PROJECT BRIEF
1. IDENTIFIERS:
PROJECT NUMBER:
PROJECT NAME:
INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT OF LAND-BASED
ACTIVITIES IN THE SÃO FRANCISCO BASIN
DURATION:
2.5 years
IMPLEMENTING AGENCY:
UNEP
EXECUTING AGENCY:
OAS
Secretaria de Recursos Hidricos (SRH) do
Ministerio do Meio Ambiente, dos Recursos
Hidricos e da Amazonia Legal do Brasil
(MMA)
REQUESTING COUNTRY OR COUNTRIES:
Brazil
ELIGIBILITY:
Under paragraph 9(b) of the Instrument.
GEF FOCAL AREA:
International waters with relevance to the
cross-cutting area of Land Degradation
GEF PROGRAMMING FRAMEWORK:
OP 10 Contaminants based Operational
Program, GPA element.
2. SUMMARY: This project develops a watershed management program for the Rio Sao
Francisco Basin, which discharges into the South West Atlantic Large Marine Ecosystem and
Brazil Current. The strategic, integrated and sustainable program for the management of this
system and its coastal zone to be formulated during this project will address the physical,
biological, chemical and institutional root causes of the progressive degradation which is
affecting the basin and, particularly, the coastal ecosystems. The project will focus on the
use of economic instruments and catalyze implementation activities with incremental costs
to restore and sustain the coastal zone through improved river basin management included in
the watershed management program. The project will complement basin-scale interventions
by the Government of Brazil, financed in part from national sources and by The World Bank
through the Program for Water Development (PROAGUA) and other donors. The project
forms the Latin American demonstration project under the Global Program of Action for the
Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities (GPA) GEF operational
program element.
3. COSTS AND FINANCING (MILLION US):
GEF:
- Project:
US$ 4.08 million
- PDF B:
US$ 0.341 million
- Project Support Costs:
US$ 0.28 million
- Monitoring/Evaluation:
US$ 0.07 million
- Subtotal GEF
US$ 4.771 million
C O-FINANCING:
- UNEP
US$ 0.175 million
- WB(PROAGUA loan)
US$ 8.625 million
- OAS
US$ 0.1 million
- Government
US$ 8.543 million
- Subtotal
US$17.443 million
TOTAL PROJECT C OST:
US$ 22.214 million
4. ASSOCIATED FINANCING (MILLION US )
US$ 3.5 (National PROAGUA)
SRH/MMA
US$10.0 (coastal zone impact assess.)
SEPRE
US $ 1.5 (State of Sergipe watershed
JICA
management grant)
5. OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT ENDORSEMENT:
Name: Daniel Ribeiro de Oliveira
Title: GEF Operational Focal Point
Organization: Secretario de Assuntos
Date: May 27, 1998

---

2
Internacionais, do Ministerio do
Planejamento e Orcamento, Brazil
6. IA CONTACT:
Ahmed Djoghlaf, Executive Co-ordinator, UNEP/GEF
Co-ordination Office, UNEP, Nairobi
Tel. 254 2 624166/ Fax 254 2 520825
Internet: ahmed.djoghlaf@unep.org

---

3
LIST OF ACRONYMS
CEEIVASF
Comite Executivo de Estudos Integrados do
Vale do Sao Francisco
CEMIG
Companhia Energetica de Minas Gerias
CHESF
Companhia Hidrelectrica do Sao Francisco
CODEVASF
Companhia de Desenvolvimento do Vale do
Sao Francisco
CPRM
Companhia de Pesquisa de Recursos
Minerais
EMBRAPA
Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa
Agropecuaria
EMINWA
Environmentally-sound Management of
Inland Water
GPA
Global Plan of Action for the Protection
Marine Environment from Land-Based
Activities
IFAD
International Fund for Agricultural
Development
IGAM
Instituto Mineiro de Gestao das Aguas
IWRN
Inter-American Water Resources Network
JICA
Japanese International Cooperation Agency
LME
Large Marine Ecosystem
MMA
Ministry of Environment, Water
Resources and Legal Amazon
OAS
General Secretariat of the Organization of
American States
PLANEVASF
Master Plan for the Development of the
Sao Francisco River Valley
PROAGUA
World Bank Program for Water
Development
SFRB
Sao Francisco River Basin
SRH
Secretariat of Water Resources of the
Ministry of Water Resources and Legal
Amazon
WMP
Watershed Management Program

---

4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1.
Background and context
1.1 GEF Programming Context. This project meets the objectives of the GEF Operational
Program #10 International Waters Land-based Activities Demonstration Project component
(paragraph 10.13). The project will identify specific strategies, investment projects and activities
that will meet GEF criteria, catalyze preparation of an integrated watershed management program
(WMP), and serve as a demonstration project for the implementation of the Global Programme of
Action for the Protection of the Marine Envcironment from Land-based Activities (GPA) in
Latin America.
1.2 Implementing Agency Programming Context. The proposed actions are consistent with
the GEF principle of linking project elements with major cross-cutting issues such as land
degradation, and with the UNEP Environmentally Sound Management of Inland Waters
(EMINWA) integrated watershed management planning process and related, regional seas
programme. The proposed actions are also consistent with UNEP's role under the GPA.
1.3 GPA Programming Context. (Annex 9) The goal of the GPA (adopted by 109 governments
at the Washington Conference in November 1995) is to prevent degradation of the marine
environment from land-based activities by assisting States in preventing and reducing major
threats to the health, productivity and biodiversity of the marine environment resulting from
human activities on land and in coastal areas. Thus, the GPA is designed to be a source of
conceptual and practical guidance to assist States in taking action, individually or jointly within
their respective policies, priorities and resources, that will lead to the prevention, reduction,
control and/or elimination of degradation of the marine environment, as well as to its recovery
from the impacts of land-based activities.
1.4 National Programming Context. Activities in the Brazilian Coastal zone are regulated by
Federal Law No 7661/88, the National Environment Program, that, inter alia, establishes the
National Coastal Management Plan, the principle objectives of which are the sustainable use of
natural resources in the Coastal Zone, and preservation, conservation and rehabilitation of
ecosystems in the Coastal Zone to promote sustainable development. A coastal zone inventory
and macrodiagnostic, including the Rio Sao Francisco estuary, was completed in 1996 by the
Government of Brazil with support from The World Bank. This study identified in a mapping
format the major human uses of the coastal zone of Brazil, environmentally sensitive sites, and
conservation units and reserves, which, in the Rio Sao Francisco coastal zone, are related
primarily to agricultural use and conservation of endangered species, including sea turtles.
1.5 The Master Plan for the Development of the Sào Francisco River Valley (PLANVASF) was
completed in 1989, with the assistance of the OAS, and was designed to provide incentives to the
public and private sectors for the development of the basin. This plan included proposals for the
development of natural and water resources, increased food production through irrigated

---

5
agriculture, increased power generation supplying the National Network, increased water and
sanitation services, improved river navigation, and enhanced environmental protection. This plan
was adopted as a part of Federal Law 8851/94, as the Plan of Economic and Social Development
of Northeastern Brazil.
1.6 Subsequently, the Federal Government passed Law 9433/97, creating the National Policy on
Water Resources and establishing public institutions such as the basin committees for the
issuance of water rights and implementation of water use payment systems. With the approval
of the National Policy Committee on Water Resources, as established by the National
Constitution, the Federal Government is promulgating criteria and guidelines to be followed by
states in implementing federal law 9433/97. Presently the States of Bahia, Pernambuco and
Sergipe, within the Rio Sao Francisco Basin (SFRB), have passed legislation consistent with
these objectives, principles and guidelines and are creating institutions to implement the new law
at the State level, and the States of Minas Gerais and Alagoas are presently modifying or creating
water legislation in order to comply with federal regulations.
1.7 In this context, the Government of Brazil requested technical assistance in developing more
integrated approaches to the management of land-based activities in the SFRB. The present
project has been prepared using GEF PDF-B funds and is based upon extensive public
consultation with stakeholders in the participating states, and initial agreement concerning
institutional arrangements for implementation of the project. This proposed project is citizen-
driven, and public and stakeholder participation remains an integral part of all components
identified in this project. PDF-B funds were used to identify a framework for the development
of: mechanisms to control the movement of priority contaminants from the land surface to
nearshore marine waters; mechanisms for managing releases of water within this regulated river
system; conservation of aquatic biological diversity; prevention of land degradation and
rehabilitation of degraded lands in critical watersheds; and implementation of environmentally
sound development proposals throughout the basin that will benefit the watershed and coastal
zone.
1.8 Building upon previous studies, the primary objective of this project will be to conduct
planning and feasibility studies required to formulate a WMP that will promote environmentally
sustainable development of the basin as a means of managing environmental degradation of the
coastal zone. The WMP will include the identification and implementation of appropriate
economic instruments, required to incorporate land-based environmental concerns affecting the
coastal zone into the future development policies, plans and programs of the riparian states.
Evaluation of the use of economic instruments as a policy mechanism to achieve environmentally
sustainable modes of development is viewed as a key element of the WMP. The project will
guide the Ministry of Environment, Water Resources and Legal Amazon (MMA) of the Federal
Government of Brazil in their implementation of complementary World Bank loan financed
programs (e.g., the Program for Water Development, PROAGUA) as well as those actions with
incremental global benefit that might be implemented in subsequent activities.

---

6
1.9 System Boundaries. The SFRB, which extends over approximately 640,000 km2,
comparable to the drainage basins of the Colorado or Columbia rivers of North America,
discharges across the North East Brazil Shelf to the Southwest Atlantic Large Marine Ecosystem
(LME) and Brazil Current (Annex 7). The river covers a large portion of the area known as the
"Drought Polygon of Brazil" as it traverses climatic zones ranging from humid to arid as it flows
through five states in Northeastern Brazil (the States of Alagoas, Bahia, Minas Gerais,
Pernambuco, and Sergipe, plus the Federal District and State of Goias at the headwaters of
tributary streams). Land-based activities in these riparian states include mining, agricultural,
urban and industrial activities, that deliver contaminants to the river system and thence to the
coastal zone. Hence, the SFRB forms an appropriate case study under the GPA (Annex 9) and
the GPA operational program of the GEF.
1.10 The basin is divided into the upper, middle, lower middle, and lower sub-basins, plus the
oceanic end point, each with distinct environmental and socio-economic characteristics. The
estuarine wetlands located at the debouchment of the river into the South West Atlantic form a
particularly important and environmentally sensitive habitat. The ecological structure and
function of this habitat, as well as its physical integrity, is currently under threat due to
unsustainable hydrological management and land use practices within the basin. Except for flood
flows during the wet season, flow originates in the humid and semi-humid areas near the
headwaters. Tributaries in the arid and semi-arid regions of the middle and lower middle sub-
basins are largely intermittent, although flood flows in these streams may cause localized
problems of flooding, erosion and sedimentation which affect the entire lower portion of the river
system and the coastal zone. Some 13 million people are resident in this basin, principally
concentrated in the upper sub-basin.
1.11 Immediate and Intermediate Problems. The priority environmental concerns in the
SFRB are thought to include soil loss, and contamination by organic pollutants and heavy metals
which will be systematically identified and quantified through the activities of this project. The
SFRB is a very complex area, in which development has occurred in an historically haphazard
and sectoral manner, with relatively little integrated planning, and within a relatively weak
institutional framework. This has resulted in a less than optimal use of its water resources and
degradation of the coastal zone, the root causes of which will be identified during the conduct of
this project. Large stretches of river have been regulated, altering natural river flows that
coincided with fish spawning periods. In addition, flow modifications have affected the
deposition of sediments, nutrients and other contaminants in the system; altered erosion and
deposition patterns; accelerated land degradation; and, modified the delivery of nutrients to the
lower reaches of the basin and the coastal zone. As a consequence, significant modifications in
the freshwater, estuarine and marine fauna and flora have occurred.
1.12 Serious environmental problems identified in the Upper sub-basin include the direct
discharge of untreated municipal effluents, and industrial and mining effluents containing heavy
metals and cyanides. In addition, there is widespread use of agro-chemicals, and deforestation is
occurring on a large scale due to the demand for charcoal and the clearing of land for agricultural

---

7
use and mining. River contamination, and the existence of large and medium size dams, further
impact fish and aquatic fauna in this sub-basin. In the Middle sub-basin, environmental
problems, while limited in comparison to the other sub-basins, include water quality problems
(largely from upstream sources), land degradation, and accelerating erosion and desertification.
Environmental problems in the Lower-middle sub-basin include water quality problems,
contaminant deposition in reservoirs, impaired fish migration, high rates of soil erosion due to
agricultural activities, contamination of surface and ground waters by runoff from irrigated lands,
and modification of river basin and estuarine geomorphology due to the presence of flow
regulation structures.
1.13 All of these upstream problems contribute to, or are related to, environmental problems in
the lower sub-basin and coastal zone which include: sedimentation; eutrophication in the
reservoirs; and oligotrophication of coastal waters; alteration of river flow regimes; reductions in
numbers and diversity of fish populations and populations of threatened and endangered species
such as the sea turtle which nests along the coast; and increased incidence of endemic diseases.
2.
Rationale and Objectives
2.1 Objectives. Building upon the previous studies and the PDF-B phase, the objective of this
GEF-GPA demonstration project is to assist the Government of Brazil to promote sustainable
development of the SFRB and its coastal zone, based upon the implementation of an integrated
approach to management of the watershed and coastal zone. The goal of this integrated and
sustainable management program for the SFRB and its coastal zone is to catalyze, through
planning and feasibility studies documented within a WMP, the incorporation of land-based
environmental concerns into development policies, plans and programs for the SFRB for the
protection of its coastal zone. If appropriate, implementation proposals, with incremental costs,
will be prepared subsequently for submission to the GEF Council for consideration.
2.2 This project proposal is being compiled at a time when the Government of Brazil and the
riparian states of the Rio São Francisco Basin are commencing the implementation of Federal Law
9433/97. The establishment of mechanisms and means for the integrated management of the
SFRB under this law can beneficially affect the South West Atlantic LME and Brazil Current
into which the river discharges. The implementation of the public participation and grass-roots
level water resources management structures, especially, provides an opportunity for the creation
and implementation of effective structures, legal controls, and fiscal instruments to mitigate land
and water management practices that degrade water quality, modify hydrological and hydraulic
characteristics of the basin, and/or adversely affect the water resources of the Basin and its
coastal zone.
2.3 GEF Project Approach. GEF incremental financing of strategic actions within this
watershed at this time provides additional opportunities to incorporate global environmental
concerns (i.e., the rehabilitation of the coastal zone and estuarine environments and critical
ecosystems affecting the South West Atlantic LME and Brazil Current) within a coherent

---

8
framework of actions and policies as set forth in the WMP, the net result of which will be the
sustainable use, including environmental use, of the land and water resources of the SFRB and its
coastal zone extending into the South West Atlantic LME.
2.4 Complementary Interventions. Components proposed for implementation during the
project period will be conducted in parallel with numerous on-going and proposed planning and
development activities. Activities that directly relate to the conduct of the proposed project
include, inter alia, the proposed US $ 25 to US $ 30 million river basin planning element of the
Program for Water Development (PROAGUA) financed by The World Bank, and coordinated by
the OAS, to promote rural water supply in semi-arid Northeast Brazil including parts of the
SFRB (US $ 8.6 million of this loan amount has been earmarked for use as co-financing in
support of this project for pilot projects in environmental management and institutional
strengthening as described in Annex 5), and national initiatives for the development of agriculture
and hydro-power development by various parastatal corporations (CODEVASF, CHESF, etc.).
A complementary project extending the concepts of PROAGUA throughout Brazil (the
"National PROAGUA") is also being implemented with an additional nationally financed
investment, a portion of which will be allocated to water resources management in the SFRB.
2.5 The Secretariat for Water Resources (SRH/MMA) is initiating implementation of a US $ 3.5
million program of infrastructure improvement in the State of Minas Gerais. The Secretariat for
Regional Policy (SEPRE) is initiating a US $ 10 million basin-wide assessment of likely coastal
zone impacts that could arise from the construction of the proposed inter-basin transfer scheme.
The Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA) is initiating a US $ 1.5 million watershed
management program in the State of Sergipe, with emphasis on the state portion of the SFRB.
Coordination of these programs within the SRH/MMA will be by common project teams
appointed by the Secretary for Water Resources. These teams will be responsible for liaison
with other project teams operating within the basin: strengthening of interagency communication
to facilitate information exchange is an explicit element of the organizational structure
development activity identified below.
3.
Project Components/Activities and Expected Results
3.1 Proposed Project Components are designed to provide information for, and permit
formulation of, a WMP for the SFRB and its coastal zone, and are concentrated in four principal
components as set forth below. Specific terms of reference and identification of individual
contractors will be developed for each component as one of the first actions initiated by the SRH,
in consultation with UNEP and the OAS. The schedule of activity implementation is presented
in Table 2 of Annex 8. More detailed information about the following components can be found
in the work program presented in Annex 8. Elaboration of the work program will be the first
action carried out by the project steering committee upon implementation of this project.
COMPONENT I: River Basin and Coastal Zone Environmental Analysis

