1
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION REVIEW (PIR) 1998
UNDP/GEF PIR Report 98
For all regular UNDP/GEF projects (excluding enabling and pre-investment activities such as PPAs,
PRIFs, and PDFs) that have been under implementation for over 1 (one) year, as of June 30, 1998
1
Basic Project Data (this section will be completed at headquarters based on the PIMS
data)
1.1
Identifiers
Short Title: Lake Tanganyika
Project Number: RAF92G32
Bureau: RBA
Country/Host: BURUNDI, TANZANIA AND ZAIRE
Focal Area:

BD
CC
OZ
IW
LD
Operational Program: BD: Coastal, marine & freshwater ecosystems
Date of entry in WP (MM/DD/YY): 01-dec-91
ProDoc Signature date (MM/DD/YY): 14-feb-95
1.2
Brief Project Description: The 5-year project aims to improve
understanding of the ecosystem function and effects of stresses on the
lake system; to take action on all other measures necessary to maintain
the health and biodiversity of the ecosystem; and to co-ordinate the
efforts of the four countries to control pollution and to prevent the loss
of the exceptional diversity of Lake Tanganyika.
1.3
Executing Agency
Type: UN Agency
Name: OPS
1.4
National Implementing Agencies:
1.5
Contacts
Res Rep: Mr. Simon Nhongo (a.i.)
Country Office Focal Point: Sylvester Sisila
Project Manager: Andrew Menz
1.6
Financial Data
GEF funding:
10,000,000
Co-financing:
UNDP (TRAC):
Government:
National Implementing Agency:
World Bank:
Regional Dev. Bank:
Others:

---

2
Total Funding for Co-financing:
Total Funding for project:
10,000,000
Associated Project Funding:
1.6.1 Financial Status
Planned disbursements ($millions)
as of 6/30/98
Actual disbursements ($millions)
as of 6/30/98
Timing of disbursement (percentage of planned vs actual expenditures):
2
Project Design (this section will be partly completed by headquarters (HQ)
2.1
Development Objective: (HQ) The ultimate objective of the project is to
demonstrate an effective regional approach to control pollution and to prevent the loss
of the exceptional diversity of Lake Tanganyika's international waters. For this
purpose, the development objective which has to be met is the creation of the capacity
in the four participating countries to manage the lake on a regional basis as a sound and
sustainable environment. The means by which the project proposes to achieve this
development objective are set out in the project document.
2.2
Immediate Objectives: (HQ)
Immediate objective 1
Establish a regional long-term management program for pollution control, conservation
and maintenance of biodiversity in Lake Tanganyika.
Immediate objective 2
Formulation of a regional legal framework for co-operative management of the lake
environment.
Immediate objective 3
Establish a programme of environmental education and training for Lake Tanganyika
and its basin.
Immediate objective 4
Establish tested mechanisms for regional co-ordination in conservation management of
the Lake Tanganyika basin.
Immediate objective 5
In order to produce a full Strategic Plan for long-term application, some specific
studies need to be undertaken. These special studies will also add to the understanding
of the lake as a whole and, in some cases, provide the baseline and framework for long-
term research and monitoring programmes.
Immediate objective 6
The implementation and sustainability of the Lake Tanganyika Strategic Plan and

