimated Approval and Supervision costs:
1. Remaining costs to approval:
2. Estimated annual supervision cost:
69
Annex 12: Documents in the Project File
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
[All sub-sections must have a continuous paragraph numbering for the entire document
per institutional standard.]
1.
70
Annex 13: Statement of Loans and Credits
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
Difference between
expected and actual
Original Amount in US$ Millions
disbursements
Project ID
FY
Purpose
IBRD
IDA
SF
GEF Cancel. Undisb. Orig. Frm.
Rev'd
Total:
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
STATEMENT OF IFC's
Held and Disbursed Portfolio
In Millions of US Dollars
Committed Disbursed
IFC
IFC
FY Approval
Company
Loan
Equity
Quasi Partic.
Loan Equity Quasi Partic.
Total portfolio: 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Approvals Pending Commitment
FY Approval
Company
Loan
Equity
Quasi
Partic.
Total pending commitment:
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
71
Annex 14: Country at a Glance
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
72
Annex 15: Incremental Cost Analysis
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
Project Development Objective and Baseline Scenario
1.
The project development objective is to maintain and enhance the long-term
economic value of Lake Skadar-Skhoder and its natural resources. The baseline funding
in support of the project amounts to $40.2 million. The baseline scenario and
corresponding funding with regards to each project component are described below.
LAKE ECOSYSTEM MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT
2.
In the past, both Montenegro and Albania have pursued lake management from a
predominantly national perspective. Little transboundary environmental co-operation
took place. There is no institutional structure for co-ordinating protection and
management. As such, under a forward-looking baseline scenario, it would prove
increasingly difficult for managers to address mounting challenges to lake sustainability
during the planned project period.
3.
This situation began to change with the creation of a project involving the two
Governments together with the Regional Environment Center (REC) and with the move
to develop a GEF project. Launched in 2000, the REC project has a total budget of
$600,000, of which $170,000 will be spent during the project period. REC project
activities include: (i) institutional capacity building to promote cross-border
communication and collaboration (especially for communities and NGOs), (ii) public
awareness activities, including preparation of promotional materials for ecotourism, (iii) a
small amount of equipment for Skadar Lake NP.
4.
While the REC project focuses on community/local communication, it does not
support high-level government coordination, nor does it implement activities on the
ground to make the cooperation concrete. Thus, while the REC project continues to be
very valuable in instilling the idea of transboundary cooperation, it cannot fund its
realization.
5.
A fair amount of environmental quality monitoring within the lake basin currently
takes place in both countries and will continue at a similar rate of expenditure under the
baseline scenario. However, this scenario has the following shortcomings: (i) the same
monitoring approaches and data collection methods are not being used by each country,
which means that the data gathered are not inter-comparable; (ii) there is no common
database with open and efficient exchange of information; (iii) data gathering and
analysis is not necessarily being carried out based on priorities concerning the lake as a
whole; (iv) the parameters measured are not necessarily those which will provide the
greatest utility for underpinning lake-wide management decisions; (v) research is
73
somewhat donor-driven, reflecting the priorities of the respective funders, (vi) data are
not readily available within either country because data collection is done by semi-
autonomous institutions which often charge high fees for it, and; (vi) technical capacities
to analyze and interpret data are limited, particularly in the case of Albania.
6.
As a result of the above, it is currently very difficult, if not impossible, to obtain
accurate and up-to date information on the status and trends of key elements of the lake's
ecosystem. However, such information is essential for effective management and to
achieve both national and transboundary priorities. These drawbacks tend to limit both
national and transboundary benefits from monitoring.
7.
Estimated baseline spending for environmental monitoring in the lake area during
the project period is $675,000 in the case of Montenegro13 and $68,000 for Albania. The
nature and purpose of some of this spending will be reoriented under the GEF Alternative
in order to increase and capture transboundary benefits.
8.
As part of baseline funding, data from a transformed programme of monitoring
will be complemented by a transboundary research project funded by the Norwegian
Research Council (NIVA). The three-year DRIMON14 project involves Montenegro,
Albania and Macedonia and covers Lakes Skadar-Shkoder and Prespa. Total funding for
Lake Skadar-Shkoder is estimated at $237,500. Project activities include: (i) establishing
nutrient budgets and addressing siltation challenges for the lake basins, (ii) assessing the
status of the lakes through dose-response relationships between nutrients and sediment
inputs and their effects; (iii) suggesting environmental goals for the lakes, based on
information on their trophic status and evidence of their reference (or natural) conditions,
in dialogue with stakeholders. This study will provide essential management-related data
which would otherwise need to be obtained through GEF support, were it not being
financed by NIVA.
9.
In addition, GTZ will finance complementary activities under the "Physical
Planning and Transboundary Management" project that covers both Montenegro and
Albania. The project, which has been approved and is expected to begin shortly, will
provide $625,000 over 18 months for preparation of detailed urban plans for six pilot
lakeside villages (needed to reduce illegal building, support well regulated residential and
tourism development), some small ecotourism-related infrastructure.15 The province of
Pisa, Italy is also financing urban planning activities in cooperation with the Municipality
of Shkodra for approximately $612,000.
LAKE SKADAR-SKHODER WATER AND NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
13 Based on an annual figure of 1.6 million Euro for country-wide environmental monitoring and an estimate that 10%
of spending takes place within the lake basin and is therefore relevant to the lake's environmental quality.
14 Interdisciplinary Assessment of Water resource Management in Two Transboundary Lakes in South
Eastern Europe
15 An additional activity under this project is considered as incremental support and is presented below under the
Alternative GEF Scenario.
74
10.
