UNDP Project Document
Governments of Burundi, D.R. Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania and
Uganda
United Nations Development Programme
Nile Basin Initiative Shared Vision Programme
United Nations Office for Project Services
Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Project - NTEAP
The objective of the project is 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). The project will improve understanding of the relationship between water resources
development and the environment in the Basin, and will provide a forum to discuss
development paths for the Nile with a wide range of stakeholders. The environmental
framework established by the project will also promote: (a) enhanced basin-wide 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) enhanced environmental management capacity for the NBI, a basin-wide institution.
Cooperation and coordination between the riparian countries and their understanding and
capabilities in terms of environmental management were initiated during the first phase of
this project; they will continue and be consolidated during its second phase. The project
comprises 4 components co-financed by UNDP/GEF and one component fully financed by
the WB. The 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.
All project components will require site selection and stakeholder participation from at least
two riparian countries, while many will involve all of the countries. Consistent emphasis will
be given to encouraging diverse stakeholder groups to work together, both within their own
countries and with counterparts in other riparian countries, as an essential contribution to
building the mutual understanding, relationships and trust that are essential to collaborative
problem-solving in the future.
The ultimate aim of the project is to prepare the way for the establishment of the permanent
institution and provide it with its environmental blueprint. The focus of this will be a Regional
Wetlands Strategy for which the project is providing the foundation.
June 2007
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I: ELABORATION OF THE NARRATIVE .....................................................................5
PART I: Situation Analysis .........................................................................................................6
1.1
Context and global significance ....................................................................................6
1.2
Threats, root causes and barriers analysis .................................................................7
Institutional, sectoral and policy context ..................................................................................7
Stakeholder analysis...................................................................................................................8
Baseline analysis.........................................................................................................................9
PART II : Strategy........................................................................................................................11
Project Rationale and Policy Conformity ...............................................................................11
Project Goal, Objective, Outcomes and Outputs/activities.................................................12
Project Indicators, Risks and Assumptions...........................................................................19
Risks............................................................................................................................................22
Expected global, national and local benefits.........................................................................24
Country Ownership : Country Eligibility and Country Drivenness .....................................25
Sustainability ..............................................................................................................................26
Replicability ................................................................................................................................27
PART III : Management Arrangements ..................................................................................28
PART IV : Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget ...................................................30
PART V: Legal Context ..............................................................................................................32
SECTION II : STRATEGIC RESULTS FRAMEWORK & GEF INCREMENT .........................33
PART I : Incremental Cost Analysis .......................................................................................33
PART II : Logical Framework Analysis..................................................................................33
SECTION III : TOTAL BUDGET AND WORKPLAN....................................................................33
SECTION IV : ADDITIONAL INFORMATION...............................................................................33
PART I : Other agreements.......................................................................................................33
PART II : Organogram of Project ............................................................................................33
PART III : Terms of Reference for key project staff and main sub-contracts.............33
PART IV : Stakeholder Involvement and Participation Plan...........................................34
Part V to X : ...................................................................................................................................36
SIGNATURE PAGE ..........................................................................................................................37
2
ACRONYMS
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
3
SVP
Shared Vision Programme
SVP-C
Shared Vision Programme Coordination project
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 Dol ars
WB World
Bank
WQM
Water Quality Monitoring
WRM
Water Resources Management
WRPM
Water Resources Planning and Management project
4
SECTION I: ELABORATION OF THE NARRATIVE
The Nile Transboundary Environmental Action Project (NTEAP) has been under implementation for
three years and its progress has been lauded by an independent Mid-Term Review. It was planned
and approved by the Governments, donors and the GEF Implementing Agencies (UNDP and World
Bank) to be executed over a five year period. This proposal is therefore not a new project and it
was necessitated by the phased nature of the GEF funds release. While the Second Phase is very
much a continuation and a consolidation of project activities undertaken to date, this resubmission is
a good opportunity to reflect the recommendations of the Mid-Term Review and the lessons learnt in
the first three years of implementation. Since the GEF has entered into a new phase recently, GEF-
4, the format and focus of this proposal also reflect the new GEF prescription for International
Waters projects.
As this is not a new project, there is no need for a formal inception phase culminating in an inception
report as is usual. However, the project will benefit from a period of stocktaking and self analysis,
updating and renewal. It is therefore planned to spend a short time (1-2 months) following the
formal approvals for the Second Phase, to revitalize the project. Project personnel will refine further
the new focus for the project as reflected in the revised LogFrame Matrix and as prompted by the
new strategic direction of GEF-4. A new work plan will be formulated, the M&E strategy will be
updated to reflect the refocused LogFrame, the Micro-Grants Strategy will be reviewed according to
the focus for the Second Phase, stakeholder participation will be examined and opportunities will be
enhanced, and the project will commence the process of phasing out project activities and their
phasing in into the permanent institution for cooperation in the Nile Basin. This period of renewal
and refocusing will culminate in a special meeting of the Project Steering Committee which will
formally approve this new thrust.
5
PART I: Situation Analysis
1.1 Context and global significance
1. The Nile River is one of the world's great rivers. Throughout history it has nourished livelihoods,
sustained an array of ecosystems and fostered a rich diversity of cultures in ten countries. The
Basin encompasses three million square kilometres one-tenth of Africa's total landmass and
serves as home to an estimated 160 million people. These people face considerable
challenges, with more than half of the riparian states being among the world's poorest countries
(see table below) and much of the region characterized by instability and rapid population
growth. The UNDP Global Human Development Report states that while the costs of River
Basin cooperation are difficult to quantify, the human and financial costs of non-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.
2. The 2006 UNDP Human Development Report quoted
HDI RANK 2006
above, argues that "increasing the benefits from the river
COUNTRY
(OUT OF 177)
and decreasing the costs arising because of the river, can
Burundi
169
unlock a wider potential for human development, economic
D R Congo
growth and regional cooperation" and it observes that this
167
is happening to some degree in some of the Nile Basin
Egypt
111
initiatives. In fact, in spite of their constraints, the Nile
Ethiopia
170
riparians recognize the potential that the Basin holds for
Kenya
152
cooperative development and they acknowledge the
Rwanda
158
benefits to be gained from greater regional integration.
Various subgroups within the Basin have engaged in
Sudan
141
cooperative activities during the last 30 years and in 1997
Uganda
145
the riparian states began, with UNDP support, to work
Tanzania
162
towards a permanent legal and institutional framework for
Source: 2006 UNDP Global Human
the entire Basin. In 1999 the riparians took a further key
Development Report
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. It also provides a
process to facilitate substantial investment in the Nile Basin to realize regional socio-economic
development. In this regard, the Report 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".