---

3
incorporated environmental management proposals.
2.3
Performance Indicators:
Note that the performance indicators listed are the original indicators pertaining to the
six immediate objectives. As requested at the previous TPR others are being developed
to measure performance against key outputs.
How can the achievement of Objective 1 be observed?
· When a Management Plan (the Lake Tanganyika Strategic Action Plan) is accepted
by all riparian states, is supported by appropriate legislation and a Regional
Management Committee and supporting technical committees are formally
constituted and supported by legislation;
· When nationally defined action programmes contained within the management plan
are funded and operational.
How can the achievement of Objective 2 be observed?
·
·
When a draft regional agreement for the co-operative management of the Lake
("the Agreement") has been drafted and approved by representatives from each of the
countries.
·
·
When the Agreement has been formally signed by all, or the majority, of the
countries.
How can the achievement of Objective 3 be observed?
· When national environment education programmes involving NGOs and
Government agencies are underway which address the specific issues related to the
lake.
· When the effects of such programmes can be seen in terms of increased awareness
at all levels, including policy level, and changes brought about in activities identified
as deleterious to the well-being of the lake.
· When a cadre of trained environmental scientists and technicians are available to
provide governmental institutions and the Regional Lake Basin Management
Committee with the information and recommendations required to take rational
management decisions.
How can the achievement of Objective 4 be observed?
· When an operational Lake Tanganyika Basin Management Committee, as the
principal body for regional co-ordination in policy management, exists that has
demonstrated its ability to tackle the issues effectively by engendering appropriate
action through a strategic planning process.
· When regular meetings of technical working groups take place within an overall
monitoring and management structure with a clear mandate and the necessary
resources to collect and analyse data from monitoring programmes and formulate
recommendations for mitigation of threats to the lake's biodiversity.
· When a regional information exchange network exists to support national activities.

---

4
How can the achievement of Objective 5 be observed?
· Successful completion of the various special studies with published results and
recommendations. These will identify trends in current and potential threats to the
lake, make recommendations for mitigation and cost effective monitoring.

· Successful integration of monitoring and scientific research programmes proposals
into a strategic planning process supported by the necessary institutional
mechanisms.
How can the achievement of Objective 6 be observed?
· When underwater conservation areas are established in all four countries with
operational management plans;
· When long term research and monitoring programmes are operational with funding
for the time horizon of the Strategic Plan and which include the participation of all
stakeholder groups;
· When operational management interventions are funded that are fully effective in
identifying and responding to environmental threats to the lake and the needs of the
communities affected.
2.4
Assumptions:
Note: to-date none of the project documents list explicit assumptions but talk of risks
and constraints; the following assumptions are based on those.
Assumption 1.
That the security situation will improve all around the lake, and that expected short
periods of insecurity will not impede the implementation on of the project.
Probability that the assumption may fail to hold or materialise. High
The project has been and continues to be seriously affected by the current conflicts in
DR Congo and Burundi, although the latter is currently less of a problem.
Assumption 2
That the 4 countries continue cooperation on the lake after the project.
Probability that the assumption may fail to hold or materialise. Modest
This assumes external funding is found to finance co-operative action. Without the risk
of failure becomes high.
Assumption 3
That the project is given low priority by the recipient governments and diverts
resources to other environmental projects.
Probability that the assumption may fail to hold or materialise. Modest to Substantial.
This varies across the region, Burundi gives this project a high priority whereas in
Tanzania it competes with many others. In DRC particularly in the lake region it is

---

5
high but seems less so in Kinshasa. In Zambia it is also in competition with many
other projects but they give it reasonable priority.
Assumption 4
That funding is forthcoming for recommended mitigating actions either from local
governments or donors.
Probability that the assumption may fail to hold or materialise. Modest
It seems reasonable to suppose that funding will be obtained for action beyond the
duration of the project provided they are seen to be part of a regional programme
within the context of a Strategic Action Plan support by the four governments.
Assumption 5
That the legislatures of the Lake Tanganyika basin countries fail to move towards
harmonising their natural resources legislation regarding the lake.
Probability that the assumption may fail to hold or materialise. Currently High
This depends largely on obtaining ratification of the legal agreement being drawn up by
the project for the management of the lake. Current political relations are not generally
good between the four countries. Nevertheless the impact of this assumption failing to
materialise in the medium term would be somewhat mitigated if the Strategic Action
Plan were signed and implemented.
Assumption 6
That the Strategic Action Plan (SAP) developed by the project is signed at high level
in all four governments.
Probability that the assumption may fail to hold or materialise. Currently
Substantial
Nevertheless a modest improvement in relations could enable the SAP to be signed as
this would constitute a general agreement of principals and priorities for action to
address transboundary concerns rather than a legally binding treaty.
Assumption 7.
That areas of conflict between the need for conservation and the expectations of local
communities can be resolved in part through the generation of alternative livelihoods.
Probability that the assumption may fail to hold or materialise. Modest.
Assumption 8.
Level of local resources, especially staff, available to carry out special studies is of
sufficient standard.
Probability that the assumption may fail to hold or materialise. Modest.
Varies across countries and disciplines but in some cases available staff of low
standard.