At present, there is no zoning or management plan in the areas surrounding the
lake, with the result that most areas are legally accessible to tourists and fishermen. Local
and commercial use of the lake natural resources is allowed everywhere, including
fishing, hunting, recreation (boating, hiking, etc.). Ensuring that these resources are used
sustainably and limiting their ecological impacts is an essential and challenging part of
lake management. However, realization of these objectives is undermined by capacity
constraints in both countries, as evidenced by problems such as high levels of illegal
fishing and hunting and by pressure from alternative uses of the lake waters that promise
localized short-term gains. Local authorities have limited experience with modern,
integrated and participatory approaches to management of natural resources.
11.
In the case of Montenegro, an estimated $1,875,000 in baseline support will be
provided during the full project period,16 to cover the annual operational budget of the
project implementation entity (the Lake Skadar National Park administration), awareness
raising and government counterpart funding for USAID and Council of Europe (CoE)
projects.
12.
In the case of Albania, the lake area received area status only in 2006, near the
end of the project preparation period. The move to initiate transboundary co-operation,
including the anticipation of international (GEF and others') support for this objective,
has been an important impetus underlying the establishment of the PA and the creation of
an associated budget. In the absence of GEF support, baseline spending by Albania under
this component would have been zero.
13.
The following donor support is being provided under the baseline scenario for
natural resource management in the project area:
GTZ is working in Montenegro supporting the "Improving Touristic Offer of LSNP"
project and is financing small tourism-related infrastructure such as signs, trails,
promotional materials, etc. The total financing is estimated at $225,000. GTZ, together
with Austrian Aide (ADA), is providing $340,000 to support small/medium infrastructure
to make the area more tourist-friendly, e.g. rehabilitation of Virpazar market in
Montenegro.
USAID, Council of Europe and Government of Montenegro: Together these donors are
providing financing for various activities aimed at tourism development based on natural
and cultural heritage, including bird watching tourism, a lake clean-up project,
construction of thematic visitor centers at Bar and Cetinje, and activities supporting
cultural heritage & local traditions, with special emphasis on promoting social inclusion.
Total financing: $340,000
UNDP: UNDP does not support on-the-ground activities at Lake Skadar, but does have a
national project to develop GIS for natural resource management. A three-phase project
16 During the PDF-B Phase, $225,000 was invested by GoM in PA infrastructure to rehabilitate the National Parks HQ
and visitor center at Lake Skadar. This investment was made in conjunction with, the PDF-B Phase and is reflected as
such in the attached incremental cost matrix.
75
totaling $512,500, it is expected to provide $50,000 of geographically relevant support
during the project period.
WATER QUALITY PROTECTION INVESTMENTS
14.
Important baseline investments are being made to control pollution within the
lake watershed, much of which has hitherto been reaching the lake. These include
hazardous wastes, solid wastes and wastewater.
15.
In the area of wastewater collection and treatment, there remain up till now major
challenges, particularly on the Albanian side where wastewater from the city of Shkodra
flows largely untreated into the lake. Overall baseline financing includes the following:
·
$17 million from KfW and Austria to Albania to help provide Shkodra city with
wastewater collection and treatment facilities
·
$200,000 from the European Agency for Reconstruction (EAR) to assist
Montenegro with the rehabilitation of an existing wastewater treatment plant for
Podgorica (presently a significant source of pollution through the Moraca River).
·
$100,000 from the government of Montenegro for piloting small-scale wastewater
treatment along the side of the lake. Some of this financing will be re-directed
towards innovative approaches under the GEF Alternative.
16.
In the area of hazardous wastes, the contract for privatization of Montenegro's
State-owned KAP aluminum plant was awarded to RUSAL, a private Russian company.
This contract includes a requirement that "legacy" hazardous and non-hazardous waste
on the KAP grounds must either be removed or contained in EU-standard sanitary land
fill by 2010. Under the agreement, RUSAL is responsible for non-hazardous wastes (with
an estimated financing of $10 million), while GoM is responsible for the hazardous waste
component.
Hazardous waste from KAP presents a particular threat to Lake Skadar as it is
contaminating groundwater which enters the lake, primarily through the Moraca River.
Addressing the KAP hazardous waste issue will have important national and
transboundary benefits by removing a significant threat to lake environmental quality. In
conjunction with GEF support, the Government of Montenegro is providing baseline
financing of $100,000 for the feasibility study and $5.16 million to clean up the site.17
17.
Management of solid waste represents an important task for lake managers and
local governments in both countries. Domestic solid waste is recognized as a serious and
growing problem in many parts of the lake basin. Wastes from settlements and tourism
facilities near the lake and in river basins are blown into the lake and collect at the
mouths of rivers, where it interferes with ecological functions, have negative impacts on
local health, and undermine tourism prospects by diminishing the aesthetic appeal of the
area. Shkodra city has an established (though inadequate) waste collection system, but
there are none in villages and communes on either side of the lake.
17 The GEF incremental cost contribution of $1.2 million to the KAP cleanup is described below in para. 35.
76
18.
Baseline spending in this area includes the following:
·
IDA-financed Montenegro Environmentally Sensitive Tourism Project
(MESTAP) is funding two regional municipal solid waste landfills, one of which
covers Bar municipality which borders the Lake, and is therefore significant for
Lake Skadar. Relevant baseline costs at this site are estimated at $300,000.18
·
Baseline spending for the city of Shkodra in Albania is estimated based on an
ongoing $500,000 annual contract for solid waste collection and disposal. It is
estimated that some 10% of that contract is collecting waste from areas in close
proximity to the lake, and therefore reducing the risk of solid waste entering the
lake. Thus, $200,000 of baseline spending is estimated over the four-year life of
the project.