---

9
Component I comprises the river basin and coastal zone diagnostic study. The objective of
Component I is to provide the sound scientific and technical basis for the strategic remedial
actions for the protection of the marine environment from land-based activities identified during
the WMP process. Activities will include:
· Quantification of priority issues identified during the PDF phase, thereby updating and
consolidating older data, and providing for the forecasting of potential future scenarios within
the linked land, water and marine system.
· Identification and quantification of the extent to which land-based activities and river
regulation in the Rio Sao Francisco influence hydrology, water quality (especially, sediment
and nutrient transport), and fisheries and aquatic ecology throughout the system and,
especially, at the coastal zone in the vicinity of its estuary.
· Identification and assessment of the most probable reasons for changes in river morphology
and aquatic faunal community composition and distributions necessary to determine the root
causes of these changes.
· Provide the quantitative basis for the determination of strategic actions to optimize the
multiple purpose utilization of the water resources of the basin and the protection and
restoration of the coastal zone ecosystems currently adversely affected by land-based
activities.
The results of this component will include:
· an inventory of the aquatic fauna, flora and hydroclimate in the lower SFRB and historic
changes in its composition; and,
· an evaluation of the environmental impacts of the river on the coastal zone including
wetlands, beaches, and fish habitat;
· an analysis of the floods and the use of artificial floods as an hydrological management
mechanism;
· an assessment of different scenarios for reservoir operation to minimize environmental
impacts on the estuary and coastal zone.
It is anticipated that the execution of these activities will be undertaken by the relevant federal
and states agencies such as CODEVASF, CHESF, CPRM and EMBRAPA, and CEMIG and
IGAM; federal universities; municipal consortia and civil associations; and local NGOs. The
coordination and supervision will be ensured by the Technical Coordinator at the SRH/MMA.
This component is anticipated to be initiated during the first through the second quarters of the
project period. GEF: US $ 990,000; co-funding: US $ 1,918,000; total: US $ 2,908,000.
COMPONENT II: Public and Stakeholder Participation
Component II provides for public involvement. The objective of Component II is to provide for
the practical, hands on-type involvement of communities in the identification and field testing of
remedial measures, as well as the establishment of a dialogue process between persons and
agencies having economic interests in the basin. Actions formulated through this process will
have the advantage of benefiting from community insights and experiences, and of being
acceptable to the communities as economically and environmentally sustainable alternatives to

---

10
presently destructive practices. Although the major effort in this area is expected to be
undertaken subsequently, the acquisition of specific information necessary for the determination
of water rights and water rate allocations, and methodologies for controlling sediment movement
within the basin (especially as it impacts the movement of sediments within the estuary), will be
undertaken during this project. This information will also contribute to implementation of
specific actions under the World Bank-financed PROAGUA program, and is a prerequisite for
the implementation of water charges under Component IV. Activities will include:
· mapping at an appropriate scale to determine land ownership and condition, and a framework
for establishing a water use allocation system;
· identification of, and establishment of coordination between, persons and agencies having
commercial or institutional responsibilities within the basin, including the fisheries,
navigation, mining and agro-industrial sectors and public sector at all levels of government;
· demonstration of sustainable agricultural and streambank management measures for
implementation under community-based land management programs (supported through the
World Bank-financed PROAGUA program that will demonstrate sound soil and water
management techniques, appropriate utilization of agro-chemicals, and improved methods of
crop management, irrigation design and maintenance of infrastructure such as roads and
irrigation ditches); and,
· creation of community-based information and training programs to support community land
management programs.
The results of this component will include:
· a sound basis to determine land ownership and condition together with the framework for
establishing a water use allocation system and will contribute to the rational allocation of
water and water charges,
· strengthened community-based and governmental initiatives that contribute to the
determination of water use and its impact on the hydrology of the system, and facilitate
implementation of water use charges, including the creation of public, private and public-
private partnerships as appropriate,
· pilot-scale demonstration projects to identify methods of stabilizing degraded lands and
riparian areas, and promulgation of appropriate remedial measures,
· training programs through which to communicate the measures to farmers and communities.
It is anticipated that the execution of these activities will be undertaken by the relevant federal
and states agencies such as CODEVASF; and municipal consortia, and civil associations. The
coordination and supervision will be ensured by the Technical Coordinator at the SRH/MMA.
This component is anticipated to be initiated during the first through the second quarters of the
project period. GEF: US $ 520,000; co-funding: US $ 1,150,000; total: US $ 1,670,000.
COMPONENT III: Organisational Structure Development
Activity III strengthens and improves institutional and staffing capabilities to implement new
laws, regulations, and procedures. The objective of Component III is to equip and train
institutions and individuals identified during the PDF Activities. Such institutional strengthening

---

11
and capacity building will contribute to the longer-term success of the watershed management
measures identified in the WMP. This component targets specific institutions and skills needed
within the basin at all levels of government, including the determination of appropriate inter-
governmental structures to facilitate coordination between federal, state, municipal and local
governments and agencies. Where appropriate, partnerships based upon the inclusion of
nongovernmental organizations, industry councils and other institutions within the coordination
mechanisms will be developed. In addition, this component supports the development of an
effective and integrated Rio Sao Francisco Basin Committee structure, as provided for under
federal law 9433/97. Activities, in concert with actions funded under PROAGUA, will contribute
to the implementation of an effective, integrated basin committee, and ancillary agencies and
organizations, at both the federal and state levels. Activities will include:
· an evaluation of the efficacy of several policy instruments for implementing the water law
and related state legislation;
· pilot scale implementation in order to relate measured improvements in both rate of water use
and degree of protection of downstream water quality; and,
· development of a framework for the implementation of the law in other sub-basins.
The results of this component will include:
· a framework for the creation of a financially-sustainable basin management agency that will
contribute to the sustainable use and management of the water resources of the basin,
including integration of environmental and coastal zone concerns into the overall management
strategy for the system,
· the establishment of an integrated river basin committee consistent with the spirit of Federal
Law 9433/07 in, inter alia, the Maranhao River sub-basin, and potential extension to the
entire SFRB,
· a framework for the conduct of inter-agency discussions within a multiple purpose basin
through the creation of a forum for the interaction of sub-basin committees and water
agencies, and public and stakeholders participating in the decision-making process.
It is anticipated that the execution of these activities will be undertaken by the relevant federal
and states agencies such as CODEVASF, CEEIVASF, IGAM; and municipal consortia and civil
associations. The coordination and supervision will be ensured by the Technical Coordinator at
the SRH/MMA. This component is anticipated to be initiated during the first through the
second quarters of the project period. GEF: US $ 450,000; co-funding: US $ 845,000; total US $
1,295,000.
COMPONENT IV: Watershed Management Program Formulation
Component IV is the formulation of the WMP. The objective of Component IV is the synthesis
of data and experiences, feasibility assessments and cost analyses developed in the three
preceding components. Included in the principal activities within this component are four
elements that address the legal, institutional, and human and natural resources bases essential for
implementation of the remedial actions identified through the WMP process. Component IV
explicitly provides for the cooperative development of a comprehensive WMP by both the

---

12
public and private sectors, based on a multi-sectoral, holistic approach to environmental
management and economic development in this Basin and its coastal zone, as provided for in
Chapters 18 and 21 of Agenda 21.
A. Information Sharing and Dissemination - The goals of this element are (1) to promote (a)
popular participation at the grass roots level throughout the basin, where some representative
community-based institutions exist, and (b) to empower decentralized decision-making relating to
the determination and implementation of management policies and practices at the community
level, and (2) to facilitate sharing of technical information between states and agencies, as well as
the extension and upgrading the data collection system to facilitate an holistic overview of
hydrological and water quality conditions in the system. Achievement of these goals will
contribute to flood forecasting, environmental and hydrological management, reservoir operations,
and an informed community. Activities will include:
· the conduct of workshops, training programs for officials and community leaders, and
informational campaigns within schools, civic groups and communities;
· the convening of two international seminars to facilitate discussion of the water resources
issues of priority concern as a means of building appreciation for the unitary nature of the Rio
Sao Francisco hydrological system and related coastal zone;
· the dissemination of the experiences gained in the determination and initial implementation of
management actions through the professional literature, seminars, public informational
meetings, and training programs to enhance the transfer of knowledge as encouraged under
Chapter 15 of Agenda 21; and,
· the use of, and support for, the Inter-American Water Resources Network (IWRN) as a means
of disseminating information regarding the conduct and findings of this activity.
· the development of a framework to extend and harmonize the existing hydrometeorological
data collection network, unifying data gathering objectives and methodologies in order to
enhance the dissemination of data and information throughout the basin.
The results of this element will include:
· meeting and workshop reports,
· a compendium of appropriate methods and means of integrating community-based decision-
making into the structure and function of the integrated basin management committee
proposed to be created under Component III,
· a regional water information system, including the publication of a magazine for basin-wide
distribution to raise awareness, build participation and inform citizen across sectoral line,
· a framework for addressing the priority issues inherent in the management of the SFRB.
It is anticipated that the execution of these activities will be undertaken by the relevant federal
and states agencies such as CODEVASF, IGAM. The coordination and supervision will be
ensured by the Technical Coordinator at the SRH/MMA. This element is anticipated to be
initiated throughout the project period. GEF: US $ 430,000; co-funding: US $ 671,000; total: US
$ 1,101,000.

---

13
B. Quantification of Water Use, Use Conflicts and Hydrological Management - The objective
of this element is to develop a quantitative framework for identifying and resolving quantitative
water use and allocation conflicts within the basin in a transparent and equitable manner. This
element creates the framework for the decision-support system to be designed under activities
conducted under PROAGUA and the determination of an appropriate economic framework.
Building upon the detailed hydrological and contaminant budgets to be completed under
Component I, activities will include:
· the quantification of the volumes of water consumed by irrigated agriculture, the levels of
contamination of surface and ground waters arising from agricultural water use, and the degree
to which abstraction and contamination of waters impacts the ability of waters to be used by
downstream users;
· an assessment of the need to develop the computational instruments needed to analyze water
use conflicts through an integrated, quantitative, mathematical modeling of natural water
flows, sectoral consumptive uses, projected inter-basin transfers into and out of the basin,
and modifications of natural flows resulting from the operation of dams and reservoirs; and,
· the development of the parameters for models that will contribute to the sustainable,
conjunctive management of the water resources of the SFRB.
The results of this element will include:
· knowledge of the stakeholders and their water requirements to be met from the water
resources of the Rio Sao Francisco,
· the quantitative basis for the formulation of related fiscal and legal mechanisms, including
allocation of water rights and development of water charges and use regulations, for the
sustainable management of the river and its coastal zone,
· a framework for the development and use of a system of mathematical models of river
hydraulics, hydrology and water use in the basin, to be included in the proposed PROAGUA
decision support system, that will contribute to informed decision-making by stakeholders
and agencies.
It is anticipated that the execution of these activities will be undertaken by the relevant federal
and states agencies such as CODEVASF, and CHESF; federal universities; and municipal agencies
and civil associations. The coordination and supervision will be ensured by the Technical
Coordinator at the SRH/MMA, in close consulation with the PROAGUA project team. This
element is anticipated to be initiated during the first through the fourth quarters of the project
period. GEF: US $ 640,000; co-funding: US $ 3,059,000; total: US $ 3,699,000.
C. Financial Mechanisms - The objective of this element is to develop and implement a system
of water rights and water charges, as provided for under federal law 9433/97, in representative
sub-basins of the Rio Sao Francisco. This element builds upon activities funded under
PROAGUA and the experiences obtained in the pilot-scale demonstration projects developed in
Component III. Activities conducted under this component will:
· review of federal and state legal and financial mechanisms relating to the sectoral uses of water
(e.g., agricultural subsidy schemes, urban land use planning regulations, etc. which affect

---

14
disturbances of the land surface that encourage erosion, water pollution, etc. to the detriment
of water courses and water resources management);
· identify and propose amendments as appropriate to those mechanisms that affect sustainable
use of water resources and the management of watersheds within the SFRB
· develop a detailed framework of the allocation and determination of water charges and
introductions of watershed management measures, including proposals for legislation and
strengthening of administrative mechanisms necessary to implement an equitable water
pricing scheme and enhance the institutional capability to determine and implement a water
use charges program; and,
· identify appropriate mechanisms to place water resources management within the basin on a
sustainable footing, and encourage the optimization of water resources management policies,
practices and programs, thereby creating a sound economic and legal basis for the sustainable
development of the basin and its coastal zone.
The results of this element will be:
· a documented review of existing water resources management and protection legislation and
recommended actions for the harmonization and optimization of such legislation in the basin,
· a program of proposed legislative initiatives to harmonize and optimize water resources
management and protection legislation in the basin,
· a documented framework for the implementation of water use charges and restructuring of
related fiscal, financial and legal mechanisms for water quantity and quality management in
the five basin states consistent with an holistic concept of the SFRB,
· a compendium of appropriate mechanisms for the sustainable utilization and management ofd
the Rio Sao Francisco.
It is anticipated that the execution of these activities will be undertaken by the relevant federal
and states agencies such as CEEIVASF. The coordination and supervision will be ensured by the
Technical Coordinator at the SRH/MMA, in close consulation with the PROAGUA project
team. This activity component is anticipated to be initiated during the third quarters of the
project period. GEF: US $ 350,000; co-funding: US $ 300,000; total: US $ 650,000.
D. Formulation of the Watershed Management Program - The formulation of a WMP is the goal
of this project. The objectives of this element are the identification and harmonization of
development initiatives in the SFRB and coastal zone, and the implementation of strategic actions
to integrate and optimize the initiatives and proposals for sustainable development in the region.
This element will enhance the capacity of basin organizations to manage the water resources of
the basin, and contribute to the development of an operational procedure that will optimize
economic use of the water resources in the basin, including environmental use. This element also
will strengthen institutional capacities to implement national and sub-national (state, municipal,
and local governmental) actions consistent with national undertakings relative to the GPA so as
to manage water flows in a climate of changing water demands and in a manner consistent with
maintenance of environmental conditions at the river estuary. Such actions will conserve

---

15
biological resources and minimize deleterious environmental impacts related to river flows. Thus,
activities to be undertaken under this element will include:
· an environmental evaluation of the basin, emphasizing the analysis of priority problems and
socio-economic issues relating to environmental practices and their relationship with the
education, health, income and organization of population especially in the coastal zone, as well
as the identification and coordination of organizational arrangements;
· support to Government efforts at introducing environmental considerations into the laws and
regulations at the national and state levels; and,
· the incorporation of strategic measures for the mitigation and prevention of land degradation,
protection of aquatic flora and fauna, and control and minimization of persistent contaminants
into regional development programs, thereby incorporating methods and procedures for
resolving priority environmental problems and obtaining global benefit into activities that
directly affect the sustainability of the use of the water resources of the Rio Sao Francisco and
development in the basin and its coastal zone.
Specific strategic actions for the integrated management of the SFRB and the rehabilitation of its
coastal zone will also be identified.
The results of this element will be:
· knowledge of the impact of land-based activities on the coastal zone,
· strengthened governmental agencies and organizations, pursuant to federal law 9433/97,
· a documented strategy and programme of action for the integrated management of the SFRB
and its coastal zone.