3. The NBI, which will eventually lead to a permanent cooperative framework, 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). 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.
6
1.2 Threats, root causes and barriers analysis
4. According to the Transboundary Environmental Analysis (TEA) carried out under the Nile Basin
Initiative : Shared Vision Programme in 2001, the problems and threats faced by the Nile River
Basin ranged from the degrading of agricultural and grazing lands, the deterioration of water
quality, the loss of wetlands and forests, the overexploitation of natural resources, pollution from
urban, industrial and agricultural sources, the proliferation of waterborne diseases to the harmful
impacts of floods and droughts. These problems represented a serious threat to the Nile River
system which is undeniably a global resource and which harbours many environmental values of
global significance. In addition, many of these threats were recognized by the TEA as having a
direct impact on human health and welfare, while others undermined people's ability to secure
their livelihoods, with poorer people being most affected by the deteriorating environmental
condition. This impact on people's lives and livelihoods exacerbated the situation since they
were driven to rely more and more on natural resources thus perpetuating, and accelerating, the
environmental degradation / poverty cycle. Collectively, these threats were seen as a
substantial barrier to long-term achievement of sustainable development in the Nile Basin
countries. The TEA reported an increasing acceptance that the underlying causes of
environmental threats in the Nile Basin are often related to institutional, governance, awareness
and information issues as well as sectoral and macroeconomic policies.
5. The following table, based on information available in the TEA, summarizes the perceived
environmental threats, overall and by country.
Basin-wide
Policy, governance, institutional and capacity constraints, insufficient
causes
environmental education and awareness, limited access to environmental
knowledge and information (including relevant scientific data), unclear tenure
and inadequate access to resources for local stakeholders, inadequate
management of protected areas and other environmental hot spots
Burundi
Deforestation, soil erosion, degradation of river banks and lakeshores, mining,
wildlife hunting
D.R. Congo
River and lake pollution, deforestation, soil erosion, wildlife hunting
Egypt
Water and air pollution, filling of wetlands, desertification, waterlogging and soil
salinity, sanitation, river bank degradation
Ethiopia
Deforestation, overgrazing, soil erosion, desertification, sanitation, loss of
biodiversity (including agrobiodiversity), floods, droughts
Kenya
River and lake pollution (point and non-point source), deforestation,
desertification, soil erosion, sedimentation, loss of wetlands, eutrophication and
water weeds
Rwanda
Deforestation, soil erosion, degradation of river banks and lakeshores,
desertification, wildlife hunting, overgrazing
Sudan
Soil erosion, desertification, pollution of water supplies, wildlife hunting, floods,
droughts, sanitation, deforestation
Tanzania
Deforestation, soil degradation, desertification, river and lake pollution, poaching
and shortage of potable water
Uganda
Draining of wetlands, deforestation, soil erosion, encroachment into marginal
lakeshore and riverine ecosystems, point and non point-source pollution
Institutional, sectoral and policy context
6. The Nile countries recognize that future development of the Basin must be environmentally
sustainable and the project is supporting them to develop sound approaches to dealing with
transboundary environmental threats at the regional and national level. There is a recognition
that the identification of environment and development synergies, and thus development on a
sustainable basis, is of utmost priority. By focusing on transboundary issues, the riparian
countries have been able to make significant progress towards their economic and
environmental goals in ways that had proved difficult to achieve independently. Consensus has
emerged in support of a set of activities in the riparian countries to (a) provide a strategic
7
framework for the environmentally sustainable development of the Nile River Basin as part of the
Shared Vision Program, (b) improve the understanding of the relationship of water resources
development and the environment throughout the Basin, and (c) provide a forum to discuss
development paths for the Nile Basin with a wide range of stakeholders.
7. The policy guidelines adopted by the NBI's Council of Ministers of Water Affairs (Nile-COM) in
February 1999 defined the primary objectives of the NBI. These objectives were to develop the
water resources of the Nile Basin in a sustainable and equitable way to ensure prosperity,
security, and peace for all its peoples; to ensure efficient water management and the optimal
use of the resources; to ensure cooperation and joint action between the riparian countries,
seeking win-win gains; to target poverty eradication and promote economic integration; and to
ensure that the programme results in a move from planning to action.
8. In 2006 the objectives of the NBI were consolidated into two outcomes, namely increased
regional cooperation in the Nile Basin in search of peace and security in the region, and efficient
trans-boundary management and optimal use of Nile Basin water and water-related resources.
9. Recognizing the importance of the environment sector, each NB country has institutionalized
environmental protection and management at the ministerial level with relevant institutions
mandated to address all sorts of environmental issues, starting from policy formulation, to
legislation, enforcement, compliance, and impact assessment reviews done through well
articulated national plans. In addition, there are hosts of programmes and projects funded by
the governments and donors that address one or more of the environmental threats facing the
Nile Basin, with varying degrees of complexity and financial support. NTEAP has and will
continue to provide support to the Basin riparians to assess and strengthen the sectoral and
sub-sectoral policies that have consequences for the environment.
Stakeholder analysis
10. There are many stakeholders in this wide-ranging project. However, two groups are considered
as key stakeholders the Nile Basin Governments and government officials on one hand, and
the grassroots communities living in the Nile Basin on the other. Both groups have a lot at stake
in the project and both stand to gain or lose from its success or failure. Both have participated
extensively in the project to date, starting with the formulation stages and the drafting of the
TEA, and continuing on to the project's implementation. The project has built on the trust and
credibility generated through the national consultation processes and fostered the contacts and
relationships which were gained right from the initial stages.
11. The involvement and participation of stakeholders is part of the project design and various
components have aimed to broaden and deepen stakeholder involvement in environmental
management. Initiatives range from the Basin-wide Working Groups that coordinate each of the
project components and which include a range of stakeholder representatives, to the local
stakeholders, especially communities and smaller NGOs that have been explicitly targeted as
beneficiaries for the Micro-Grant Programme this will continue in the Second Phase. A wide
range of stakeholders have also been involved in and benefited from the information and
knowledge management component as well as the environmental education and awareness
programme of NTEAP. Representatives of all major stakeholder groups have also had
opportunities to participate in monitoring and evaluating the project. All this stakeholder activity
will continue during the Second Phase and will culminate in the handing over to stakeholders as
appropriate, of the initiatives, the experience, the know-how and other benefits of the project as
it is phased out.