Global Environmental Objective and Alternative Scenario
19.
The project global environmental objective is to enhance transboundary
cooperation for managing the sources and impacts of potentially conflicting development
objectives and activities affecting the waters of the Lake Skadar-Shkoder basin.
20.
The total cost of the alternative scenario is $46.6 million. This consists of $ 40.2
million of baseline investments and $6.5 million in incremental finance. The proposed
project, with a total financing of $15.7 million including a GEF contribution of $5
million, covers all incremental activities as well as key baseline activities financed by the
two governments. It addresses major gaps in baseline activities and is aimed at achieving
a variety of global, transboundary and national benefits.
COMPONENT 1: UNDERSTANDING/MANAGING THE LAKE ECOSYSTEM
21.
Under the alternative GEF scenario, $2.8 million of incremental support will be
provided to enhance and solidify a long-term programme of integrated environmental
management of the lake. This represents a key step towards the establishment and
operation of a permanent institutional structure for lake management. The additional
support will support for the establishment of a Bilateral Lake Management Committee
(BLMC) and several bilateral Working Groups to coordinate implementation of key
actions called for in the Strategic Action Plan. Working Groups will be set up for:
(i)
coordinating legal and institutional frameworks;
(ii)
coordinated planning, including development of a lake-wide zoning and
management plan (to be integrated into relevant national and local spatial and
Protected Area plans);
(iii)
designing and overseeing a lake-wide research and water quality monitoring
program;
(iv)
coordination and conflict resolution relating to water management issues;
18 This figure is based on an estimate that 10% of the total spending is relevant for the lake.
77
(v)
developing and overseeing a joint public awareness-raising and education
program; and
(vi)
preparing a coordinated strategy and plan to promote sustainable tourism
development.
22.
The project will also finance a small Secretariat to support the BLMC and
Working Groups and to coordinate and facilitate implementation of joint project
activities.19
23.
Accurate and up-to date information on the status and trends of key elements of
the lake's ecosystem is essential for effective protection and management. For a
transboundary lake it is important that the same monitoring approaches and data
collection methods are used by each country, that a common database is established with
open and efficient exchange of information, and that analysis is carried out based on
priorities concerning the lake as a whole.
24.
Incremental support under this component leveraged by the GEF is as follows:
(i)
Government of Montenegro will provide $160,000 for the BLMC and Working
Groups; $25,000 for public outreach and communication, and $67,000 for
monitoring
(ii)
Government of Albania will provide $100,000 for the BLMC and Working
Groups and $7,000 for monitoring.
(iii)
SNV Netherlands, which is providing $112,500 for institutional strengthening,
stakeholder participation and co-operation between the two countries.
(iv)
GTZ will provide approximately $20,000 in technical assistance to develop a
framework strategy for preparation of the Lake-wide Management Plan.
25.
In addition to the above, $2,330,000 in incremental support is being requested
from the GEF for the following elements:
(i)
Technical assistance, training, equipment and support for incremental operating
costs (on a declining basis) will be provided to support the establishment of the
BLMC and Working Groups to enable them to carry out their responsibilities.
This includes the establishment of a small Secretariat for the BLMC and 1-person
technical support units in each country, as well as the costs of regular meetings
and communications.
(ii)
Technical assistance, equipment and support for incremental operating costs will
be provided for implementation of joint activities designed and overseen by the
Working Groups. These will mainly consist of studies, targeted research and
monitoring, and preparation of spatial and development plans, as well as the
development and implementation of a public outreach and education program.
Lead responsibility for implementation of these joint activities will be assigned to
19 Implementation of the programs developed by the WGs will mainly be financed through other
components.
78
either Montenegro or Albania, based on the capacity of their implementing
agencies and their priorities. An important part of the monitoring program will
be to establish and maintain a common, publicly accessible data base and
networks for information exchange. .
COMPONENT 2: ENHANCING SUSTAINABLE USE OF THE LAKE SKADAR-SHKODER
ECOSYSTEM
26.
The total cost of the GEF Alternative under Component 2 is $6.4 million. This
total consists of $4.9 million in baseline support and $1.5 million in incremental support.
Incremental support from GEF totalling $1.025 million will include the following:
·
Technical assistance, training, equipment and materials, and some incremental
operating costs to strengthen the capacity of the local administrations responsible
for management of the lake and its natural resources, including both improved
communication and partnership with local governments and communities and
more effective enforcement of regulations (e.g. against illegal construction and
illegal fishing).
·
Technical assistance, civil works and equipment and materials to support
development of of sustainable tourism as the best alternative for the use of the
lake ecosystem. This includes small scale infrastructure such as hiking trails and
signage, birdwatching platforms, rehabilitation of cultural heritage sites to
enhance their touristic and educational value;
·
Technical assistance and equipment and materials to build capacity and provide
incentives for sustainable use of natural resources. This may include, for
example, legal and technical assistance for local fishermens' and other resource
users' associations, improved market facilities accessible to registered fishermen,
training in handicrafts based on local resources, etc. .
27.
An incremental budget of $420,000 is leveraged from the government of
Montenegro and $60,000 from the government of Albania in support of this component.
COMPONENT 3: URGENT INVESTMENTS TO PROTECT WATER QUALITY
28.