The execution of these activities will be ensured by the project team at the SRH/MMA with the
active participation of UNEP, the OAS ,and the World Bank (mainly the PROAGUA project
team), together with the relevant federal and state organizations and non-governmental
organizations. This element is anticipated to be initiated during the first through the second
quarters of the project period. GEF: US $ 700,000; co-funding: US $ 621,000; total: US $
1,321,000.
4.
Risk and Sustainability
4.1 To effect the sustainable management of the SFRB and its coastal zone, it is necessary to
formulate a comprehensive program of coordinated actions by the Federal Government of Brazil
and the riparian states. The federal water law and other legislation provides a sound basis for
implementation of actions necessary to introduce sustainable management actions into this basin.
The main risk facing the activity is that the legal mechanisms provided under the water law are
not fully implemented by the basin states and that the basin committee remains relatively
ineffectual in implementing cross-sectoral integration activities that will benefit the river system
and coastal zone. However, recent moves toward adoption of complementary legislation by the
basin states would suggest that this risk is small. Nevertheless, some emphasis on strengthening
the basin committee is given in this project as a means of catalyzing and encouraging a more
effective cross-sectoral role of the committee in managing water resources and related

---

16
development in the basin on a sustainable basis.
4.2 The risk of unsustainable development in the SFRB is that continued development following
current trends might result in serious undesirable environmental side effects, such as the
catastrophic decline in the fisheries, damage to the underlying natural resource base, flooding or
drying of critical habitats, and pollution of downstream ecosystems, including economic units of
production. Such degradation of the natural resource base would severely limit reclamation and
rehabilitation options available for implementation following formulation of the WMP.
Notwithstanding, opportunities exist for the reclamation of some natural resources, such as soils,
natural vegetation and forests, by strategically introducing effective and adequate environmental
management practices and procedures. GEF funded activities, in conjunction with other state,
national and international co-funded activities, could make a difference in the development of this
basin and its coastal zone by helping to promote the adoption of actions which will contribute to
the sustainable development of this important river and ocean system.
4.3 Project Components and their implementation, including the participation process, are
designed to achieve sustainability. Demonstration projects have been selected on the basis of
their sustainability, both from the ecological as well as the economic points of view, and to
achieve the maximum degree of beneficial impact on the coastal zone and adjacent marine and
freshwater ecosystems, while other project components have been proposed for the purpose of
quantifying the causes and effects of degradation of water and natural resources in the basin, and
of identifying strategic means of reclaiming once productive areas and keeping them productive.
Wherever possible the project will develop opportunities for the establishment of financial
incentives, private sector investment and cost recovery in environmental management, as in the
reclamation of eroded or mined lands, pastures and forests, rational management of natural
forests, exploitation of newly forested areas or newly irrigated areas. The project also will
provide actual, working examples of the new or refined land management actions necessary for
the sustainable development of the watershed consistent with the procedures and processes
embodied in the federal water law and related state legislation previously adopted or currently
under consideration. The steering committee will be responsible for transmitting
recommendations to the appropriate governmental bodies.
4.4 The national and state governments have pledged their support to actions proposed to be
implemented with the incremental financial assistance of the GEF by allocating state and national
financial resources in excess of US $ 20 million, including the JICA grant to the coastal state of
Sergipe, and federal governmental initiatives in the upper and lower middle portions of the basin.
Further, the SRH/MMA has already put into place management and administrative structures to
ensure the complementarity of the various national and international efforts proposed for
implementation within the SFRB, and, through federal water law 9433/97 and PROAGUA,
respectively, has created the necessary legal and financial structures to promote successful and
sustained application of environmentally-sound principles of multiple purpose river basin and
coastal zone management to the SFRB.

---

17
5.
Stakeholder Participation and Implementation Arrangements
5.1 Formulation of this proposal has involved extensive and broad-based participation by
representatives of the municipal, state and national Governments, academic and research
institutions, private sector representatives and non-governmental organizations. The
participation process was facilitated by a series of consultative workshops, conducted in Belo
Horizonte in the upper sub-basin during November 1997; Penedo in the lower sub-basin and
estuary during December 1997; and, Petrolina in the middle and lower middle sub-basins during
February 1998. Follow-up consultations were held with participants in the workshops and with
other selected personnel from the SRH/MMA during February 1998 to prepare the project brief,
which was subsequently endorsed by the GEF project preparation steering committee, which
met in Brasilia and subsequently discussed and agreed at a meeting in Washington between
representatives of the GEF Implementing Agencies and the OAS in March 1998.
5.2 Approximately 270 persons representing more than 100 institutions, government agencies
and NGOs, participated in the public meetings and provided inputs in drafting this proposal,
many of which are expected to participate in the implementation of the project. This proposal is
based on some 135 project concept documents prepared during the PDF-B process (Annex 4).
5.3 All the proposed activities will be driven by a Project Steering Committee comprised of
representatives of SRH/MMA; UNEP, as Implementing Agency; and OAS, as Executing Agency.
The other GEF Implementing Agencies will be informed of, and may participate in, meetings of the
Steering Committee in an ex officio capacity. The Steering Committee, at its first meeting to be
convened at the earliest possible moment following project approval by the GEF, will be chaired
by the Secretary for Water Resources of Brazil, who will act as Executive Director of the Project, in
consultation with UNEP and the OAS. One Technical Coordinator, to be contracted by OAS as
the Executing Agency in consultation with UNEP, will also be confirmed at this inaugural meeting
of the Steering Committee.
5.4 The Steering Committee will agree administrative and reporting procedures consistent with
UNEP standards and OAS requirements including financial reporting. The Steering Committee will
determine a proposed concept of execution for the program of work outlined herein. This program
of work will be elaborated jointly by the Executing Agency and the SRH/MMA, in consultation
with UNEP, prior to the second meeting of the Steering Committee and inauguration of project
Components. Finally, the Steering Committee, at its inaugural meeting, shall conduct any other
such business as may be required to initiate project Components, and set a date for the second
meeting of the Steering Committee.
5.5 Participation of the national, state and municipal agencies of Brazil with competence in the
region, scientific and academic institutions, and concerned civil organizations (NGOs) will be by
way of sub-committees of the Steering Committee. Subsequent meetings of the Steering
Committee shall be scheduled by the Steering Committee but shall be at least every six months
during the project period. The activities of the Steering Committee will be supported by the

---

18
SRH/MMA, with funds provided by GEF through the Implementing Agency. UNEP and OAS
will support Project Execution. OAS, due to its historic involvement in the basin, its partnership
with UNEP in similar projects within the region, and its role in implementing activities under
related projects, will act as Executing Agency and manager of the funds provided to the project by
UNEP on behalf of GEF, consistent with UNEP financial reporting requirements.
5.6 Activities of national personnel, with the support of the international agencies, will be based
upon preparatory work and Terms of Reference agreed with and approved by the SRH/MMA, in
consultation with UNEP and OAS. To the extent possible, all Components will be executed by
national agencies of Brazil and/or by consultants from Brazil under the direct supervision of the
SRH/MMA and OAS. The SRH/MMA and Executing Agency will coordinate field activities, as
directed by the Steering Committee, through coordinators appointed from their staff. The main
Coordination activities will be directed from Brasilia, Brazil. All project activities will be
conducted within the basin.
6.
Incremental Costs and Project Financing. Recognizing that domestic benefits will
accrue from this project, the Government of Brazil, the riparian state and municipal governmental
units, and other participating parties defined herein, have committed substantial baseline funding to
this project, both in the form of direct national appropriations for projects in Minas Gerais and
those associated with the proposed inter-basin transfer scheme, and in the form of loans secured
from The World Bank under the PROAGUA project. In addition, these governmental and
nongovernmental entities have proposed counterpart contributions under the alternative project
that represent a substantial percentage of the total funds required, thereby demonstrating their full
support for, and interest in, this program. These investments are assumed to provide national
benefits. Incremental GEF financing will promote consideration of issues of global environmental
concern, within a strategic, sustainable development framework. The baseline and alternative costs
are presented in Annex 1.
Project Financing
The breakdown of project financing is presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Component Financing (US $).
CO-FINANCING
ACTIVITY
GEF
Governme
World
UNEP
OAS
TOTAL
nt
Bank
I. River Basin and Coastal
990,000
1,918,000
--a
2,908,000
Zone Environmental
Analysis
II. Public and Stakeholder
520,000
1,150,000
--a
1,670,000
Participation
III. Organizational Structure
450,000
845,000
--a
1,295,000

---

19
Development
IV-A. Information Sharing
430,000
671,000
--a
1,101,000
and Dissemination
IV-B. Quantification of
640,000
3,059,000
--a
3,699,000
Water Use and Hydrological
Management
IV-C. Financial Mechanisms
350,000
300,000
--a
650,000
IV-D. Formulation of the
700,000
396,000
--a
150,000 75,000 1,321,000
Watershed Management
Plan
PROAGUA
8,600,000
8,600,000
TOTAL (Project Costs)
4,080,000
8,339,000 8,600,000 150,000 75,000 21,244,000
Project Support Costs
280,000
280,000
Monitoring and Evaluation
70,000
70,000
PDF Preparation
341,000
204,000
25,000
25,000 25,000
620,000
GRAND TOTAL
4,771,000
8,543,000 8,625,000 175,000 100,00 22,214,000
0
aThe application of the US $ 8,600,000 World Bank PROAGUA loan-financing is to be
determined pending signature of the loan agreement.
7.
Monitoring, Evaluation and Dissemination
7.1 The administrative, technical and financial reporting framework will be provided by the
Implementing Agency through the Executing Agency and Steering Committee using standard
UNEP reporting protocols. Utilizing key process and status indicators will be an intrinsic part of
the project. These indicators will be implemented through the establishment and integration of
monitoring tools into project components, as agreed by the Steering Committee at their second
meeting, as set forth above. A monitoring and evaluation plan, consistent with GEF criteria, will be
prepared by the Executing Agency and SRH/MMA, and approved by the Steering Committee and
UNEP. The objective of this monitoring is to contribute to improving, and, if needed, adapting
management of work program activities as well as creating the basis for project evaluation.
Implementing Agency supervision will be exercised through the Executing Agency and by
participation in the regular meetings of the Steering Committee, the first and second meetings of the
Steering Committee wherein the work plan and terms of reference for project staff and consultants
will be discussed and agreed. A project implementation review would be undertaken jointly by the
Government and UNEP two years after the end of the project.
7.2 STAP Review. (Annex 3) This project proposal was reviewed by Prof. Bjorn Kjerfve of the
Marine and Geological Sciences Department of the University of South Carolina, an International
Waters Expert included in the STAP Roster of Experts. Comments made by Prof. Kjerfve did not
require any changes in this document. In general, the comments of the STAP reviewer were
strongly supportive of the project approach, methodology and design.

---

20
7.3 Incorporated into the WMP formulation are specific work program components (see
Component IV) which explicitly aim to promote and disseminate the experiences obtained through
the WMP formulation process and GPA demonstration project to the water resources
professionals Latin America, and to communities within the SFRB through a program of public
information and education. As previously noted, work program activities encourage and facilitate
technology transfer and information dissemination through programs of public participation,
stakeholder involvement, and professional and community-based education and information
dissemination. State and municipal governmental, NGO and citizen involvement in project
execution, especially, will also contribute to the dissemination of information on specific
technologies and techniques that contribute to the sustainable environmental management and
economic development of the watershed. Finally, the publication of the WMP for the SFRB will
communicate to all concerned organizations, agencies and citizens the comprehensive strategic
approach for the management of this critical drainage basin. Copies of this management program
will be widely disseminated within the planning project area.

---

21
Brazil: Intregrated Management of Land-Based Activities in the São Francisco Basin
LIST OF ANNEXES
(Included in printed version)
Annex 1:
Incremental Costs
Annex 2:
Logical Framework Analysis
Annex 3:
STAP Roster Technical Review
(included in electronic version or to be provided by the IA upon request)
Annex 4:
Public Involvement Plan Summary
Annex 5:
The World Bank PROAGUA Project
Annex 6:
Available Reference Documents
Annex 7:
Geography of the Rio Sao Francisco Basin and Planning Context.
Annex 8:
Proposed Work Program.
Annex 9:
The Global Program of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from
Land-Based Activities
Annex 10:
Root Causes Analysis

---

22
ANNEX 1
INCREMENTAL COSTS
1. Broad Development Goals. The goal of the watershed management program (WMP) for the
Sao Francisco River Basin (SFRB) and nearshore waters of the South West Atlantic Large Marine
Ecosystem (LME) is to promote environmentally sustainable development within the basin and
its coastal zone. Achieving this goal requires taking into consideration programs of investments of
the federal Government of Brasil and the five riparian states, as well as municipalities, local
authorities, and nongovernmental organizations in the basin.
2. Baseline Situation. Significant investments have been made in the project area and
surrounding environs. These consist of: (1) ongoing and long term development projects for the
SFRB, and (2) environmentally related activities associated with development programs or
executed independently by federal, state, and local authorities. Some of these projects are
financed by national agencies such as CHESF, CEMIG, CODEVASF, etc. and possible other
cofinancing. The World Bank loan for the large-scale PROAGUA project costs US $ 198 million
for Northeastern Brazil. These cover related investments in irrigation, hydropower, sanitation,
transportation, and other infrastructure in the SFRB in the coming years. Another project is co-
funded through an International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) loan by government
for environmentally sustainable development activities at the grass roots level in the semi-arid
region. Government and counterpart funding is also provided within the sub-basin for the
formation of a committee in the state of Minas Gerais by IGAM/SRH. There will also be studies
on the impact of agriculture and agro-industries on water resources by EMBRAPA/CODEVASF
and studies of surface and ground water quality by EMBRAPA. Although many of these latter
initiatives are relatively uncoordinated to realize direct benefits for the project, they nevertheless
represent in-country programs and activities within the region that may have impacts on the
project site.
3. Other baseline activities, which have largely domestic or local impacts, include monitoring and
remediation works being conducted by the federal government and states within the basin. Other
investments of the federal government and states in routine environmental monitoring within the
basin have not been estimated. Although data gathered under these programs will be available to,
and used in, the preparation of the WMP to address Land-based Sources of Marine Pollution in
the Sao Francisco Basin, with the exception of the harmonization of the hydrometeorological
network, no additional efforts will be undertaken under this project. Conservatively, these costs
have not been considered in the calculations presented in Table 1.
4. GEF Alternative Scenario. The alternative scenario consists of the implementation of those
actions needed to both introduce sustainable development into development projects in the
SFRB, and achieve the resulting global environmental benefits embodied in the mitigation of
transboundary environmental problems affecting coastal marine waters and the South West
Atlantic LME. The costs of these actions are those necessary to include sustainable development

---

23
considerations in the projects within the basin over and above the requirements of the regular
environmental impact assessments and mitigation measures required to be completed under
existing Brazilian federal and state environmental laws and regulations.
5. Water resources management in the SFRB will be directed and coordinated by the federal
Mininstry for Environment, Water Resources and the Legal Amazon, as set forth in federal law
9433/97. This agency, and any subsequently empowered river basin committee, will require
strengthening, to be provided through GEF support.
6. Reduced soil loss, improved flood forecasting, and more effective and sustainable use of
available water resources are national benefits to be expected as a result of the activities of this
project, but these also have significant impacts in maintaining the watershed and its environs, and
the globally significant resources within the basin. However, the full extent of localized benefits
cannot be estimated at this time and it is assumed that the domestic funding provided is
equivalent to the national costs and will adequately compensate for the domestic benefits
achieved.
7. Global Benefits. The global benefit arising from the GEF intervention will be the formulation
of a comprehensive watershed management program to reduce contamination and pollution of
surrounding wetlands, coastal areas, and riverine systems. A strategic program of activities will to
be included for the Sao Francisco Basin where improved management would reduce
contamination from discharges into the South West Atlantic Large Marine Ecosystem and Brazil
Current. A breakdown by component follows.
Component 1 River Basin and Coastal Zone Environmental Analysis. The activities set forth
under this component are designed to assess and quantify specific issues of concern within the
basin identified during the PDF activities; namely, the interception of contaminants from the
headwater areas of the basin by the existing system of dams and reservoirs in the SFRB and the
management of nutrient and sediment flows to the coastal zone. The proposed project considers
means for reducing the flow of contaminants into the river and reservoirs and increasing the
transport of nutrients and sediments to the coastal zone to offset the oligotrophication of the
South West Atlantic that is currently occurring. The baseline costs cover existing infrastructure
and investments in the basin, as well as the estimated $1,918,000 counterpart contributions from
the Brazilian government and local governmental and nongovernmental organizations. The
alternative project costs are US $ 2,908,000. GEF incremental funding is US $ 990,000.
Component 2 Public and Stakholder Participation. The baseline costs of this component
represent completed and ongoing activities by the Brazilian government and states for engaging a
variety of stakeholders in the design and implementation of on-the-ground watershed and basin
management activities. The Government of Brazil and local governmental and non-governmental
organizations will contribute US $ 1,150,000 to cover strengthening of human resources capacity,
reinforcement of institutions working in the basin, and additional operation costs. The alternative
project cost is US $ 1,670,000. GEF incremental funding is US $ 520,000.

