-1_1.jpg)
PROJECT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL WORK PROGRAMME INCLUSION
UNDER THE GEF TRUST FUND
AGENCY'S PROJECT ID: PIMS 3999
GEFSEC PROJECT ID: 2584
FINANCING PLAN
COUNTRY: Regional Burundi, D.R. Congo, Egypt,
Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania and
PPG Project
Uganda
GEF phase 2
6,700,000
Co-financing*
PROJECT TITLE: Nile Transboundary Environmental
Action Project (NTEAP)
GEF IA/ExA
350,000
GEF IA/EXA: UNDP
Government
1,000,000
DURATION: Second Phase 18-24 months
Nile Basin Trust
66,260,000
GEF FOCAL AREA: International Waters
Fund
GEF Strategic Objectives: SO 2
AfDB
2,880,000
GEF Strategic program: IW 3 Balancing overuse and
GTZ
1,500,000
conflicting uses of water resources in transboundary Co-financing
71,990,000
surface and groundwater basins
Total
PIPELINE ENTRY DATE: 24 November 1999
Total
78,690,000
ESTIMATED STARTING DATE: October 2007
* Expected co-financing for phase 2
EXPECTED CEO ENDORSEMENT: September 2007
IA/EXA FEE: US$ 670,000
CONTRIBUTION TO KEY INDICATORS IDENTIFIED IN THE FOCAL AREA STRATEGIES:
This is not a new project, but submission of a request for second phase funding of the Nile
Transboundary Environmental Action Project; Phase 1 was originally approved by GEF
Council in December, 2001. The project is jointly implemented by UNDP and the World Bank
as GEF IAs and forms an integral part of the overall Shared Vision Programme of the Nile
Basin Initiative which is being implemented according to the IWRM principles. It contributes
to the goals of GEF-4 IW Strategic Objective 2: it plays a catalytic role in addressing
transboundary water concerns by assisting countries to utilize the full range of technical
assistance and institutional reforms that are needed. It is also fostering international (14+
donors and a least 4 International Organizations), multi-state cooperation (9 countries and 1
observer) on priority transboundary water and environmental concerns through more
comprehensive, ecosystem-based approaches to environment management and therefore
makes a contribution to Strategic Objective 1 as well. The project addresses one of the four
identified global concerns in the GEF-4 IW strategy, namely, overuse and conflicting uses of
water resources in the Nile Basin and is therefore targeted under Strategic Programme 3.
Project activities focus on area-wide interventions that involve integrated land and water
resources management as wel as preventive measures to address environmental threats. It
does this primarily through the facilitation and capacity building for the integrated
management and use of land and water resources according to the principles of IWRM.
Other indicators identified for strategic program 3 and targeted by the project include the
setting up of national inter-ministry committees, ministerially-agreed action programmes that
lead to experience sharing and learning, knowledge management, and replication of good
practices that contribute to sustaining livelihoods as well as food and water security. Similar
targets will be pursued by the project for regional/basin agreements through the facilitation of
negotiations for a cooperative framework as a co-financed catalytic outcome with
medium/high risk of not being achieved and ensuring that the mandate of the emerging
permanent basin institution includes environmental functions.
______________________________________
i
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
RECORD OF ENDORSEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENTS
ORIGINAL ENDORSEMENT
RECOMMITMENT OF ENDORSEMENT
COUNTRY
SIGNATORIES AND DATE
SIGNATORIES AND DATE
Burundi
July 26 2001, Jerome Karimumur Yango,
May 16 2007; Salvator Ndabirorere, Focal
Le Directeur general De L'ONCEN et
Point for GEF, Ministry of Land Planning,
Point Focal Operationnel GEF
Tourism and Environment
D.R. Congo
March 12 2001,Henri Mova
May 16 2007; Didace Pembe Bokaga,
Sakanyi,Ministere Des Affaires Foncieres
Ministere De L'Environnement Conservation
Environment et Development Tourstique
De La Nature Eaux et Forets
Egypt
July 12 2001, Dr. Ibrahim Abd El Galil,
May 15, 2007; Dr Mohamed Sayed Khalil,
Chief Executive Officer and GEF National GEF National Focal Point, Egyptian
Focal Point, Egyptian Environmental
Environmental Affairs Agency
Affairs Agency
Ethiopia
July 27 2001, Dr. Tewolde Berhan gebre
May 14, 2007, Dr Tewolde Berhan Gebre
Egziabher, General Manger,
Egziabher, Director General, Environmental
Environmental Protection Authority
Protection Authority
Kenya
January 17 2001, D.N Kinyanju, Acting
May 22, 2007; Mr. Maurice Mbegera, Director
Director, National Environment
Compliance and Enforcement, National
Secretariat
Environment Management Authority
Rwanda
June 29 2001, Sahunde Mivumbi Marcel,
May 21 2007, Dr Rose Mukankomen, Director
Minister of Energy, Water and Natural
General, Rwanda Environmental Management
Resources
Authority
Sudan
July 2, 2001; Yassin Eisa Mohamed, GEF May 28 2007, Dr. Saadeledin Ibrahim,
Focal Point, Ministry of International
Secretary General, Higher Council for
Cooperation
Environment and Natural Resources
Tanzania
June 20, 2001;Abubaker R.M.S. Rajabu,
May 18, 2007; Eric K. Mugurusi, for
Permanent Secretary
Permanent Secretary, Vice Presidents Office
Uganda
July 26, 2001; Keith Muhakanizi, for
June 12 2007;Keith Muhakanzi, Deputy
Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Finance
Secretary to the Treasury, GEF Operations
and Economic Development
Focal Point
APPROVAL ON BEHALF OF THE UNDP
This proposal has been prepared in accordance with GEF policies and procedures and
meets the standards of the GEF Project Review Criteria for work program inclusion.
Name & Signature
John Hough
Project Contact Person: Mirey Atallah, Regional
UNDP-GEF Officer-in-Charge
Technical Advisor, International Waters/Land
Degradation
Date: 22 June 2007
Tel. +9613108985
email:
mirey.atallah@undp.org
______________________________________
ii
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
PROJECT SUMMARY................................................................................................................................. 6
A)
PROJECT RATIONALE, OBJECTIVES, OUTPUTS/OUTCOMES, AND ACTIVITIES.......................................... 8
Background....................................................................................................................................................... 8
The Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Project................................................................................. 9
Project Objectives and Outcomes and progress during Phase 1..................................................................10
The Mid-Term Review ....................................................................................................................................16
The Second Phase...........................................................................................................................................17
B)
KEY INDICATORS, ASSUMPTIONS, AND RISKS .........................................................................................24
Key Indicators ................................................................................................................................................24
Risks................................................................................................................................................................26
2
COUNTRY OWNERSHIP..........................................................................................................................27
A) COUNTRY ELIGIBILITY............................................................................................................................... 27
B)
COUNTRY DRIVENNESS ............................................................................................................................28
3
PROGRAM POLICY AND CONFORMITY...........................................................................................29
A) FIT TO GEF FOCAL AREA STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND OPERATIONAL PROGRAM .......................... 29
B)
SUSTAINABILITY (INCLUDING FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY) ...................................................................31
C)
REPLICABILITY ..........................................................................................................................................32
D)
STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT..................................................................................................................33
E)
MONITORING AND EVALUATION ...............................................................................................................34
4
FINANCING .................................................................................................................................................37
A)
PROJECT COSTS AND CO-FINANCING.....................................................................................................37
B)
PROJECT BUDGET ....................................................................................................................................38
5
INSTITUTIONAL COORDINATION AND SUPPORT........................................................................39
A)
CORE COMMITMENTS AND LINKAGES .....................................................................................................39
B)
CONSULTATION, COORDINATION AND COLLABORATION BETWEEN IAS, AND IAS AND EAS..............40
C)
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENT ..........................................................................................41
TABLES & FIGURES
Table 1
Applying IWRM principles at a basin scale in the Nile
6
Table 2
Confirmed co-financing for NTEAP
8
Table 3
Micro-Grants Projects by environmental theme and country
14
Table 4
Summary of National Eligible Projects
16
Table 5
Components/Outcomes, key indicators and links to IW goals
24
Table 6
Risks and mitigation measures
26
Table 7
Ratification of the Rio and Ramsar Conventions by the riparians
28
Table 8
Indicative budget for activities that will facilitate replication
33
Table 9
Highlights of M&E plan and corresponding budget
36
Table 10
Project budget for the Second Phase by Components
37
Table 11
Co-financing sources in cash and in kind
38
Table 12
Co-financing for NTEAP in the context of the broader NBI
38
Table 13
Project management budget
38
Table 14
Consultants/Technical Personnel
39
Figure 1
Overview of the basin-wide Shared Vision Programme
29
______________________________________
iii
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
APR Annual
Project
Report
ATP Applied
Training
Project
CBO
Community Based Organization
CBSI
Confidence Building and Stakeholder Involvement
CIDA
Canadian International Development Agency
CSO
Civil Society Organization
D R
Democratic Republic
DSS
Decision Support System
EAs Executing
Agencies
(GEF)
EE&A
Environmental Education and Awareness
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment
ENSAP
Eastern Nile Subsidiary Action Project
ENTRO
Eastern Nile Technical Regional Office
EWUAP
Efficient Water Use in Agriculture Production project
GEF
Global Environment Facility
GEMS
Global Environmental Monitoring System.
GPS
Global Positioning System
GW Ground
Water
HDI Human
Development
Index
HDR
Human Development Report
IAs
Implementing Agencies (GEF)
ICCON
International Consortium for Cooperation On the Nile
IW
International Waters (GEF focal area)
IWC International
Waters
Conference
IWRM
Integrated Water Resources Management
KM Knowledge
management
KMS
Knowledge Management Specialist
LDCs Least
Developed
Countries
LVBC
Lake Victoria Basin Commission
MDG Millennium
Development
Goals
M & E
Monitoring and Evaluation
MTR Mid-Term
Review
NB
Nile Basin
NBI
Nile Basin Initiative
NBD
Nile Basin Discourse
NBDF
Nile Basin Development Forum
NBTF
Nile Basin Trust Fund
NELCU
Nile Equatorial Lakes Coordination Unit
NELSAP
Nile Equatorial Lakes Subsidiary Action Project.
NGO Non-Governmental
Organization
Nile-COM
Council of Ministers of Water Affairs of Nile Basin States
Nile-TAC
NBI Technical Advisory Committee
NRAK
Nile River Awareness Kit
NTEAP
Nile Transboundary Environment Action Project
PDF
Preparatory Development Facility (GEF)
PIP
Project Implementation Plan
PIR Project
Implementation
Report
PMU
Project Management Unit
PSC Project
Steering
Committee
RBM River
Basin
Model
RPT
Regional Power Trade project
RWQWG
Regional Water Quality Working Group
SAP
Strategic Action Programme
SDBS
Socio-economic Development and Benefit Sharing project
SEA
Strategic Environmental Assessment
SEF
Strategic Environmental Framework
SGP Small
Grants
Programme
SVP
Shared Vision Programme
SVP-C
Shared Vision Programme Coordination project
______________________________________
iv
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
TEA Transboundary
Environmental
Analysis
TPR Tripartite
Review
UNDP
United Nations Development Programme
UNESCO United
Nations
Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization
UNOPS
United Nations Office for Project Services
US$ United
States
Dollars
WB World
Bank
WQM
Water Quality Monitoring
WRM
Water Resources Management
WRPM
Water Resources Planning and Management project
______________________________________
v
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
1 PROJECT
SUMMARY
1) This document constitutes the submission for the second phase of the
environment component (Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Project) of the
comprehensive Nile Basin Initiative originally submitted and approved by Council
in December 20011 and jointly implemented by UNDP and the World Bank as
implementing agencies of the GEF and partners of the Nile riparians. This second
phase was designed following an independent evaluation (mid-term review) of the
first phase which concluded that the project has achieved satisfactory results.
This submission takes into consideration the recommendations of the MTR, the
evolution of conditions in the Nile Basin and the new GEF IW strategy for GEF 4.
2) The Nile riparians have agreed to come together around a shared vision: "to achieve
sustainable socio-economic development through the equitable utilization of, and benefit
from, the common Nile resources". Once the riparians agreed to this vision, a consortium
of development partners established a partnership around a Shared Vision Program
(SVP), to support Nile riparians in achieving their vision. Consequently the World Bank
has been entrusted with the management and oversight of the multi-million Nile Basin
Trust Fund financing a parallel track of regional technical assistance projects and sub-
regional investments. As a parallel and mutually reinforcing process, UNDP has been
supporting the negotiations of a legally binding cooperative framework since 1997. The
two international organizations, also GEF implementing agencies (IAs), naturally came
into a partnership to support the environment component of the NBI, the Nile
Transboundary Environmental Action Project (NTEAP), co-funded by the GEF and
herewith submitted to request the second phase of GEF funding (US$6.7M).
3) The SVP, which can be equated with an Integrated River Basin Management approach
for the Nile, comprises 7 different projects2. The NTEAP strives to secure the ecosystem
integrity of the Nile Basin and is an essential part of the SVP: without the remaining SVP
projects, NTEAP would not achieve its goal; and without NTEAP, the integrated
approach to Nile resource development and management would be equally hampered.
Some illustrative examples are given below:
Table 1:
Applying IWRM at a basin scale in the Nile
RESULT
NTEAP RESPONSIBILITY
FURTHER NBI CONTRIBUTION
Conserving wetlands
Identification of key wetlands; piloting
WRPMP identifies policy reform options in
management planning, setting best
support of transboundary cooperation;
practice
develops a DSS to guide development options
Building capacity for
Identify the key environmental issues
ATP undertake targeted trainings, maintain a
IWRM
and best practices e.g. wetlands
roster of trainers, training institutions and
management
professionals as a repository for training
courses and materials in the basin
Strengthening basin-wide Building trust and networks of
NBI governance is ensuring overal synergies
cooperation
professionals in the basin; defining the
and coordination with a cooperative framework
environment function of a potential
being negotiated by the COM to provide a
permanent institution.
legal basis to sustain and guide cooperation.
Reducing agriculture's
Identification of impacts of agriculture
EWUAP Proposing options and developing
impact on the Nile Basin
on ecosystem health and integrity
guidelines to enhance water use efficiency in
ecosystem integrity
Agriculture
Choosing appropriate
Articulation of socio-economic roles of
SDBS Weighing benefits of agriculture v/s
socio-economic
wetlands and other ecosystems of the
conservation v/s infrastructure to guide
development options
basin
decision-making
Public buy-in and support Engaging stakeholders and changing
CBSI Public participation in line with IWRM
to the NBI and its vision
behaviours towards natural resources
principles; NBDF networking national NGOs,
raising awareness and enhancing public
participation in and scrutiny of NBI issues
1 Annex G
2 For details of the SVP and linkages among the projects refer to Annexes H and I
______________________________________
6
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
4) The NTEAP has been designed as an integrated 5 year project, with UNDP and the WB
as GEF co-implementing agencies. It was submitted to the December 2001 Council
under GEF 3. The implementing agencies were notified just prior to submission that due
to GEF 3 fund flow shortages, the project could be submitted and presented in its
entirety to the council, yet the GEF funds would have to be phased.