The total cost of the GEF Alternative under Component 3 is $34.7 million. It
includes $32.5 million in baseline support and $2.2 million in incremental support. The
incremental support of GEF is estimated at $1.6 million and will be directed towards
addressing urgent pollution hot-spots, as follows:
·
Hazardous waste: GEF will provide incremental support for addressing the
hazardous waste problem at KAP. GEF funding of $ 1 million is requested for:
carrying out an initial inventory and categorization of the wastes; co-financing of
a feasibility study; and on-ground investment -- either as co-financing for a
secure landfill or to implement other measures to prevent movement of toxic
79
materials through the groundwater and into the Moraca River (depending on the
findings of the feasibility study).
·
Wastewater treatment: GEF support is being requested to help address the
growing problem of untreated domestic wastewater flowing directly into the lake
from lakeside villages and communes, and private residences and touristic
facilities (e.g. restaurants) which have been built on the lakeshore during the past
few years. Specifically, based on the priorities identified in the SAP, GEF would
contribute to the installation of a small scale, environmentally and economically
sustainable wastewater collection and treatment system in one village on the
Montenegro side and appropriate waste treatment of containment facilities for
about 30 restaurants on the Albania side. The proposed GEF contribution to this
effort is $365,000.
·
Lake buffer vegetation restoration: GEF will finance TA and various investments
(equipment, materials, labor) to restore tree groves, control stream bank erosion
and fish nursery buffer vegetation at priority sites on both sides of the lake for an
estimated cost of $ 280,000.
29.
An incremental budget of $520,000 is leveraged from the government of
Montenegro and $20,000 from the government of Albania in support of this component.
80
Incremental Cost Analysis Matrix
Component
Category
Amount
Domestic Benefits
Global Benefits
USD
-
1.
Baseline
2,743,200
Updated national and local environmental policies
Understanding/Managing
and laws and efforts to harmonize policies,
the Lake Skadar
legislation and practices with EU instruments, but
Ecosystem
little coordination for lake management
2003 MOU for cooperation is followed by a
bilateral agreement but no concrete measures taken
to implement agreements in MOU.
Some ecological monitoring done in both countries
separately but no mechanism in place to foster
transboundary institutional and technical
cooperation. Decisions concerning the future of the
lake driven more by local short-term economic gain
than basin-wide, long-term environmental and
economic sustainability
Alternative
5,545,000
Institutions responsible for lake basin planning and
Governments coordinate and cooperate across
management are strengthened and their decisions
the border to jointly address the lake's
are based on understanding the impacts of changing
transboundary environmental and
water conditions of the lake and their costs and
socioeconomic issues
benefits in the short- medium and long terms both
Systems for coordination and cooperation at
for environmental sustainability and economic
basin level are operational and sustainable to
development.
secure an integrated approach to environment
Monitoring plans and databases are managed with
and water issues that takes into account long-
input from both countries and accessible to the
term environmental benefits against short-
public.
term economic gains.
Governments and scientific institutions
recognize the importance and value in
establishing and share information, allowing
them to cooperatively develop and
transboundary ecosystem-based lake
Increment
2,801,800
management.
81
Component
Category
Amount
Domestic Benefits
Global Benefits
USD
2. Enhancing Sustainable
Baseline
4,895,500
Economic growth linked to tourism potential of the
Use of the Lake
lake basin and watershed with limited public
Ecosystem
understanding and appreciation of the importance of
environmentally sustainable management of the lake
and its resources and of their role in achieving long-
term environmental and economic sustainability.
Alternative
6,395,5000
Public education and public information increases
Environmentally sustainable tourism
awareness on sustainable use of the lake resources
development and effective implementation of
including tourism development that improves
the zoning and resource management plans,
socio-economic conditions in the lake basin while
including sustainable use of land and fish
maintaining ecological systems and quality
resources in the lake basin will reduce water
quality degradation and improve the
transboundary ecosystem health and value.
Increment
1,499,500
3. Investments to Protect
Baseline
32,524,000
Some pollution `hotspots' have been identified as
Water Quality
existing or developing problems and both
governments are making effort to remediate and
mitigate the sources with donor support especially
in sewage collection and waste water treatment and
hazardous waste management
Alternative
34,705,000
Government and donor support is complemented
Interventions for water pollution control,
and extended with innovative and low-cost
chemicals and hazardous waste management
environmentally-friendly solutions that address
and erosion control will reduce the
unsafe and unsightly localized conditions.
environmental stress on the lake ecosystem
and improve water quality
Increment
2,181,000
82
Component
Category
Amount
Domestic Benefits
Global Benefits
USD
Baseline Total
40,162,700
Increment Total
6,482,300
GEF Increment
4,550,000
Non-GEF Increment
1,932,300
Total Project 15,710,000
GEF financing
4,550,000
Co-financing 11,160,000 From Government of Montenegro and Albania, SNV and tbd
Associated financing 30,942,000 From REC, NIVA, GTZ, Italy-Pisa province, ADA, USAID, COE, GOM, WB, KFW, EAR,
RUSAL, IDA
83
Annex 16: STAP Roster Review
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
ANNEX C STAP ROSTER REVIEW
STAP ROSTER TECHNICAL REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED GEF-IW PROJECT: "LAKE
SKADAR-SHKODRA INTEGRATED ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT"
(ALBANIA, MONTENEGRO)
by J. A. Thornton PhD PH CLM
Managing Director
International Environmental Management Services Ltd United States of America
Introduction
This review responds to a request from The World Bank (WB) to provide a technical
review of the proposed International Waters project entitled Lake Skadar-Shkodra Integrated
Ecosystem Management.