12. Other stakeholders with whom the NTEAP has consulted, and collaborated include sister
projects and national and international Nile Basin stakeholders. For example, 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, and
this was a great success. It is planned to follow this by national level parliamentarian awareness
workshops and dialogue. The NBI has signed an MoU with the International Water
8
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
entrusted to organize the NBDF 2008 for which the theme is "Environmental Management for
Peace and Regional Cooperation in the Nile Basin".
Baseline analysis
13. The riparian countries have not been unaware of the problems that were identified in the
Transboundary Environmental Analysis, and existing projects and programmes include in-
country plans and strategies for economic development and for environmental conservation and
natural resource management by individual governmental agencies at national and local levels
as well as by private enterprise and NGOs. The total baseline has been estimated to be worth
US$403 million. This amount included US$77 million for the estimated costs of defined NBI
SAP projects.
14. It was argued in the original project brief that the perpetuation of business-as-usual would limit
the NBI's ability to encourage more effective integrated land and water management within
overall economic development strategies on a Basin-wide scale thus placing its globally
significant resources in jeopardy. The majority of support for natural resource management and
environmental conservation would have continued to focus on independent national-level
activities. Some sub-regional activities were expected to be implemented through the NEL-SAP
and the EN-SAP projects in addition to important existing East African activities involving Kenya,
Tanzania and Uganda (such as the GEF-funded Lake Victoria Environmental Management
Project and the Sida-funded Lake Victoria Initiative). However, none of these activities were on
a Basin-wide scale, which is the key to success when recognizing the transboundary,
downstream characteristics of impacts and the shared nature of resources within a river
catchment. The ability of the Nile riparians to effectively address transboundary environmental
issues requiring coordination at the Basin-wide level would have remained limited, especial y for
those environmental issues related to future investments in land and water management. Key
cross-border environmental issues such as environmental information sharing, community-level
land and water management (including the control of aquatic weeds), environmental education
and awareness, transboundary benefits from wetland conservation (including threats to
migratory species) and water quality monitoring, could not be addressed adequately or at the
appropriate scale if approached purely from the national level.
15. Taking each of the proposed areas of intervention by the Nile Transboundary Environmental
Action Project, in turn below, the business-as-usual scenario is examined in a bit more detail.
Institutional Strengthening to Facilitate Regional Cooperation
16. The baseline for this component amounts to US$93 million and there are two main types of
intervention. The first comprises capacity building and institutional support to the water
resources and environment sectors. The second is more technical and deals with water
resources assessments combined with planning, model ing, forecasting and simulation,
including environmental planning and monitoring. This baseline of actions is largely national in
character and is unevenly distributed within the Basin. Apart from World Bank and FAO-funded
regional projects that were specifically designed in the context of the wider Nile programme,
there were no other projects in the institutional strengthening category which specifically
9
targeted the coordination of transboundary elements required for cooperative management of
shared water resources.
Community-level Land, Forest and Water Conservation
17. The baseline under this rather broad category is large and consisted of projects totalling some
US$206 million. This included three sub-regional NEL-SAP projects with estimated costs of
US$61 million. Many of these projects targeted agricultural productivity or expansion through
irrigation or other intensification as the basis for food security and poverty alleviation. Other
projects in this category attempted integrated land and water management with an emphasis on
soil conservation, as well as land rehabilitation and community-based efforts in afforestation,
reforestation and forest management. Although it was recognized as cross-cutting, multi-
sectoral and interdisciplinary, the IDA portion of the Lake Victoria Environmental Management
Project was also categorized as baseline under this component.
Environmental Education and Awareness
18. The TEA identified less than US$1 million in externally-funded baseline activities for this
category. This was mainly because most environmental education and awareness activities
were being undertaken on a relatively small scale by a large number of NGOs and community
organizations which were widely dispersed within the Basin and there was no central project
database documenting these activities. While existing and emerging environmental NGOs were
undoubtedly very active in environmental education and awareness in a number of the Nile
Basin countries, and they still are, their activities are still almost exclusively limited to local and
national levels. There is no programme to build awareness of interdependence and
opportunities for cooperation across national boundaries. The NBI project on Communication
and Stakeholder Involvement was the first of its kind in attempting to develop common
messages and common dialogues among the people of the Nile Basin.
Wetlands and Biodiversity Conservation
19. At the time of NTEAP formulation, the non-GEF-funded baseline actions under this component
were comparatively large at US$74 million, and included a US$16 million NEL-SAP fisheries
project for Lake Albert. This is an impressive total for a region as pervaded by poverty and food
security concerns as the Nile Basin. The focus of these projects was mainly environmental
management and planning, targeting wetlands and other protected areas, with an emphasis on
both conservation and sustainable use, but the projects were distributed very unevenly within
the Basin. Apart from the Lake Albert initiative, the only project with a transboundary focus at
the time was a GEF project addressing East African cross-boundary protected areas (however it
is precluded from the baseline since this is GEF-funded). The critical linkages between
transboundary water resource management and the Basin's acutely threatened and dwindling
natural ecosystems is of such importance that the significance of transboundary wetland
conservation (including biodiversity) cannot be overestimated.
Water Quality Monitoring
20. The baseline of action for this component amounts to US$29 million, almost entirely in Egypt,
together with the GEF and IDA-funded Lake Victoria Environmental Management Project which
addresses water quality issues in the Lake Victoria Basin (the GEF portion does not form part of
the baseline). This is an indication of the low priority given to the transboundary aspects of
water quality in the wider Nile Basin. This is surprising since water quality is a matter of growing
concern, particularly in the Basin's more heavily populated and farmed areas and it is becoming
especially critical at and around the large-scale irrigation schemes with intensive use and
storage of agrochemicals (e.g. in Egypt and Sudan), as well as the larger urban and industrial
settings throughout the Basin. It is only in Egypt that there is a significant water quality
monitoring programme in spite of the major human health and environmental implications of
water quality.
10
PART II : Strategy
Project Rationale and Policy Conformity
21. 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.
22. 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.
23. 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 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.
24. 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
25. 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.
26. 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.
27. 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.
28. 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.
29. 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
11
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.
30. 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 project1. 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.
31. While Phase 1 of NTEAP has made significant progress, incremental to the baseline, its work is
incomplete and without the Second Phase the progress will be placed in jeopardy.