5) Responding to this request, the UNDP funds were divided into two phases although the
project was not set out nor designed in separate phases. This is reflected in the fact that
the World Bank GEF funds were approved over a five year period; likewise the Nile
Basin Trust Fund Resources were availed to the project with the assurance to donors of
a five year time frame for the project. Furthermore, integration of funds over a five year
implementation period is reflected by the fact that all components are funded by at least
one other funding source besides the UNDP GEF funds.
6) The entire project was designed and approved according to the IW strategy in GEF 3. It
was designed following an extensive process involving environmental experts from all
nine NBI countries and approved by their GEF focal points and Ministers of Water
Resources, which form the Nile Council of Ministers. Key areas that were addressed
were selected based on an intensive country by country assessment and basin-wide
overlay reflected in the Transboundary Analysis Report (TEA).
7) In the spirit of adaptive and results based management, this submission for phase 2
gave the opportunity for the project to rethink its approach, mainly based on (i) the
results of the mid-term evaluation; (ii) the changes in the GEF IW focal area strategy and
(iii) the changes in the context of the NBI. NTEAP has maintained the original
development objective designed and agreed by the 9 riparians, namely, "to create more
effective Basin-wide stakeholder cooperation on transboundary environmental issues by
supporting the implementation of a subset of the actions prioritized by the
Transboundary Environmental Analysis." However, for the Second Phase, its focus is
the following:
To protect critical Nile Basin ecosystems from transboundary threats through the provision of
a strategic environmental framework and the engagement of stakeholders according to the
principles of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)
8) The project still retains the original components, their main thrust in this second phase
will be oriented towards: (i) identifying, documenting and communicating impacts, best
practices and lessons learnt; (ii) laying the grounds for the conservation of key wetlands
in the Basin and (iii) paving the way towards the proposed permanent river basin
institution with requisite mandate and strengths in the areas of environment and
wetlands protection. This new thrust is intended to strengthen and inform the process of
negotiation of the cooperative framework, a co-financed catalytic outcome of the NBI.
9) NTEAP constitutes an intrinsic part of the NBI and SVP; as such it is co-financed by the
pledges made during the International Consortium On the Nile meeting held in Geneva in
2001 through the Nile Basin Trust Fund, the government contributions quantified for the
project itself, as wel as other donor contributions under the umbrella of the NBI. Other
contributions, for example the countries' annual contributions to the functioning of the
Nile Secretariat, the host country contributions to the SVP projects and the financing to
both NELSAP and ENSAP are not considered as co-financing to NTEAP but provide for
another multi-million value of parallel funding. The co-financing for this second phase is
estimated at US$ 71.99.
______________________________________
7
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
Table 2:
Confirmed co-financing for NTEAP
SHARED VISION PROJECT
Phase 1
Phase 2
TOTAL
Applied Training Project (ATP)
5.6
11.38
16.98
Confidence Building and Stakeholder Involvement (CBSI)
4.4
7.16
11.56
Efficient Water Use in Agriculture Production (EWUAP)
1.79
2.6
4.39
Regional Power Trade (RPT)
2.12
3.15
5.27
NTEAP
3.2
5.79
8.99
Socio-economic Development and Benefit Sharing (SDBS)
0.96
4.93
5.89
Water Resource Planning and Management (WRPM)
5.5
9.15
14.65
SVP Coordination project (SVP-C)
4.5
7.1
11.6
NBTF unal ocated (SVP or NBI project to be determined)
0
15
15
Total Shared Vision Project (NBTF)
28.07
66.26
94.33
Non-NBTF
Riparians
2.36
1
3.36
AfDB 0
2.88
2.88
GTZ
3.0 1.5 4.5
UNDP/TRIB
3.85
0.35
4.2
Canadian Space Agency
2.5
0
2.5
Total Non-NBTF
11.71
5.73
17.44
OVERALL CO-FINANCING
39.78
71.99
111.77
10) This request for the second phase builds on the previous 3 years of the project, the
findings of the mid-term review, the 2007 workplan and its expected results. The second
phase is planned to run through September 09 with some components and their sub-
components phasing out earlier. The GEF funding solicited for this second phase is of
US$6.7M, and the GEF implementing agency is UNDP. Given that the project has been
thought and designed as a collaborative initiative between UNDP and the WB, both
agencies will continue providing supervisory services until the project closes down.
A) PROJECT RATIONALE, OBJECTIVES, OUTPUTS/OUTCOMES, AND ACTIVITIES
BACKGROUND
11) The Nile River is one of the world's great rivers.
HDI RANK 2006
Throughout history it has nourished livelihoods,
COUNTRY
(OUT OF 177)
an array of ecosystems and a rich diversity of
Burundi
169
cultures in ten countries. The Basin D R Congo
167
encompasses 3 million square kilometres one-
Egypt
tenth of Africa's total landmass and serves as
111
home to an estimated 160 million people. These
Ethiopia
170
people face considerable challenges, with more
Kenya
152
than half of the riparian states being among the
Rwanda
158
world's poorest countries (see table below) and
Sudan
much of the region characterized by instability
141
and rapid population growth. The Global Human
Uganda
145
Development Report (HDR) states that while the
Tanzania
162
costs of River Basin cooperation are difficult to Source: 2006 UNDP Global Human
quantify, the human and financial costs of non-
Development Report
cooperation are very evident. Unfortunately,
efforts to relieve poverty by promoting more rapid economic development in the Basin
are being undermined by increasingly severe environmental degradation.
12) The 2006 UNDP HDR quoted above, argues that "increasing the benefits from the river
and decreasing the costs arising because of the river, can unlock a wider potential for
human development, economic growth and regional cooperation" and it observes that
this is happening to some degree in some of the Nile Basin initiatives. In fact, despite
their constraints, the Nile riparians recognize the potential that the Basin holds for
cooperative development and they acknowledge the benefits to be gained from greater
regional integration. Various subgroups within the Basin have engaged in cooperative
______________________________________
8
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
activities during the last 30 years and in 1997 the riparian states began, with UNDP
support, to work towards a permanent legal and institutional framework for the Basin. In
1999 the riparians took a further key step by launching the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI), a
transitional mechanism that includes nine out of the ten Nile countries as equal members
in a regional partnership to promote economic development and fight poverty. The NBI
garnered the support of more than 14 development partners through the Nile Basin Trust
Fund managed and administered by the World Bank which also technically backstops
and supports the implementation of the SVP. The NBI also provides a process to
facilitate substantial investment in the Nile Basin to realize regional socio-economic
development. In this regard, the HDR stresses that the benefits of cooperation do not
accrue exclusively to the less well-off countries. Benefits can also be acquired by
countries with relatively high standing in the HDI, as compared to those with low
standing, by sharing the same river basin and forming part of a cooperative approach to
river systems. The Report cites the case of the Nile Basin Initiative, where Egypt (with a
higher HDI), is linked to countries with a lower HDI, and could "reinforce its emergence
as a partner and champion of African interests at the World Trade Organization".
13) The NBI, which will eventually lead to a permanent legally binding agreement, is
comprised of the Council of Ministers of Water Affairs of the Nile Basin (Nile-COM), a
Technical Advisory Committee (Nile-TAC), and a Secretariat (Nile-SEC). It is intended as
a transition mechanism to provide countries with the sufficient time to build trust,
negotiate the cooperative framework and identify benefit sharing options. The NBI is
guided by a Shared Vision "to achieve sustainable socio-economic development through
the equitable utilization of, and benefit from, the common Nile Basin water resources."
Within the global community of transboundary water cooperation initiatives, the vision of
the Nile riparians in establishing parallel processes fostering the development of an
enabling framework for cooperation and joint investment is recognized as a unique and
exceptional approach. Similarly, the benefit sharing rationale adopted by the NBI rather
than a strict water budget and allocations approach had, at the time of its creation, been
a cutting edge approach.
THE NILE TRANSBOUNDARY ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT
14) The Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Project (NTEAP) is the environmental
component of the broader Nile Basin Initiative3. It arose out of the recognition by the Nile
countries that future development of the Basin must be environmentally sustainable.
This realization followed a Transboundary Environmental Analysis (TEA) which was
carried out by the Nile riparians with funding from GEF PDF resources and support from
UNDP and the World Bank. NTEAP is the first of the series of seven regional technical
assistance projects planned under the NBI's Shared Vision Program (SVP). As an
integral component of the SVP, NTEAP is a complex project operating in nine countries,
financed by several donors and contributing directly or indirectly to each of the other six
projects under the Nile Basin Initiative. NTEAP also contributes to the sub-regional
investment programmes: the Nile Equatorial Lakes SAP and the Eastern Nile SAP.
15) According to its design, NTEAP was scheduled to last five years and implementation
commenced in May 2004 when its first Steering Committee meeting approved a half year
work plan and budget for the second half of 2004. It set out to strengthen riparian
cooperation and coordination by supporting a series of measures focusing on various
aspects of transboundary environmental management. Project activities have targeted
capacity building, training, education and awareness raising, knowledge and information
sharing, development of a decision support system, communications, and environment
conservation field activities at selected pilot sites guided by the priorities identified in the
TEA. The project uses regional and national networks, regional and national working
3 See annex H
______________________________________
9
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
groups, and national coordinators (NPCs) as its main implementing agents. Diverse
stakeholder groups have been encouraged to work together, both within their own
countries and with counterparts in other riparian countries, to help build the mutual
understanding, relationships and trust that are essential to joint problem-solving and to
understanding the differences in preoccupations from one riparian to another. At the
level of the riparians, the project aims to build bridges between the countries to better
enable a variety of key stakeholders to identify and take advantage of the opportunities
offered by international collaboration. At the level of the NBI, NTEAP ensures that
environmental considerations are integrated in the decision-making processes and the
selection of investment options at Basin and sub-Basin levels.
16) The project is designed as an integrated 5 year project, with UNDP and the WB as GEF
co-implementing agencies. It was submitted to the December 2001 Council under GEF
3. The implementing agencies were notified just prior to submission that due to GEF 3
fund flow shortages, the project could be submitted and presented in its entirety to the
GEF, yet the GEF funds would have to be phased. The budget for activities covered by
the World Bank was fully confirmed at the outset. The budget for the UNDP components
was to be made available in two phases. According to the World Bank's Project
Appraisal Document (PAD), "The project has been designed with a phased approach.
This is a function of funding constraints present in the GEF". It is the understanding of
stakeholders and donors that this is not a new project but merely the second phase of
the 5-year project which they have committed to. Much of the funding leveraged from
bilateral sources was committed on the understanding that the GEF funding had been
committed in full although it wasn't available in its entirety at the time of approval. This is
also reflected in the fact that the World Bank GEF funds were approved over a five year
period; likewise the Nile Basin Trust Fund Resources were availed to the project with the
assurance to donors of a five year time frame for the project. Furthermore, integration of
funds and a five year implementation period are reflected by the fact that all components
are funded by at least one other funding source besides UNDP/GEF.
17) The commitment of NBTF funds and GEF-World Bank funds and the project's viability
are only warranted with the availability of influx of additional resources at midterm. To
that avail, US$1.8 million additional NBTF funds have been approved by the World Bank
in 2007 to fund the additional wetlands & biodiversity component with UNDP/GEF funds
to be injected through the second phased requested with this submission.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES4 AND PROGRESS DURING PHASE 1
18) The original Objective of the NTEAP, as formulated in the GEF Project Brief LogFrame
Matrix, was: To create more effective Basin-wide stakeholder cooperation on
transboundary environmental issues by supporting the implementation of a subset of the
actions prioritized by the Transboundary Environmental Analysis.
19) The World Bank Grant Agreement was more specific in setting the objectives of the
Project as: To develop a framework of actions to address high priority transboundary
environmental issues in the Nile basin through, (a) provision of a forum to discuss
development paths for the Nile; (b) improvement in the understanding of the relationship
between water resources management and the environment; and (c) enhancement of
basin-wide cooperation among NBI Countries.
20) The project aims to improve the understanding of the relationship of water resources
development and the environment in the Basin, and provide a forum to discuss
development paths for the Nile with a wide range of stakeholders. The environmental
framework established by the project should also promote: (a) enhanced basin-wide
4 In this document, "Outcome" and "Component" refer to the same level in the project framework and are used interchangeably.
While GEF favours the use of "Component", the Nile Secretariat prefers to use "Outcome".
______________________________________
10
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
cooperation and environmental awareness essential to the successful implementation of
the Agenda for Environmental Action in the Nile Basin through the NBI's SVP, SAPs and
other programmes, and (b) a basin-wide institution, the NBI, with substantially enhanced
environmental management capacities. Among the salient products of the NBI is the
conclusion of negotiations on the cooperative framework (as a co-financed outcome with
medium/high risk of not being achieved within the lifetime of the project), the foundation
for the permanent institution (with recommendations for its environment function
specifically in relation to sustaining wetlands) and the broader work being done on IWRM
by the NBI (including cross-referencing with the RBM/WRPM project and other SVP
projects) and at a national level by national inter-ministerial committees. The negotiations
on the cooperative framework and the SVP constitute two parallel and mutually
supportive elements of basin cooperation, with the legal framework providing the
assurance of long-term commitment while the SVP informs and supports the
negotiations and their orientation. This is namely reflected in the provision of language in
the cooperative framework in relation to the sustainability, conservation and valuation of
the basin's wetlands.
21) The above original objective for the NTEAP, planned to be realized within a five to eight
year time frame, intended to contribute to the two medium term outcomes of the NBI
which are:
· Increased regional cooperation in the Nile Basin, and to contribute to peace and
security in the region
· Efficient transboundary management and optimal use of Nile Basin water and
water-related resources
22) The project, which had an original budget of over US$40 million, including the in-kind
contributions of the riparian governments, had the following five themes:
· Institutional Strengthening to Facilitate Regional Cooperation
· Community-level Land, Forest and Water Conservation
· Environmental Education and Awareness
· Wetlands and Biodiversity Conservation
· Water Quality Monitoring Basin-wide
23) The project is now in its third year of implementation and progress achieved so far has
been assessed (in March 2007) against indicators established in the UNDP Project
Document (see Annex J) and World Bank Project Appraisal Document (PAD).
Achievement of those indicators can best be described through reference to the three
Annual Reports produced to date. The full reports can be obtained at the following links:
Annual Report 2006: http://nileteap.org/docs/FY06_Annual_Report.pdf
Annual Report 2005: http://nileteap.org/docs/FY05_Annual_Report.pdf
Annual Report 2004: http://nileteap.org/docs/FY04_Annual_Report.pdf
24) The 2004 Annual Report depicted a project in its establishment/inception phase. It
recorded the setting up of the Project Management Unit and the Project Steering
Committee, outlined its strategies and plans, and recorded its efforts towards the
establishment of its networks. As part of the planning process, a number of stakeholder
workshops were held and its outreach activities were initiated.
25) By 2005 the project was reporting on some tangible progress. Achievements included
the setting up of National Project Coordinators offices in each participating country, the
adoption of a Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy, and implementation progress with
project components such as the micro-grants (30 agreements signed with NGOs),
capacity building activities, various environmental education and awareness workshops
and networks as wel as information materials, baseline studies on water quality and a
number of outreach activities.
______________________________________
11
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
26) The 2006 Annual Report considered the production of the Nile River Awareness Kit as
one of the year's highlights. Capacity building was also cited as a major area of activity
for the year, with various regional training events. The NTEAP also reported the approval
of over 20 national eligible projects in eight countries, the approval and implementation
of over 30 schools projects, as well as the approval and implementation of 179 Micro-
Grants initiatives spread across the nine riparian countries.