I note that I am a designated expert on the STAP Roster of Experts with particular
experience and knowledge concerning watershed management and land-ocean interactions. I
have served as Government Hydrobiologist with the Zimbabwe Government, Chief Limnologist
with the South African National Institute for Water Research, Head of Environmental Planning
for the City of Cape Town (South Africa), and, most recently, as Principal Environmental
Planner with the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (USA), a position that
I hold concurrent with my position as Managing Director of International Environmental
Management Services Ltd, a not-for-profit corporation providing environmental education and
planning services to governments worldwide. In each of these positions, I have had oversight of
projects and programs designed to assess contaminant loads to aquatic ecosystems from land-
based activities, and to develop appropriate and affordable mitigation measures to reduce such
loads and minimize their impacts on the aquatic environment, both freshwater and marine.
This review is based upon a thorough review of the project document, consisting inter
alia of the Project Document (22 pages plus Annexes 1, 3-5, 8 and 17); the Project Executive
Summary and GEF Council Work Program Submission inclusive of Annex A; and, the (Draft)
Lake Shkoder Transboundary Diagnostics Analysis (TDA). Other, relevant documents served as
reference sources, including the GEF Operational Strategy, Agenda 21, and related materials
establishing the necessity and priority of land-based activities to control marine pollution as set
forth in the Global Program of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-
Based Activities.
84
Scope of the Review
This review addresses, seriatim, the issues identified in the Terms of Reference for
Technical Review of Project Proposals.
Key Issues
Key issue 1. Scientific and technical soundness of the project. Overall, the project
appears to be scientifically and technically sound. The approach proposed, which includes an on-
going diagnostic and demonstration project-based program, adequately addresses the needs to
initiate actions to (1) create a binational mechanism to jointly manage the shared water resources
of Lake Skadar-Shkodra, (2) quantify the risks associated with a legacy of historic water quality
degradation and current threats to the biodiversity and ecology of the Lake, (3) strengthen the
existing national mechanisms for management of land- and water-based activities within the
drainage basin tributary to the Lake, and (4) encourage implementation of urgent environmental
management actions through provision of incremental financing of remedial actions to address
identified "hotspots". The need for both a land- and water-based approach is documented in the
Lake Shkoder Transboundary Diagnostics Analysis that was completed during the preparation of
this project. The TDA also identified a number of priority interventions that could be considered
as recipient activities under Component 4, targeting priority environmental concerns within the
Lake Skadar-Shkodra Basin.
A review of the Components set forth in the project document suggests that the primary
focus of this proposed project will be on capacity building and institutional strengthening; to wit,
Component 1 focuses on the institutional and human resources necessary to manage and monitor
the water resources of Lake Skadar-Shkoder at the binational level, Component 2 focuses on
research and monitoring necessary to complete and refine the data available to substantiate the
management measures employed, and Component 3 primarily focuses on the human resources
necessary to undertake the management of the resource at the national level. In addition,
Component 4 will provide important "on-the-ground" experience in problem solving. These
needs are adequately documented in the TDA, especially for management actions at both the
national and binational levels where the countries appear to have utilized a primarily passive and
country-based management strategy, rather than a holistic approach to managing the shared
resources of the Lake.
From a scientific standpoint, providing a framework within which the two countries can
assemble a shared data base comprised of similar variables, measured in a consistent manner,
and stored in an accessible form is an essential first step toward creating the baseline from which
disturbances can be measured and assessed. Such a data base will also facilitate both individual
and joint enforcement of regulations and standards by the countries within the shared basin. In
addition, disseminating these data to interested parties, including citizens, nongovernmental
organizations, and corporations, through an accessible data base will help to ensure timely action
to correct problems, be they concerns regarding overexploitation of the living resources of the
Lake, pollution from lakeshore development, or impacts related to human activities within the
drainage basin tributary to the Lake.
85
With regard to creating an appropriate regulatory framework, an understanding of the
current status of the Lake waters is also useful in determining whether or not conditions of
impairment continue to exist, and in identifying emerging issues that could potentially adversely
affect the Lake ecosystem. Appropriate data will permit a realistic evaluation of the standards
likely to be applied by regulators at the country and local government levels. Further, the
upgrading of the laboratories and enhancing of the institutional capacities to utilize shared
methodologies, implemented by trained and competent staff in the Basin countries, is a necessary
element in the shared enforcement process. Joint action of this nature can overcome the
possibility that operations could be shifted between Basin countries in order to avoid regulations
at the country and local levels.
Key issue 2. Identification of global environmental benefits and/or drawbacks of the
project, and consistency with the goals of the GEF. The proposed project establishes a
framework within which to address the major causes of environmental stress within the aquatic
environment of Lake Skadar-Shkodra; namely, the historic legacy of contamination, the current
threat of overexploitation of aquatic resources, and the likely future risk of uncontrolled
development in the drainage area, including the inputs of contaminants washed off the land
surface and into the aquatic ecosystem.
The legacy of contamination stems from the presence of aluminium and steel plants in the
drainage basin, as well as from ongoing discharges of wastewater from the human settlements in
the Basin. While the data gathered during the TDA suggest that the legacy of the aluminium and
steel processing plants has been mitigated by the rapid flushing rate of the Lake, the threat of
ongoing degradation from wastewater discharges from urban and agricultural operations within
the drainage basin remains. If unchecked, these discharges threaten the globally significant
ecosystems of the Lake, including Ramsar sites in both countries, and downstream areas of the
Adriatic Sea. These ecosystems, in addition to be transboundary aquatic systems in their own
rights, are either directly or indirectly connected to the transboundary waters of the
Mediterranean Large Marine Ecosystem (LME). Consequently, true global benefit is presumed
as a result of the connection of the Mediterranean Sea with the North Atlantic Oceanic
circulation.