---

24
Component 3 Organization Structure and Development. Together with monitoring and regulation
of commercial fishing and aquaculture activities along the course of the river, this component will
result in strategies to increase the numbers of, and restore the biological diversity among, fishes
and marine wildlife, especially in the SFRB estuary and coastal zone. Such increases are expected
to contribute to the maintenance of global biological diversity within the South West Atlantic
LME and Brazil current, and may also result in domestic benefits arising from (possible)
increased commercial fishing opportunities within the riverine and lacustrine portions of the
basin. Benefits will be evaluated during WMP formulation. There is no baseline cost of this
alternative. The Government of Brazil and local governmental and non-governmental
organizations will contribute US $ 845,000 to cover strengthening of human resources capacity,
and additional operation costs. The alternative project cost is US $ 1,295,000. GEF incremental
funding is US $ 450,000.
Component 4 Watershed Management Program. The rational use of water and other natural
resources in the basin and at the coast is limited by several existing and potential uses of water
within the basin that are competing for increased shares of river flow. This competition can
influence the extent of ecosystem degradation within the coastal zone. Given the intensity of
demands upon this system, including its coastal marine waters, development of an integrative
system of water resource management models could provide for a significant improvement in the
decision-making ability of regulatory agencies in the basin that would result in both global and
domestic benefits. Such an improvement would contribute to achievement of an optimal mix
different water uses, based upon the corresponding costs and benefits of each use, including
environmental uses, which could support negotiated allocations among the different stakeholders
and related water pricing decisions. Knowledge of the critical factors of influencing river and
coastal zone behavior, and experience with methods of negotiation and agreement among
competitive users of water, to be acquired under activities 1 through 3 above, will be used for
improving management of natural resources in the basin, and could be transferred to other
international basins where complex mixes of competitive water uses exist. The baseline cost of
this Component is US $4,651,000, representing investments in operating the existing
hydrometeorological network (under activity 4.1 in Annex 8) and other counterpart government
contributions. The alternative project cost is US $ 6,771,000. GEF incremental funding is US $
2,120,000.
8. Part of the baseline contributing to all project components includes activities funded through
cofinancing from UNEP, OAS and government counterpart (preparation activities), of $254,000
as well as funding from the World Bank PROAGUA loan (to be determined following signature
of the loan agreement) of $8,625,000.
9. It should be noted that specific expenditures for activities may be initiated at any time during
the six-month period preceding the indicated date, as human and financial resources, and
prerequisite information availability, warrant. Further, it is anticipated that each component
within the four principle activities is likely to be executed over the period of at least a year.

---

25
ANNEX 1 - Incremental Cost Matrix (US $M)
Component
Category
Amount
Domestic Benefits
Global Benefits
River basin and coastal
Baseline
1.918
Interception of
zone environmental
contaminants from the
analysis
headwater areas of the basin
by the existing system of
dams and reservoirs in the
SFRB; reduced nutrient and
sediment flows basin wide
Alternative
2.908
Same as above.
Reduced flow of
contaminants into the river
and coastal zone and offset
of oligotrophication of the
South West Atlantic;
increased protection of
globally significant water
systems
Increment
.990
Public and stakeholder
Baseline
1.150
Domestic advantages
participation
gained from pilot
demonstrations with local
stakeholders; rehabilitation
of local natural vegetation
in coastal wetlands and
along river banks;
promotion of appropriate
agricultural practices and
land regulations
Alternative
1.670
Same as above.
Improved coastal zone
management in the basin
and surrounding wetlands
and water systems, resulting
in reduced contamination
and pollution from
agriculture
Increment
.520
Organizational structure
Baseline
.845
Improved monitoring and
development
regulation of commercial
fishing and aquaculture
activities along the river
Alternative
1.295
Same as above.
Increased protection of
biological diversity among
fishes and marine life in
SFRB, estuary, and coastal
zone and greater
maintenance of South West
Atlantic LME and Brazil
current
Increment
.450
Watershed management
Baseline
4.651
Better management of water

---

26
program formulation
uses through controlled
· Information Sharing
pricing, regulations, etc.
and Dissemination
and improved watershed
· Quantification of
management
Water Use, Use
Conflicts,
Hydrological
Management
· Financial
Mechanisms
· Formulation of Water
Shed Management
Program
Alternative
6.771
Same as above.
Positive impacts of
watershed management
applied to other
international basins
Increment
2.12
TOTAL
Baseline
8.564
Additional
8.879
Co-
financing*
Alternative*
22.214
Increment
4.08
Project
.280
support/administration
Monitoring and
.070
Evaluation
PDF Preparation
.341
Total Increment
4.771
* Includes World Bank PROAGUA loan ($8.625 M); UNEP and OAS Co-financing ($.05M) and government counterpart ($.204M) for project
preparation.

---

ANNEX 2 - LOGFRAME MATRIX
PROJECT PLANNING MATRIX
SUMMARY
OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE
MEANS OF
CRITICAL ASSUMPTIONS
INDICATORS
VERIFICATION
RISKS
OVERALL OBJECTIVES
Incorporation of land-based
Reduced pollution loads and
Measurable
Governments* will agree to
environmental concerns into
mitigation and prevention of
improvements in the
invest in the required baseline
development policies, plans and
negative impacts on numbers and river basin and coastal
costs
programs for the São Francisco River
diversity of fish populations and zone environmental
Failure to do so would severely
Basin for the protection of its coastal
populations of marine animals
situation observed
limit reclamation and
zone
through regional
rehabilitation options available
monitoring programs
for implementation following
formulation of the watershed
management program
strengthening of the Basin
Committee should overcome
this risk
Outcomes
Improved river basin and coastal zone Endorsement of the Integrated
Meetings, reports and
Endorsement would facilitate
environmental analysis within the
Watershed Management Program publications
appropriate exchange of
basin and its coastal zone
by the Ministry of Environment,
information between agencies
Water Resources and Legal
and improved sectoral
Amazon, as well as by the Basin
approaches at the national level
Committee and all the basin
as embodied in the federal water
stakeholders
law

---

28
Improved public and stakeholder
Endorsement of the NGO and
Meetings, reports and
/Lack of appropriate fora for
participation through hands on-type
public participation plans by
publications
encouraging stakeholder
involvement of communities in the
appropriate local and regional
Implementation of
participation is a risk. The
remedial measures
meetings
demonstration projects
strengthening of the Basin
by state and municipal
Committee should promote
governments, NGO and stakeholder participation
citizens
Development of the organizational
Coordination of actions related to Meetings, reports and
The legal mechanisms provided
structure and staffing capabilities
with river management and
publications
under the water law may not be
needed to implement financial
planning
fully implemented by the basin
mechanisms for water rights and water
states; however strengthening of
charges, as provided for under federal
the Basin Committee,
law 9433/97, in representative sub-
promulgation of appropriate
basins of the Rio Sao Francisco
laws and regulatory regimes for
controlling environmental
pollution, and availability of
trained staff will bring a
comprehensive and cohesive
approach to watershed
management in the SFRB
Quantification of Water Use, Use
Resolution of quantitative water
Meetings, reports and
Governments will agree and
Conflicts and Hydrological
use and allocation conflicts within publications
adopt the proposed DSS. This
Management through implementation
the basin in a transparent and
will be likely to be met given
of a decision-support system
equitable manner
proposed inclusion of the DSS
in PROÁGUA

---

29
Formulation of the Watershed
Improved coordination of actions Meetings, reports and
As the formulation of the
Management Program
related with river management and publications
Watershed Management
planning
Program builds upon the
Allocation and determination of
synthesis of data and
water charges
experiences, feasibility
assessments and costs analyses
Identification of appropriate
developed in the preceding
mechanisms to place water
activities, it is imperative that
resources management within the
these activities be finalized
basin on a sustainable footing
according to the workplan and
in an acceptable manner. Based
on the above assumptions, this
is likely to happen
Components/Activities
River Basin and Coastal Zone
Environmental Analysis
Availability of various drafts and
Publication of
It is assumed that the various
Evaluation of the environmental
final version of the assessment
assessments,
drafts and final version of the
impacts of the river on the coastal
reports and strategic program for
consultants and meeting assessment reports and strategic
zone including wetlands, beaches, and
sustainable economic development reports
program for sustainable
fish habitat as means of mitigation
from the consultants
economic development will be
Convening of steering committee
ready on time according to the
meetings according to endorse
agreed workplan. However,
these findings to agreed
contingency delays may happen
workplan; and inclusion of the
and cannot really be evaluated
findings in subsequent
components / activities

---

30
Public and Stakeholder Participation Preparation of community-based
Initiation of appropriate Governments and the basin
Identification and establishment of
management programs and training action at the state level
community at large will agree to
coordination between, persons and
according to the agreed workplan
and community level to the management programs and
agencies having commercial or
Adoption of the management
implement the proposed training and with the concept of
institutional responsibilities within the programs at the community level
programs and concept
coastal zone management seems
basin, including the fisheries,
for the benefit of the coastal zone coastal zone protection to be met since the basin
navigation, mining and agro-industrial
environment
communities are likely to be
sectors
involved in the identification
and demonstration of
Demonstration of sustainable
conservation measures in the
management measures for community-
watershed as well as in the
based implementation
dialogue process. Thus, actions
formulated through this process
will benefit from community
insights and experiences and will
be acceptable to the
communities
Organizational Structure
Preparation of draft proposals and Preparation of draft
Governments and the basin
Development
state and community-based level
proposals and state and community at large will agree to
Pilot scale implementation of several
discussions according initiation of community-based level
the proposals for specific
policy instruments for implementing the agreed workplan
discussions according to legislative actions and related
water law and related state legislation in
the agreed workplan
capacity building programs.
order to achieve measured
Adoption of the environmentally-
This seems likely to be achieved
improvements in both rate of water use
sound practices within
and a degree of protection of
agricultural, mining and urban
since the basin communities are
downstream water quality; and
economic sectors aimed at the
to be involved in the dialogue
development a framework for the
process. Actions formulated
implementation of the law in other
protection and/or rehabilitation of
through his process will benefit
basins
critical areas by the basin
community
from community insights and
experiences and will be
acceptable to the communities.

---

31
acceptable to the communities.
Such reforms are also supported
and encouraged by the federal
law 9433/97
Formulation of the WMP for the
Preparation of drafts according to Publication and
It is assumed that the
Basin
the agreed workplan
adoption of the WMP
governments and basin
Formulation of an WMP based on the
Dissemination of information
communities will actively
synthesis of data and experience,
cooperate in the development
feasibility assessments and costs
and further implementation of
analysis developed in the five
the WMP This assumption is
preceding activities
likely to be met as governments
and basin communities will be
Dissemination of initial
directly |involved in the
implementation of management actions
preparation of the IWMP
to enhance international coordination
and communication with other riparian
countries

---

32
Results
River Basin and Coastal Zone
Completion by of the various
Meeting reports and
The various assessments will be
Environmental Analysis
assessments and technical studies various technical
finalized in a manner acceptable
Quantification of the historical
required for the WMP for
publications
to the Governments. This is
evolution of the river and its estuary
sustainable development at the
likely to be achieved since
based upon an analysis of the changes basin by the basin stakeholders;
environmental monitoring is
in the rates and locations of sediment
and endorsement by the steering
currently on-going in the
erosion and deposition within the river committee
baseline development programs
channel and estuary that affect
and investments in the
navigation, river morphology, and
hydrometeorological network
shoreline wetlands
Analysis and modeling of the behavior
of the river flow and its effect on the
transportation of sediments and
nutrients under current and forecast
future conditions
Quantitative basis for the
determination of strategic actions to
optimize the multiple purpose
utilization of the water resources of
the basin and the protection and
restoration of the coastal zone
ecosystems currently adversely
affected by land-based activities
Public and Stakeholder Participation Endorsement of alternative means Meeting reports,
Governments and the basin
Rational allocation of water and water of economic production by the
technical publications
stakeholders will agree and
charges, the identification of water user steering committee and adoption
and training programs
adopt the proposed
by the basin stakeholders
publications
alternative means of economic

---

33
groups, and the strengthening of
by the basin stakeholders
publications
alternative means of economic
community-based initiatives
Numbers of informed consumers
Activity progress
development and training and
Identification of degraded lands and
public environmental
Numbers of individuals trained
Report s of the technical
riparian areas in need of stabilization,
coordinator to the GEF information will be accepted and
and demonstration of appropriate
and UNEP/OAS
disseminated to a wide audience.
remedial measures to protect the
This is likely to be met since it
coastal zone
is encouraged in federal law
9433/97
Organizational Structure
Adoption of the legal assessment
Meeting reports,
Governments will agree to and
Development
and improvement
publication of the legal
adopt the recommended
Creation of a basis for a financially-
recommendations, and the
assessment and of the
legislative and institutional
sustainable basin management agency
conceptual basis for DSS and
conceptual and technical changes and will support the
and contribution to the sustainable use hydrological models, by the
basis for DSS
public participation
and management of the water resources steering committee; and inclusion
Activity progress
programming, staff training and
of the basin, including integration of
of the DSS in economic
reports of technical
strategic planning. This is likely
environmental and coastal zone
development program
coordinator to the GEF to be met as coordinated
concerns into the overall management
Increased information exchange
and UNEP/OAS
management actions are
strategy for the system
among basin stakeholders
embodied in the new federal law
9433/97 which seeks to enhance
and strengthen the ability of the
basin agency to undertake
planing and management
activities within the basin

---

34
Watershed Management Program
Formulation
Cooperative development of a
Adoption of the Integrated
Meeting reports and
As the formulation of the
comprehensive WMP by both the
watershed management Plan by the watershed management
Watershed Management program
public and private sectors, based on a
basin stakeholders and by the
program
builds upon the synthesis of data
multi-sectoral, holistic approach to
steering committee
and experiences, feasibility
environmental management and
assessments and costs analyses
economic development in the basin and
developed in the preceding
its coastal zone, as provided for in
activities, it is imperative that
Chapters 18 and 21 of Agenda 21
these activities be finalized
Determination of appropriate methods
according to the workplan and in
and means of integrating community-
an acceptable manner. Based on
based decision-making into the structure
the above assumptions, this is
and function of the basin committee.
likely to happen
The results of the action element will
also enhance transparency and sharing
of data throughout the basin, which will
promote sustainable utilization and
management of available water resources
Development and use of a system of
mathematical models of river hydraulics,
hydrology and water use in the basin, to
be included in a proposed decision
support system, that will contribute to
informed decision-making by
stakeholders and agencies
Formulation of related fiscal and legal
mechanisms, including allocation of
water rights and development of water
charges and use regulations, for the
sustainable management of the river and
its coastal zone

---

35
* governments means appropriate federal, state or municipal governments and agencies

---

36
ANNEX 3
STAP ROSTER TECHNICAL REVIEW
Björn Kjerfve
Professor of Marine and Geological Sciences
University of South Carolina
Integrated Management of Land-based activities in the São Francisco Basin
This GEF project is a US$ 22.2 million water management program for the 640,000 km2
tropical Rio São Francisco basin in northeastern Brazil. The population of the river basin is
13,000,000. The Rio São Francisco has its headwaters in Minas Gerais south of Belo
Horizonte, and discharges 120 km3 annually (3,800 m3 s-1 on the average) into the South
Atlantic Ocean on the border between Sergipe and Alagos. On the 3,200 km route to the sea,
the river traverses a gradient of climatic zones, the climate becoming increasingly drier as the
river winds through the Sertão. The richest penaeid shrimp fishery in Brazil occurs where the
river discharges into the Atlantic. Further offshore flows the Brazil Current towards the south
with a transport of anywhere from 20,000,000 to 40,000,000 m3 s-1. Four large dams have
been constructed along course of the river and are a major source for hydroelectric power with
a combined yield of 10,000 MW. River water is also extensively used for irrigation of
agricultural lands. The river has a rich cultural history and played a central role in the
development of the interior of Brazil in past centuries. This GEF project appears well
justified in terms of the importance of the Rio São Francisco to the continued development of
the arid Sertão and is an opportunity for coordinated sustainable development of both river
basin and coastal areas.
Scientific and technical soundness of the project:
The project is well conceived, and justifications are articulated convincingly. It is encouraging
to see this type of project, which is focused on studies and analyses aimed at derivation of an
intelligent set of plans for a consensus of optimized management and development of a major
river basin.
Identification of GEF benefits and/or drawbacks of the project:
A major focus of the project is the coastal areas of Alagoas and Sergipe. It is encouraging to
see that there now exists a realization that all activities within a drainage basin potentially
have coastal consequences. This vision, which ought to be adopted elsewhere, is an overall
benefit, and GEF plays an important role in encouraging this vision. Further, rational
development and management of the river resources is of economic benefit to Brazil, the
affected riparian states, special interest non-governmental organizations, and everyone living
within the São Francisco basin, and thus is a benefit to GEF. There are no obvious drawbacks
to the project although it is an expensive project.