Progress with Component 1 - Institutional Strengthening to Facilitate Regional
Cooperation
27) The structure of the project (including staffing, equipping, setting up finance and
administrative systems) was established, baseline studies on the status of regional
cooperation, EE&A, WQM, NGOs and NGO Networks were done in the whole Basin.
The Project Steering Committee was opertionalized and to date, four PSC meetings
were conducted. Concept papers on "macro-policies and environment" and "strategic
environmental framework" were developed and disseminated to the project stakeholders
for review and enhancement. The development of the Nile Basin DSS subcomponent
was designed to be jointly supported by NTEA and WRPM. While the WRPM project is
entrusted with the design and implementation of the DSS, NTEAP is expected to provide
financial support through GEF funding, follow up on the design and implementation
process to ensure the full integration of environmental considerations in the model. The
component which has started in March 2006, has completed the establishment of its
implementation mechanisms across the basin, including recruitment of professional and
national staff at both regional and national levels. DSS baseline assessment was
completed in all NB countries with special focus on availability of data required for the
DSS, current level of use of analytic tools, such as water resources models, and
inventory of national stakeholders. Preparations have been completed for conceptual
design of the Nile Basin DSS and its components, the Information Management System,
the River Basin Model and other analytic tools. The WRPM project has procured a
consortium led by Hydrophil GmbH (Austria) to assist in the development of the design of
the DSS. On the Capacity building side, the WRPM project has selected and sponsored
eight students for a postgraduate study leading to MSc degree in Hydro-informatics at
UNESCO-IHE, the Netherlands. The students have now successfully completed nine of
the twelve study modules and are developing proposals for their graduate research. To
enhance relevance of the research, WRPM project is providing technical support,
availing data and contributing to the selection of test watersheds in the Nile Basin.
28) NTEAP has improved its communication and knowledge sharing tools. A commuinication
strategy as a basis for knowledge sharing and learning has been developed. It is part of
the NBI communication network, linked through the www.nilebasin.org and
www.nileteap.org domains through efficient electronic connections for all project
personnel. The production of knowledge/ education/ awareness tools has been
enhanced through development of an interactive, multimedia learning CD for knowledge
and awareness regarding the resources of the Nile Basin. Teachers, journalists,
government representatives, resource managers, researchers, etc, have been trained on
the use of the tool and are now using it to conduct environmental education and
awareness programmes in their respective organisations. An online version is available
on the NTEAP website. Other tools include posters and brochures. Global Positioning
System (GPS) receivers have been given to all NPCs for obtaining georeferenced
information on project activities uploaded into a comprehensive map and database.
Twelve issues of the quarterly newsletter have been published in French, English,
Arabic, Amharic and Kiswahili. National level good practices compilation workshops have
been conducted and these will be followed by regional level compilation of good
practices on the basis of the pilot field level projects to capture good practices and trigger
replication. A repository for resources and documents relevant to transboundary
environmental management linked to the NBI resource centre has also been set up.
______________________________________
12
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
29) The project developed a monitoring and evaluation strategy and action plan5
characterized by tracking matrices which helped to ensure that the project activities were
planned and implemented according to agreed targets. Monitoring and evaluation of
project management and progress flagged hindrances and bottlenecks in a timely
manner and allowed corrective measures to be taken when necessary. The project's
flexible management approach also enabled it to respond to riparian recommendations
such as the initiation of the Wetlands and Biodiversity component slightly ahead of time.
The LogFrame Matrix was updated and the performance measurement framework
developed a Training of Trainers' Manual for training of NGOs and CBOs on Micro-
Grants Monitoring and Evaluation. Over 100 NGOs and CBOs were trained in
monitoring and evaluation. The project underwent an independent Mid-Term Review,
and the outcomes of that exercise were shared with the riparians and the development
partners.
30) In its efforts to strengthen its linkages with the NBI's two Subsidiary Action Programs as
well as the other SVP projects, the NTEAP initiated joint activities during 2006. These
included joint training sessions, collaborative M&E inputs, and joint workshops. A
coordination matrix of activities reflecting expected outputs and time frame was prepared
jointly with the two SAPs to be implemented during the first half of 2007. This resulted in
planning jointly with SAPs to conduct baseline studies on lake and wetlands ecosystems
where long term investment projects have been planned by the SAPs.
31) The annual PSC meetings have offered opportunities for directors of environmental
agencies of the NBI countries to meet and discuss environmental issues of the Nile
Basin, improve relationships and enhanced cooperation among countries. The
interaction between staff that come from all of the NBI countries has also helped to
enhance the understanding of environmental and water issues of the respective
countries. It is this understanding and appreciation of each others problems that has
contributed to confidence and trust building.
Progress with Component 2 - Community-level Land, Forest and Water Conservation
32) The emphasis of the Micro-Grants Programme in Phase 1 was on implementing pilot
projects that were developed on the basis of common environmental threats facing the
Nile Basin which were identified at the national level through broad consultations.
33) Intensive community mobilization efforts coupled with training activities have lead to the
approval and implementation of 179 Micro-Grant projects in the nine countries of the Nile
Basin. With a budget totalling a little over US$4 million, these projects intend to pilot
viable approaches to integrated land and water management in areas that have profound
impact on the Basin's integrity. The Programme has led to an increased awareness
among the communities in the Basin on the environmental challenges facing the Basin
and created a sense of understanding that without appropriate conservation and
mitigation measures, the natural resources of the Nile Basin would be seriously depleted.
34) The efforts exerted by the project have led to two heads of state from Basin countries
paying visits, and in one case presenting a donation to a project that has managed to
enhance the network and information sharing among communities in Uganda.
35) The Micro-Grants Programme is implemented directly by over 180 NGOs and CBOs with
31 projects (over $250,000) managed or implemented by women NGOs. The thematic
areas of focus range from capacity building of NGOs/CBOs, to Land Degradation,
Environmental Awareness raising and combating Water Quality Degradation.
5 C.f. Annex K
______________________________________
13
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
36) The extent and scope of the Micro-Grants Programme as summarized in the table below
reflects the priorities in each country, however an underlying factor in all the countries
has been the drive to enhance capacities of the communities through the pilot projects to
articulate a number of viable approaches to land and water resource management that
would lead to the conservation of the environment of the Basin and the efficient use of its
water. The MTR recognized the value of the Micro-Grants Programme in building solid
NGO/CBO constituencies where they did not exist before. This contributed to building
the capacities of CBOs and NGOs in terms of the identification, development and
implementation of projects is widely acknowledged in the basin. In Burundi, where the
SGP was recently approved by the GEF, the micro-grants component has established all
the infrastructure and the SGP is consequently expected to have a quick start-up.
37) Of the 179 projects under implementation, projects addressing Land Degradation as a
theme were the most numerous 97 or 55% of the projects funded. This was followed
by training, awareness raising and networking projects 34 in all or 19% of the total and
this was justified by the low level of knowledge in the Basin about the environmental
threats and the need to enhance capacities and networking prior to instigating
environmentally focused projects. In almost all the projects there were various activities
that addressed other thematic areas in addition to the main theme. The extent and scope
of the Micro-Grants Programme are summarized in the table below.
Table 3.
Micro-Grant Projects by environmental theme and country
I
COUNTRIES
I
A
A
A
D
N
OP
Y
N
ANIA
NDA
PROJECT THEMES
RUND
Z
HI
A
EGYPT
KEN
N
TOTAL
BU
SUDA
ET
RW
UGA
D.R. CONGO
TA
Deforestation
11
10 - 6 16 2 6 4 4 59
Soil
Erosion
8 2 - 6 - 7 3 2 2 30
Siltation
- - - - - - 2 3 3 8
Wetlands
Degradation
- - - 1 - - - 1 1 3
Floods
and
Drought
- - - - - - 1 - - 1
Water
Weed
Infestation
- - - - 1 1 - 2 - 4
Nile Water Pollution
-
1
18
-
-
-
-
1
3
23
Loss of species & ecosystems
-
4
-
1
2
1
3
4
2
17
Community Training, Environment
- - 6 3 3 1 7 8 6 34
Awareness and Networking
Total number of projects under
19 17 24 17 22 12 22 25 21 179
implementation
Progress with Component 3 - Environmental Education and Awareness
38) This component comprises three distinct sub-components each is discussed in turn:
39) Public awareness on Nile environmental threats enhanced in NB countries
Awareness of Nile environmental threats was enhanced through annual awareness
campaigns conducted during the World Environment Days, through building capacities of
practitioners on the threats and mitigation measures and through the establishment of
networks to assist in information sharing and dissemination. Both print and electronic
outreach materials were developed and disseminated. Training manuals on awareness
materials development and environmental reporting were developed. The campaigns,
awareness materials and capacity building have increased the visibility of the NBI and
understanding of the Nile Basin environment.
______________________________________
14
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
40) Networks of secondary schools for projects based learning established and
functioning in NB countries Through the establishment of school environment projects,
the project has initiated a project based learning model enabling teachers and students
to learn by doing. To enhance the model, the project has trained over 200 teachers,
established a teachers' network to facilitate information exchange and is developing
teaching materials. The model will produce a generation with better environmental
management practices.
41) Networking established among universities and other research institutions
Through an established environmental education lecturers' network, the project has
facilitated 11 masters students to conduct research on environmental threats to the Nile
Basin. The project has also built capacity in lecturing on environmental and
sustainability mainstreaming and is developing a university course based on Nile
environmental threats. If the course is adopted, Nile environmental issues will be better
understood by graduates.
Progress with Component 4 - Wetlands and Biodiversity Conservation
42) The Wetlands and Biodiversity Programme was launched in 2007 as part of the Second
Phase, slightly ahead of schedule based on a decision by the PSC. A regional working
group has been established and a plan of action to implement activities has been
developed. Studies that will promote a better understanding of wetlands and biodiversity
at sites in the NELCU and ENTRO have been initiated. The component will focus on the
sustainability of important Nile basin wetlands which is a target that requires regional,
transboundary cooperation. With this in mind it will work to lay the foundation for a
Regional Wetlands Strategy and ensure that the transition from NTEAP to the permanent
Basin organization is a seamless one that maintains the momentum. A key result of the
component will be proposal for a strategic approach to wetlands management in the
basin with key actions, steps and responsibilities defined.
Progress with Component 5 - Water Quality Monitoring Basin-wide
43) The Water Quality Component, through the regional working groups, developed regional
water quality monitoring baseline studies in al Nile Basin countries, classified laboratory
facilities, designated focal and reference laboratories and procured laboratory
equipment. Transboundary sampling stations were selected and parameters to be
measured were agreed upon. Water quality data management and institutional and
technical capacities for water quality monitoring were assessed and water quality
awareness messages were developed. In addition, water sampling and testing, and data
reporting formats, were agreed upon and manuals prepared. A concept paper on
operationalizing the transboundary water quality monitoring network was developed and
close collaboration was initiated with the SAPs and the Lake Victoria Basin Commission.
44) The above mentioned achievements in the Water Quality Monitoring component have
lead to enhanced networking at the national and regional levels by the RWQWG
members. It also resulted in enhanced linkages between TAC members and Ministers
and Directors of Water and Environment. Water experts networked and were exposed to
experiences from the other countries in the Basin. Awareness on water quality issues
was enhanced and sustainability of activities was assured through partnerships with
NELCU, ENTRO and LVBC. Transboundary water quality monitoring, will give global
recognition to the NBI through GEMS/Water Quality, and will further enhance regional
cooperation.
______________________________________
15
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
45) Riparians countries afford a high importance to the issue of water quality, especially as it
relates to soil erosion and siltation. This component being fully funded through the
WB/GEF funds, and given that it will continue operating during the second phase of the
project, will be included in the log-frame and detailed in the UNDP ProDoc. While from a
financial aspect, it will not receive funding from GEF 4, the project operations and
supervision missions so far have recommended increasing cross-component
cooperation and the programmatic linkages will be maintained.
National Eligible Projects
46) At its meeting of January 2005, the Project Steering Committee decided to allocate
current budget resources to address national priorities within the Nile Basin. The
"National Eligible Projects" (NEPs) were envisaged to address some of the relevant
environmental priority issues at the national level in line with the NTEAP components
and which have tranboundary impacts. Through an iterative process involving
communication with the PSC members and development partners, the PMU established
a procedure for the approval and implementation of the NEPs. The projects were
presented by the NPCs after they were reviewed at the national level by a committee
comprising the PSC member, the NPC and the MGC. The projects were then presented
to the PMU for review and final approval by the PSC. The process culminated in the
review and approval of 21 projects totaling US$751,029 in the nine riparian countries.
The focus of the projects ranges from biodiversity conservation in protected areas, to
water quality improvement, tree planting, alternative energy and sedimentation control.
The following table is a summary of projects undertaken, by country, together with their
budgets. As indicated by the table, NTEAP support was worth US$748,302 and this was
supplemented by funds totaling US$1,598,329 made available and/or mobilized by the
Governments themselves.
Table 4.
Summary of National Eligible Projects
NO. OF
TOTAL
NTEAP
COUNTRY
PROJECTS
BUDGET
SUPPORT
Burundi
3
102, 000
90,543
D.R. Congo
1
24,623
13,923
Egypt
2
315,515
111,968
Ethiopia
3
926,726
92,485
Kenya 2
119,431
85,125
Rwanda 3
123,006
81,835
Sudan 3
530,700
110,500
Tanzania 2
123,501
96,234
Uganda 2
81,129
65,701
Grand total
21
2,346,631
748,302
THE MID-TERM REVIEW
47) In the latter part of 2006, three years into implementation, NTEAP was subjected to an
independent evaluation, the Mid-Term Review (MTR). The findings of the MTR regarding
progress during Phase 1 are tabulated in its Annex 3. Achievement of Objectives and
Outputs at Mid-term. The MTR found the overall management of the project to be highly
satisfactory with spending being in line with the original work plan schedule. It
considered the delivery of outputs to be ahead of schedule and the quality of achieved
outputs was considered as satisfactory, in general. The MTR considered the project to
be well advanced in the achievement of its goals and objectives and assessed that out of
40 project targets for its 5-year duration, 12 had been fully attained and three had
advanced to more than 90% of completion by the mid-term. In fact, when focusing strictly
on the NTEAP targets, closer to 50% of targets had been met by the mid-term.
______________________________________
16
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
48) The MTR argued that this successful management was possible due to devoted
personnel in the field and at the project headquarters and to the good working conditions
provided by the host countries. The success was also attributed to the role of the PSC
that supported the project staff and successfully guided the entire project.
49) However, the MTR made 35 recommendations for improvement, mostly at output and
activity level. It also warned that the project still has many challenges and some
management difficulties to overcome, and that some of these represented potential
obstacles to the smooth running of activities. All the recommendations but five have
been accepted by project management. Many related to corrective action that the PMU
already had in place or planned (and budgeted) as part of its adaptive management
approach. The full and detailed management response to the MTR is in Annex L, while
the following section, which discusses plans for the Second Phase at the component
level, makes reference to the MTR recommendations which, in many instances, are used
as the springboard for the approach and activities planned for the Second Phase.