---

6
Assumption 9.
That the project will leave in place a cadre of individuals in all four countries in all
stakeholder institutions able to carry forward the Strategic Action Plan.
Probability that the assumption may fail to hold or materialise. Modest.
Probably the greater risk is that key individuals will cease to be available at critical
times in the early stages of handing over full responsibility for the SAP to the region.
Assumption 10.
That two full time senior managerial staff in the field would be sufficient to implement
the project.
This was an implicit assumption of the agreed project design was very risky and
failed.
3
Project Performance
3.1
Procurement Data
Please report the US$ value of UNDP/GEF Payments to Supplying Countries for
Procurement in GEF Donor Countries. Please enter Project expenditure from project
start up until December 31, 1997 into the matrix against the donor country supplying
the personnel, sub-contract, equipment and training to the project.
Supplying Country
Personnel
Sub-con
Equipment
Training
Total
tracts
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Canada
China
Côte d'Ivoire
Czech Republic
Denmark
Egypt
Finland
France

---

7
Supplying Country
Personnel
Sub-con
Equipment
Training
Total
tracts
Germany
Greece
India
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Korea
Luxembourg
Mexico
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nigeria
Norway
Pakistan
Portugal
Russia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
United Kingdom
United States
Please calculate the following ratio:
Procurement from donor countries as a % of total project expenditure from project
start up to December 1997:
3.2
Project Implementation
3.2.1 Implementation Progress Rating
Immediate Objective, 1.
Satisfactory:
The development of the SAP under the currently approved process is going well
although the full participation of Congo in the development of the first draft is now
doubtful.

---

8
Immediate Objective, 2.
Satisfactory:
The process agreed at the regional workshop held in February 1998 can still be
expected to produce a document agreeable to all in good time. However, whether or
not each country signs the Agreement is a matter of local foreign policy and cannot be
guaranteed to occur within the lifetime of the current project.
Immediate Objective, 3.
Unsatisfactory:
Progress within this very broad objective is patchy across the region being best in
Zambia and currently non-existent in Congo and Burundi. Subsequent to the
agreements made at the last TPR remedial actions, including the appointment of a full
time Socio-Economic/Environmental Education field co-ordinator/facilitator are being
implemented. In addition a training needs assessment has been carried out that will
result in a more coherent approach to the achievement of this objective.
Immediate Objective, 4.
Satisfactory:
This objective depends largely on the outcome of the legal component and the
development of an agreed structure for the lake management body during the latter
stages of the project.
Immediate Objective, 5.
Unsatisfactory:
Due to general delays in physical implementation, some avoidable, but many
unavoidable owing largely to large geographical and institutional scope of project
coupled with the lack of full time field staff. These factors have been exacerbated by
periods of limited or no access to large sections of the lake shore.
Immediate Objective, 6.
It is too early in the project to rate this in terms of implementation as it relates
essentially to the implementation of Strategic Action Plan. Nevertheless it is likely
that such implementation will fall short of the original project expectations as on the
current schedule it was due to begin around August 1998 This is now not possible
because of the status of other project components.
Project as a whole:
Unsatisfactory:
See below