Project Goal, Objective, Outcomes and Outputs/activities
32. 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 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.
33. 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.
34. 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.
35. 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
1 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.
12
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)
36. 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.
37. 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.
38. 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.
1 Regional and national institutions strengthened in addressing transboundary threats to Nile
ecosystem resources (23,412,356 GEF 1,350,756; 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
39. 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.
13
Component 1: Regional and national institutions strengthened in addressing transboundary
threats to Nile ecosystem resources
40. 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.
41. 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.
42. 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.
43. 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.
44. 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.
45. 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
14
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)
46. 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.
47. 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.
48. 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.
49. 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 threat2.
50. 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
2 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.
15
consultations as indicated in the 2007 workplan in Annex M. A regional workshop will review the
transboundary experiences for discussion, consolidation and dissemination.
51. 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.
52. 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 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.
53. 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
54. 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.
55. 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.
56. 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.
16
57. 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 collaboration with environmental agencies.
58. 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.
59. 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
60. 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.
61. 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.
62. 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.
63. 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.
64. 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
17
a plan of action has already been negotiated and agreed with the Lake Victoria Basin
Commission.
65. 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.
Component 5: Increased capacity and awareness on water quality monitoring in the Nile
Basin countries
66. This Component will initiate a basin wide dialogue on water quality and improve understanding
of trans-boundary water quality issues, improve capacities for monitoring and management of
water quality and initiate exchange and dissemination of information on key parameters. It will
also increase understanding of the current state of water quality and to identify the water quality
management needs of the different riparian countries. There will be exchange of water quality
information as well as on regulatory issues. Regional water quality monitoring and assessment
will be initiated as well as basin wide dialogue and collaborative action on water quality by the
different stakeholders within the basin. Information exchanges and data processing will be
designed and implemented in close collaboration with other SVPs and SAPs.
67. The Component also aims at increasing both the physical and technical capacity in the riparian
countries through trainings, Workshops and Seminars. This Component comprises of two sub
components:
(i) Enhanced National capacities for water quality monitoring
(ii) Awareness raising and information sharing on trans-boundary water quality monitoring.
68. The MTR noted that he component had a slow start with a number of activities delayed.
However, recently, relatively large number of planned activities have been initiated, some of
which are near completion. The importance of the components to the Nile basin management is
generally acknowledged, consensus over the objectives of the component, and the approach to
accomplish them is yet to be achieved. The commitment of the members of PSC and
commitment and capacities of WQWG members to fully undertake their role in making the
component effective and successful need to be enhanced. The component reports should be
more focused toward achieving the objectives of the component. The training activity that has
been conducted by the component so far was relatively well received by most of the participants.
Them MTR further noted that water quality data generation, storage, retrieval, sharing and
utilization for better water quality planning and management in the region has not been initiated
yet. The modality and mechanism for data exchange and utilization by and between the NBI
countries is not in place. The MTR recommended that a Concept Paper that clarifies and refines
the component's objectives and proposes a strategy for achieving these objectives be prepared.
The consensus amongst the WQWG members on the objectives and implementation approach
is essential to avoid any unnecessary delays.
69. The project should take steps to enhance the ownership of the component by WQWG and by
the organizations they represent. It further recommended that water quality data generation,
storage, retrieval, sharing and utilization should be initiated. The modality and mechanism for
data exchange and utilization among the NBI countries need to designed and a regional
modality or framework for transboundary water quality management be prepared.
70. The work planned for the Second Phase covers is based on the MTR recommendations and on
sustaining the Component's activities after the Project's closure. This component will support
the operationalization of the Nile trans-boundary water quality monitoring strategy, through the
institutionalization of the transboundary water quality monitoring network, and the launching of
the Nile transboundary water quality monitoring in the countries. It will also develop
transboundary water quality data and information sheets to be submitted to the DSS Component
of WRMP project for incorporation into the NBI data and information sharing Protocol.
Collaboration with ENSAP, NELSAP and LVBC will also be enhanced. Training of the NBI
18
Laboratory Managers will be undertaken as well as dissemination of water quality awareness
materials and the piloting of the Water Quality Testing Kits and biological monitoring materials in
schools and communities.
Project Indicators, Risks and Assumptions
71. 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:
Components/Outcomes, key indicators and links to IW goals
COMPONENT
/ OUTCOME
LINK/FIT TO IW
KEY INDICATORS AND TYPE
(and
GOALS
descriptor)
1. Regional
Outcome Indicator 1 (process): Transboundary EIA
Collaboration by
and national
guidelines for use by NBI investment programmes
the countries of the
institutions
developed
Nile Basin
strengthened
Comment: The idea is to build on what the East African
corresponds to the
in addressing
Community has already initiated in developing
second strategic
transboundary transboundary EIA guidelines for use by SAPs
objective of the IW
threats to Nile Outcome Indicator 2 (process): Policy recommendations focal area strategy
ecosystem
on Basin environment protection formulated and
for GEF-4: To play
resources
submitted for consideration in at least two countries
a catalytic role in
Comment: The macro/sectoral policies study will be
addressing
(seeks regional carried out by NBI countries. It is hoped that these
transboundary
collaboration
studies will provide information on policies that impact on water concerns by
and strong
the environment and enable recommendations for policy assisting countries
institutions as a adjustments
to utilize the full
mechanism for
Outcome Indicator 3 (process): Environment function of
range of technical
safeguarding
the NB permanent institution defined through a
assistance,
ecosystems
consultative process
economic,
from
Comment: NTEAP will conduct consultations to define
financial,
transboundary
the environment function of the permanent NBI institution regulatory and
threats)
and submit a proposal to the Nile-SEC for consideration
institutional
by the TAC and COM
reforms that are
Outcome Indicator 4 (process): Nile Basin Development
needed
Forum in 2008 defines the environmental issues and
priorities for the Basin
Comment: NTEAP will formulate a Discussion Paper
It also contributes
outlining issues and options, for the Forum. Following
to the balancing of
the Forum, NTEAP will carry out further consultations
competing water
and assessments, etc, leading to the definition of the
uses as targeted
environment function of the permanent institution.