50) Among the challenges identified by the MTR was the need to balance the administrative
duties of the NPCs with their engagement in technical subjects; and the need for PMU
staff to balance their attendance of meetings, field visits and administration
responsibilities with knowledge building, conceptual work and assisting the national
partners with the implementation of recommendations from numerous workshops. Both
of these recommendations have been taken on board by project management. The MTR
also identified a need to strengthen collaboration among NTEAP components since the
outputs are interrelated and mutually reinforcing. Likewise, the project should start to
build a close team environment with other SVP projects, with projects financed by other
donors and with the development initiatives at the various governmental levels. NTEAP
was also advised by the MTR to increase its visibility through dissemination of its
technical achievements and the provision of advice to the less experienced partners. It
should also demonstrate the applicability of its outputs and show the benefits obtainable
from environmentally sound management. The MTR identified the Strategic
Environmental Framework as a priority in order to enhance the sustainability of NTEAP's
products. Finally, the MTR recommended that, specifically for pilot projects on the
ground, NTEAP should accord priority to transboundary activities.
51) The UNDP prodoc was signed in February 2003, WB grant agreement in April 2003 and
the project launched in May 2004; its 5-year duration would have taken it to
approximately the end of 2008.The MTR concluded that during the second phase, with
the administrative routines well tuned and the technical personnel enriched by the past
three years experience, as well as with the collaboration of the other six SVP projects
now on-going, the NTEAP will attain its objectives. In order to fully do so, it
recommended a one year extension until the end of 2009, pending approval of the
UNDP/GEF phase 2 funding.
THE SECOND PHASE6
52) This proposal is for the Second Phase of the project following the satisfactory progress
as recorded by the Mid-Term Review and the satisfactory progress towards the trigger
indicators as in Annex J. It is a request to GEF CEO and GEF Council to approve the
second phase of funding and it represents the continuation and culmination of the work
carried out so far during Phase 1. It must be stressed that this is not a new proposal and
that it is necessitated by the funding arrangement agreed with GEF at the time of initial
project submission in 2001. As noted in the World Bank's PAD, the project was designed
with a phased approach because of funding constraints present in the GEF at the time.
While all the Bank GEF components were fully funded from the initial GEF allocation, the
6 Second phase as used by the project stakeholders including MTR consultants refers to the project lifetime subsequent to
the mid-term evaluation i.e starting with the 2007 PSC approval of the management response to the MTR. From a GEF
perspective, the second phase starts following submission, endorsement, approval and initiation of the project.
______________________________________
17
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
UNDP components required a second submission to the GEF. The entire project was
designed in an extensive process involving environmental experts from all nine NBI
countries and approved by their GEF focal points and Ministers of Water Resources,
which form the Nile Council of Ministers. Key areas that were addressed were selected
based on an intensive country by country assessment and basin-wide overlay reflected
in the TEA.
53) Therefore, although this Second Phase proposal is not a new project, it provides an
excellent opportunity to take stock of the project's achievements and strategy in the light
of changing circumstances within the Nile Basin. It also reflects the recommendations of
the MTR and ensures that the project is aligned with the strategic objectives for
International Waters in GEF-4. At the same time, the proposal remains within the
broader spirit of the initial document as negotiated and agreed by the riparian states, the
Implementing Agencies and the GEF.
54) Consultations and discussions on the necessary adjustments and fine-tuning
commenced soon after the MTR findings became available and have continued right into
the preparation of this proposal. As a result, the LogFrame has been reviewed and the
current version is in Annex B.2. The new LogFrame takes into account commitments
already made and agreements reached, Basin-wide, through working groups and similar
mechanisms which were created as part of the implementation effort during Phase 1.
The 2007 workplan approved and endorsed by the PSC and the IAs acts as a bridge
between phases 1 and 2 of UNDP/GEF funds, ensures the continuity of activities,
maintains the momentum gained in project implementation and ensures that the
environment is truthfully taken into consideration by the SAPs and broader SVP.
55) During the Second Phase, the NTEAP will maintain the original development objective
designed and agreed by the 9 riparians, namely, "to create more effective Basin-wide
stakeholder cooperation on transboundary environmental issues by supporting the
implementation of a subset of the actions prioritized by the Transboundary
Environmental Analysis" while striving towards the following focus:
To protect critical Nile Basin ecosystems from transboundary threats through the provision of
a strategic environmental framework and the engagement of stakeholders according to the
principles of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)
56) This Objective provides a sharper focus for NTEAP on aspects of the NBI spectrum that
are not being addressed by any of the other six SVP projects. It acknowledges that it is
not necessary for NTEAP to continue working in areas where there is already a specific
NBI project, and its limited resources are better spent covering those aspects of the Nile
"environment" not covered by other projects, namely "ecosystems", while still seeking to
work through the Strategic Environment Framework and the engagement of
stakeholders, according to IWRM principles.
57) While the broad themes of the components have remained the same, each component
has been refocused to bring it fully into line with GEF-4 IW Strategic Program 3. As is
evident, this proposal covers four out of the five original components because they are
the ones requiring GEF funding support. Funding for the fifth component, water quality
monitoring, is fully covered from the existing World Bank GEF grant; that component has
also been adjusted following the MTR, IA supervision missions and the emerging
situation in the basin. Such adjustments are reflected in the UNDP Prodoc, workplans,
budgets and to ensure full cooperation and synergies between the project's components.
58) The four Components covered by this proposal, their funding and their outcome
indicators are summarized below. This section further details how each component has
incorporated the recommendations of the MTR.
______________________________________
18
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
1 Regional and national institutions strengthened in addressing transboundary threats
to Nile ecosystem resources (23,412,356 GEF 1,360,937; co-fin 22,061,600)
· Transboundary EIA guidelines for use by NBI investment programmes developed
· Policy recommendations on Basin environment protection formulated and
submitted for consideration in at least two countries
· Environment function of the permanent institution defined through a consultative
process
· NBDF in 2008 defines the environmental issues and priorities for the Basin
· Nile Cooperative Framework negotiations concluded with specific references to
wetlands conservation (co-financed catalytic outcome)
2 Improved capacity of Nile Basin countries for integrated natural resources
management across relevant GEF focal areas (15,356,370 GEF 1,399,970; co-fin 13,956,400)
· Best practices addressing Nile environmental threats at community level documented
and replicated
3 Enhanced environmental education and public awareness targeting Nile Basin
transboundary issues (7,770,580 GEF 1,247,780; co-fin 6,522,800)
· Environmental campaigns and schools award programs adopted and institutionalized
at national levels in at least 6 NBI countries
4
Enhanced conservation and management of Nile Basin wetlands and their
biodiversity through application of IWRM approaches (15,485,530 GEF 2,007,530;
co-fin 13,478,000)
· Strategic approach to wetlands management in the basin with key actions,
steps and responsibilities developed
· Management plans for at least three selected wetlands developed and under
implementation
59) As noted above, the comprehensive framework comprising project objective, outcomes,
activities and indicators for the Second Phase is given in Annex B.2: Project Logical
Framework Matrix. Following is a brief summary of the full scope of each Component,
reference to the issues raised by the MTR for the component, and how these will be
addressed through the focus of activities during the Second Phase.
Component 1: Regional and national institutions strengthened in addressing
transboundary threats to Nile ecosystem resources
60) According to the PIP, this component aims to enable improved transboundary
cooperation on environmental management among and between Nile Basin countries
through improved communication, knowledge exchange and enhanced tools for
environmental management. The priority transboundary threats as identified by the TEA
include deforestation, soil erosion, poor sanitation, floods and droughts, loss and
destruction of ecosystems, threatened species and habitats and wetland degradation.
These define the scope of the NTEAP right across its Components.
61) This Component will focus on strengthening transbounday mechanisms such as
networks, and working groups, to promote transboundary cooperation in addressing the
above identified environmental threats. In following the advice of the MTR, during the
Second Phase, the Component will ensure coordination between the project
components, between NTEAP and other SVP projects, and with the SAPs; will
strengthen and ensure the sustainability of the already established networks; will
consolidate the work on national policy reform; facilitate high level consultations to define
the environment function of the future permanent institution; and, continue the dialogue
on the strategic environmental framework. These support and inform on-going
negotiations on the cooperative framework.
______________________________________
19
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
62) A large sub-component is devoted to supporting the development of a river basin model
to improve the understanding of river basin hydrology, its response and transboundary
implications of future development. The river basin model is implemented by the SVP
Water Resources Planning and Management Project in collaboration with NTEAP. This
work will continue and integrate the outcomes of the wetlands and WQ components.
63) In response to the MTR recommendations on knowledge management, activities will be
implemented on the production of information documents adapted to all levels of
stakeholders. Drawing on the technical components, NTEAP will join forces with other
SVP projects and focus its messages on the Nile, its ecology and its socio-economic
values. It will also extend the existing environmental information network to host
institutions and line agencies for e.g. by linking with their websites. The NTEAP page on
the NBI corporate website will be regularly updated, in line with IW:LEARN standards,
and an update of the information on the NRAK will be initiated. The knowledge base will
be further expanded by developing outreach materials from the Nile RAK in local
languages. Good practices will be documented, translated and published in both
electronic and printed formats. Selected sections of the TEA country reports will be
updated as baseline information to be used by the Nile Basin permanent institution. The
quarterly newsletter will continue to be published in English, French, Amharic, Arabic and
Kiswahili focussing on ecosystems health, livelihoods and environmental management.
64) During the Second Phase, emphasis will be placed on monitoring and evaluation and on
deriving lessons learnt and best practice. In particular, best practices arising from the
community based projects will be "marketed" to the SAPs for up-scaling, and to other
communities, national agencies and donors for replication. Based on the positive
experience over Phase I, participatory monitoring will be emphasized as a tool to
improve visibility and ownership at the national level. The NTEAP Monitoring and
Evaluation strategy will be updated during the inception period of the Second Phase to
reflect the results-based approach emphasized by the NBI. Evaluation of the
community-based activities will be undertaken at the end of 2007 and 2008. Information
on selected indicators will be compiled periodically to facilitate the preparation of the
project annual report and final report respectively. These will be used as inputs to the
independent terminal evaluation that will take place four months before project closure.
65) An important feature of this Component in the Second Phase will be the formulation and
implementation of a phase-out plan and the development of proposals towards the
uptake of NTEAP's results and best practices by the emerging permanent river basin
organization. A most important part of the plan is to ensure that NTEAP's foundation
work towards the permanent institution, its formulation of the appropriate policies and all
its other facilitation work will be handed over as a cohesive package. In doing so, the
NTEAP will facilitate a basin-wide consultative process to define the environment
function of the permanent institution. This will take place by September 2009 at the
latest. Other activities under this component will finish by the end of 2008 except for the
knowledge management sub-component which will go on until May 2009.
Component 2: Improved capacity of Nile Basin countries for integrated natural
resources management across relevant GEF focal areas (e.g. Biodiversity, Land
Degradation)
66) This component will continue to support pilot activities in geographic and thematic areas
of transboundary significance. It will demonstrate the feasibility of local level approaches
to reduce land degradation, conserve water, minimize pollution and protect biodiversity,
including mitigation actions for erosion, water use efficiency, non-point source pollution,
invasive water weeds, environmental awareness and NGO networking.
______________________________________
20
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
67) The Regional Micro-Grants Strategy which was developed in 2005 will be revised to
reflect the focus of the Second Phase which is wetlands sustainability and the principles
of IWRM. GEF funds will be devoted to funding pilot activities of a transboundary nature
addressing Wetlands issues in particular. Emphasis will be placed on encouraging
community-based projects that protect and preserve wetlands and discourage their
conversion into agricultural land. Moreover, the M-G national action plans will be
reviewed and updated to reflect this important convergence with the Wetlands
Component. The Micro-Grant Coordinators will be trained to help in guiding the design of
project proposals submitted by NGOs to focus on the wetlands theme. Support will also
be sought from the Environmental Awareness component to provide the communities
and coordinators with publicity materials and publications on wetlands, their importance,
best practices from successful pilots that address wetlands and sustainability strategies
and guidance on integrating successes from wetlands community-based activities into
local and national environmental plans.
68) The co-financing from the Nile Basin Trust Fund will address other transboundary
environmental threats across the GEF global areas of focus. The component aims at
expanding the focus of the Micro-projects to enhance the capacity of the Nile Basin
countries for integrated natural resource management in the two GEF areas of
Biodiversity and Land Degradation through pilot measures aimed in particular at
improving water use efficiency in the Basin. The Programme will eventually lead to
identifying viable approaches that could be upscaled and replicated. They could also be
used to support the development of policy options that may be adopted by the countries
on the basis of the field trials and demonstrations. The Micro-Grant Programme will also
contribute to stress reduction targets through reduced land degradation and habitats
enhancement. The Programme will also support the sustained livelihoods for the
communities by encouraging the integration of livelihood activities into the thematic
areas of focus. Ultimately, it will contribute to improved water use efficiency.
69) At least 10% of the projects will be targeting women NGOs and CBOs and ensuring
women's participation in the other 90%. In addition, a specific target of the new approved
projects will be set for cross-border projects in agreement with the PSC and constituency
of the micro-grants projects. Priority will be given to countries where facilitating factors
for cross-border cooperation are availed and/or where linkages with the SAPs are
possible and meaningful. Specific attention will be given to transboundary projects
addressing a common Nile threat7.
70) Allocations have been provided for conducting audits in addition to the allocations to
conduct an independent evaluation of the projects in each country. Best practices of and
synergies with the Small Grants Program will be sought and where possible, joint
evaluations will be undertaken. The emphasis in 2007 and 2008 will be on identifying
best practices and reviewing the lessons learnt from Phase 1. This has already been
started at the national level through country level consultations as indicated in the 2007
workplan in Annex M. A regional workshop will review the transboundary experiences
for discussion, consolidation and dissemination.
71) Many on-going projects have been designed to end in September 2008. Some new
projects will begin implementation in January 2008 upon receipt of the Second Phase
funds and the last instalments are expected to be awarded in December 2008.
72) In the second half of 2007, the Programme will seek to enhance its partnerships with the
private sector to introduce new innovative technologies into the projects and making use
of existing ones such as drip irrigation especially in semi-arid areas of Egypt and Sudan.
In doing so, special caution will be given to (i) strict criteria and guidelines for engaging
7 For the purpose of NTEAP, a transboundary issue is an environmental threat or challenge to sustainable development that is
shared by at least two Nile Basin countries. The principal transboundary issues are identified in the TEA Report.
______________________________________
21
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
with the private sector; (ii) establishing environmental and social safeguard policies and
(iii) considering an exceptional increase in the micro-grants ceilings to enable meaningful
projects (also applies to cross-border projects) as recommended by the MTR.
73) Overall, in its second phase, the selection of micro-grants will give due consideration to
the pilot nature of the projects and to testing different approaches to codify best practices
and impacts. This will enable the component to conclude with recommendations on
policy reform and on up-scaling and replication of tested approaches.
Component 3: Enhanced environmental education and public awareness targeting
Nile Basin transboundary issues
74) This EE&A component aims at increasing public awareness and understanding of the
community of interest and the common ecospace that the Nile creates. Activities
especially target the future generation in the basin countries. Interventions are planned
to act on three levels: (i) the general public, (ii) primary and secondary schools, (iii)
university environmental education. Environmental Education and awareness is a cross
cutting component working on creating awareness among all stakeholders of the impact
of Nile environmental threats and their impact on communities. Consequently the
component will work more closely with the Micro-Grants, Wetlands and Water Quality
components and the SAPs in capacity building of stakeholders through awareness
materials, participatory design, the printing and dissemination of outreach materials,
planning and execution of campaigns, and using case studies in the development of
school and university modules.