---

9
3.2.2 Reasons for success or difficulties (such as delays, cost overruns) in
implementation
Successes has been due to dedication of a small number of field staff both regional
and external working under unexpectedly difficult conditions; augmented by high
quality external and local consultants.
Difficulties have resulted from delays in choice and procurement of equipment, delays
owing to lack of clarity regarding local reimbursement for services and other matters
regarding administration in the field, wars, shortage of full time field staff and of
quality part time staff.
3.3
Project Impact
3.3.1 Impact rating
Project as a whole
Currently unsatisfactory but cannot be judged accurately until project completed.
Note: The Lake Tanganyika Project must be considered as a multi­focal area project,
containing elements of the Operational Programmes for Biodiversity and International
Waters.
3.3.2 Verbal assessment of project impact
It is premature to try and judge project impact as it is at a stage where in spite of
previous difficulties much could still be achieved through the ongoing strategic
planning process and the activities that could lead from that. To say more with two
years still to run would be speculative.
3.3.3 Basis for impact assessment:
3.3.3.1 What is the data or information base for your assessment?
3.3.3.2 What are your experiences with impact indicators?
3.3.3.3 Can the change in indicator values be measured against a baseline or a target?
3.3.3.4 What is the main obstacle to assess the impact of the project?
3.4
Project Relevance
Please assess adequacy of project design and validity of project purpose
Original project design was poor owing in particular to a lack of detailed consideration
of project implementation logistics, including project expectations of national
involvement support in kind expected and conditions under which that support would
be provided.

---

10
Project purpose remains valid as without a raised awareness nationally coupled with a
lake wide i.e. regional overview, and agreed planning process threats to the lake will
almost certainly increase to the point where reversal is impossible.
3.5
Monitoring and Evaluation
3.5.1 Please describe briefly the Monitoring and Evaluation procedures and tools in
place.
a) Quarterly progress reports
b) Progress review at National working group meetings
c) Progress review at Regional Steering committee meetings
d) Tripartite reviews
e) Mid-term review - now due, expected in November 1998
3.5.2 Please indicate dates for Tripartite meetings held in the past and/or scheduled for
the future.
First January 1998
Second due January 1999
3.5.3 What steps have been taken to put in place a monitoring system that extends
beyond the term of the project to monitor impact?
None.
3.6
Sustainability and Replication
The process whereby the Strategic Action Plan for the lake is being developed
provides good potential for sustainability as it emphasises the interactive and cyclical
nature of the process rather than the plan as a one off output. It also provides a
logical process for decision making and setting priorities for action that does not
necessarily depend and on large inputs of resources.
Sustainability of lake health indicators will be almost entirely dependent on the ability
to leverage additional funding before the end of the current project.

---

11
4
Stakeholder involvement
4.1
Type of stakeholder involved in which phase of the project cycle
Stakeholders
Government
NGOs
For
Academic
Others
Profit
/Research
Org.
Institut.
Project
national
regional
local
internati
national
commu
phase
onal
nity org
Design
x
x
x
Implement.
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
M&E
x
x
x
x
4.2
All Stakeholder
4.2.1 Does the actual set of stakeholders reflect the real stakeholders?
Yes.
4.2.2 Estimation of time and cost for adequate stakeholder involvement
Through workshops, meetings, both nationally and regionally and on-the-job training
a large proportion of the projects time and money is spent on trying to involve
stakeholders at the different levels. Owing to the very broad stakeholder base of this
project maintenance of continuity of involvement throughout the project is a major
challenge and a heavy drain on resources. Eg the agreed basic SAP process (workshops
meetings etc) is expected to cost $400,000 over 15 months.
4.2.3 Which are the mechanisms set up by project management to assure participation
of stakeholders in decision making?
Village environmental committees.
National working groups
National steering committees
National and local, NGO and private sector participation in SAP process.
Environmental Education awareness programmes and PRAs at village level.
4.2.4 Assessment of how stakeholder involvement has influenced (degree of
ownership) project design, implementation and impact.
Most probably had little involvement in project design and involvement in certain
sectors of project implementation has not been adequate. However the content of the
SAP is largely being driven by local stakeholders as will be the design of proposals
for mitigating actions.