under Strategic
Outcome indicator 5 (process): Nile Cooperative
Programme 3
Framework negotiations concluded with specific
references to wetlands conservation (co-financed
catalytic 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
19
COMPONENT
/ OUTCOME
LINK/FIT TO IW
KEY INDICATORS AND TYPE
(and
GOALS
descriptor)
· 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 The Micro-Grant
capacity of
Nile environmental threats at community level
Programme is in
Nile Basin
documented and replicated
line with the GEF's
countries for
Comment: Capacities will be improved through the
Council-approved
integrated
design and implementation of projects that will have the
mandate in that it
natural
potential to become best practices and replicated within
places human
resources
the Nile Basin or elsewhere. As the component may
activities at the
management
implement projects across the GEF focal areas, the
centre of the
across
proxy indicator will focus on land degradation and water
transboundary
relevant GEF
management as the majority of projects fall into these
system and strives
focal areas
two themes
to influence
Output 1 Indicator (stress reduction, process) A
behaviour to
(ultimate aim is minimum of 200 projects, of which 10% targeting women achieve the
improved
groups, implemented by communities across the basin
targeted benefits.
integrated
Comment: 179 projects have been approved and are
management,
under implementation during Phase I. About 38 new
It is also closely
and capacity is projects are expected to be approved during Phase II.
linked to GEF-4 IW
the means for
All projects are considered viable at the design and
Strategic
achieving it)
approval phase. However, only few of the 200 plus
Programme 3:
projects that would be implemented during both Phases
integrated natural
would produce best practices and have the potential to
resources
be replicated and up-scaled
management
Output 2 Indicator (process) : No of professional women
across focal
and men trained on the Nile environmental threats
areas....priority is
across the basin
also accorded to
Comment: Training workshops, project based learning,
integrated
communication materials will be undertaken to increase
approaches across
capacities through diverse approaches. The
GEF focal areas
beneficiaries of these approaches will be as diversified
where multiple
and gender-balanced as possible. Such undertakings
benefits may be
will focus on the proposed mitigation activities,
generated because
monitoring aspects, management of projects and
of inter-linkages
deriving lessons learnt and best practices
such as with
20
COMPONENT
/ OUTCOME
LINK/FIT TO IW
KEY INDICATORS AND TYPE
(and
GOALS
descriptor)
sustainable forest
management.
3. Enhanced
Outcome Indicator 1 (process): At least 8 universities in
Through this
environmental 6 NBI countries approved and adopted the
component and its
education and environmental modules based on Nile environmental
contribution to
public
threats
IW:LEARN the
awareness
Comment: The projects works with 18 universities 2 in
project will
targeting Nile
each country. Adoption of modules takes along time but generate
Basin
at least 8 universities are targeted
knowledge feeding
transboundary Outcome Indicator 2 (process): Environmental
into the GEF goals
issues
campaigns and schools award programs adopted and
of experience-
institutionalized at national levels in at least 6 NBI
sharing and
(target is a high countries
learning among
level of
Comment: Campaigns are used as tool for awareness
projects, the
environmental
raising in addition to print and electronic media.
identification and
appreciation
Institutionalization will make the tools sustainable and
replication of good
and sensitivity
transboundary
practices and the
among the
Output 1 Indicators (process):
development of
general public
· At least 2 environmental awareness programmes
knowledge
on NB
delivered in al least 5 countries
management tools
transboundary
· Awareness material on 5 selected Nile Environment
to capture good
issues)
threats produced and disseminated across the basin
practices and their
· Environmental campaigns and schools award
replication.
programs adopted and institutionalized at national levels
in at least 6 NBI countries
It will also address
Comment: Two programmes include campaigns and
one of the areas of
awards scheme; Training on awareness materials
global concern
production were carried out and a manual produced
identified for GEF-
Output 2 Indicator (process): At least 60 % of the
4, namely Strategic
participating schools adopt project based learning
Programme 3
(environmental modules and school projects)
"Overuse and
Comment: Project based learning includes - environment conflicting uses of
projects, e- learning materials and teachers capacity
water resources in
building. The project works with 10 schools in each
surface and
country, due to slow uptake in certain countries it is
groundwater
expected that at least 60% will adopt the PBL model
basins"
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
conservation
· Strategic approach to wetlands management in the
interlinked
and
basin with key actions, steps and responsibilities
transboundary
management
developed
concerns as part of
of Nile Basin
· Management plans for at least three selected
the ecosystem
wetlands and
wetlands developed and under implementation
approach, the
their
Output 1 Indicators (process):
project will create
biodiversity
· One network at regional level established and
benefits also for
21
COMPONENT
/ OUTCOME
LINK/FIT TO IW
KEY INDICATORS AND TYPE
(and
GOALS
descriptor)
through
functioning
the biodiversity
application of
· National level wetlands management networks
focal area
IWRM
established and functioning in at least 5 countries
approaches
· Training program on wetlands management
In its use of the
developed in 2 languages
IWRM, it links up
(the ultimate
Output 2 Indicators (process):
strongly with
aim is the
· Ecological and socio-economic studies on wetland
Strategic
sustainability of roles in sustainable development conducted. Study
Programme 3 -
wetlands and
completed in the two SAP regions
Balancing overuse
their
· National baseline surveys carried out and written up
and conflicting
biodiversity,
Output 3 Indicators (process):
uses of water
with IWRM
· Over 50 officers from across the Basin, trained in
resources in
providing the
wetlands management
transboundary
framework for
· Awareness programmes conducted in nine NBI
surface and
that)
countries
groundwater
Output 4 Indicators (process):
basins;
· Environmental flow assessments carried out in at least There is also a
three selected wetland sites
strong link with the
· Transboundary wetlands management plans prepared Biodiversity focal
for at least 2 selected sites
area which has
·
been identified as
Wetlands inventory carried out and the results
a desirable
mapped on a GIS platform
element under the
IW Strategic
Programmes for
GEF-4.
Risks
72. 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.
73. Possible project risks and risk mitigation measures are summarized in the table below.
Risks and mitigation measures
RISK
RISK
RISK
RISK MONITORING AND RESPONSE (MITIGATION)
TYPE
RATING
Commitm
Political Medium Many countries in the region are facing insecurity and
ent of the
to High
contention, political uncertainty, extreme poverty, diseases,
Nile Basin
etc. These conditions threaten a long-term project such as
countries
NTEAP aimed at creating an enabling environment on a
regional basis. This and other NBI projects seek to build
trust and mutual support among the Nile Basin countries.
22
RISK
RISK
RISK
RISK MONITORING AND RESPONSE (MITIGATION)
TYPE
RATING
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.