---

37
Appropriateness:
The project as a whole appears to fit well within the context of the goals of GEF, and the
operational strategies and priorities of the project would appear to be of high relevance to
GEF.
Regional context:
The rational development and water management of the Sertão as proposed in this proposal is
applauded. This region, a large portion of the São Francisco basin, is as of yet under-
developed, at least partially as a result of the arid climatic conditions. However, the Rio São
Francisco is a renewable hydroelectric resource on a grand scale. Well managed agriculture
irrigation has the potential to enhance regional agricultural production. Better soil management
and pollution and erosion control is encouraging. Also, the coastal region holds immense
potential for tourism and ecotourism development, and is already a rich shrimp fishery
resource.
Replicability:
If successfully executed, this project could well serve as a model for how to implement
sustainable development in other large and small drainage basins by emphasizing the need for
studies, analyses, and consensus solutions.
Sustainability:
The results of the project, when implemented, would potentially result in significant
sustainable yields: optimum hydroelectric power generation, better water and soil
management, pollution control, improved agricultural production as a result of holistic
irrigation strategies, a blue-print for coastal tourism development, and optimized fisheries,
and as an overall result, enhanced economic development.
Linkages to other focal areas, programs, and/or action plans:
This GEF project appears to be well linked to national and regional programs, and as long as
project activities take adequate advantage of the international expertise provided by the
participating international organizations, the linkages are good.
Other beneficial or damaging environmental effects:
The fact that the project will generate feedback between water resource management in the
drainage basin and how the coastal area is utilized and developed is an important and novel
benefit. There are no damaging environmental effects associated with the project.
Degree of involvement of stakeholders in the project:
The stakeholders represent an impressive combination of Federal Government organizations,
state government organizations, municipal government organizations, universities, non-
governmental organizations, and international organizations. As long as all units listed in the
proposal are involved equitable in the execution of the project, there is great potential for
successful execution.

---

38
Capacity-building aspects:
The studies and analyses proposed under this GEF project would benefit both government
and non-government organizations by providing a strategic basin-scale blueprint for water
management and development but with special attention directed towards the needs and
priorities of each sub-region. The execution of the project would also have the potential to
enhance the intellectual capacity and infrastructure of universities in the river basin. As a
result, the public educational system is likely to improve and maybe also public health
facilities.
Innovativeness of the project:
The scale of the project, an attempt to develop a holistic water management plan for a major
river basin, is a very innovative approach. As long as equitable attention is given to competing
political and economic interests such that recommendations represent a balance between
competing points of view, and an attempt is made to reach consensus solutions whenever
possible, the project has the potential of becoming a success with minimal associated risks.
Implementing Agency Response
Prof Dr Kjerfve's review is strongly supportive of this project. No changes in the project
were required.

---

39
ANNEX 4
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN SUMMARY
1. The formulation of the proposal for the Integrated Management of the Water Resources
of the São Francisco Basin and its Coastal Zone, including its proposed GEF components,
has involved extensive and broad-based participation by representatives of the municipal,
state and national Governments, academic and research institutions, private sector
representatives and non-governmental organizations. The participation process was facilitated
by a series of consultative workshops, conducted in Belo Horizonte on 25 November 1997,
Penedo on 9 December 1997, and Petrolina on 2 February 1998.

2. Approximately 270 persons representing more than 100 institutions, government agencies
and NGOs, participated in the public meetings and provided inputs in drafting this proposal,
many of which are expected to participate in the implementation of the project. This project
proposal is based on some 135 project concept documents proffered during the public
meetings.

3. A list of those institutions that participated in the public meetings convened prior to the
preparation of this project document, and which are expected to participate in project
implementation as well as subsequent public meetings, is presented below. Governmental
organizations are categorized as federal, state, or municipal government level agencies.
Nongovernmental organizations and other governmental bodies are also listed. State
governmental agencies and nongovernmental organizations are identified by state; namely,
Alagoas (AL), Bahia (BA), Minas Gerais (MG), Pernambuco (PE), and Sergipe (SE). Where
the participating organizations are known by an acronym, the acronym is also shown.
4. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS
·
Ministério do Meio Ambiente dos Recursos Hídricos e da Amazônia Legal - MMA
-
Secretaria de Recursos Hídricos - SRH
-
Secretaria do Meio Ambiente - SMA
-
Coordenação Nacional do Gerenciamento Costeiro - GERCO
-
Companhia de Desenvolvimento do Vale do São Francisco - CODEVASF
-
Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente - IBAMA
·
Comitê Executivo de Estudos Integrados do Vale do São Francisco ­ CEEIVASF
·
Companhia Hidrelétrica do São Francisco - CHESF
·
Companhia de Pesquisa de Recursos Minerais - CPRM
·
Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária ­ EMBRAPA
·
Fundação Nacional do Índio - FUNAI
·
Ministério Público Federal de Alagoas
·
Universidade Federal de Alagoas - UFAL
·
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais - UFMG
·
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE

---

40
5. STATE GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS
·
Secretaria de Agricultura e Irrigação do Estado de Alagoas (AL)
·
Secretaria de Planejamento do Estado de Alagoas (AL)
·
Empresa de Pesquisa Agropecuária do Estado de Alagoas - EPEAL (AL)
·
Instituto do Meio Ambiente - IMA (AL)
·
Núcleo de Meteorologia e Recursos Hídricos (AL)
·
Polícia Militar do Estado de Alagoas (AL)
·
Secretaria de Recursos Hídricos, Saneamento e Habitação do Estado da Bahia (BA)
-
Superintendência de Recursos Hídricos
·
Centro Interamericano de Recursos da Água - CIRA - Salvador (BA)
·
Secretaria de Estado do Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Sustentável - SEMAD (MG)
·
Secretaria do Trabalho e Ação Social da Criança e do Adolescente - SETASCAD (MG)
·
Centro de Estudos e Pesquisa Educacionais de Minas Gerais - CEPEMG (MG)
·
Companhia de Águas e Saneamento - COPASA (MG)
·
Companhia Energética de Minas Gerais- CEMIG (MG)
·
Fundação Centro Tecnológico ­CETEC (MG)
·
Fundação Estadual do Meio Ambiente - FEAM (MG)
·
Fundação João Pinheiro ­ FJP (MG)
·
Fundação Rural Mineira ­ Colonização e Desenvolvimento Agrário ­ RURALMINAS
(MG)
·
Instituto Estadual de Florestas - IEF (MG)
·
Instituto Mineiro de Gestão das Águas - IGAM (MG)
·
Processamento de Dados do Estado de Minas Gerais - PRODEMGE (MG)
·
Superintendência do Desenvolvimento e Cooperação - SUDECOOP (MG)
·
Universidade do Estado de Minas Gerais - UEMG (MG)
·
Secretaria de Ciência e Tecnologia e Meio Ambiente de Pernambuco (PE)
·
Secretaria de Planejamento, Ciência e Tecnologia - SEPLANTEC (SE)
·
Administração Estadual do Meio Ambiente de Sergipe - ADEMA (SE)


6. MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS

·
Prefeitura Municipal de Belo Monte (AL)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Feliz Deserto (AL)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Igreja Nova (AL)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Penedo (AL)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Piaçabuçu (AL)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de São Francisco (AL)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Baianópolis (BA)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Catolândia (BA)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Cotegipe (BA)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Cristópolis (BA)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Curaçá (BA)

---

41
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Dom Basílio (BA)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Bom Despacho (MG)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Divinópolis (MG)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Itaúna (MG)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Lagoa Grande (MG)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Lagoa da Prata (MG)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Pará de Minas (MG)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Pitangui (MG)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Rio Acima (MG)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de São Gonçalo do Abaeté (MG)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Três Marias (MG)
·
Serviço Autônomo de Água e Esgoto de Sete Lagoas (MG)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Brejo Grande (SE)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Poço Redondo (SE)
·
Prefeitura Municipal de Neópolis (SE)


7. NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOs)

·
Associação de Agricultores - Igreja Nova (AL)
·
Associação de Capela - Penedo (AL)
·
Associação dos Concessionários do Projeto Marituba - Penedo (AL)
·
Associação dos Moradores do Bairro Senhor do Bonfim - Penedo (AL)
·
Associação dos Moradores de Ponta Morfina - Penedo (AL)
·
Associação dos Moradores do Vale do Boacás - Igreja Nova (AL)
·
Associação dos Trabalhadores Rurais de Marizeiro - Penedo (AL)
·
Casa do Penedo - Penedo (AL)
·
Central Estadual das Associações dos Assentados e dos Pequenos Agricultores de Alagoas
-Maceió (AL)
·
Colônia Z 12 - Penedo (AL)
·
Cooperativa dos Produtores Rurais de Penedo (AL)
·
Federação dos Pescadores de Alagoas - Maceió (AL)
·
Fundação Teotônio Vilela - Maceió (AL)
·
Associação do Canaã - Sobradinho (BA)
·
Associação dos Produtores e Irrigantes - Barreiras (BA)
·
Fundação de Desenvolvimento Integrado do São Francisco - Ibotirama (BA)
·
Fundação de Desenvolvimento Interior do São Francisco - Xique-Xique (BA)
·
Movimento Sociedade Alternativa ­ Juazeiro (BA)
·
Projeto Ararinha Azul - Curaçá (BA)
·
Fundação Sustentabilidade e Desenvolvimento - Brasília (DF)
·
Água - Consultores Associados - Belo Horizonte (MG)
·
Associação Ambiental do Alto São Francisco - Lagoa da Prata (MG)
·
Associação Mineira de Defesa do Ambiente - Belo Horizonte (MG)
·
Associação Municipal da Micro-região do Vale do Itapecerica - Divinópolis (MG)
·
Brigada Ecológica - Belo Horizonte (MG)
·
Casa Nobre Consultoria - Divinópolis (MG)
·
Colônia de Pescadores de Três Marias - Três Marias (MG)

---

42
·
Comitê da Bacia do Graça - Lagoa Grande (PE)
·
Conselho Municipal de Conservação e Defesa do Meio Ambiente - Belo Horizonte (MG)
·
Consórcio ECOPLAN/MAGNA/CAB - Belo Horizonte (MG)
·
FAHMA Planejamento e Engenharia Agrícola Ltda ­ Belo Horizonte (MG)
·
Fazenda Terra Nova - Paracatu (MG)
·
Movimento de Cidadania pelas Águas - Belo Horizonte (MG)
·
Partido Verde de Petrolina (PE)


8. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

·
Organização dos Estados Americanos ­ OEA/OAS
·
Programa das Nações Unidas para o Meio Ambiente ­ PNUMA/UNEP
·
Banco Mundial ­ BM/The World Bank


9. FOREIGN GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS

·
Tennessee Valley Authority ­ TVA (USA)

---

43
ANNEX 5
THE WORLD BANK PROAGUA PROJECT
The US $ 8.6 million Sao Francisco Watershed Component of the Watershed
Resources Management Project (PROAGUA) is described as follows in The World Bank
(Draft) "Project Appraisal Document for a Proposed Loan in the Amount of US$198.0
Million Equivalent to the Federative Republic of Brazil for a Water Resources Management
Project", dated January 29, 1998:
`A program that attempts to change the paradigm for water resources management in
the Northeast towards efficient and effective allocation and use of the region's scarce water
resources has to include a sound management plan for the Sao Francisco river basin, which is
the major river in this region and traverses five States. The Sao Francisco river basin is
experiencing a number of problems ­ among which, the degradation of its upper-basin where
over 75% of the river total water flow is generated; intensification of water conflicts within
the basin, especially between hydropower and irrigation; and significant potential regional
conflicts as the proposal of a trans-basin diversion to supply water to other States (Paraiba,
Ceara and Rio Grande do Norte) continues to be the most controversial water issue in the
Northeast. Solutions to these complex problems require the creation of a bsin committee as
well as of local WUAs [water user associations]; participatory management of the basin's
water resources; the implementation of sound water resources management practices; the
establishment of A,O&M [administration, operation and maintenance] plans for existing and
new infrastructure; the developmentof a well-coordinated systems [sic] for the allocation of
water rights in the basin; the strengthening of Federal, State and local institutions. In
particular, solutions depend on political agreement on the principles that should guide the
allocation of water rights, by the Federal and State Governments, for users in the Sao
Francisco river basin and for the eventual trans-basin diversion. Such agreement may be
reached through a National Water Resources Council, the establishment of which is stipulated
in the National Water Resources Law, with participation of authorities of the highest possible
level (ministers and Governors). One basic principle for negotiation is that of water as an
economic good, as defined by the Water Law. This implies that more efficient uses of water,
in economic terms, should be of high priority, while some financial compensation could be
envisaged for the less efficient, lower priority uses of water. Depending on the magnitude of
these compensations, Government subsiudies aiming at social equity, currently implicit, could
be reduced and become more explicit.
`This component would support primarily the creation and effective start-up of the
Sao Francisco River Basin Committee, as defined by the National Water Law; provide
financial support towards the development of WUAs in the basin; and develop a simulation
model for water allocation under the principle that water is an economic good, with emphasis
on aspects such as: (i) the system of water allocation; (ii) the costs for the different user
groups; (iii) revenues of the Water Agency, also to be created as per the Water Law; (iv) the
priority investments, at river basin level, that would be financed by the future Sao Francisco
Water Agency. The component would be carefully designed to avoid duplication with a
number of other initiatives taking place in the basin. To support the creation of the WUAs,

---

44
the component would finance small pilot activities in miucro-watershed management,
recuperation of river gallery forest, pollution and erosion control, training and education
programs, among others.'

---

45
ANNEX 6
AVAILABLE REFERNCE DOCUMENTS
1. This annex presents a list of publications on the SFRB and its coastal zone that were
referred to during the PDF activities or that were prepared as a result of the PDF
activities. These documents, categorized into publications relating to (a) natural resources
and the environment, (b) water resources management, (c) regional economy, (d)
institutional strengthening and support, and (e) public participation, together with the
project concepts presented during the public participation workshops (summarized in
Annex 4), form the documented basis for the formulation of the WMP proposed as the
outcome of this project.
2. NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT
CEEIVASF. "Relatório de Trabalho sobre a Situação das Várzeas e Lagoas Marginais no
Baixo Curso do Rio São Francisco" ­ Versão Preliminar, Elaboração ADEMA-SE e IMA-
AL, Brasília, 1997.
CODEVASF/FAO. "Estimativa da Erosão Anual e Potencial no Vale do Rio São Francisco",
Brasília, dezembro, 1993.
CODEVASF. "Estudos Hidrológicos de Subsídio Para os Estudos Fluviomorfológicos do Rio
São Francisco" - Simons & Associates, Brasília, setembro, 1997.
CODEVASF. "PROJETO CAATINGA - Projeto de Conservação do Meio-Ambiente e de
Desenvolvimento Agropecuário Sustentável na Área de Caatinga do Vale do São Francisco" -
Ministério do Meio Ambiente, dos Recursos Hídricos e da Amazônia Legal ­ Brasília, março
de 1996.
CODEVASF. "Projetos de Irrigação no Vale do São Francisco" - Ministério do Meio
Ambiente, dos Recursos Hídricos e da Amazônia Legal ­ Brasília, novembro, 1996.
ELETROBRÁS. "Diagnóstico das Condições Sedimentológicas dos Principais Rios
Brasileiros", Centrais Elétricas S.A., Diretoria de Planejamento e Engenharia, Rio de Janeiro,
agosto de 1992.
Landim, J.M. Bittencourt, A.C.S.P. e Martin, L. "Esquema Evolutivo da Sedimentação
Quaternária nas Feições Deltaicas dos Rios São Francisco (SE/AL), Jequitinhonha (BA),
Doce (ES) e Paraíba do Sul (RJ), Dominguez" ­ Revista Brasileira de Geociência, São Paulo,
dezembro, 1981.
Landim, J.M. Bittencourt, A.C.S.P. e Martin, L. "O Papel da Deriva Litorânea de
Sedimentos Arenosos na Construção das Planicies Costeiras Associadas às Desembocaduras
dos Rios São Francisco (SE/AL), Jequitinhonha (BA), Doce (ES) e Paraíba do Sul (RJ),
Dominguez" ­ Revista Brasileira de Geociência, São Paulo, junho, 1983.