---

12
4.2.5 Please describe efforts made to involve women in project design and
implementation and the effect of this on the prospects for achieving global
environmental objectives.
To date no specific efforts to involve women have been made other than to ensure as
much participation as possible during participatory rural appraisals.
4.3
NGO Stakeholder
Please refer to attachment on Stakeholder Involvement.
4.3.1 Full names of each participating NGOs.
Burundi:
Advisory: (FAO/FINNIDA) Lake Tanganyika Fisheries Research Project.
Working Group: ODEB (Organisation pour la Défense de l'Environnement au
Burundi)
Congo:
Advisory:RESE, MEB (Mouvement des Ecologistes de Bukavu), NOPTA (Nouvelles
options de Pêche pour le lac Tanganyika), CEPAC (Centre d'Etude et de
promotion pour les Actions de Dev. Communautaire),SOCODEFI
Working Group: CADIC (Comite d'Action pour le Developpement Integral),
Tanzania
Advisory: TACARE,(lake Tanganyika Catchment Reforestation and Education)
WCST, (Wildlife conservation society of Tanzania) CARITAS, Diocese of Western
Tanganyika
Zambia
Advisory: ZOS (Zambian Ornithological Society), IUCN
Working group: WWF
4.3.3 Please indicate factors that limit NGO involvement
Much of project has strong technical/scientific bias for which NGOs are not usually
appropriate. Project components that are likely to make more use of NGO
involvement will be the Environmental Education/Socio-economic components once
mitigation actions are agreed upon as part of the SAP process, and parts of training
strategy.
5
Cross-Cutting Issues
5.1
Leveraging additional resources and actions
5.1.1 Financial leveraging

---

13
Apart from the co-financing contributions reflected in the budget, how has the project
mobilised additional financial resources for either addressing global environmental
concerns or financing baseline activities? Please also indicate the amounts of leveraged
resources.
No action to date.
5.1.2 Actions "leveraged"
5.1.2.1 How has the project contributed to bring about changes in Implementing
Agency, other donor, or country strategies ­ or private business practices ­ to give
stronger emphasis to global environmental issues?
No action to date.
5.1.2.2 How has the project contributed to bringing about policy or legislation
changes?
No action to date.
5.2
Capacity development
5.2.1 How has the project contributed to human resource development?
Briefly summarise training and education indicators such as a) number of degrees or
certificates earned; b) number of managers introduced to environment impact
assessment methodologies etc.
TRAINING UNDERTAKEN TO DATE ON LTBP
Date
Target Group/s
Participants
Title of training
Training Location
JAN-Feb -local officials
PRA Training
Mpulungu & villages
`97
Workshop & Practice
(extractive)
On the
FPSS team and
Tz x 6, Zam x 5
Fishing Practices
Mpulungu & Kigoma
job
fishers
6-8/5/97 Local stake-
80 local
Local stakeholders
Zambia: Mpulungu
holders
stakeholders
workshop
05/06/9
EE practitioners
Nsongela
Awareness to Actions
ICCE, UK
7
Environmental
Tarimo (NEEC )
Education methods
6/98-
Ms Emma Msaky Pollen analyses
University of Arizona
6/99
Drama group
Drama group training
Mpulungu
09.'97
Wildlife fisheries Tz x 3, Bur x 4
Dive Training &
Kigoma
CRH officials
DR Congo x 4
Underwater survey
Zam x 4
06-
local officials
ca. 20
PRA Workshops
Kigoma /Rukwa
09/97
and some pr.