Institution Operation Medium The project depends on the capability of government
al
al
institutions and staff to provide visionary leadership. This
leadership
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 Operation Medium Effective implementation of the SVP projects has been a
coordinati al
challenge and NTEAP has not been an exception. The
on
strong Project Management Unit together with the build-up
capacity
of capacity and capabilities of the NBI institutions has
guarded against this risk and the effort will continue,
responding to needs as they arise.
National
Operation Low
The project has been designed to strengthen institutional
institution al
and human resources capacity in the recipient countries.
al capacity
Component 1.1 "Regional 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
Seven of the ten countries in the Nile region are at present,
and
to High
or have recently been, involved in internal or external
conflict
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 see the
NBI as a tremendous opportunity to achieve cooperation,
economic exchange and eventually 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
23
RISK
RISK
RISK
RISK MONITORING AND RESPONSE (MITIGATION)
TYPE
RATING
GEF project, as well as the larger NBI, in an efficient and
effective manner.
Leadershi Operation Low
The MTR identified a potential predicament for the project
p vs.
al
it needed to maintain its leading role and take initiatives,
Participati
guiding the NBI towards mainstreaming environment; but it
on and
also needed to encourage a participatory approach to the
Ownershi
implementation and management of the project's activities.
p
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 will guide the beneficiaries
towards the project's goal by reconciling their roles of
manager and catalyst.
Sustainabi Strategic
Medium While the project accepts that the expected change of
lity of
approach to management of the Nile Basin environment by
project
the riparians, is a long term target, it must ensure that the
products
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.
Expected global, national and local benefits
74. The Nile Basin is a resource of truly global significance. It is the longest river in the world and
runs across the borders of ten African countries. 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. Any
effort towards the improved management of the Nile Basin can be considered as a benefit of
global significance.
75. At the National level, the NBI-SVP and NTEAP will deliver a range of benefits starting from the
security and stability that comes from transboundary cooperation and benefit sharing;
information and knowledge management and sharing; national awareness and environment
education creating a more alert and sensitive public; training and capacity building in a number
of government sectors such as those responsible for water management, environmental
protection, natural resources management, education, agriculture, etc.
76. At the level of local communities the NTEAP will deliver tangible as well as indirect benefits to
individuals such as farmers and fisherfolk, community groups, NGOs and CBOs. The benefits
will arise from the higher degree of awareness, increased ownership and participatory
management of the Basin resources, the application of best practices and more efficient use of
water resources. NGOs will also benefit from the Micro-Grant Programme, capacity building and
training.
24
Country Ownership : Country Eligibility and Country Drivenness
77. 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.
78. Eight of the nine countries are sub-Saharan countries considered as LDCs. These countries
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."
79. 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:
Ratification of the Rio and Ramsar Conventions by the participating countries
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
80. The project has been under implementation 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.
81. 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 projects and SAPs has been estimated to total some US$27.5 million over six years
and 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 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
25
up and arrangement ensures that NTEAP is responding to country priorities and results in full
ownership of the project by participating countries.
82. 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.
83. 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.
The NBI Shared Vision Program Framework
The SVP Program
Implementation Approach
Nile-COM
Policy level
Nile-TAC
Nile-SEC
PMU -
Benefit Sharing / Integration
Regional
- Integration & Monitoring
Level
- Development scen
enar
ario
ios,
s, Private Sector
enga
gageme
ment
nt
WRM
Conf Bldg
Environ
Power Trade
Agricul.
Appl. Training
-IWRM Policy
- Public information
-Power Forum
-Demontstration/Pilots
Network of Training
Strategic framework &
-& Planning
- Stakeholder
-Power development
-Regional Consult.
Institutes
Transboundary Action
-Communic., info. &
Involvement
-options
-Training
Curriculum Develop.
analysis platform
Spec
Special
ial Basin
sin-wide
Working Groups,
, ad hoc
National
National NBI
tional NB I Of
Offi
fice
ce
Level
(one per countr
try;
y; in
intermin
m iste
teria
rial linka
kage)
Conf Bldg
Environ
Power
Agricul
WRM
Training
Sustainability
84. 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.
85. 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
26
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.
86. 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.
87. 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 wel for its sustainability.
88. 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, followed 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.
89. 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.
90. 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.
Replicability
91. 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.
92. 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.
93. 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.
27
94. 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.
95. 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 excellent 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.
96. 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 fully 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.
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 international conferences and similar
48,050
events
Projects based learning
170,000
Publication and distribution of
200,000
handbooks/manuals
Participation of African RBOs in NBDF
150,000
ICT assistance with IW:LEARN so the website
5,000
can be compatible
TOTAL
693,050
PART III : Management Arrangements
97. The Governments of the Nile Basin are the major stakeholders of NTEAP and the NBI and
through the Nile Council of Ministers (Nile-COM), which is the highest decision-making body of
the NBI, the Governments provide strategic guidance to the operations of the NBI.
Governments are also represented on the PSC which meets yearly to approve NTEAP Work
Plans and provide policy guidance to the project.
28
98. The Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) represents a transitional institutional mechanism, an agreed vision
and Basin-wide framework, and a process to facilitate substantial investment in the Nile Basin to
realize regional socio-economic development. The NBI comprises the Nile-COM supported by a
Nile Technical Advisory Committee (Nile-TAC) and it manages overall fund flows and
disbursements, as wel as information sharing, coordination, integration, and monitoring and
evaluation. As the executing agency for the project, the NBI defines procedures for issues such
as information management and the NBI-website, reporting, monitoring and evaluation.
99. It is supported by the NBI-Secretariat (Nile-SEC) which serves as the executive arm the NBI,
and is the executing agency for the World Bank GEF, the UNDP GEF and Nile Basin Trust Fund
(NBTF) financed portions of the Project.
100. The United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) has been contracted by the NBI to
support it in the execution of the project. UNOPS hires technical and administrative staff for the
SVP projects, and executes all the financial functions of the project on behalf of the NBI.
UNOPS also oversees management of the Project Management Unit in order to facilitate local
contracting, fund management, local procurement, disbursement, programme administration,
and project-level financial monitoring.
101. The Project Management Unit (PMU) for the Transboundary Environment Action Project, is
located in Khartoum, Sudan. The PMU operates at the Basin-wide level and, in support of the
NBI, is responsible for managing and implementing the project in all participating countries. The
PMU coordinates smooth operations, and maintains and enhances the dialogue between the
Nile riparians. It is staffed by the Regional Project Manager, regional Lead Specialists for each
project component as well as other staff, covering knowledge management, monitoring &
evaluation, procurement and finance specialists, and general support. Together they form the
project management team.