75) In noting that the ultimate aim of this outcome is a change in attitude towards the Nile
and its environment, the MTR acknowledged that a number of networks (journalists,
schools, universities) have been formed by NTEAP, but it felt that their sustainability is
not assured this must be addressed. The MTR advised that there is a need to nurture
those networks that have a future. It also noted that the impacts of public awareness
and understanding of Nile transboundary environmental issues have not yet been
assessed, and that there is a need to concentrate on the delivery of an environmental
education curriculum/course outline for schools; environment education materials need
to be shared among countries through the NPCs; and, NTEAP work plans should include
specific outputs for collaboration with specific SAP and SVP projects.
76) For the public awareness sub-component, the proposed Second Phase activities are
based on achievements obtained in Phase 1, the MTR recommendations and available
funds. National EE&A departments will be encouraged to plan and share good practices
through joint annual work planning of environmental agencies. Environmental
campaigns, such as the Nile Environment Week campaigns will be continued and
institutionalized into the environment agencies as one of the phase-out activities. The
established environmental journalists will be revitalized through the provision of
information through press releases and a press section will be included in the website
and updated frequently. National journalist networks will be established and supported
in all countries in collaboration with CBSI to ensure full complementarity and no overlaps;
support to the media network will also be linked with the Global Water Partnership's East
Africa office to ensure cost-effectiveness of all interventions.
77) The secondary schools sub-component will consolidate activities implemented in Phase
1 and initiate a phase-out strategy. Ten pilot projects will be run in each country with the
emphasis on information and experience sharing through the intranet and exchange
visits. Various e-learning materials will be developed and the Nile Basin Schools Awards
Scheme will be institutionalized within the Ministry of Education in col aboration with
environmental agencies.
______________________________________
22
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
78) The universities and research institutions networking sub-component places its
emphasis on the development of a university course and the implementation of a phase-
out strategy.
79) Most activities under this component will be wound down in the third quarter of 2008 with
the last activities ending at the end of 2008.
Component 4: Enhanced conservation and management of Nile Basin wetlands and
their biodiversity through application of IWRM approaches
80) The PIP saw this component as improving the understanding of wetlands function in
sustainable development and improving management at selected transboundary
wetlands sites. The ultimate aim of the component is the sustainability of wetlands.
81) Work on this component had only just started at the time of the MTR which noted that its
implementation should benefit from the experience gained by NTEAP over the past two
years. It advised that NTEAP should work with SAPs and accept specific
recommendations which should be treated as priority actions.
82) The immediate outcome of the Wetlands Component is to enhance cooperation and
capacity for conservation and management of wetlands and their biodiversity. This
outcome aims at improving the understanding of wetlands function in sustainable
development, and improving wetlands management at selected transboundary sites.
The activities are designed to build on nationally focused wetland and biodiversity
conservation and management initiatives in the Nile Basin, using networks of existing
centers of knowledge and experience to provide a transboundary overlay to complement
national wetlands conservation activities. The Component has three sub-components
namely: Enhancement of regional cooperation and capabilities; Better understanding and
broader awareness of the role of Wetlands in supporting sustainable development; and,
More effective management of wetlands and transboundary protected areas.
83) The first sub-component establishes the regional wetlands working group through which
collaboration will be the aim. The second sub-component deals with the advancement of
knowledge on wetlands and biodiversity and making the information available for
management purposes. This will be done through a mixture of research and gathering of
baseline information throughout the region at national level using national experts.
Acting on the advice of the MTR, the component has developed a plan of action to share
data with NELSAP, ENSAP and LVBC.
84) The third sub-component comprises two main thrusts - wetlands education, awareness
and training; and pilot initiatives in practical wetlands management. As part of the
practical work, environmental flow assessments will be carried out in selected wetland
areas where management plans will also be prepared. The work will include a rapid
assessment of wetland fauna, flora and socio-economic aspects. Transboundary
management plans will be prepared according to guidelines provided under the Ramsar
and the Biodiversity conventions. Sites that have been identified include the Sudd,
Dinder Aletash, Sio Malaba, Cyohoha, Kaya-Koboko and Mashar marshes. In addition,
an inventory of wetlands in the Basin will be carried out using a GIS platform. Wetlands
will be mapped and categorized and their size will be determined. The criteria for
classification will be determined regionally so that a harmonized approach will be applied
for the development of the Regional Wetlands Map. The principles of IWRM will be
applied both at the level of key wetland sites (i.e. balancing conservation and sustainable
use) and at the level of the Basin in a way that the hydrological model and DSS being
developed by the WRPMP, will enable the identification of necessary policy reforms and
other measures to secure minimum environmental flows for the wetlands. Finally, this
component will seek linkages with the SDBS, CBSI, WRPMP as well as with ENSAP and
NELSAP. It is important to note that a plan of action has already been negotiated and
agreed with the Lake Victoria Basin Commission.
______________________________________
23
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
85) Component 4 activities will be wound down in July 2009. The phase-out from the Second
Phase into the permanent institution will include regional dialogue focused on the future
management of the Basin's globally significant wetlands and ecosystems. The
component will work closely with the WRPM project and the Nile GW project, to ensure
that wetlands sustainability is adequately reflected in the RBM and DSS.
B) KEY INDICATORS, ASSUMPTIONS, AND RISKS
KEY INDICATORS
86) The project's components and key indicators correlate well with the goals and measures
that are the focus of the GEF-4 IW Strategy, as follows:
Table 5.
Components/Outcomes, key indicators and links to IW goals
COMPONENT /
OUTCOME
KEY INDICATORS AND TYPE
LINK/FIT TO IW GOALS
(and
descriptor)
1. Regional
Outcome Indicator 1 (process): Transboundary EIA guidelines for use by NBI
Collaboration by the
and national
investment programmes developed
countries of the Nile Basin
institutions
Comment: The idea is to build on what the East African Community has already
corresponds to the second
strengthened
initiated in developing transboundary EIA guidelines for use by SAPs
strategic objective of the
in addressing
Outcome Indicator 2 (process): Policy recommendations on Basin environment
IW focal area strategy for
transboundary
protection formulated and submitted for consideration in at least two countries
GEF-4: To play a catalytic
threats to Nile
Comment: The macro/sectoral policies study will be carried out by NBI countries. It
role in addressing
ecosystem
is hoped that these studies will provide information on policies that impact on the
transboundary water
resources
environment and enable recommendations for policy adjustments
concerns by assisting
Outcome Indicator 3 (process): Environment function of the NB permanent
countries to utilize the full
(seeks regional
institution defined through a consultative process
range of technical
collaboration
Comment: NTEAP will conduct consultations to define the environment function of
assistance, economic,
and strong
the permanent NBI institution and submit a proposal to the Nile-SEC for
financial, regulatory and
institutions as a
consideration by the TAC and COM
institutional reforms that
mechanism for
Outcome Indicator 4 (process): Nile Basin Development Forum in 2008 defines the
are needed
safeguarding
environmental issues and priorities for the Basin
ecosystems
Comment: NTEAP will formulate a Discussion Paper outlining issues and options,
from
for the Forum. Following the Forum, NTEAP will carry out further consultations and
It also contributes to the
transboundary
assessments, etc, leading to the definition of the environment function of the
balancing of competing
threats)
permanent institution.
water uses as targeted
Outcome indicator 5 (process): Nile Cooperative Framework negotiations
under Strategic
concluded with specific references to wetlands conservation (co-financed catalytic
Programme 3
outcome)
Comment: UNDP is co-financing the negotiations on the Nile Cooperative
Framework which has medium/high risks of non-completion within the timeline of
the GEF-funding. These two processes are mutually supportive and have clear
feedback loops.
Output 1 Indicators (process):
· PSC, PMU & nine national offices managed and functioning
· Process for the definition of the environment function of the NBI facilitated
· Functioning inter-ministerial committees arise out of the working groups in each
of the riparians
Output 2 Indicators (process):
· Quarterly newspapers published in 5 languages,
· Website and updated regularly
· Knowledge on wetlands, WQ, EE&A and microgrants codified and disseminated
· Good practices documented and disseminated
· Environmental knowledge base expanded
Output 3 Indicator (process): RBM developed & integrated in the Decision Support
System(DSS)
Output 4 Indicator (process): Transboundary guidelines for EIA produced
&submitted for approval
Output 5 Indicator (process): Policy recommendations approved by at least two
countries
Output 6 Indicators (process):
· Monthly, quarterly, semi annual, annual, field visits, surveys and review reports
produced and disseminated to respective partners
· M&E strategy updated as per Results Based System
2. Improved
Outcome Indicator (process) : Best practices addressing Nile environmental threats
The Micro-Grant
capacity of
at community level documented and replicated
Programme is in line with
Nile Basin
Comment: Capacities will be improved through the design and implementation of
the GEF's Council-
countries for
projects that will have the potential to become best practices and replicated within
approved mandate in that it
integrated
the Nile Basin or elsewhere. As the component may implement projects across the
places human activities at
natural
GEF focal areas, the proxy indicator will focus on land degradation and water
the centre of the
______________________________________
24
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
COMPONENT /
OUTCOME
KEY INDICATORS AND TYPE
LINK/FIT TO IW GOALS
(and
descriptor)
resources
management as the majority of projects fall into these two themes
transboundary system and
management
Output 1 Indicator (stress reduction, process) A minimum of 200 projects, of which
strives to influence
across
10% targeting women groups, implemented by communities across the basin
behaviour to achieve the
relevant GEF
Comment: 179 projects have been approved and are under implementation during
targeted benefits.
focal areas
Phase I. About 38 new projects are expected to be approved during Phase II. All
projects are considered viable at the design and approval phase. However, only
It is also closely linked to
(ultimate aim is
few of the 200 plus projects that would be implemented during both Phases would
GEF-4 IW Strategic
improved
produce best practices and have the potential to be replicated and up-scaled
Programme 3: integrated
integrated
Output 2 Indicator (process) : No of professional women and men trained on the
natural resources
management,
Nile environmental threats across the basin
management across focal
and capacity is
Comment: Training workshops, project based learning, communication materials
areas....priority is also
the means for
will be undertaken to increase capacities through diverse approaches. The
accorded to integrated
achieving it)
beneficiaries of these approaches will be as diversified and gender-balanced as
approaches across GEF
possible. Such undertakings will focus on the proposed mitigation activities,
focal areas where multiple
monitoring aspects, management of projects and deriving lessons learnt and best
benefits may be generated
practices
because of inter-linkages
such as with sustainable
forest management.
3. Enhanced
Outcome Indicator 1 (process): At least 8 universities in 6 NBI countries approved
Through this component
environmental
and adopted the environmental modules based on Nile environmental threats
and its contribution to
education and
Comment: The projects works with 18 universities 2 in each country. Adoption of
IW:LEARN the project will
public
modules takes along time but at least 8 universities are targeted
generate knowledge
awareness
Outcome Indicator 2 (process): Environmental campaigns and schools award
feeding into the GEF goals
targeting Nile
programs adopted and institutionalized at national levels in at least 6 NBI countries
of experience-sharing and
Basin
Comment: Campaigns are used as tool for awareness raising in addition to print
learning among projects,
transboundary
and electronic media. Institutionalization will make the tools sustainable and
the identification and
issues
transboundary
replication of good
Output 1 Indicators (process):
practices and the
(target is a high
· At least 2 environmental awareness programmes delivered in al least 5
development of knowledge
level of
countries
management tools to
environmental
· Awareness material on 5 selected Nile Environment threats produced and
capture good practices and
appreciation
disseminated across the basin
their replication.
and sensitivity
· Environmental campaigns and schools award programs adopted and
among the
institutionalized at national levels in at least 6 NBI countries
It will also address one of
general public
Comment: Two programmes include campaigns and awards scheme; Training on
the areas of global concern
on NB
awareness materials production were carried out and a manual produced
identified for GEF-4,
transboundary
Output 2 Indicator (process): At least 60 % of the participating schools adopt
namely Strategic
issues)
project based learning (environmental modules and school projects)
Programme 3 "Overuse
Comment: Project based learning includes - environment projects, e- learning
and conflicting uses of
materials and teachers capacity building. The project works with 10 schools in
water resources in surface
each country, due to slow uptake in certain countries it is expected that at least
and groundwater basins"
60% will adopt the PBL model
Output 3 Indicators ( process):
· At least 2 junior faculty or graduate students exchanged in at least 6 countries
· Training modules developed and adopted in at least 6 universities
Comment: 10 students have been exchanged, lecturers are expected to have joint
projects to enhance cooperation; A regional framework has been developed and
an adoption process initiated
4. Enhanced
Outcome Indicators (process):
In addressing interlinked
conservation
· Strategic approach to wetlands management in the basin with key actions,
transboundary concerns as
and
steps and responsibilities developed
part of the ecosystem
management
· Management plans for at least three selected wetlands developed and under
approach, the project will
of Nile Basin
implementation
create benefits also for the
wetlands and
Output 1 Indicators (process):
biodiversity focal area
their
· One network at regional level established and functioning
biodiversity
· National level wetlands management networks established and functioning in at
In its use of the IWRM, it
through
least 5 countries
links up strongly with
application of
· Training program on wetlands management developed in 2 languages
Strategic Programme 3 -
IWRM
Output 2 Indicators (process):
Balancing overuse and
approaches
· Ecological and socio-economic studies on wetland roles in sustainable
conflicting uses of water
development conducted. Study completed in the two SAP regions
resources in transboundary
(the ultimate
· National baseline surveys carried out and written up
surface and groundwater
aim is the
Output 3 Indicators (process):
basins;
sustainability of
· Over 50 officers from across the Basin, trained in wetlands management
There is also a strong link
wetlands and
·
with the Biodiversity focal
their
Awareness programmes conducted in nine NBI countries
area which has been
biodiversity,
Output 4 Indicators (process):
identified as a desirable
with IWRM
· Environmental flow assessments carried out in at least three selected wetland
element under the IW
providing the
sites
Strategic Programmes for
framework for
· Transboundary wetlands management plans prepared for at least 2 selected
GEF-4.
that)
sites
· Wetlands inventory carried out and the results mapped on a GIS platform
______________________________________
25
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
RISKS
87) The greater number of risks associated with the project are of an operational type and
they are considered to be of medium to low rating. On the other hand, the political risks
faced by the project, while fewer in number, are rated medium to high and are more
significant. The operational type risks are considered as within the control of project
management and measures have been put in place to mitigate them. The political risks
are beyond the ability of the project to control and all the project can do is put in place
mechanisms and systems that will reduce the risk potential and mollify its effects on the
project. As part of the inception activities for the Second Phase, project management
will, with the support of the IAs and the PSC, develop and adopt a risk management plan
underpinned by enhanced monitoring of the situation. Management responses could
include strengthened supervision with more field visits and more frequent reporting;
adjustments to the project monitoring strategy; changes to implementation
arrangements; changes in budget allocation; temporary interruption of activities.
88) Possible project risks and risk mitigation measures are summarized in the table below.
Table 6.