The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of OP 8,20 contributing to the
global effort to address environmental concerns arising from industry, agriculture, fishing, and
exploitation of the natural environment for tourism and recreation insofar as it relates to Lake
Skadar-Shkodra. A regional approach is essential, and provides the basis for GEF participation,
given that each country may need to engage in an additional level of effort beyond that required
under their current national legal framework.
20 Operational Program 8 (OP 8) includes as indicative activities, inter alia, global pollutant projects which are
designed to "help countries collaboratively address damaged and seriously threatened waterbodies, and the most
imminent transboundary threats to their ecosystems....[by modifying] the ways in which human activities are
conducted in different sectors so that the waterbody and its international drainage basin can sustainably support
human activities." "Imminent transboundary concerns that seriously threaten waterbodies include pollution,
overexploitation of living and non-living resources, habitat degradation, and nonindigenous species." This
Operational Program is intended to play a catalytic role in leveraging public- and private-sector resources, and
engender cooperation among the GEF Implementing Agencies.
86
In this regard, the participation of a broad cross-section of governmental,
nongovernmental and civil organizations with interests in the Lake and its drainage basin would
be an important element in ensuring the implementation of the project outcomes, even though the
outcomes, in the global sense, are environmental in nature. Currently, this participation is
provided through the relevant national agencies. Establishment of the various working groups
and secretariat, and the stakeholder involvement, as proposed in the project document, will
contribute to achieving this objective, and add the necessary community and transboundary
dimensions to the management of this resource. Unfortunately, the civil society organizations are
not listed in the project document, so it is not possible to gain a full understanding of the extent
or nature of the proposed stakeholder involvement in the project.
This project is complementary to other GEF initiatives within the eastern Mediterranean
region, including the Lake Ohrid project. Given the GEF aim of incrementally funding projects
that contribute to sustainable economic development in a replicable manner, the current
proposal and its companion proposal would seem to be well-suited to achieving such an aim.
Key issue 3. Regional context. The participation in this project of the two countries in the
Lake Skadar-Shkodra Basin argues persuasively that adequate and appropriate consideration has
been given to the regional context of the project. Notwithstanding, the project team noted that a
Basin-wide approach to water resources management, which would have significantly increased
the area of influence of the project, was discounted due to the size of this larger geographic unit
and the fact that the available financial resources would be insufficient to bring about meaningful
change in such a large area. It was noted, however, that one reason for discounting this larger
project area was the fact that the Basin would be incorporated into the River Basin planning and
management program mandated by the European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive.
Further, this larger drainage basin was included in the TDA and resultant Strategic Action
Program (SAP), which should ensure that actions undertaken within the Lake Skadar-Shkodra
ecosystem management project are fully integrated into this larger Basin framework.
Actions proposed to better integrate the national regulatory initiatives into a regional
program are fully consistent with the development of a sustainable regional approach to
managing this waterway. These actions are supported within the proposed project by
complementary actions to strengthen the national regulatory programs and institutions. To this
end, however, this reviewer notes that the project funds are expected to be allocated to each
country as well as to the regional working group. It would seem advantageous, however, to
further strengthen the binational entity by channeling the funds to each country through the
binational organization. This would provide greater surety that the projects undertaken are truly
regional in scope, even if located within the national territory of one or other of the Basin
countries. By so doing, this financial management mechanism also would create a more
substantial role for the binational authority and potentially accelerate the creation of a permanent
binational commission tasked with jointly managing the shared water and ecological resources of
Lake Skadar-Shkodra.
The proposal clearly indicates an intention to disseminate information and results on a
regional basis, both within the Basin and elsewhere in the region. Such a regional (European)
effort has been initiated during the project development process through the exchange visits to
87
Lake Geneva and Lake Constance, amongst others. In part, this dissemination process
will utilize the proposed binational secretariat as a repository and focal point for information on
the protection and conservation of the ecosystem. As suggested above with respect to the fiscal
arrangements for the project, delegation of such responsibilities to the Secretariat should help to
hasten and strengthen the process of formation of a truly binational commission for the
management of the Lake.
Key issue 4. Replicability. The implementation of demonstration projects as a key feature
of this project clearly contributes to the potential for replication of beneficial practices and
techniques. Further, the inclusion of mechanisms for disseminating information and results
achieved fosters replication of effective and successful measures throughout the region, and
especially within the participating countries. As identified through the Global International
Waters Assessment process and related initiatives such as the Lake Basin Management Initiative
of the International Lake Environment Committee Foundation (ILEC), GEF International Waters
projects are a primary means by which basin-scale management practices are being developed
and implemented through the world. These initiatives have endorsed the development and
implementation of information sharing mechanisms at both the regional and global scales--in
part, through the global IW-LEARN initiative. This endorsement underlines the importance of
information sharing and dissemination between projects, a fact that is adequately and clearly
identified within the project brief for this project. Nevertheless, it is recommended that this
project seek to ensure the dissemination of lessons-learned in the broadest possible manner.
The project document suggests that the proposed activities will continue to embrace the
concept of project twinning as one mechanism to enhance exchange of knowledge and
experience. As recognized within the project brief for this project, there is considerable
complementarity between this project and the projects currently being implemented in the
eastern Mediterranean Basin. The inclusion within the Project Document of establishment of
explicit linkages between projects is wholly consistent with this concept. Such communication
will enhance the replicability of the project outputs and the results of the project, significantly
contributing to the coordinated and comprehensive management of the Aegean Sea and
Mediterranean Sea basins.