---

46
MMA/FMA/DEPAM. "Programa Para o Gestao Integrada dos Recursos Naturais da
Bacia do Rio Sao Francisco" ­ Recursos Pesqueiros Como Ponto Focal, Brasilia, julho, 1997.
PLANVASF. Plano Diretor para o Desenvolvimento do Vale do São Francisco, "Análise dos
Recursos Naturais Para a Atividade Agropecuária", Convênio Governo Brasileiro - OEA -
Brasília, julho, 1989.
PLANVASF. Plano Diretor para o Desenvolvimento do Vale do São Francisco, "Plano
Diretor Síntese", Convênio Governo Brasileiro - OEA - Brasília, dezembro, 1989.
PLANVASF. Plano Diretor para o Desenvolvimento do Vale do São Francisco, "Plano
Setorial de Energia", Convênio Governo Brasileiro - OEA - Brasília, julho, 1989.
PLANVASF. Plano Diretor para o Desenvolvimento do Vale do São Francisco, "Programa
Para o Desenvolvimento da Irrigação", Convênio Governo Brasileiro - OEA - Brasília, junho,
1989.
PLANVASF. Plano Diretor para o Desenvolvimento do Vale do São Francisco, "Programa
de Desenvolvimento das Áreas Indígenas da Região do Vale do São Francisco", Convênio
Governo Brasileiro - OEA - Brasília, dezembro, 1989.
PLANVASF. Plano Diretor para o Desenvolvimento do Vale do São Francisco, "Programa
Para o Desenvolvimento da Pesca e da Aquicultura", Convênio Governo Brasileiro - OEA -
Brasília, julho, 1989.
Senado Federal - Comissão Especial Para o Desenvolvimento do Vale do Rio São Francisco.
Volume I , "Notas Taquigrafias dos Painéis e Exposições", Brasília, 1995.
SEPLANTEC. "Processo Erosivo na Foz do Rio São Francisco" ­ Relatório Técnico No
01/97, CPERH, Aracaju, junho, 1997.
Simpson, L.D. "The São Francisco River: Lifeline of the Northeast", Latin America Water
Forum, São Paulo, Brazil, January 1997.
3. WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
CODEVASF/FAO. "Ordenamento dos recursos hídricos da bacia do rio São Francisco:
erosão". TCP/BRA/2257. Brasília.
CODEVASF/OEA. "Plano Diretor para o Desenvolvimento do Vale do São Francisco" ­
Relatório Final. Brasília: PLANVASF, 1989, 515 p.
CODEVASF. "Plano de Desenvolvimento do Sistema de Gestão de Recursos Hídricos da
Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio São Francisco (PDSG-RH/BHSF)" Referenciais e metodologias

---

47
propostas para concepção, implantação e desenvolvimento do sistema. Brasília, junho,
1997, 52 p.
CODEVASF. "Projetos de Irrigação no Vale do São Francisco". Companhia de
Desenvolvimento do Vale do São Francisco, Brasília, novembro 1996.
Costa, W.D. e Costa, V.D. "Disponibilidades hídricas subterrâneas na região Nordeste do
Brasil". A Água em Revista, ano V, no. 9, CPRM, Belo Horizonte, novembro, 47-59.
Development & Resources Corporation. "Plano de desenvolvimento integrado do vale do
São Francisco". Rio de Janeiro, CODEVASF, 1974.
DNAEE. "Diagnóstico e planejamento da utilização dos recursos hídricos da bacia do rio
São Francisco". Brasília, DNAEE/CNEC, 1979, 3v.
DNAEE. "Plano Nacional de Recursos Hídricos" - Documento preliminar, consolidando
informações já disponíveis. Brasília, 1985, 321 p.
Duda, A.M. "Addressing Global Environment Issues Through a Comprehensive
Approach to Water Resources Management ­ Perspectives from the São Francisco and
Plata Basin". GEF, Washington, DC, 1997.
ELETROBRÁS. Reunião específica de energia do Grupo de Trabalho São Francisco -
programa de ações; Ata. Rio de Janeiro, 8 de abril, 1996.
FGV. Plano Nacional de Recursos Hídricos ­ "Termos de referência para a elaboração de
Relatórios de Grandes Bacias". Fundação Getúlio Vargas: Relatório Técnico, Rio de
Janeiro, agosto, 1997.
Lanna, A.E. "Modelos de Gerenciamento das Águas". A Água em Revista, Belo
Horizonte. Vol. 5 no. 8, março, 1997, pág.: 24-33.
Maia Neto (1997). "Água para o desenvolvimento sustentável". A Água em Revista, ano
V, no. 9, CPRM, Belo Horizonte, novembro, 1999, pags. 21-32.
Rebouças, A. e Gaspary, J. "As águas subterrâneas do Nordeste, Estimativas
Preliminares". SUDENE, Série Hidrogeologia, no. 6. Recife, 1966.
Ribeiro dos Anjos, N.da F., Kitson, T., et al. "Regulated River Basins: A Review of
Hydrological Aspects for Operational Management." UNESCO Series ­ Technical
Documents in Hydrology, International Hydrological Programme, Paris, 1984.
Romano, P.A. e Cadavid, E.A. "Políticas para o planejamento e gestão dos recursos
hídricos da bacia do rio São Francisco". Secretaria de Recursos Hídricos/MMA.
Documento apresentado na Reunião Word Water Council, Latin American Water Forum,
São Paulo, 1997.

---

48
SECTMA/PE. "Relatório sobre a Transposição do Rio São Francisco e as Atuais
Necessidades de Recursos Hídricos do Nordeste". Secretaria de Ciência, Tecnologia e
Meio Ambiente do Estado de Pernambuco, Recife, 1995.
Senado Federal. "Comissão Especial para o Desenvolvimento do Vale do São Francisco"
­ Relatório Final, vol. 1. Brasília, 1995.
Tonet, H.C. e Lopes, R.G.F. "Alternativas organizacionais mais adequadas para viabilizar
o uso dos instrumentos de Avaliação de Impactos Ambientais e Gerenciamento de Bacia
Hidrográfica". Texto de Consultoria em Gestão Pública para Projeto de Tecnologias de
Gestão Ambiental do IBAMA. Brasília, 1994.
U. S. Bureau of Reclamation. "Reconhecimento dos recursos hídricos e de solos da bacia
do rio São Francisco". Rio de Janeiro, SUVALE, 1970, 5v.
Vieira, V. "Águas do São Francisco para a preservação da vida no semi-árido". XII
Simpósio Brasileiro de Recursos Hídricos, Anais (CD-Rom), Brasília, 1997.
4. REGIONAL ECONOMY
Amsber, J. Von. "Project Evaluation and the Depletion of Natural Capital: An Application
of the Sustainability Principle", Environmental Working Paper No. 56, The World Bank,
Washington, D.C., February, 1993.
Cabral, B. "Legislaçäo Estadual de Recursos Hídricos", Caderno Legislativo No. 002/97,
Volume II. Senado Federal, Brasília, Brasil, novembro, 1997.
David, L.J., Golubev, G.N., and Nakayama, M. "The Environmental Management of
Large International Basins" - The EMINWA Programme of UNEP, Water Resources
Development, Volume 4, Number 2, June, 1988.
FMAM. "Estrategia Operacional del Fondo para el Medio Ambiente Mundial".
Washington, D.C., febrero, 1996.
FMAM. "Incremental Costs, GEF Council Meeting", Washington D.C., April 2-4, 1996.
FMAM. "Programas Operacionales del FMAM", Washington, D.C., junio, 1997.
Governo do Brasil Lei No. 9433, "Política Nacional de Recursos Hídricos". Brasília, 8 de
janeiro de1997.
King, K. "The Incremental Costs of Global Environmental Benefits", Working Paper
Number 5, Global Environment Facility (FMAM/GEF), Washington, D.C., 1993.
Munasinghe, M. and Lutz, E. "Environmental-Economic Evaluation of Projects and

---

49
Policies for Sustainable Development" Environmental Working Paper No. 42, The World
Bank. Washington, D.C., January 1991.
UNEP/OAS. "Global Environment Facility Proposal for PDF Block B Grant". Integrated
Water Resources of the São Francisco River and its Coastal Zone". Brasília, 1997.
UNEP/OAS. "Strategic Action Programme for the Binational Basin of the Bermejo River,
(GEF Proposal)", Washington, DC, April 1997.
World Bank, "Status of IBRD-IDA Projects in Execution (Brazil)". SEC M 97-898, IDA
SEC M 97-518, Washington, D.C., November 1997.
5. INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING AND SUPPORT
CEEIVASF. "Histórico do CEEIBH e dos Comitês de Estudos da Bacias Hidrográficas",
Brasília, outubro, 1997.
CODEVASF. "Projetos de Irrigação no vale do São Francisco". Fonte de Desenvolvimento
Sustentável do Nordeste, Brasília, novembro 1996.
CODEVASF/DNOCS. "Avaliação da Capacidade Institucional das Agências Executoras
Federais do PROÁGUA", Brasília, 1997.
CODEVASF. "PROJETO CAATINGA ­ Projeto de conservação do meio-ambiente e de
desenvolvimento agropecuário sustentável na área de caatinga do Vale do São Francisco".
Brasília, março, 1996.
CODEVASF. "Plano de Desenvolvimento do Sistema de Gestão de Recursos Hídricos da
Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio São Francisco" ­ PDSG-RH/RHSF, Brasília, 1997.
MMA/SRH. "Subprograma de Desenvolvimento Sustentável de Recursos Hídricos para o
Semi-Árido Brasileiro ­ PROÁGUA". Detalhamento do arranjo institucional e do componente
gerenciamento, monitoria e avaliação Mimeo, Brasília, 1997.
PLANVASF. "Plano Diretor para Desenvolvimento do Vale do São Francisco (1989 ­
2000)"­ Relatório Final. Brasília, Convenio Governo Brasileiro-OEA, dezembro, 1989.
PROÁGUA. "Componente, Estudos e Projetos. Sub-componentes Estadual". Estudos
específicos e projetos solicitados pelo Estado, 1997 (todos os estados participantes do
projeto PROÁGUA), Brasília, 1997.
PROÁGUA. "Fortalecimento Institucional nos Estados Participantes". Relatório Final,
volume 1. Situação Atual dos Estados, Brasília, 31 de junho, 1997.

---

50
PROÁGUA. "Subprograma de Desenvolvimento Sustentável de Recursos Hídricos para o
Semi-Árido Brasileiro". Detalhamentos do arranjo institucional e do componente
gerenciamento, monitoria e avaliação, Brasília, 1997.
Souza, F. de "O impacto da transposição de bacias sobre a irrigação no Estado do Ceará".
Universidade Federal do Ceará, mimeo, 1993.
Vasconcellos, E.L. e Mendonça, H.G. "Avaliação da Capacidade Institucional da agência
executoras federais do PROÁGUA", mimeo, Brasília, 1997.
6. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Brasil. Lei 9,433. "Institui a Política Nacional de Recursos Hídricos e Cria o Sistema
Nacional de Gerenciamento de Recursos Hídricos", de 8 de Janeiro, 1997.
Cardoso, A.J. Munguba "Gestão Participativa de Sistemas de Abastecimento de Água",
Proposta para a Barragem Ponto Novo ­ SRH/Bahia. Brasília, 1997.
Castro, G.W. "Guia para Capacitadores ­ em Apoio à Organização de Pequenos
Produtores Rurais". Programa Nacional de Capacitação Técnica. INCRA/PNUD, Brasília,
1992.
Chalub, L. e Zatz, I. "O Que é Isto, Capacitação? Capacitação de Quem, Em Quê, Para
Quê, Como ... ?" Brasília, 1994.
FAO. Plan de Acción sobre Participación en el Desarrollo Rural. Conferencia, 1991.
Governo do Estado da Bahia, Secretaria de Recursos Hídricos, Saneamento e Habitação ­
SRHSH. "Plano Diretor de Recursos Hídricos - Bacia do Rio Itapicuru". Documento
Síntese. Salvador, 1995.
Ministério do Meio Ambiente, dos Recursos Hídricos e da Amazônia Legal.
"Gerenciamento Integrado de Recursos Hídricos da Bacia do São Francisco e da sua
Zona Costeira" ­ Proposta para doação FMAM (PDF Bloco B.) Secretaria de Recursos
Hídricos, PNUMA/OEA, Brasília, 1997.
Ministério do Meio Ambiente, dos Recursos Hídricos e da Amazônia Legal - Secretaria
dos Recursos Hídricos. "Política Nacional de Recursos Hídricos", Brasília, 1997.
Ministério do Planejamento e Orçamento, PROJETO ÁRIDAS. "Nordeste: uma
estratégia de desenvolvimento sustentável" ­ Brasília, 1995.
Zatz, I. e Chalub, L. "Influência das Organizações de Produtores Irrigantes em Projetos
Públicos". Brasília, 1996.