Risks and mitigation measures
RISK
RISK
RISK
RISK MONITORING AND RESPONSE (MITIGATION)
TYPE
RATING
Commitment Political Medium
to
Many countries in the region are facing insecurity and contention,
of the Nile
High
political uncertainty, extreme poverty, diseases, etc. These conditions
Basin
threaten a long-term project such as NTEAP aimed at creating an
countries
enabling environment on a regional basis. This and other NBI projects
seek to build trust and mutual support among the Nile Basin countries.
The emphasis on regional cooperation, the collaborative efforts that are
part of project design, and the regional ownership that is already
showing, are powerful instruments for achieving the project's objectives.
They will also contribute towards the building of longer term trust and
understanding. By adopting a dual approach of regional facilitation
coupled with tangible pilot demonstration projects, the project has so far
succeeded in curbing this potential risk and this approach will continue
as will the careful monitoring of the situation.
Institutional Operational
Medium
The project depends on the capability of government institutions and
leadership
staff to provide visionary leadership. This may be limited where there
are few or no incentives for staff, little appreciation of research and
innovation and a weak support infrastructure. The project has sought
visionary leadership within, and not outside, the boundaries of the Nile
Basin and through study tours, exchange visits and consultations it has
exposed leaders to good practice and enhanced institutional capacity
and leadership to the benefit of project activities. An overarching
principle that lends to commitment in this area is the ability of the
countries and specifically the host institutions to integrate the activities of
NTEAP into their national planning process. This will contribute to
mitigating this risk by ensuring that the activities are given the necessary
recognition and are implemented in a timely manner. It will also
contribute to national ownership.
Regional
Operational
Medium
Effective implementation of the SVP projects has been a challenge and
coordination
NTEAP has not been an exception. The strong Project Management
capacity
Unit together with the build-up of capacity and capabilities of the NBI
institutions has guarded against this risk and the effort wil continue,
responding to needs as they arise.
National
Operational
Low
The project has been designed to strengthen institutional and human
institutional
resources capacity in the recipient countries. Component 1.1 "Regional
capacity
Capacity Building for Transboundary Environmental Management" is
specifically designed to develop a culture of good practice within national
environmental management institutions. Phase 1 has contributed to
overcoming low capacity and in the main it has been successful. The
situation will be closely monitored and the effort adjusted accordingly.
Insecurity
Political Medium
to
Seven of the ten countries in the Nile region are at present, or have
and conflict
High
recently been, involved in internal or external conflict. This brings both
operational and political risks to a process and a project of this size.
However, leaders in the Nile Basin countries have made it clear that they
______________________________________
26
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
RISK
RISK
RISK
RISK MONITORING AND RESPONSE (MITIGATION)
TYPE
RATING
see the NBI as a tremendous opportunity to achieve cooperation,
economic exchange and eventual y greater integration and
interdependence, which can yield high returns in terms of growth, food
security, sustainable development and peace. The Implementing
Agencies will continue to nurture this positive attitude towards the
project. UNDP and the Bank have been involved in the Nile region since
1995 and 1997 respectively, and are confident of their ability to deliver
this GEF project, as wel as the larger NBI, in an efficient and effective
manner.
Leadership
Operational
Low
The MTR identified a potential predicament for the project it needed to
vs.
maintain its leading role and take initiatives, guiding the NBI towards
Participation
mainstreaming environment; but it also needed to encourage a
and
participatory approach to the implementation and management of the
Ownership
project's activities. To reduce the risk of sacrificing one target for the
other, the project will monitor and assess the readiness of the
beneficiaries to implement programmed tasks having provided the
leadership necessary to adopt a programme of work, the project will
guide the beneficiaries and assist them with implementation through the
provision of information, identifying options and helping them reach a
decision. Project personnel wil guide the beneficiaries towards the
project's goal by reconciling their roles of manager and catalyst.
Sustainabilit Strategic
Medium
While the project accepts that the expected change of approach to
y of project
management of the Nile Basin environment by the riparians, is a long
products
term target, it must ensure that the progress that it will have made
towards this goal by the time it is wound up, is not lost. In order to guard
against such waste, the project will be implementing an extensive phase-
out/phase-in strategy through which it will prepare for its functions,
achievements, networks and other gains and benefits to be taken over
and assimilated as seamlessly as possible by more permanent
institutions. This process has already started.
2 COUNTRY
OWNERSHIP
A)
COUNTRY ELIGIBILITY
89) The participating countries, namely Burundi, D.R. Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya,
Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda, are eligible for GEF assistance under para 9(b)
of the GEF Instrument and for UNDP technical assistance.
90) Eight of the nine countries are sub-Saharan countries considered as LDCs. All riparians
have committed themselves to work together for the sustainable development of the Nile
Basin and are in the process of concluding a legal and institutional cooperative
framework and the establishment of a permanent Nile Basin institution. These
considerations are evidence of the eligibility of NBI countries which neatly fall under the
GEF IW Strategic Objective 1: "To foster international, multi-state cooperation on priority
transboundary water concerns through more comprehensive, ecosystem-based
approaches to management", and Strategic Objective 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."
91) In addition, the Nile Basin countries have demonstrated their commitment to global
moves towards environmental management by signing and ratifying the Rio Conventions
as well as the Ramsar Convention as follows:
______________________________________
27
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
Table 7.
Ratification of the Rio and Ramsar Conventions by the riparians
COUNTRY
CBD
FCCC
CCD
Ramsar
Burundi 1997
1997
1997
2002
D R Congo
1996
1996
1997
1996
Egypt 1994
1994
1995
2006
Ethiopia 1994
1994
1997
-
Kenya 1994
1994
1997
1986
Rwanda 1994
1998
1998
1990
Sudan 1995
1993
1995
1995
Tanzania 1996
1996
1997
1988
Uganda 1993
1993
1997
2000
B) COUNTRY DRIVENNESS
92) The project has been going for three years with the full support and active participation of
all nine countries at all levels ranging from inter-ministerial groups to grassroots
communities country ownership is not in question.
93) These countries have committed themselves to working together for the sustainable
development of the Nile Basin. Their combined contribution in cash and in kind to the
NBI and its seven SVP projects and SAPs has been estimated to total US$27,556,202
since 2001 and with UNDP assistance they are in the process of concluding a legal and
institutional cooperation framework and are planning to establish a permanent Nile Basin
institution. The transitional NBI institutional structure, comprising the Nile-Council of
Ministers and the Nile-TAC, supported by the Nile-Sec (see Figure 1 below), provides
overall policy guidance to the project and ensures regional as well as inter-sectoral
integration of the entire Shared Vision Programme of which NTEAP is one of seven
projects. The NTEAP reports to a Project Steering Committee composed of the directors
of environment agencies of the NBI countries, which provides strategic guidance to the
project. The Project Management Unit in Khartoum and the national coordination offices
in each riparian country are run by practitioners from participating countries. Working
groups composed of national experts have been established and are functioning in the
areas of environment education, water quality monitoring and wetlands and biodiversity
conservation. These working groups plan and implement activities both at national and
regional levels. This institutional set up and arrangement ensures that NTEAP is
responding to country priorities and results in full ownership of the project by participating
countries.
94) The Nile riparian countries have made a conscious decision to self-finance the recurrent
running costs of the regional Secretariat and they contribute an annual amount
(combined total of US$315,000) to the budget of the Secretariat. This decision was
taken as an assertion of true ownership and control of the process.
95) During Phase 1 of NTEAP, true commitment and high level political support were
demonstrated by the participating countries. The NTEAP was launched in 2004 by the
president of Sudan, the presidents of Uganda and Burundi paid visits to NTEAP projects,
and ministers of water affairs and environment in participating countries have officiated
at numerous meetings of NTEAP and visited various NTEAP projects. This high level
commitment and ownership of NTEAP activities continue and will be consolidated at the
beginning of the Second Phase when the riparian countries (through their respective
NPCs) will be invited to note the extent to which the NBI and the NTEAP in particular
respond to the priority needs as identified by the countries.
______________________________________
28
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
Figure 1: Overview of the basin-wide Shared Vision Programme
The SVP Program
Implementation Approach
Nile-COM
Policy level
Nile-TAC
Nile-SEC
PMU -
Benefit Sharing / Integration
Regional
- Integration & Monitoring
Level
- Development scenarios, Private Sector
engagem ent
WRM
Conf Bldg
Environ
Power Trade
Agricul.
Appl. Training
-IW RM Policy
- Public inform ation
-Power Forum
-Demontstration/Pilots
Network of Training
Strategic framework &
-& Planning
- Stakeholder
-Power development
-Regional Consult.
Institutes
Transboundary Action
-Communic., info. &
Involvem ent
-options
-Training
Curriculum Develop.
analysis platform
Special Basin-wide
W orking Groups, ad hoc
National
National NBI Office
Level
(one per country; interministerial linkage)
Conf Bldg
Environ
Power
Agricul
WRM
Training
3
PROGRAM POLICY AND CONFORMITY
A)
FIT TO GEF FOCAL AREA STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND OPERATIONAL PROGRAM8
96) The Nile Basin is a resource of truly global significance. The Nile is the longest river in
the world. It runs across the borders of ten African countries (population of the Basin is
160 million and population of the NBI countries is 300 million) traversing numerous sites
of cultural, historical and ecological significance. It sustains valuable wetlands and
riverine habitats together with their biological diversity and provides a number of
ecosystem services and functions such as nutrient transport and cycling, and the
mitigation of floods and droughts.
97) Cooperative work on the Nile, as fostered by the Nile Basin Initiative, corresponds to
both of the Strategic Objectives of the IW focal area strategy for GEF-4: Strategic
Objective 1: To foster international, multi-state cooperation on priority transboundary
water concerns through more comprehensive, ecosystem-based approaches to
management, and Strategic Objective 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.
98) The vision of the Nile Basin Initiative is: "To achieve sustainable socio-economic
development through the equitable utilization of, and benefit from, the common Nile
Basin resources" and the NBI is globally recognized as a pioneer in reaching high level
multi-country political agreement for river basin management focused on sharing the
myriad benefits that water can provide, rather than the water itself. Within the framework
8 This project was designed and formulated in the late 1990s and when it was approved for GEF funding it satisfied the
requirements under GEF-3 for IW projects. Since it started implementation in 2004, and as it will run for five years, it spans two
cycles of the GEF. In preparing this proposal for the second phase of funding, all efforts are made to conform to the
requirements of GEF-4 while safeguarding the investments already made in the three years of implementation. These
investments were intended to satisfy the requirements of GEF-3 and were also the basis of other donor support to the project.
______________________________________
29
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
of this vision, riparians and development partners have agreed on a number of priority
development areas including: agriculture development, power and trade, navigation and
energy production.
99) It is within the NBI context that the Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Project
(NTEAP) was developed as the environment pillar of the sustainable development of the
Nile Basin. Core funding of NTEAP was 60% from GEF sources and when considered
on its own, NTEAP may not be seen as cost effective. However, when considered within
its rightful context in the NBI, NTEAP is a very cost effective way of injecting environment
into all interventions on the ground, all Basin-wide policies, strategic plans, etc
100)
It also contributes to the Biodiversity Focal Area through its work on wetlands and
ecosystems in that it creates an enabling environment for the effective management of
both protected areas within sustainable protected area systems and of productive
wetland landscapes in which biodiversity considerations have been integrated.
101)
The scope of the project spans the entire Nile Basin and activities are targeted at
multicountry, national interministerial, and subnational/community levels. The project
also addresses the identified global concern of overuse and conflicting uses of water
resources in the globally significant Nile Basin which comes within the scope of IW
Strategic Programme 3.
102)
The project will also contribute to the implementation of IWRM as advocated by the
global community through the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation and this is expected
to lead to improved water security for communities, reduce conflicts among states,
improve ecological flows in basins, and enhance resilience to fluctuating climatic
regimes. Over time, this intervention is expected to contribute to improved community
livelihoods, increased crop yields, improved environmental flows, and reduced health
risks, on a sustainable basis.
103)
The project fits within the scope of work that GEF has pledged to support, namely
the balancing of conflicting/competing water uses through application of IWRM,
enhanced functioning of joint management institutions; integrated natural resources
management across focal areas; improved flow regimes from infrastructure developed;
protected water supplies; and increased resilience to fluctuating climatic regimes.
104)
Other indicators identified for Strategic program 3 which will be targeted by the
project include the setting up of national inter-ministry committees, ministerially-agreed
action programmes and contribute to the adoption of national water resource and IWRM
reforms/policies with evaluations to show their effectiveness. Similar targets will be
pursued by the project for regional/basin agreements and ensuring environment
functions are instituted within the permanent Nile Basin institution.
105)
In terms of broader global commitments, the project supports the countries in working
towards their MDGs with a specific focus on MDG-1 by improving water use efficiency.
It also addresses MDG-3 since it promotes gender equality and the empowerment of
women; for example the micro-grants component has allocated a minimum quota for
projects targeting women and the project has adopted innovative measures to ensure
women's participation in national and regional meetings conducted in the framework of
the project9. The project contributes to MDG-7 by assisting national environmental
agencies to integrate environment into development agendas, and MDG-8 by bringing
together nine countries, several donors and international organizations.
9 When issuing an invitation the project makes it clear that in case more than one delegate are allowed, if a woman is not part
of the delegation, then only one person is entitled to participate.
______________________________________
30
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
B) SUSTAINABILITY (INCLUDING FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY)
106)
A number of factors will contribute to the sustainability of the benefits of NTEAP. The
most important aspect underpinning the sustainability of the project is that it is set within
a much larger initiative, the NBI, to which the governments of the Nile countries have
committed themselves at the highest level. The governments see the NBI as offering the
possibility of moving beyond isolated planning and unilateral actions towards cooperative
development planning for the utilization of this transboundary resource, seeking win-win
opportunities in the spirit of benefit sharing. The GEF project is set to benefit from this
strong commitment to the NBI. While intangible and unquantifiable, this commitment is
the most important element for the long-term sustainability of the NTEAP benefits.
107)
A distinguishing feature of the way NTEAP is being implemented is the voluntary
nature of those participating in working groups, advisory teams, and similar coordination
mechanisms. These stakeholders, which number around 2000 spread across the Basin
in the nine participating countries, get no personal gain from their participation, and do so
because of their genuine commitment to the work of NTEAP. This commitment is
expected to continue well beyond the NTEAP closedown and augurs wel for the
sustainability of its benefits.
108)
As noted above, the Nile riparian countries have agreed to cover the recurrent
running costs of the Nile Secretariat which is the precursor for a permanent Basin
organization, through annual contributions towards its operations. This decision has
been taken as a sign of true ownership and control of the process. It is also an indication
of financial sustainability which is particularly important for those project components
which will entail recurring costs past the life-span of the project and would be considered
as core environmental function of a potential permanent river basin organization. The
Nile Sec has already initiated a process of Institutional strengthening for a smooth
transition towards a permanent institution, a process giving due attention to NTEAP.
109)
Sustainability of project benefits will also depend on the approach adopted during
project implementation and the feeling of ownership that it cultivates. Through its
commitment to a meaningful participatory process, every effort has been made to ensure
that riparian country stakeholders genuinely "own" the project and this augurs well for its
sustainability.