Key issue 5. Sustainability of the project. The project executive summary indicates that a
significant element of the sustainability of the project supported interventions rests upon the
implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive and related initiatives. In addition,
country-level actions in support of the project are identified as indicative of a commitment to
ongoing support of project actions and activities, beyond the immediate period of project
implementation with GEF support. The project brief acknowledges a number of incentives for
the participating countries to provide the necessary resources beyond the project period,
including their participation as signatories to the Ramsar Convention. Further, the project
proposes to address another key element in the provision of adequate resources to ensure the
future sustainability of the project-supported interventions; that is, the availability of
information, the development of a trained cadre of individuals, and the strengthening of
appropriate institutions with the knowledge and ability to implement actions to protect the Lake
environment. To this end, the project document sets forth an array of financial and other
mechanisms, both in-hand and proposed, to ensure the sustainability of the land- and water-based
88
elements proposed to be developed during the project. These mechanisms include various
bilateral financing arrangements as well as grass roots activities designed to sustain the project
actions beyond the period of application of GEF funds. To a great extent, the to-be-determined
stakeholder participation element will be critical to the long-term sustainability of the project,
particularly those relating to future environmental challenges and threats.
Key issue 6. Targeted Research Projects. Targeted technical demonstration and capacity
building projects are key features envisioned within the GEF International Waters Waterbody-
based Operational Program. These activities are clearly included as major elements of this
proposed project, primarily under Component B which is focused on the use of targeted surveys
as the means of determining and identifying appropriate and applicable management measures to
quantify emerging issues (such as avian influenza that is in part spread by waterfowl), and
Component C which is focused on improved environmental management.
There is also provision within the project brief for creating and implementing an on-
demand small-grant program that would support creation of capacity and strengthening of
academic and research institutions in the Basin. Implementation of these provisions is strongly
recommended. The interventions, funded in part by the GEF, strive for sustainability and the
continuation of successful interventions beyond the project period. For this reason, it is most
important that the lake and watershed management measures identified by the project be
internalized within the appropriate ministries such that they continue to be implemented over the
longer term. Likewise, it is equally important that the demonstration projects continue to be
monitored, and the results reported using the information dissemination mechanisms previously
identified, beyond the project period. Such continuity is totally consistent with the catalytic
nature of the GEF, and an essential element to the sustainability of the project. Capacity building
and trainer training, envisioned in the project brief, thus become the basic building blocks upon
which this project will succeed or fail, both from the point of view of its sustainability and from
its scientific and technical integrity.
Secondary Issues
Secondary issue 1. Linkage to other focal areas. This project is formulated as an
International Waters project under OP 8 of the GEF Operational Strategy. While no specific
cross-cutting areas are identified, the project clearly has linkages to the cross-cutting area of land
degradation in terms of its focus on land-based activities and to the protection of aquatic
biodiversity in terms of its focus on fisheries.
Secondary issue 2. Linkages to other proposals. The project recognizes the
complementarities between the management of Lake Skadar-Shkodra and other GEF-related
initiatives in the region. Indeed, actual linkages were explored and strengthened during the
period of project formulation. Specific linkages with these projects are proposed and identified in
the project brief. Where such linkages are based upon project development initiatives, this
reviewer recommends that the project team seek to maintain ongoing contacts with relevant
sister institutions during the period of project implementation and beyond. As noted above, such
linkages include contacts with the Lake Geneva and Lake Constance organizations, among
others.
89
In addition, the project proposes to make use of IW-LEARN. Such an overt linkage
provides a high degree of sustainability and connectivity to this project, and contributes to the
likelihood that lessons learned can and will be transferred beyond the project boundaries to other,
similar situations and locations within the Mediterranean region and beyond.
Secondary issue 3. Other beneficial or damaging environmental effects. The project has
no known or obvious damaging environmental impacts associated with the activities proposed to
be executed. The beneficial impacts of the project have been fully articulated above, and include
the identification of alternative methods for achieving a high quality lake environment through
targeted interventions that address both chronic land-based sources and catastrophic lake-based
events that contribute to the degradation of the Lake and its resources. The provision of trained
staff and institutional capacities needed to enforce and enhance existing environmental
protection regulations, and the dissemination of successful management measures further
contribute to the benefit of the Lake and its drainage basin. All of these benefits accrue not only
within the project area, but, as a result of their wider dissemination using the electronic and
other media provided, also to the wider river basin and beyond.
Secondary issue 4. Degree of involvement of stakeholders in the project. Component C of
the project is geared toward the involvement of stakeholders. Involvement of the wider public is
catered for through an information system established by the Regional Environment Center and
other media. Active stakeholder participation is encouraged through the committee and working
group structure to be created under Component A. Unfortunately, there are few additional details
as to the participants proposed to be included. That said, the project brief does allude to the
participation of the relevant regulatory agencies and ministries in the execution and
implementation of the project activities, and the project explicitly indicates support for capacity
building and institutional strengthening with respect to these organizations. Such involvement is
in addition to the current level of involvement of the country- and local-level institutions, and is
critical to the sustainability of the project and its expansion into areas not specifically involved in
the demonstration projects.
Secondary issue 5. Capacity building aspects. Components A through C are aimed in part
at the acquisition and dissemination of information on the successful measures to protect the
Lake environment through the creation of appropriate institutions (Component A), conduct of
targeted research and monitoring (Component B), and the training of agency staff and strengthen
institutions (Component C). In addition, Component A, in part, seeks to encourage dissemination
of lessons learned with respect to lake and watershed management practices. These elements
should be implemented in conjunction with complementary GEF International Waters initiatives,
including the best practices data base being compiled by the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) and the IW-LEARN initiatives being executed by the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP). These efforts will enable wider dissemination of knowledge
of practices that have positive effects. Such knowledge is an essential element in building
capacity and strengthening institutions in the region.