---

51
ANNEX 7
GEOGRAPHY OF THE SFRB AND PLANNING CONTEXT
1. The Upper Sub-basin is located in the southernmost part of the Basin, primarily within the
State of Minas Gerais, in a region characterized by rolling hills and tablelands. The climate is
humid temperate to sub-tropical, with an average precipitation of approximately 1,250 mm
per year. This sub-basin contributes more than 70 percent of the overall flow of the river.
Belo Horizonte, the capital of the State of Minas Gerais, is located in this area, as are other
moderately sized cities including Patos de Minas, Januaria, and Betim. Development within
this reach of the river includes large industrial plants, mainly for steel production and
manufacturing of paper and automobiles, diversified mining, and irrigated agriculture based on
the large Tres Marias Dam. Agricultural production is primarily soybeans and cattle with
higher value crops, such as fruit cultivars grown within irrigated areas. This region also has
large areas of cultivated forests of eucalyptus for use in the paper industry and in the
production of charcoal for the steel industry. Over half of the population of the basin, or
more than 7 million (1994 Census) people, lives in this sub-basin.
2. The Middle Sub-basin is located in the states of Minas Gerais and Bahia and is
characterized by two distinct zones. The western portion of the sub-basin is fed by
orographic rainfall in the elevated areas, has perennial water courses, and is relatively fertile,
supporting cerrado or caatinga vegetation and agricultural production in both private and
public irrigation schemes. The eastern portion of the sub-basin is characterized by
intermittent or seasonal water courses, and supports considerably less development.
Caatinga vegetation dominates in this semi-arid area, and agricultural production is limited to
cattle and goat production, subsistence agriculture, and limited irrigated agriculture where
water is available. Precipitation averages around 900 mm per year and there are no dams or
reservoirs in this sub-basin. The population is rural and sparse, mostly involved in
agricultural activities and dependent on the river for irrigation, transportation and water
supply, with more than half of the families classified as indigent or poor.
3. The Lower-Middle Sub-basin is located in the states of Bahia and Pernambuco. The river is
the boundary between the two states and represents a major source of irrigation water for
fruit and vegetable production in the region of Petrolina and Juazeiro. Vegetation is
predominantly caatinga, distinctive of the sertão region of Brazil, and the soils are mostly
thin and non-productive. Precipitation averages about 500 mm per year. Development in this
region has been strongly influenced by federally sponsored irrigation projects, implemented
by the Companhia de Desenvolvimento do Vale do São Francisco (CODEVASF), which
provided the base for subsequent private investment in high value export vegetable crops.
This sub-basin also contains the majority of the hydroelectric power infrastructure within the
Rio São Francisco Basin: the Sobradinho (34.1x109 m3; 1,050 MW), Itaparica (10.7x109 m3;
1,500 MW), Paulo Afonso (1x109 m3; 4,400 MW) and Xingo (3.3 x109 m3; 3,000 MW) dams
provide renewable energy for most of Northeastern Brazil. This infrastructure also provides
an opportunity for the development of river-borne inter-modal transportation systems as the
river was originally marginally navigable in this region through to its upper reaches. In
addition, an inter-basin transfer scheme, proposed for construction below the Sobradinho

---

52
Dam to supply water to the Northeastern States of Ceara, Rio Grande do Norte and Paraiba,
is still being analyzed. Most of the population is located in the cities of Juazeiro in Bahia and
Paulo Afonso and Petrolina in Pernambuco.
4. The Lower Sub-basin includes the states of Bahia, Alagoas, Sergipe and Pernambuco; the
river forming the border between the states of Bahia and Pernambuco and between the states
of Alagoas and Sergipe. Vegetation in this sub-basin is mostly cerrado (and Mata Atlántica in
the humid lower reaches), although there are large semi-arid areas, covered by caatinga, in the
northernmost portion of the sub-basin. Precipitation varies from 1,300 mm per year along the
Atlantic coast to 500 mm per year along the upstream boundary. Population is concentrated
near the coast in small municipalities and rural communities, and is generally classified as poor
or indigent. Sugar and alcohol are the main agricultural products of the sub-basin, with
estuarine and coastal marine fisheries forming an important source of food and income. River
navigation was historically important in the transportation of sugar and other agricultural
products, and limestone and building materials, but has declined in recent years due to
aggradation of the river channel which forced the development of the regional road system.
5. The lowest reaches of the sub-basin contain an extended estuary and estuarine wetlands.
The ecological regime of the delta and coastal areas represents an asset that has not been fully
defined or protected. Some of this area has been developed for agricultural production using a
system of polders and drainage channels. The beach to the south of the delta is a principle
nesting area of threatened and endangered sea turtle species, while the oceanic end point of the
river debouches across the North East Brazil Shelf to the South West Atlantic LME. This
entire area has been significantly modified by the regulation of the river upstream of the
estuary and coastal zone (e.g., erosion of river banks, sedimentation, formation of islands in
the delta, and erosion of the southern extreme of the delta). These modifications not only
affect the estuary by altering flooding cycles, but also impact the nearshore marine
environment by modifying the nutrient and sediment content of the river water, affecting
marine fauna, and the sediment and turbidity dynamics of the estuary with observed, although
unquantified, changes in the aquatic fauna, flora and geomorphology of the river mouth. This
project will focus on fully identifying and quantifying these impacts, especially those relating
to land-based activities within the watershed, and developing a program of strategic actions to
minimize the negative environmental impacts of land-based activities on the coastal marine
environment while supporting sustainable economic development in the basin.
6. The Rio São Francisco has been subjected to a significant degree of infrastructural
modification as a consequence of public efforts to promote development. The principal
Federal entities having responsibilities within the basin are CODEVASF (Development
Company of the São Francisco River), CHESF (Hydroelectric Company of the São Francisco
River, the major power agency in the basin), and SUDENE, an organization created in 1959
for the purpose of comprehensive planning and support to development in Northeastern
Brazil. In 1984 the Executive Committee of Integrated Studies of the Basin (CEEIVASF) was
created, within the framework of the Special Commission for Integrated River Basin Studies
in Brazil, to undertake specific planning studies in the basin. This Committee was among the
first to consider the São Francisco River Basin as a hydrologic unit, but the Committee was
restricted by its mandate to the preparation of studies, and it lacked the institutional

---

53
independence and financing to successfully implement a comprehensive program of river
basin management. Other official organizations with interests in the São Francisco Basin
include the Inter-State Parliamentary Commission for the Development of the Rio São
Francisco (CIPE) composed of the Presidents of the Legislative Assemblies of the five
riparian States, and UNIVALE, a Union of Municipal Authorities in the basin.
7. In 1989, a Master Plan for the Development of the Sào Francisco River Valley
(PLANVASF) was completed, with the assistance of the General Secretariat of the
Organization of American States (OAS), and was designed to provide incentives to the public
and private sectors for the development of the basin. This plan included proposals for the
development of natural and water resources, increased food production through irrigated
agriculture, increased power generation supplying the National Network, increased water and
sanitation services, improved river navigation, and enhanced environmental protection. This
plan was adopted as a part of Federal Law 8851/94, as the Plan of Economic and Social
Development of Northeastern Brazil.
8. In January 1997, the Federal Government passed Law 9433/97, creating the National
Policy on Water Resources and establishing public institutions (basin committees) for the
issuance of water rights and implementation of water use payment systems. With the
approval of the National Policy Committee on Water Resources, as established by the
National Constitution, the Federal Government is promulgating criteria and guidelines to be
followed by states in implementing federal law 9433/97. Presently the States of Bahia,
Pernambuco and Sergipe have passed legislation consistent with these objectives, principles
and guidelines and are creating institutions to implement the new law at the State level. The
States of Minas Gerais and Alagoas are presently modifying or creating water legislation in
order to comply with federal regulations. Implementation of these laws will create a climate
that should address many of the concerns identified by the Special Commission for
Development of the São Francisco Valley. This Commission, created by Act No. 480 of the
Federal Senate, concluded that activities undertaken in the basin have been fragmented and
sectoral, and that, as a result, the necessary legal or institutional framework for implementing
an integrated management approach has not been developed. Implementation of an holistic
and integrated program of river basin and coastal zone management was recommended.
Strategic programs of action identified through this project and its complementary investment
activities (to be implemented through The World Bank, MMA, and Secretariat for Regional
Policy (SEPRE)) will seek to catalyze actions to address these issues in a practical and
meaningful manner.
9. Activities in the Brazilian Coastal zone are regulated by Federal Law No 7661/88, the
National Environment Program. This law, inter alia, establishes the National Coastal
Management Plan, the principle objectives of which are the sustainable use of natural
resources in the Coastal Zone, and preservation, conservation and rehabilitation of
ecosystems in the Coastal Zone to promote sustainable development. A coastal zone
inventory and macrodiagnostic, including the Rio Sao Francisco estuary, was completed in
1996 by the Government of Brazil with support from The World Bank. This study
identified in a mapping format the major human uses of the coastal zone of Brazil,
environmentally sensitive sites, and conservation units and reserves, which, in the Rio Sao

---

54
Francisco coastal zone, are related primarily to agricultural use and conservation of
endangered species, including sea turtles.

---

55
ANNEX 8
PROPOSED WORK PROGRAM
Project Identifier
GF/1100-98-
Project Name:
INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT OF
LAND-BASED ACTIVITIES IN THE SÃO
FRANCISCO BASIN
Implementing Agency:
UNEP
Executing Agency:
OAS
Ministerio do Meio Ambiente, dos Recursos
Hidricos e da Amazonia Legal do Brasil
(MMA), Secretaria de Recursos Hidricos
(SRH).
Requesting Country or Countries:
Brazil
Country Eligibility:
Under paragraph 9(b) of the Instrument.
Focal Area:
International Waters
Cross-cutting areas
Land Degradation
GEF Programming Framework:
OP 10
Estimated Starting Date
October 1998
Project Duration:
2.5 years.
1. This project develops a watershed management program (WMP) for the SFRB, which
discharges into the South West Atlantic Large Marine Ecosystem and Brazil Current. The
strategic program of action for the integrated and sustainable management of this system and
its coastal zone to be formulated during this project will address the physical, biological,
chemical and institutional root causes of the progressive degradation which is affecting the
basin and, particularly, the coastal ecosystems. The project will focus on the use of economic
instruments and catalyze implementation activities designed to facilitate sustainable
development within the basin and coastal zone, and complements basin-scale interventions by
the Government of Brazil, financed in part from national sources and by The World Bank
through the Program for Water Development (PROAGUA) and other donors. The project
forms the Latin American demonstration project under the Global Program of Action for the
Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities (GPA) GEF operational
program element.
2. The Rio São Francisco Basin extends over approximately 640,000 km2, comparable to the
drainage basins of the Colorado or Columbia rivers of North America, and discharges across
the North East Brazil Shelf to the Southwest Atlantic Large Marine Ecosystem (LME) and
Brazil Current. The river covers a large portion of the area known as the "Drought Polygon of
Brazil" as it traverses climatic zones ranging from humid to arid as it flows through five states
in Northeastern Brazil; i.e., Minas Gerais, Bahia, Pernambuco, Alagoas and Sergipe. The
Federal District of Brasilia and the State of Goias are also sometimes included in the
watershed as the headwater tributaries originate in these areas. The basin is generally divided
into the Upper, Middle, Lower Middle, and Lower sub-basins, plus the oceanic end point,
each with distinct environmental and socio-economic characteristics. The estuarine wetlands

---

56
located at the debouchment of the river into the South West Atlantic form a particularly
important and environmentally sensitive interface between the riverine and marine
environments. The ecological structure and function of this interface, as well as its physical
integrity, is currently under threat due to unsustainable hydrological and land use management
practices within the basin. Except for flood flows during the wet season, flow is contributed
primarily from the humid and semi-humid areas near the headwaters. Tributaries in the arid
and semi-arid regions of the Middle and Lower Middle sub-basins are largely intermittent,
although flood flows in these streams may cause localized problems of flooding, erosion and
sedimentation which affect the entire lower portion of the river system and the coastal zone.
Some 13 million people are resident in this basin, principally concentrated in the upper sub-
basin.
3. Building upon previous studies, this GEF project will help the Government of Brazil to
promote sustainable development of the SFRB and its coastal zone, based upon the
implementation of a WMP integrating the watershed and coastal zone. The goals of this
Project are (i) to assist the Government of Brazil to incorporate land-based environmental
concerns into development policies, plans and programs for the Basin and for the protection
of its coastal zone; and (ii) to conduct pilot demonstration activities during WMP formulation
to gain information needed for management purposes.
4. The formulation of the proposal for the Integrated Management of the Water Resources of
the São Francisco Basin and its Coastal Zone, including its proposed GEF components, has
involved extensive and broad-based participation by representatives of the municipal, state
and national Governments, academic and research institutions, private sector representatives
and non-governmental organizations. The participation process was facilitated by a series of
consultative workshops, conducted in Belo Horizonte in the upper sub-basin during
November 1997; Penedo in the lower sub-basin and estuary during December 1997; and,
Petrolina in the middle and lower middle sub-basins during February 1998. Follow-up
consultations were held with participants in the workshops and with other selected personnel
from the SRH/MMA during February 1998 to prepare the project brief, which was
subsequently endorsed by the GEF project preparation steering committee, which met in
Brasilia during March 1998. Final preparation of the project brief was completed in
Washington DC during March 1998 in consultation with representatives of the Implementing
Agencies (UNEP, The World Bank, and UNDP).
5. Approximately 270 persons representing more than 100 institutions, government agencies
and NGOs, participated in the public meetings and provided inputs in drafting this proposal,
many of which are expected to participate in the implementation of the project. This
proposal is based on some 135 project concept documents prepared during the PDF-B
process. A full review of reports and basic documentation available in different Government
agencies, both of the Federal Government and the States, and contacts with those agencies, as
well as with private sector representatives, academic institutions and NGOs, was also
completed during the PDF-B process.
6. Proposed Project Components correspond to those identified in the PDF-B Grant
Proposal. The project components, comprised of several activities arising from the public

---

57
participation process conducted during the PDF phase, are designed to provide information on,
and permit formulation of, an WMP for the Rio São Francisco Basin, and are concentrated in
four principal activity areas as set forth below. The relationship between these activity areas
and the activities defined in the project brief is shown in Table 1. Preliminary descriptions and
budgets for each of the 20 proposed components have been prepared by the United Nations
Environment Programme, as Implementing Agency, in consultation with the Organization of
American States and the Federal Government of Brazil, and are summarized below. It should
be noted that many of the components are multi-faceted in nature and include not only specific
issue-related activities, but also provide opportunities for stakeholder involvement, citizen and
professional environmental education, and institutional strengthening, etc.; however, for the
sake of brevity and clarity, each component has been categorized into only one issue area and
has not been repeated under its related issue areas.
Table 1. Proposed Project Activities, Work Program Activity Areas and Components.
Project Activity
Work Program Activity Area
Component
I. River Basin and Coastal Zone
A. River Basin and Coastal
1.1 through 1.4
Environmental Analysis
Zone Environmental Analysis
II. Public and Stakeholder
B. Public Participation
2.1 through 2.3
Participation
III. Organizational Structure
C. Organizational Development 3.1, and 3.3 through
Development
3.5
IV. WMP Formulation
D. Watershed Management
1.5, 3.2, and 4.1
Program Formulation
through 4.7
A. COMPONENT I: RIVER BASIN AND COASTAL ZONE ENVIRONMENTAL
ANALYSIS
7. Component I comprises the river basin diagnostic study, and is designed to provide for the
collection and analysis of additional field data relevant to the diagnosis of those additional
priority issues of concern, identified during the PDF investigations, which were not
previously considered during the preparatory phase of the project. These data will contribute
to the sound scientific and technical basis for the strategic remedial actions identified in the
WMP process. This Component consists of five Activities that will permit quantification of
the issues, thereby updating and consolidating older data, and providing for the forecasting of
potential future conditions within the system. Based on analyses conducted as a result of
PDF activities, some of the proposed Activities target specific, representative locales where
specific data and information are required. Detailed work plans, setting forth detailed terms
of reference and goals to be achieved during the project, will be developed for each Activity as
one of the first actions initiated by the local executing agency in consultation with UNEP and
the OAS.
Issue 1: Water Resources Issue Identification

---

58
8. Consideration is given to those issues not previously identified but which were identified
during the PDF activities as having impacts on the basin and, as a result, require further study
and quantification to determine root causes which will be addressed in the WMP.
Activity 1.1: River Flow, Water Quality and Fisheries in the Lower SFRB and Coastal Zone
(AL and SE). This Activity seeks to identify and quantify the extent to which river regulation
in the Rio Sao Francisco influences hydrology, sediment and nutrient transport, and fisheries
throughout the system and, especially, at the coastal zone in the vicinity of its estuary.
Knowledge of the consequences of river regulation, which are likely to include changes in the
rate and location of sediment erosion and deposition within the river channel and estuary that
affect navigation, river morphology, and shoreland wetlands; modification of the river flow
regime that affects sediment and nutrient transport and estuarine fisheries; and, changes in the
mass of sediment and nutrients delivered to the river mouth, will form the basis for the
determination of strategic actions to optimize the multiple purpose utilization of the water
resources of the basin. The results of the project will (i) quantify the historical evolution of
the river and its estuary since the dams were built, (ii) permit analysis and modeling of the
behavior of the river flow and its effect on the transportation of sediments and nutrients
under current and forecast future conditions, (iii) form the basis for determining appropriate
(and/or alternative) fisheries management practices, (iv) contribute to a strategy for
environmentally-sound reservoir operation, and (v) allow an assessment of the feasibility of
river transportation of agricultural products. Project deliverables will include 1. a documented
evaluation of the environmental impacts of the river on the coastal zone including wetlands,
beaches, and fish habitat; 2. a documented analysis of the use of artificial floods as an
hydrological management mechanism; 3. an inventory of aquatic fauna present in the lower
Rio San Francisco Basin and historic changes in its composition; and, 4. a documented
analysis of different scenarios for reservoir operation to minimize environmental impacts on
the estuary (see also Activity 4.4). The project deliverables will also include the documented
assessment of the most probably reasons for changes in river morphology and aquatic faunal
community composition and distributions necessary to determine the root causes of these
changes. GEF: US $ 500,000; co-funding: US $ 678,000; total: US $ 1,178,000.
Activity 1.2: Impact of Mining on Water Resources in the Rio das Velhas (MG). This
Activity seeks to identify and quantify the impact of mining activities in the "Iron
Quadrangle" of the State of Minas Gerais on water quality. Knowledge of the locations,
types, and magnitudes of water quality impacts created will contribute to the identification
methods to mitigate negative impacts. The results of the project will (i) provide a
quantitative assessment of the nature and location of water quality impacts due to mining
activities in the basin, (ii) provide data for an assessment of the severity and magnitude of
mining-related contamination of the waters of the Rio Sao Francisco, and (iii) form the basis
for determining appropriate mitigation measures. Project deliverables will include a
documented inventory of mines and other sources of pollution, a documented strategy for
identifying actions necessary to mitigate the negative impacts of mining, and a documented
assessment of the downstream impacts of water contamination due to mining. GEF: US $
150,000; co-funding: US $ 325,000; total: US $ 475,000.