110)
Another important factor which will influence sustainability is whether the project
outcomes will indeed result in tangible benefits for local communities. Because of its
nature, the initial beneficiaries of the project are selected government agencies and
ministries, fol owed by NGOs and local communities. In order to ensure long-term
sustainability, the project will seek to ensure that its benefits reach local farmers, NGOs
and the private sector.
111)
The project is also responsible for the setting up of a number of working groups and
part of their brief is the identification of cost-effective mechanisms to sustain the activity
and involvement of these working groups in the NBI after the NTEAP has ended.
112)
Finally, project sustainability will depend on maintaining and strengthening the
growing cooperation among the Nile Basin countries. There is a strong commitment and
a clear understanding that so much has been invested already that the NBI, including the
present project, must succeed for the process to move forward. Regional commitment to
the process is high, with the specifics of cooperation anchored in the Policy Guidelines
endorsed by the Nile Council of Ministers.
______________________________________
31
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
C) REPLICABILITY
113)
The NTEAP has invested a lot of energy during Phase 1 into setting up networks at
various levels and in various sectors throughout the Basin. This will continue, but due to
limited resources, there are limits to the reach of the project. In recognition of this, and in
the hope that its successful modalities, its tested pilots, its lessons learnt and its
experience gained can continue to be applied within and beyond the Nile Basin after it
ends, the project will take steps to record and disseminate its experiences and results.
114)
With the help of the IW:LEARN Programme, the project will contribute to the GEF
goals of experience-sharing and learning among projects and the identification and
replication of good practices. It will contribute to the development of knowledge
management tools to capture good practices and lead to their replication.
115)
The project has improved its communication and knowledge sharing tools. It is part
of the NBI communication network, linked through the nilebasin.org and nileteap.org
domains through efficient electronic connections for all project personnel. The
production of knowledge/ education/ awareness tools has been enhanced through the
acquisition of the necessary equipment. And Global Positioning System (GPS) sets
have been provided for all NPCs for acquiring georeferenced information on project
activities. National level good practices compilation workshops have been conducted in
each of the NBI countries and these will be followed by regional level compilation of good
practices on the basis of the pilot field level projects.
116)
NTEAP has established links with the SAPs, both NELSAP and ENSAP. Joint areas
of collaboration have been elaborated and it is expected that the Water Quality
Operational Manuals and the Nile Transboundary Water Quality Monitoring Strategy, the
Micro-Grants and other initiatives that have been developed successfully at the regional
level, will be replicated and applied at the sub-Basin levels with the support of the SAPs.
Similar collaboration has also been forged with the LVBC under which the LVEMP Phase
2 will be operating. These linkages will ensure both the replicability and sustainability of
NTEAP's activities and its recognized Best Practices at the sub-regional level.
117)
One particularly successful initiative from Phase 1 that will be "marketed" for
replication through a publication in hard and soft copy as well as through training
workshops, is the Manual for Micro-Grant Monitoring that was developed by the project.
In view of the importance of the monitoring and evaluation of Micro-Grants initiatives,
project personnel collaborated on the joint development of this manual which focuses on
providing basic monitoring tools and formats to enable the Micro-Grant Coordinators and
implementing NGOs to design monitoring systems to track progress and success with
their projects. The GEF Small Grants Programme and NTEAP's Micro-Grants
Programme have demonstrated excel ent collaboration over the years and have
recorded the lessons learned. These will be made available on the SGP website, NBI
website and IW LEARN website.
118)
Opening up to and contributing to the broader International Waters community has
been a characteristic of NTEAP in its first 3 years of implementation and will be
continued during the second phase as allowed by financial considerations. While the
project website is designed in accordance with the corporate image of the NBI, it will
internalize and reflect guidance provided by IW:LEARN for GEF IW projects.
Furthermore, it will contribute to experience notes reflecting on project implementation
and experiences that might be useful for upcoming projects supported by GEF. Finally,
the project will ful y participate at the International Waters Conference in 2007, but its
participation will probably be wound down at the next IWC in 2009. In the meantime, the
project will contribute to and participate in Pan-african processes to help further
transboundary water resource management and the delivery of expected benefits.
______________________________________
32
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
Table 8.
Indicative budget for activities that will facilitate replication
BUDGET US$
TYPE OF REPLICATION ACTIVITY
GEF & Co-finance
Workshops on consolidation of good practice
120,000
Sharing experiences through participation in regional and
48,050
international conferences and similar events
Projects based learning
170,000
Publication and distribution of handbooks/manuals
200,000
Participation of African RBOs in NBDF
150,000
ICT assistance with IW:LEARN so the website can be
5,000
compatible
TOTAL
693,050
D) STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT
119)
Participation by a wide range of stakeholders has been a characteristic of the NTEAP
right from the formulation stages, through the Transboundary Environmental
Assessment, and on to the implementation stages of the project.
120)
The involvement and participation of stakeholders is part of the project design for
particular components with the ultimate aim of enhancing stakeholder involvement in
environmental management in general. The basin-wide Working Groups that have been
set up to coordinate each of the project components include a range of stakeholder
representatives and they have worked well they will continue into the Second Phase.
Local level stakeholders, especially communities and smal er NGOs, have been targeted
as beneficiaries of the Micro-Grant Fund and this will continue. The remarkable efforts in
approving more than 170 projects (between Micro-Grants, school projects and NEPs) by
national experts working voluntarily for long hours reflects a high level of commitment
and ownership. In many cases, these experts joined the project staff in long monitoring
visits where they provided their technical inputs to communities and local government
officials. A wide range of stakeholders is also expected to be involved in and benefit
from the information and knowledge management component as well as the
environmental education and awareness programme. Representatives of all major
stakeholder groups are also provided with opportunities to participate in monitoring and
evaluating the project.
121)
The NTEAP has at the outset adopted as its core implementation modality
consultation, coordination and collaboration with relevant partners, sister projects and
national and international Nile Basin stakeholders. Recognizing the value of bringing
parliamentarians into the Nile discourse, the NTEAP organized an awareness workshop
for the parliamentarians of NBI countries in 2006 in collaboration with the CBSI. It is
planned to follow this by national level parliamentarian awareness workshops and
dialogue. The NBI has signed a MoU with the International Water Management Institute
(IWMI) to initiate collaborative studies. As a follow up of this MoU, the NTEAP has
conducted consultations with IWMI and has identified areas of study which will be
beneficial and supportive in the achievements of NTEAP's objectives. NTEAP managed
to secure extra budgetary resources from the Canadian Space Agency under the TIGER
initiative to produce and disseminate an interactive awareness CD-ROM on the Nile
which is now being used by numerous users all across the Basin. A French version of
NRAK was launched recently at a Nile Day ceremony in Kigali, Rwanda and the
production of an Arabic version has also been initiated. NTEAP collaborates with the
Applied Training Project of NBI, the UNESCO Chair in Water Resources of Sudan to
organize training in IWRM for NBI stakeholders. The Nile 2002 Conference series were
conducted annually during 1992-2002, and were instrumental in building trust and
confidence among Nile riparians. These are now continuing as a biennial Nile Basin
Development Forum. NTEAP has participated actively in the 2006 NBDF and is currently
______________________________________
33
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
entrusted to organize the NBDF 2008 for which the theme is "Environmental
Management for Peace and Regional Cooperation in the Nile Basin"; this is the
opportunity for the NBI to share and transfer its knowledge with other Sahelian basin
organizations who will be invited to participate in NBDF. NTEAP has initiated
consultation with the Lake Victoria Basin Commission on conducting collaborative
studies regarding a wetlands inventory of the Nile Equatorial Lakes region.
122)
In applying IWRM principles at the Basin level, NTEAP will benefit from two
undertakings of the SVP-C in terms of interministerial coordination and collaboration:
a. At a national level: the TAC members are convening Nile coordination meetings
in collaboration with the national coordinators of the CBSI. NTEAP NPCs,
Microgrant Coordinators and PSC members are full-fledge participants in such
meetings and can therefore be exposed to and liaise with PSC members of other
SVPs.
b. Nile Basin coordination offices: headed by the TAC and staffed by CBSI they
ensure NBI projects and endeavours are coordinated at a national level.
E) MONITORING AND EVALUATION
123)
Project monitoring and evaluation has been conducted in accordance with
established UNDP and GEF procedures throughout Phase 1, by the project team, led for
this task by the M&E Lead Specialist, with support from UNDP/GEF and UNOPS. A
basin-wide Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy and Action Plan, based on concepts of
adaptive management, which was developed and has been in place throughout Phase 1,
is attached as Annex K. The Plan served to monitor both project management
performance as well as project impact linking the two processes to ensure that the
findings of internal project monitoring activities are applied in the implementation
approach of the project (adaptive management) so as to achieve the targeted impacts.
On the other hand, monitoring of the progress towards the targeted outcomes and
impacts of the project served to inform project management and the PSC about those
aspects of the project which required boosting. The NTEAP M&E Strategy and Action
Plan includes reporting formats, performance indicators, a standard methodology for
data collection and analysis, and capacity building in monitoring and evaluation.
124)
The original Logical Framework Matrix from the GEF Project Brief has provided the
performance and impact indicators for project implementation along with their
corresponding means of verification. The indicators also provide the framework for
reporting in Annual APR/PIRs. Following the MTR and in order to reflect changing
circumstances and changes in GEF requirements, the LogFrame has been refocused for
the Second Phase (Annex B contains both the original and the refocused LogFrames);
given that the certain components e.g. component 5 receive funding from the
WB/GEF fund as carry over from the first phase.
125)
The Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy and Action Plan, including budget, will be
reviewed, presented and finalized by the M&E Lead Specialist as part of the inception
activities for the Second Phase following a collective fine-tuning of indicators, means of
verification, and the full definition of project staff M&E responsibilities. The Plan will be
linked to the LogFrame Matrix through its reference to indicators/targets for project
implementation and for results (outcomes and impact). It will identify reviews and
evaluations which will be undertaken at the project component level, using the
benchmarks established at the time of the MTR.
126)
By linking the indicators selected for the project to the GEF-4 IW Strategy (see table
in Section 1.B), and the "Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators for GEF International
Waters Projects", the NTEAP M&E Plan will provide an assessment of progress towards
the GEF indicators as well.
______________________________________
34
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
127)
The following M&E elements which have been used during Phase 1 will be continued
during the Second Phase:
128)
Inception period: Since the NTEAP has been going for three years and this is
merely the start of the Second Phase, a formal Inception Workshop will not be required.
However, a special PSC meeting is envisaged to launch the Second Phase. The
meeting will review/confirm the M&E Plan among other things.
129)
Day to day monitoring of implementation progress: will remain the responsibility
of the Regional Project Manager (RPM) based on the project's Annual Work Plan and its
indicators.
130)
Periodic monitoring of implementation progress: will be undertaken by UNDP
and UNOPS through quarterly meetings with the RPM, and based on monthly and half-
yearly reports produced by the Project Management Unit (PMU).
131)
Annual Monitoring: will continue as before through the Project Steering Committee
process. The PIR will be used as one of the basic documents for discussions in the PSC
meetings. The RPM will present the PIR to the PSC/TPR, highlighting policy issues and
recommendations for the decision of the PSC participants.
132)
External Evaluations: An independent mid-term review (MTR) has been carried out
(see Section 1.A) and its findings have been used in the formulation of this proposal for
the Second Phase of NTEAP. The management response to the MTR is in Annex L. A
terminal evaluation is also planned just prior to conclusion, pursuant to GEF / UNDP
monitoring and evaluation guidance.
133)
Annual evaluations of the Micro-Grants Programme: Independent evaluations of
the Micro-Grant Programme will be conducted at the national level once a year during
the second phase.
134)
Final Project Meeting: This meeting, to be held during the last three months of the
project, will bring together all the project proponents from the nine countries, including
the broader NBI regional structures such as the TAC, WRPMP, NTEAP, SVP-C and
SAPs. They will not tackle any technical issues but will review and reach consensus on
the project's effectiveness in delivering its results. The outcome of this meeting will
comprise the main input to the Project Terminal Report.
135)
Project Terminal Report: During the last three months of the project the team will
draft a Project Terminal Report for discussion at the Final Project Meeting. Following this
meeting, the PMU will amend and finalize the Project Terminal Report, summarizing all
activities, achievements and outputs of the Project, lessons learnt, objectives met or not
achieved, structures and systems implemented, etc. This report will serve as the
definitive statement of the Project's activities during its lifetime covering the entire project
and sources of funds. It will also lay out recommendations for any further steps that may
need to be taken to ensure sustainability and replicability of the Project's activities.
136)
The table below, which will be reviewed and refined during the inception period as
mentioned above, provides a summary of the M&E activities planned for the Second
Phase of NTEAP, together with their indicative budgetary allocations.
______________________________________
35
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
Table 9.
Highlights of Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and corresponding Budget
BUDGET US$
TYPE OF M&E ACTIVITY
RESPONSIBLE PARTIES
(excluding project
TIME FRAME
staff time)
Relevance and effectiveness
· PMU
Within one month of
survey for Phase 1
·
None
Key stakeholders
Second Phase start up
Special "inception" meeting of
· PMU
Within one month of
the PSC
· PSC
Second Phase start up
· UNDP/GEF
·
US$60,000
WB
· NBTF representative
· UNOPS
Review current M&E Strategy
· M&E LS with PMU
Immediately following PSC
& Action Plan
· NBI (Sec and TAC)
meeting
·
None
UNDP/GEF
· WB
APR/PIR
· PMU
Annually
· UNDP/GEF
None
· UNOPS
Project Steering Committee
· PSC members as
At least once a year
(PSC) Meetings / TPR
designated
meetings
· PMU
· UNDP/GEF
·
US$60,000
WB
· NBTF representative
· UNOPS
· Invited guests
Independent evaluation of the
· MGLS
During the last quarters of
Micro-Grants Programme
· M&E LS
2007 and 2008
·
US$60,000
MGCs
· SGP as necessary
Participatory monitoring
· M&E LS
During 2008
· NPCs
US$80,000
· Contractors
Compile and distribute lessons
· M&E LS
Early 2008
learnt and best practice
· Contractors
US$35,600
· KM specialist
Final external evaluation
· PMU
4 months from the end of
· UNDP/GEF
project implementation
· WB
US$71,200
· External Consultants
(i.e. evaluation team)
Final Project Meeting
· PMU
During final 3 months
· PSC
· NBI
·
US$60,000
UNDP/GEF
· WB
· Stakeholders
Final project reports (technical
· PMU
During the final 3 months
& financial)
· UNOPS
None
· UNDP/GEF
TOTAL INDICATIVE COST
(excluding project team staff time and UNDP staff and travel
US$426,800
expenses)
______________________________________
36
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
4 FINANCING
A) PROJECT COSTS AND CO-FINANCING
137)
According to the GEF Project Brief, when approved by the GEF and the
Governments in 2001, the NTEAP had a total budget of US$110.59 million. Of this, GEF
agreed to provide US$26.49 million, and the balance of US$84.1 million was to be
provided through co-funding arrangements in cash and in kind. This amounted to a co-
funding ratio of approximately 3:1.
138)
The GEF contribution comprised funds to two implementing agencies, namely the
World Bank (US$8.0 million) and UNDP (US$18.49 million). Funds for the components
to be covered by the World Bank were approved for the full five year duration; funds for
the UNDP components were split into two phases with US$8.8 million being available for
the first phase and US$9.69 million to become available in a second phase following
resubmission of the project proposal to follow the MTR.