102. The Regional Project Manager (RPM) provides overall leadership for and management of
the Project and reports to the Project Steering Committee, the NBI Secretariat as the executing
arm of the NBI, and UNOPS for the effective functioning of the Project Management Unit and the
overall delivery of the Project. The RPM works in close liaison with the Nile Basin Initiative
Secretariat to ensure effective project implementation, as well as regional and inter-sectoral
integration within the Shared Vision Programme.
103. The project has appointed a National Project Coordinator (NPC) in each of the participating
countries to be responsible for supervising and coordinating the implementation of project
activities at the country level. The NPCs provide a crucial link between the thematic Lead
Specialists based in the PMU and the national specialists and organizations involved in
implementing the various project components within the respective countries. The NPC also
serves as a link between NTEAP and the respective national NBI office.
104. There is also a National Micro-Grants Coordinator (MGC) in each of the participating
countries, who is responsible for supervising and coordinating the implementation of the Micro-
Grant Programme activities at the country level.
105. The project has also established National and Regional working groups who participate fully
in the planning and implementation of Project activities at the country level in conjunction with
the NPCs.
106. Finally, the World Bank and UNDP, as the joint Implementing Agencies for the GEF, jointly
support the implementation of NTEAP. Each brings its specialized expertise and comparative
advantage to the benefit of the project in the thematic areas of intervention.
107. An illustration of the project management and implementation framework is in the
organigram on the last page.
29
PART IV : Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget
108. 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.
109. 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.
110. 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.
111. 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 wel .
112. The following M&E elements which have been used during Phase 1 will be continued during
the Second Phase:
113. 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.
114. 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.
115. 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).
116. 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
30
meetings. The RPM will present the PIR to the PSC/TPR, highlighting policy issues and
recommendations for the decision of the PSC participants.
117. 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.
118. 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.
119. 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.
120. 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.
121. 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.
Highlights of Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and corresponding Budget
BUDGET US$
RESPONSIBLE
(excluding
TYPE OF M&E ACTIVITY
TIME FRAME
PARTIES
project staff
time)
Relevance and
· PMU
Within one month of
effectiveness survey for
· Key stakeholders
None
Second Phase start up
Phase 1
Special "inception"
· PMU
Within one month of
meeting of the PSC
· PSC
Second Phase start up
· UNDP/GEF
·
US$60,000
WB
· NBTF representative
· UNOPS
Review current M&E
· M&E LS with PMU
Immediately fol owing
Strategy & Action Plan
· NBI (Sec and TAC)
PSC meeting
·
None
UNDP/GEF
· WB
APR/PIR
· PMU
Annually
· UNDP/GEF
None
· UNOPS
Project Steering
· PSC members as
At least once a year
Committee (PSC)
US$60,000
designated
31
BUDGET US$
RESPONSIBLE
(excluding
TYPE OF M&E ACTIVITY
TIME FRAME
PARTIES
project staff
time)
Meetings / TPR meetings
· PMU
· UNDP/GEF
· WB
· NBTF representative
· UNOPS
· Invited guests
Independent evaluation of · MGLS
During the last quarters
the Micro-Grants
· M&E LS
of 2007 and 2008
Programme
·
US$60,000
MGCs
· SGP as necessary
Participatory monitoring
· M&E LS
During 2008
· NPCs
US$80,000
· Contractors
Compile and distribute
· M&E LS
Early 2008
lessons learnt and best
· Contractors
US$35,600
practice
· KM specialist
Final external evaluation
· PMU
4 months from the end
· UNDP/GEF
of project
· WB
US$71,200
implementation
· 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
· PMU
During the final 3
(technical & financial)
· UNOPS
None
months
· UNDP/GEF
TOTAL INDICATIVE COST
(excluding project team staff time and UNDP staff
US$426,800
and travel expenses)
PART V: Legal Context
122. This Project Document shall be the instrument referred to as such in Article I of the Standard
Basic Assistance Agreement (SBAA) between the Authorities of the Governments of Burundi,
Congo DM, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda and the United Nations
Development Project (UNDP), signed by the parties on 20 November 1975, 13 July 2005, 19
January 1987, 26 February 1981, 17 January 1991, 2 February 1977, 24 October 1987, 30 May
1978, 29 April 1977. The Implementing Agency shall, for the purpose of the Standard Basic
Assistance Agreement, refer to the Government Cooperating Agency described in the
aforementioned agreement.
123. UNDP acts in this project as Implementing Agency of the Global Environment Facility (GEF),
and all rights and privileges pertaining to the UNDP as per the terms of the SBAA shall be
executed mutatis mutandis to GEF.
32
124. The Country Director of the Lead Country Office (Sudan) is authorized to effect in writing the
following types of revisions to this project document, provided it has verified the agreement
thereto by the UNDP GEF unit in writing and is assured that the other signatories of the project
document have no objections to the proposed changes:
· Revisions or additions to any of the annexes of the Project Document
· Revisions which do not involve significant changes in the immediate objectives, outputs or
activities of the project, but are caused by the rearrangement of inputs already agreed to or by cost
increases due to inflation;
· Mandatory annual revisions which rephase the delivery of agreed project inputs or increased
expert or other costs due to inflation or take into account agency expenditure flexibility.
· Inclusion of additional annexes and attachments only as set out in the Project document
The executing agency will provide the Country Director of the Lead CO and UNDP GEF with
certified periodic financial statements and with an annual audit of the financial statements relating to
the status of UNDP (including GEF) funds according to the established procedures set out in the
Programming and Finance manuals . The Audit will be conducted by the legal y recognized auditor
of the executing agency, or by a commercial auditor engaged by the executing agency.
SECTION II : STRATEGIC RESULTS FRAMEWORK & GEF INCREMENT
PART I : Incremental Cost Analysis
Refer to Annex A of the Executive Summary.
PART II : Logical Framework Analysis
The Project Logical Framework Matrix, refocused for the Second Phase, is to be found in Annex B
of the Executive Summary. Annex B.1 is the original LogFrame approved at the time of signature,
Annex B.2 is the refocused LogFrame which will guide implementation of the Second Phase.
SECTION III : TOTAL BUDGET AND WORKPLAN
Refer to Total Budget and Workplan in Annex C
SECTION IV : ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
PART I : Other agreements
Endorsement letters from all nine participating countries are available in a separate pdf file.