---

14
stakeholders
09/97
Workshop
11 Tz
GIS intro
Kigoma
attendees
7 Za
10/97
Anglophone
11 Tz
Joint SS Technical
Kigoma
Scientists
7 Za
Training Workshop
Nov 97
Nat Met training
5 Tanzanians
NOAA satellite data
Kigoma
schools
instructors
capture & analysis
3 days,
Village Headmen
Za
Mpulungu
Jan `98
April/M
Regional (4
SE/EE workshop
Mpulungu
ay 98
countries)
June/
BIOSS
Francophone
BIOSS and follow-up to
Bujumbura
July
Dive training
1998
BIOSS
Anglophone
Dive and Underwater
Zambia, Tanzania
parks staff,
Survey training
To be
BIOSS teams
BIOSS dive
Taxonomic Training for
Cruise of Congo Coast
set,
Teams +
Biodiversity Monitoring
1998/9
terrestrial
support
ongoing
Pollution
Field teams
on-the-job
Burundi, Tanzania
ca 5
Zambia
ongoing
sedimentation
Field teams
on-the-job
Tanzania Zambia
ca 4
Burundi
ongoing
BIOSS
Field teams
on-the-job
Congo Burundi, Tanz
ca 6
Zambia.
5.2.2 How has the project contributed to institutional development?
Institution
Government
NGOs
For
Academic
Others
Profit
/Research
Org
Institut.
national
regional
local
internati
national
commu
onal
nity org
Number
48
10
5
3
6
5
4
6
2
Please estimate the level of capacity developed for each category of institution:
limited, moderate or substantial increase in capacity
Limited
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Moderate
x
x
x
x
Substantial
Briefly summarise institutional development indicators such as a) adoption of
environmental management plans; b) inter institutional linkage and networks
The process for the development of the Strategic Action Plan for the management of
the lake has been accepted by all countries and as all major stakeholders are involved it

---

15
may be expected that the final plan will be adopted. Inter institutional linkages and
networks have been developed mainly through the National Working Groups and
through the formation of multi-institutional teams to carry out research under the
projects various technical special studies.
In addition to a) and b) appropriate indicators would be, implementation of relevant
monitoring and research programmes; regional management body formed and
functional; adoption of legal agreement for lake management; community based
institutions for monitoring lake resource usage.
5.2.3 What factors constrain project efforts to increase the capacity of recipient
countries/institutions?
The very broad range of institutions involved limits the resources that can be directed
at any individual institution and thus limits the impact.
Limited number of full time staff dedicated to capacity building.
Lack of suitable staff for training in certain subject/institution combinations.
Until recently, lack of regional training strategy based on in-depth training needs
assessment.
Low priority of Lake Tanganyika as a national concern.

---

16
6
Lessons Learned
Please describe briefly the "lessons learned".
Regarding implementation the principal lesson is that in a project with such a broad
remit, geographically and institutionally plus a number of fairly high risk assumptions
more resources need to be committed to planning operational factors prior to project
implementation. These include: careful consideration of the level of full time field staff
required both international and regional. Identification of key institutions, their
precise role and the resources they will receive and be required to commit.
Remuneration/financial compensation payable to (government) staff/institutions.
In addition far more local consultation and involvement should have taken place in the
early stages of the project in a more formal manner than actually occurred.
Ideally some regionally agreed partitioning of budgetary resources prior to
implementation would have been of assistance in assuaging fears of unfair distribution
of resources among the four countries.
Reports:
Please list any mid-term or final evaluation report, annual performance review report
(APR), completion report, etc. available for further reference (HQ)
Project Performance Evaluation Report. October 1997
Report of Tripartite Review Meeting, Lusaka, Zambia, 19-20 January 1998
Your opinion:
Please make any comments you might have on the PIR questionnaire, the PIR process
or other PIR related matters. Your comments will help us to improve the PIR process
for the next year.
From the project manager:
It would be useful to have clarification of the role of the implementing sub-contractor in
this process which is ostensibly aimed at the UNDP project officers responsible.
Repeated reporting in different formats, PPER, PIR etc results in appear to be
unnecessary repetition and distraction from implementation of the project.
Information on how precisely this information is used and feed-back on the outcome of
the process would make it a more meaningful exercise.

---