139)
Due to reviews and adjustments to the GEF funding allocations, the amount available
for the second phaed was reduced to US$6.7 million. While this penalized the project, it
enhanced the co-funding ratio which is now calculated as 4:1 over the whole 5-year
project. This results because while the co-funding amount has remained more or less
the same, the GEF contribution has been reduced by 10% overall (27% of the second
phase funding). Specifically, the projected co-finance disbursement during NTEAP
Phase 2 is $71.99 m. or about a 10:1 co-finance ratio.
140)
A full and detailed budget by component and activity is in Annex C. The following
tables summarize overall project funding, co-funding (co-funding support letters are in
Appendix 1), budget for project management and budget for technical assistance.
Table 10.
Project budget for the Second Phase by Components, indicating the
GEF contribution and co-funding
TOTAL COST
PROJECT COMPONENTS
Co-Finance
GEF (US$)
(US$)
Component 1. Regional and national institutions
strengthened in addressing transboundary threats to Nile
22,061,600 1,180,756
23,242,356
ecosystem resources
Component 2. Improved capacity of Nile Basin countries
for integrated natural resources management across
13,956,400 1,399,970
15,356,370
relevant GEF focal areas (e.g. Biodiversity, Land
Degradation)
Component 3. Enhanced environmental education and
6,522,800 1,247,780
7,770,580
public awareness targeting Nile Basin transboundary issues
Component 4. Enhanced conservation and management of
Nile Basin wetlands and their biodiversity through application
13,478,000 2,007,530
15,485,530
of IWRM approaches
Coordination with other projects
9,292,000
180,181
9,472,181
SUB-TOTALS 65,310,800
6,016,217
71,327,017
Project management
6,679,200
683,783
7,362,983
TOTALS 71,990,000
6,700,000
78,690,000
______________________________________
37
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
Table 11.
Co-Financing sources in cash and in kind, classification and type
NAME OF CO-FINANCIER (SOURCE)1
CLASSIFICATION
TYPE AMOUNT (CONFIRMED)
Nile Basin Trust Fund
Trust Fund
Cash
66,260,000
Riparian countries
Participating Governments
in kind
1,000,000
UNDP
IA
Cash
350,000
AfDB
Regional Development Bank
Cash
2,880,000
GTZ Bilateral
Cash
1,500,000
TOTAL
71,990,000
1 Letters of co-financing commitment have been included in Appendix 1.
Table 12:
Confirmed co-financing for NTEAP
SHARED VISION PROJECT
Phase 1
Phase 2
TOTAL
Applied Training Project (ATP)
5.6
11.38
16.98
Confidence Building and Stakeholder Involvement (CBSI)
4.4
7.16
11.56
Efficient Water Use in Agriculture Production (EWUAP)
1.79
2.6
4.39
Regional Power Trade (RPT)
2.12
3.15
5.27
NTEAP
3.2
5.79
8.99
Socio-economic Development and Benefit Sharing (SDBS)
0.96
4.93
5.89
Water Resource Planning and Management (WRPM)
5.5
9.15
14.65
SVP Coordination project (SVP-C)
4.5
7.1
11.6
NBTF unal ocated (SVP or NBI project to be determined)
0
15
15
Total Shared Vision Project (NBTF)
28.07
66.26
94.33
Non-NBTF
Riparians
2.36
1
3.36
AfDB 0
2.88
2.88
GTZ
3.0 1.5 4.5
UNDP/TRIB
3.85
350,000
4.2
Canadian Space Agency
2.5
0
2.5
Total Non-NBTF
11.71
5.73
17.44
OVERALL TOTAL CO-FINANCING
39.78
71.99
111.77
B) PROJECT BUDGET
141)
The following tables summarize the amounts for project management and for
technical assistance10.
Table 13.
Project management budget
ESTIMATED
OTHER
PROJECT
COMPONENT
STAFF
GEF (US$)
SOURCES (US$)
TOTAL (US$)
WEEKS
Executing Agency Support
683,783 5,679,200 6,362,983
to Project Management
Office supplies, equipment
-
1,000,000 1,000,000
maintenance, office security
TOTAL
683,783
6,679,200
7,362,983
10 The full detailed budget by Component, Output and Activity is in Annex C.
______________________________________
38
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
Table 14.
Consultants/Technical Personnel Working for Technical Assistance
Components11
ESTIMATED
OTHER
PROJECT TOTAL
COMPONENT
STAFF
GEF (US$)
SOURCES (US$)
(US$)
WEEKS
Local Recruited Personnel
1500
792,820
291,189
1,084,009
International Recruited
430 906,093 167,499 1,073,592
Personnel
Local consultants
976
732,600
0
732,600
International Consultants2 - - -
-
Total 3141
2,431,513
458,688
2,890,201
2 No international consultants for technical assistance components are expected to be recruited.
5
INSTITUTIONAL COORDINATION AND SUPPORT
A) CORE COMMITMENTS AND LINKAGES
142)
The NBI Shared Vision Programme is a multi-faceted initiative currently comprising
seven projects. NTEAP was the first of the seven to commence implementation and this
provided it with a comparative advantage in that it was able to influence and establish
links with the other projects as they came on stream. These linkages have provide an
effective avenue for NTEAP to "infuse" environment into the fabric and function of the
other projects, thus achieving its objective of seeing environment mainstreamed into the
NBI operation and ultimately into the operation of the Nile Basin permanent institution.
Annexes H and I list the linkages that are recognizable between NTEAP and its sister
projects.
143)
An initiative such as the NBI requires specific skills and is quite demanding in terms
of capacities for supervision, technical support and management oversight. These are
the reasons why UNDP and the World Bank joined forces and are working cooperatively
on this initiative.
144)
UNDP started supporting cooperation in the Nile Basin in 1973, through a first
training for hydrologists from the riparian countries Hydronet. Since then, it has
continued its support, by facilitating the conception and preparation of the NBI, the
establishment of the technical committee, the negotiations committee and the processes
related to the cooperative framework. Since 1997 up until this day, UNDP has been
providing support for the negotiations. The design and submission of the NTEAP for
GEF funds was a natural outcome of this involvement and of UNDP's experience in the
area of transboundary water resource management. NBI also links and aligns very
closely with the Transboundary Waters Management component of UNDP's recently
approved Water Governance Strategy. In certain Nile riparians, UNDP COs have been
supporting policy dialogues and facilitating certain NBI related activities and
disbursement. During the second phase, efforts will be exerted to inscribe priorities and
activities emerging from the NBI in the national programming processes, in consultation
with the governments.
11 Technical assistance personnel and consultants presented in this table are those directly contracted by the environment
project of the SVP.
______________________________________
39
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
145)
The recently submitted and approved Nile Groundwater MSP is also implemented by
UNDP. Nile GW focuses on integrating surface and groundwater management in the
basin and will support the NBI in characterizing the basin and its hydrological regime.
NTEAP and Nile GW will both focus on a key ecosystem in the Nile Basin: the Sudd
Wetlands. This recently declared Ramsar site is the largest wetland in Africa and is
suspected to boast globally significant biodiversity while also playing a key role in
regional climate regimes and the buffering of hydrological events. These two projects will
collaborate within the context of the NBI to further the understanding of the functioning of
this key and other wetlands in the Basin and put forth policy reform recommendations
and options to ensure their values and functions are sustained.
146)
At the request of Nile riparians, the World Bank has been engaged in Nile Basin
cooperation since 1997. The Bank has supported, in close collaboration with UNDP, the
preparation of the TEA; the development of the SVP and its individual projects; and
assisted in the organization of the International Consortium of Cooperation On the Nile
(ICCON) held in 2001. ICCON was instrumental in obtaining the donor support
necessary to realize the SVP and launch the SAPs. The majority NBI financing is
channeled through the multi-donor Nile Basin Trust Fund, which is managed by the
Bank. The World Bank, often in coordination with donor partners, supervises the SVP
and reports back to the NBTF Committee on the implementation status as well as
matters of fiduciary oversight. Moreover, the WB has been a key partner in supporting
the development and design of investments and infrastructure for economic development
as well as the large-scale implementation of priority interventions.
147)
Both the World Bank and UNDP teams have a strong presence in the Basin and
continent. Linkages with other initiatives of relevance to the NBI, be them at the country,
Basin, sub-regional or continental level will be leveraged to further NTEAP and the NBI
in achieving their vision. Specific attention will be given to GEF supported initiatives such
as the Migratory Soaring Birds Project (UNDP, Sudan, Egypt, Ethiopia) or the TerrAfrica
Strategic Investment Program (WB-lead with GEF IAs, Sub-saharan Africa).
B) CONSULTATION, COORDINATION AND COLLABORATION BETWEEN IAS, AND IAS AND EAS
148)
As GEF implementing agencies, UNDP and the World Bank have been conducting
joint supervision missions of NTEAP on a biannual basis; they provide technical support
to the project team, and participate as observers in the project steering committee
meetings. Both agencies have provided inputs to the TORs of the mid-term evaluation
and have conducted a mid-term review mission to assess the validity of the findings and
recommendations of the MTE.
149)
UNDP has been and will continue to be responsible for reporting to the GEF, mainly
through the preparation of annual PIRs. Ad hoc reporting as needed will also be
undertaken during the remaining life-time of the project.
150)
The World Bank has been and will continue to be responsible for supervising
components funded through the WB/GEF and NBTF windows. It will maintain its
reporting to the NBTF and support the full integration of NTEAP as the environment
component of the overall NBI.
151)
In terms of financial management, the execution of the NBI as a whole, including
NTEAP, has been entrusted to UNOPS which has established a regional office in the
Basin, has trained the NBI teams on financial management and ensures that
procurement is undertaken according to international fiduciary standards. UNDP and the
World Bank ensure that the budget allocations and revisions correspond to donor
guidelines (both GEF and NBTF) and are in line with the technical aspects and
objectives of the project.
______________________________________
40
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
C) PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENT
GEF IMPLEMENTING AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES
152)
Building on the successful implementation of the PDF phase of the project, the first
Phase of NTEAP continued to be jointly implemented by the two GEF IAs, UNDP and
the World Bank, each with its specialized expertise and comparative advantage.
153)
Project execution entrusted to the NBI and UNOPS contracted to carry out the
financial management and administration.
154)
The PMU which has been set up by UNOPS, has been responsible for contracting,
fund management, procurement, disbursement, programme administration and project
level monitoring. This arrangement will continue into the Second Phase and will
incorporate the improvements recommended by the MTR.
155)
The overall NTEAP is a joint UNDP-World Bank supported project, even though it is
only UNDP that will serve as Implementing Agency for the second phase. The relative
strengths of each agency will continue to be drawn upon for backstopping, management
and support to the project; likewise such matters as in-house technical expertise,
technical experience in relevant project components, on the ground presence, ability to
handle small contracts expeditiously, etc.
THE PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE AND PROJECT GUIDANCE
156)
The Project Steering Committee sets the policy for the project and provides strategic
guidance and direction to the Regional Project Manager and other project stakeholders.
It also supports UNDP which maintains ultimate accountability to the GEF for the delivery
of project products and the administration of project funds which are administered as per
the Standard Basic Assistance Agreements between UNDP and the Programme
countries. UNDP and the nine Governments form part of and respect PSC decisions
and agreements. Details of the PSC's role and specific responsibilities are in the terms
of reference in Annex F.
THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT UNIT AND OPERATIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
157)
While basin-wide implementation of the project is attained through the PMU located
in Khartoum, the project relies on the network of National Project Coordinators to
coordinate national activities for all the components and national/local Micro-Grant
Coordinators for the implementation of the Micro-Grants component. In addition, the
vast NGO networks and other development partners provide support to the project in the
implementation process while benefiting from the information and knowledge that is
generated during the implementation phase. Lessons learnt and best practices will
continue to be documented and disseminated among project beneficiaries throughout
the Basin as well as to all other relevant partners and sister projects.
158)
The participation of partners in the implementation and decision making process is
very crucial to the project's success. Continuous consultations with the Project Steering
Committee, the Nile Secretariat, the United Nations Office of Project Services (UNOPS)
and other development partners in both planning and implementation of project activities,
is institutionalized to ensure consensus, support and ownership of the project.
159)
Regular as well as occasional reporting, an up-to-date website, quarterly newsletters,
teleconferencing and constant communications through email are al mechanisms that
the project has adopted and will continue using to keep its partners informed. Project
Steering Committee meetings, scheduled supervision missions from Canadian
International Development Agency (CIDA), the World Bank and UNDP have been useful
events that helped to enhance project implementation and generate new ideas they will
continue.
______________________________________
41
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
160)
The SVP coordination meetings have also enhanced coordination with other SVP
projects and the SAPs. Project progress reports are also presented at the regular and
extraordinary meetings of the NBI Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and they include
issues that need policy guidance from the Council of Ministers.
161)
Figure 2 below summarizes the organizational framework that has served NTEAP
well and which will continue into the Second Phase. While the Water Quality Monitoring
Lead Specialist is shown on the chart for the sake of completeness, the position remains
funded by the World Bank GEF funds from the first phase and is not part of this Second
Phase proposal.
______________________________________
42
GEF Executive Summary
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme July 25th, 2007
NTEAP(Project Management
Nile Basin Initiative
Committee)
Nile Transboundary Environmental
Regional Project Manager
Action Project (NTEAP) Organogram
Gedion Asfaw
Bilingual Secretary
Rejoice Manaseh
Monitoring
Environment
Microgrants Lead
Knowledge
Water Quality
&Evaluation Lead
Education&Awareness
Specialist
Management
Monitoring Lead
Specialist.
Lead Specialist
Amir Baker
Specialist
Specialist
Intisar Salih
Maushe Kidundo
John Omwenga
Joel Arumadri
Finance &
Wetalands and
Bilingual Secretary
National/Local
Web Designer/IT
Procurement
biodiversity Lead
Hasan Abbas
Microgrants
Mohammed
Specialist
specialist
Coordinators
Rahim
Ronald Okuonzi
Henry Busuluwa
1. Philbert Mundanda,
Burundi
National Project
2. Stephane Lubunga,
Coordinators
Finance
Procurement
Adminstartive
Receptionist
DR Congo
1. Ruzima Salvator,
Assistant
Assistant
Assistant
Joseline Ladu
3. Khaled Bayoumy,
Burundi
Egypt
Sadig Goda
Khalid Ibrahim
Riha Abdu
2. Joseph Afata, DR
4. Menberu Alebachew,
Congo
Ethiopia
3. Ithar Khalil, Egypt
5. Martin Madara, Kenya
Securty Guards
4. Wubua Mekonnen,
6. Joseph Bizima,
(4),Drivers(2),
Ethiopia
Rwanda
Messenger(1),
5. Lily Kisaka, Kenya
7. Ishrag Dirar, Sudan
6. Emannuel Muligirwa,
Cleaner(1),
8. Alex Jubex, S.Sudan
Rwanda,
Gardener(1)
9. Victor Kamagenge,
7. Abdel salam,Sudan
Tanzania
8. Abdala Shah,
10. Jane Kisakye.Uganda
Tanzania
9. Kigoolo Stephen,
Uganda
Drivers(9)
______________________________________
GEF Executive Summary
Drivers(9), Admin
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Programme Draft ver 7 20Jun
Assistants(2+)