In addition to the dissemination of knowledge and information, the proposed
development of standard methods for analysis and impact assessment will benefit institutions and
90
staff throughout the region. In this regard, Component B contains work elements that are likely
to be aimed at establishing a certification process for laboratories, common standards, and
reenforced institutional capacity within the region. Maintaining such standards and certification
requires trained individuals, actively and conscientiously applying their knowledge and skills for
the public good.
Secondary issue 6. Innovativeness. Development of appropriate management practices
governing the protection of the Lake environment, within the context of an integrated land- and
water-based management program, demonstrates a strong desire that the results and outputs of
this project reflect the state-of-the-art with respect to the integration of lake management and
economic development in transboundary inland lakes. By creating and strengthening the
appropriate human resources, institutions, data acquisition and dissemination systems, and
shared management mechanisms, the project team has clearly attempted to develop a
management program that will be accepted by the basin governments and stakeholders. While
many of the actions and approaches reflect state-of-the-art practice, their application in the Lake
Skadar-Shkodra Basin will significantly advance current practice in that specific Basin as well as
within the region as a whole. In this manner, the project promotes innovation and development
of regionally applicable remedial practices and experiences.
General Conclusion and Recommendations
Overall, it is the conclusion of this reviewer that the proposed project, with the goal of
"Lake Skadar-Shkodra Integrated Ecosystem Management", is wholly consistent with the GEF
International Waters operational program, its broader philosophy, and funding criteria.
Consequently, this project is recommended for funding.
In completing the Project Executive Summary and GEF Council Work Program
Submission, the reviewer recommends that each of the Components be elaborated so as to
clearly summarize the following elements of each activity; namely, (1) the objectives of the
Component, (2) the results or outcomes that this Component is intended to achieve, (3) the
outputs or deliverables to be generated by the activities carried out under the Component, (4)
indicative activities to be conducted, (5) the costs broken out as GEF funds requested, local share
provided, and total cost of the Component, and (6) an indication of the likely stakeholders
targeted to be participants in executing the activities. This information, to the extent that it is
presented, is currently scattered throughout the document or indicated as an expected outcome of
the project Appraisal process. The likely participants are not clearly identified, and the activities
and component costs are shown in some detail only in Annex A, the Incremental Cost Analysis.
In implementing this project, the GEF Implementing Agency is enjoined to give
consideration to strengthening the role of the binational Secretariat by centering project
management, including financial management, and monitoring within this Committee. Such
strengthening could accelerate the ability of the countries to create a River Basin Authority,
pursuant to the EU Water Framework Directive, and contribute to the creation of lasting working
relationships between the binational entity and the national ministries having responsibilities for
the management of Lake Skadar-Shkodra.
91
IA RESPONSE TO STAP REVIEW:
[NOTE: the above STAP review relates to an earlier project design and many aspects are
no longer directly relevant to the current project proposal. The following responses to the STAP
review also pre-dated the redesign of the project.]
The STAP Reviewer's main suggestion is that all GEF funds should be channeled
through the binational Secretariat, rather than just the funds that will finance jointly implemented
activities. The proposal is that this would strengthen the Secretariat and potentially accelerate
the creation of a permanent transboundary institution. While the objective is good, the proposal
to channel all funds through the Secretariat is not realistic. This Secretariat does not currently
exist and it is not certain what legal standing it will have, particularly during the early part of the
project. During project preparation it has been agreed that establishment of transboundary
institutional structures needs to be done through a phased approach, giving them successively
greater mandate and responsibilities as their specific roles are clarified, agreed and approved by
the two Governments. It should also be borne in mind that the permanent institutional structure
may be a formal coordination mechanism, rather than an implementing body. Finally, it is now
Bank policy to mainstream project implementation responsibilities within regular government
structures and to avoid the creation of independent "Project Implementation Units." We believe
we can make a successful case for giving the bilateral Secretariat responsibility for
implementing some activities in order to achieve coordination and efficiency (e.g. procurement
of equipment which will be the same for both countries), but according to WB policy the bulk of
national level activities should be implemented by the respective responsible government
agencies.
The STAP Reviewer also noted that the PAD could include more information regarding
civil society organizations and other stakeholders which will participate in the project. We have
included some more information on this aspect in Sections 3B and 4D of the PAD, to reflect
some of the information from the Social Assessments already carried out in both countries during
preparation. These assessments provided a starting point by identifying some relevant formal
and informal local organizations (e.g. fishermen's associations, religious organizations), and by
raising awareness about the project through public meetings and focus group interviews. The
PAD will be further strengthened based on the continued public discussions of the proposed
project, which will take place prior to Appraisal.
We note that the "small grants program" referred to on p. 6 of the STAP Review is
actually the competitive research grants program under Component B.
We have revised the Project Description section and the Results Framework to more
clearly identify the objectives, outputs, deliverables, activities and financing (GEF vs. other) for
each component, as indicated on p. 8 of the Review. However, we note that in keeping with WB
procedures, the PAD includes a Results Framework rather than a LogFrame, and that the former
does not call for a detailed breakdown of project activities. Detailed activity and cost
breakdowns are not normally part of a WB PAD, but they have been prepared and were used as
the basis for the more general descriptions and aggregate project cost tables presented in the
PAD.
92
93
Annex 17: Maps
SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE AND BALKANS
The basin of Lake Shkoder (source: HMI Tirana) (Taken from TDA: Figure 3.11)
Habitat map of the Lake Shkoder surroundings (From TDA, Figure 3.25)
94
ANNEX 18
Strategic Action Plan
Summary Actions Table
95
96
97
98
99