Letters of financial commitment are in Annex H of the Executive Summary
PART II : Organogram of Project
See next page
PART III : Terms of Reference for key project staff and main sub-contracts
Full Terms of Reference for all key project personnel are in Annex G of the Executive Summary.
33
PART IV : Stakeholder Involvement and Participation Plan
The following table summarizes the opportunities that are foreseen for stakeholder
involvement and participation during the Second Phase. It will be reviewed and refined
further during the inception period at the commencement of the Second Phase.
OUTPUTS
PARTICIPATION OPPORTUNITIES
Output 1.1 Regional and national
Participation by senior representatives of national
coordination and technical policy
environment agencies and environment research
advise provisions
institutions, technical staff of all the SVP and SAP projects
are crucial to the success of the activities of this output.
Output 1.5. M&E System in place Participation by the Nile Secretariat, senior representatives
of national environment agencies, regional and national
thematic working groups, national steering committees,
NGOs and other SVP and SAP projects as well as regional
and national independent experts who will conduct
evaluations and surveys are essential to the activities of this
output.
Output 2.1. Capacities of NGOs
Participants for activities under this output include national
and CBOs on addressing
NGOs and CBOs, NGO networks and government staff from
environmental threats enhanced
the environment institutions of the NB countries.
Output 2.2 Viable options for
Participants for activities under this output include
community level actions to
communities, NGOs, CBOs, national and local steering
address Nile environmental
committee of Micro-grants. Other stakeholders include
threats (in accordance to the
national independent experts who will conduct reviews and
relevant GEF focal areas)
audits.
produced
Output 3.1 Public awareness on
Participants for activities under this output include national
Nile environmental threats
environment institutions, Environmental Practioners
enhanced in NB Countries
Regional Network, national environmental working groups,
Journalists Network, University Professors Network, School
Teachers Network, the media, students and professionals
from the SVP and SAPs.
Output 3.2 Networks of secondary Participants for activities under this output include the
schools for project based learning
environmental working groups, ministries of education,
established and functioning in NB
School Teachers Network, Journalists Network, NGOs,
countries
District Officers, PTAs, the media and students.
Output 3.3 Networking established Participants for activities under this output include ministries
among Universities and research
of higher education, universities, national environmental
institutions
working groups, Journalists Network, University Professors
Network, the media and students.
Regional and national working groups, Biodiversity and
Wetlands professionals, Ramsar and CBD Conventions
Output 4.1 Wetlands WG
Secretariats, national line ministries and international NGOs
established
such as IUCN.
Participants for activities under this output include regional
Output 4.2 Ecological and
and national working groups, Biodiversity and Wetlands
economic studies on wetlands
professionals, EN and NEL SAPs Professionals, the World
roles in sustainable development
Bank and line ministries, international, regional and national
consultants.
Output 4.3: Wetlands Education
Participants in activities under this output include National
Training and awareness
Wetlands Managers and regional and national working
programmes developed according groups
to needs
Output 4.4. Pilot initiative in
Participants in activities under this output include national
support of capacity building and
Micro-grants Steering Committees, line ministries,
management plans
communities, experts and NGOs.
34
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
Water Quality
Knowledge
&Evaluation Lead
Education&Awareness
Specialist
Monitoring Lead
Management
Specialist.
Lead Specialist
Amir Baker
Specialist
Specialist
Intisar Salih
Maushe Kidundo
John Omwenga
Joel Arumadri
National Project
Finance &
Wetalands and
Bilingual Secretary
National/Local
Web Designer/IT
Coordinators
Procurement
biodiversity Lead
Hasan Abbas
Microgrants
Mohammed
1. Ruzima Salvator,
Specialist
specialist
Coordinators
Rahim
Burundi
Ronald Okuonzi
Henry Busuluwa
1. Philbert Mundanda,
2. Joseph Afata, DR
Burundi
Congo
2. Stephane Lubunga,
3. Ithar Khalil, Egypt
Finance
Procurement
Adminstartive
Receptionist
DR Congo
4. Wubua Mekonnen,
Assistant
Assistant
Assistant
Joseline Ladu
3. Khaled Bayoumy,
Ethiopia
Sadig Goda
Khalid Ibrahim
Riha Abdu
Egypt
5. Lily Kisaka, Kenya
4. Menberu Alebachew,
6. Emannuel Muligirwa,
Ethiopia
Rwanda,
Securty Guards
5. Martin Madara, Kenya
7. Abdel salam,Sudan
(4),Drivers(2),
6. Joseph Bizima,
8. Abdala Shah,
Messenger(1),
Rwanda
Tanzania
7. Ishrag Dirar, Sudan
Cleaner(1),
9. Kigoolo Stephen,
8. Alex Jubex, S.Sudan
Gardener(1)
Uganda
9. Victor Kamagenge,
Tanzania
Drivers(9), Admin
10. Jane Kisakye.Uganda
Assistants(2+)
Drivers(9)
35
Part V to X :
OTHER ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS REQUIRED BY THE SPECIFIC FOCAL AREA,
OPERATIONAL PROGRAM, AND STRATEGIC PRIORITY . Please consult the UNDP-GEF
Regional Coordinator or the UNDP-GEF Intranet for more details.
36
SIGNATURE PAGE
[Note : leave blank until preparing for submission for CEO endorsement]
Country: ___________________
UNDAF Outcome(s)/Indicator(s):
_____________________________________
(Link to UNDAF outcome., If no UNDAF, leave blank)
Expected Outcome(s)/Indicator (s):
_____________________________________
(CP outcomes linked t the SRF/MYFF goal and service line)
_____________________________________
Expected Output(s)/Indicator(s):
_____________________________________
(CP outcomes linked t the SRF/MYFF goal and service line)
_____________________________________
Implementing
partner:
_________________________
(designated institution/Executing agency)
Other
Partners: _________________________
_________________________
Programme Period:_____________
Total budget:
____________
Programme Component:_________
Allocated resources:
____________
Project
Title:__________________
·
Government
____________
Project
ID: _________________
·
Regular
____________
Projec
t Duration: ______________
·
Other:
Manage
ment Arrangement: ______
o Donor _________
o Donor _________
o Donor _________
·
In kind contributions _________
Agreed by (Government): _______________________________________________________
Agreed by (Implementing partner/Executing agency):________________________________
Agreed by (UNDP):______________________________________________________________
37