---

59
Activity 1.3: Fisheries Impacts on Migratory Fishes in the Middle SFRB (MG and BA). This
Activity seeks to determine the impact of commercial and recreational fisheries on migratory
fish populations, and to relate changes in species composition and numbers to not only
fisheries pressures but also to water quality and river regulation in the middle SFRB (between
Tres Marias and Sobradinho lakes, complementing the on-going Jaiba Project downstream of
Sobradinho Lake). Knowledge of these impacts will contribute to the sustainable economic
development of the middle SFRB and maintenance of the aquatic ecosystem. The results of
this project will identify measures for the maintenance of economically viable populations of
commercially valuable migratory fish species. The project will be carried out through the
direct participation of fishermen presently working in the river. Project deliverables will be a
documented inventory of fish species and their migratory patterns, and recommended
methods for the sustainable management of fishes consistent with cultural norms. GEF: US $
180,000; co-funding US $ 99,000; total: US $ 279,000.
Activity 1.4: Development of a Water Quality Monitoring System in the Lower Middle SFRB
(BA and PE). This Activity seeks to develop a monitoring program which will acquire water
quality data which will contribute to an assessment of point source and nonpoint source
pollution of surface and ground waters in the Lower Middle portions of the SFRB.
Knowledge of water quality conditions will contribute an assessment of the relative
magnitudes of point and nonpoint sources of water pollution in the basin, facilitate
determination of priority pollutants and pollution sources, and permit an assessment of
downstream impacts. The results of this project will contribute to the development of
appropriate, priority pollutants and pollution control programs in support of strategic
actions to promote sustainable development in the basin. Further, this project will contribute
to the strengthening of basin organizations involved in water quality management and build
capacity for water quality monitoring and assessment that can be transferred elsewhere within
the region. Project deliverables will include a documented assessment of pollutants and
pollution sources in the lower middle SFRB, and a documented framework for mitigating
priority pollutants that can be extended throughout the basin. GEF: US $ 160,000; co-
funding: US $ 816,000; total: US $ 976,000.
Activity 1.5: Impact of Agriculture on Groundwater Resources in the Rio Verde/Jacare (BA).
This Activity seeks to develop a monitoring program will contribute to an assessment of the
relationship between rainfall, runoff and groundwater recharge in the Middle portion of the
SFRB, and the extent of contaminant- and abstraction-related impacts of agriculture on water
availability in the Rio Verde sub-basin. Knowledge of the relationship of irrigated agriculture
and groundwater will contribute to the development of a sustainable and conjunctive use of
surface and groundwater resources. The results of this project will (i) quantify the volumes
of water consumed by irrigated agriculture, (ii) quantify the level of contamination of surface
and groundwaters arising from agricultural water use, (iii) identify the degree to which
abstraction and contamination of waters impacts the ability of waters to be used by
downstream users, and (iv) contribute to sustainable, conjunctive management of the water
resources of the Rio Verde sub-basin (see Activity 3.2). Project deliverables will include a
documented assessment of the use of surface and groundwaters in the Rio Verde sub-basin
which can be extrapolated throughout the irrigation areas of the Middle SFRB. GEF: US $
140,000; co-funding: US $ 254,000; total: US $ 394,000.

---

60
B. COMPONENT II: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
9. Component II, providing public participation projects, is designed to provide for the
collection and analysis of the information on the feasibility and relative costs of certain
remedial measures identified during the PDF Activities as well as a basis for transferring such
experiences to the public at large. By involving the Basin communities in practical, hands on-
type involvement in the identification and field testing of remedial measures, as well as in a
dialogue process, actions formulated through the project process will have the advantage of
benefiting from community insights and experiences, and of being acceptable to the
communities as economically and environmentally sustainable alternatives to presently
destructive practices. While the major effort in this area is expected to be undertaken
subsequently, one Activity that targets the acquisition of specific information necessary for
the determination of water rights and water rate allocations is proposed to be undertaken
during this project of the watershed management program preparation process. (public
participation activities are set forth under Component IV, Watershed Management Program
Formulation.)
Issue 2: Sustainable Development and Stakeholder Participation
10. Consideration is given to activities which identify alternative means of economic
production or alternative economic activities which enhance the environment and/or minimize
environmental degradation, and which identify and coordinate the interests of persons and
agencies having commercial or institutional responsibilities within the basin, including the
fisheries, navigation, mining and agro-industrial sectors.
Activity 2.1: Determination of Land Use in the Lower-Middle SFRB. (BA and PE). This
Activity seeks to determine land use in the lower middle basin of the Rio Sao Francisco as a
prerequisite for the determination of land ownership which is important in the
implementation of water charges as set forth under Activity 4.2. The knowledge gained
through this project will contribute to the rational allocation of water and water charges and
the identification of water user groups. The results of the project will contribute to the
determination of water use and its impact on the hydrology of the system, and facilitate
implementation of water use charges. This project will also contribute to the identification of
degraded lands and riparian areas in need of stabilization. Project deliverables will include
documented mapping at an appropriate scale to determine land ownership and condition, and
a documented framework for establishing a water use allocation system (see also Activity 4.2
which employs these data for determination of water rates and charges). GEF: US $ 200,000;
co-funding: US $ 584,000; total: US $ 784,000.
Activity 2.2: Rehabilitation of Degraded Agricultural Lands for Water Quality Improvement
in Selected Sub-basins (MG and BA). This Activity seeks to promote the use of agricultural
best management practices and rehabilitation techniques including vegetation to protect water
quality in the basin. Through the use of community-based educational programming and pilot
scale demonstration projects, this project will demonstrate sound soil and water management
techniques, appropriate utilization of agrochemicals, and improved methods of crop

---

61
management, irrigation design and maintenance of infrastructure such as roads and irrigation
ditches. The results of this project will enhance the capacity of agricultural communities to
develop sustainable farming techniques that will contribute to environmentally-sound
management of water quality in the basin. Project deliverables will include a documented
study of appropriate soil and water management measures and development of a documented
training program through which to communicate these measures to farmers. GEF: US $
250,000; co-funding: US $ 354,000; total: US $ 604,000.
Activity 2.3: Vegetative Stabilization of River Banks (AL and SE). This Activity seeks to
determine the feasibility and costs of stabilizing river banks through the cultivation of
different native plant species. Complementing the hydrological studies set forth in Activity
1.1, this project provides a practical evaluation of revegetation as a means of controlling
erosion of river banks under conditions of variable river flow. The results of this project will
contribute the definition of best management practices for the stabilization of river banks in
the lower basin. Project deliverables will include a documented demonstration of the efficacy
of various native plant species as a means of stabilization of river banks under variable flow
conditions. GEF: US $ 70,000; co-funding: US $ 212,000; total: US $ 282,000.
C. COMPONENT III: ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
11. Component III, providing projects designed to strengthen and improve institutional and
staffing capabilities to implement new laws, regulations, and procedures, is designed to
provide for the equipping and training of institutions and individuals identified during the
PDF Activities. Such institutional strengthening and capacity building will contribute to the
longer-term success of the watershed management measures identified in the Integrated
Management of Land-based Sources of Marine Pollution in the SFRB. This Component
consists of five Activities that target specific institutions and skills needed within the basin.
Issue 3: Institutional Strengthening
12. Consideration is given to providing an effective framework in which activities of
professionals are carried out, including legal, structural, economic and administrative activities.
Activity 3.1: Pilot Implementation of Federal Water Policy in the Maranhão River (MG).
This Activity seeks to facilitate implementation, on a pilot basis, of Federal Law 9433/97 and
the corresponding State legislation, by testing methods for the creation of a Water Basin
Committee and Water Agency, through active popular participation. This will allow
identification of the practical problems arising from the application of the law and an
assessment of the capacity of stakeholders to organize. The results of this project will
identify the best legal instruments for creating a Water Agency, including determination of the
composition of its management, and permit evaluation of the implications of implementing a
Basin Development Plan in a climate of organizational transparency in which information is
accessible to all stakeholders in the Maranhão River. Project deliverables will include a report
evaluating the efficacy of several policy instruments for implementing the water law and
related state legislation; quantitative evaluation of the pilot scale implementation will be
related to measured improvements in both rate of water use and degree of protection of

---

62
downstream water quality; and, a documented framework for the implementation of the law
in other basins. GEF: US $ 150,000; co-funding: US $ 195,000; total: US $ 345,000.
Activity 3.2: Conjunctive Use of Surface and Groundwater (BA). Based upon quantitative
data gathered under Activity 1.5, this Activity seeks to develop, through the use of water
rights and water pricing, alternative means of managing surface and ground water use in a
selected sub-basin. This project will develop and implement, on a pilot basis, a system of
groundwater rights in the sub-basin that will restrict the rate of groundwater abstraction so as
to minimize impacts on surface water flows. The results of this project will provide
quantitative information on the surface and ground water hydrology of the sub-basin, and
contribute to the regulation of water use to ensure sustainable development of available
resources. Project deliverables will include the documented granting of water rights and the
establishment of an adequate and appropriate administrative framework in the sub-basin,
which can be extended to other sub-basins in the SFRB. GEF: US $ 250,000; co-funding: $
480,000; total: US $ 730,000.
Activity 3.3: Support to Citizen Management Committees in Selected Sub-basins. (BA and
PE). This Activity seeks to develop conflict resolution techniques for use under conditions
of water scarcity, employing the small committee structures authorized under the federal
water law as a mechanism for encouraging discussion and participation of stakeholders in the
decision-making process. It is envisaged that several mechanisms will be employed in this
process, including citizen management committees, management committees, and technical
development committees, whose structure and terms of reference will be established under
this Activity. Experiences gained during this project will strengthen citizen participation in
the water resources management process, and provide guidance for the establishment of
effective (sub-)basin management committees elsewhere in the basin [under the federal water
law, these committees will participate in the basin-wide decision-making process of the
integrated basin management committee]. The results of this project will enhance rational
water use within the basin, integrated management of water resources for economic purposes,
including environmental purposes, and the capacity of communities to manage their water
resources in a sustainable manner. Project deliverables will include a documented framework
for the creation and management of citizen committees that can be extended throughout the
basin, and a documented program of public participation in the management of water
resources in selected sub-basins. GEF: US $ 100,000; co-funding: US $ 175,000; total: US $
275,000.
Activity 3.4: Support to the Creation of an Integrated Water Basin Committee in the SFRB.
This Activity seeks to support the development of an effective and integrated SFRB
Committee, as provided for under federal law 9433/97. This project, in concert with activities
funded under PROAGUA, will contribute to the implementation of an effective, integrated
basin committee, and ancillary agencies and organizations, as a forum for inter-sectoral
discussion, technical information exchange, and decision-making regarding the water resources
management of the SFRB. The results of the project will develop a framework for the
creation of a financially-sustainable basin management agency and contribute to the
sustainable use and management of the water resources of the basin, including integration of
environmental and coastal zone concerns into the overall management strategy for the system.

---

63
The committee thus created will also provide a forum for the interaction of sub-basin
committees created under Activities 3.3 and 3.5. Project deliverables will include a
documented framework leading to the establishment of an integrated river basin committee
and related agencies, consistent with the spirit of federal law 9433/97, in a multiple purpose
river basin that can be transferred to other multiple purpose river basins in the region. GEF:
US $ 150,000; co-funding: US $ 205,000; total US $ 355,000.
Activity 3.5: Support to Technical Integration within the Framework of the Integrated Water
Basin Committee in the SFRB (AL, BA, MG, PE and SE) This Activity seeks to provide a
forum within the Integrated Water Basin Committee structure identified under Activity 3.4
for on-going dialogue on integrated water resources management issues between stakeholders,
across sectoral and state boundaries, in the SFRB in order to promote exchange of issues,
experiences, information sharing and transfer of technologies, as a means of harmonizing
policies and practices and resolving conflicts between users groups in this multiple purpose
water use basin. The project will enhance the abilities of basin committee to manage the
water resources of the basin in an effective manner, contribute to the transparent functioning
of basin agencies, and provide the framework within which water use and management issues
can be resolved. Such a function will be especially important under conditions of water
scarcity within the basin. The results of the project will strengthen the ability of basin
institutions to carry out their mandates in a coordinated and effective manner, and promote
integrated management of the water resources of the Sao Francisco River as a whole. Project
deliverables will include the documented framework for the conduct of inter-agency
discussions within a multiple purpose basin, and a documented institutional structure and
conflict resolution procedure within the context of the Integrated Water Basin Committee.
GEF: US $ 50,000; co-funding: US $ 270,000; total: US $ 320,000.
D. COMPONENT IV: WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FORMULATION
13. Component IV, development of the Watershed Management Program, is designed to
provide for the synthesis of data and experiences, feasibility assessments and cost analyses
developed in the three preceding Components. Included in the principal activities within this
Component are Activities that address the legal, institutional, and human and natural
resources bases essential for implementation of the remedial actions identified through the
WMP process. The six Activities explicitly provide for the cooperative development of a
comprehensive Watershed Management Program by both the public and private sectors,
based on a multi-sectoral, holistic approach to environmental management and economic
development in this Basin and its coastal zone, as provided for in Chapters 18 and 21 of
Agenda 21.
Issue 4: WMP Formulation
14. Consideration is given to the synthesis and integration of the results of the studies,
demonstrations, and other investigations previously described into a comprehensive, WMP of
action for the Rio São Francisco Basin. Pursuant to the GEF Operational Strategy dated
February 1996, this program of action will identify priority water-related environmental
issues of concern, define the relationship of these issues to national (and state) environmental

---

64
planning and economic development plans, establish clear priorities, and determine realistic
baseline and agreed incremental costs.
Activity 4.1: Promote Popular Participation in the SFRB. This Activity recognizes the need
to promote popular participation at the grass roots level throughout the basin, where some
representative community-based institutions exist, and to empower decentralized decision-
making relating to the determination and implementation of management policies and practices
at the local level for the integrated sustainable economic development and management of
water resources, including environmental protection and rehabilitation. It is envisaged that
workshops, training programs for officials and community leaders, and informational
campaigns within schools, civic groups and communities will be among the specific actions
undertaken during the implementation of this project. Specific support for the Inter-American
Water Resources Network (IWRN) is provided as a means of disseminating information
regarding the conduct and findings of this project. The project will promote transparency in
decision-making, effective management of water resources at the community level in a manner
consistent with the spirit of the federal water law, and determination of appropriate methods
and means of integrating community-based decision-making into the structure and function of
the integrated basin management committee proposed to be created under Activity 4.5. The
results of this project will contribute to holistic and effective decision-making in the basin.
Project deliverables will include a magazine for basin-wide distribution to raise awareness,
build participation, and inform citizens across sectoral lines; and a documented framework for
the creation of effective grass roots participation in water resources management, including
the means whereby local level involvement can be integrated into the structure and functioning
of the integrated basin management committee. GEF: US $ 160,000; co-funding: US $
217,000; total: US $ 377,000.
Activity 4.2: Evaluation of financing mechanisms for sustainable watershed management in
the SFRB. This Activity seeks to build upon activities funded under PROAGUA and the
experiences obtained in the pilot-scale development and implementation of water rights and
water charges, as provided for under federal law 9433/97, in representative sub-basins of the
Rio Sao Francisco (see Activity 3.2) to the entire SFRB. In addition, this Activity seeks to
promote a review federal and state legal and financial mechanisms relating to the sectoral uses
of water (e.g., agricultural subsidy schemes, urban land use planning regulations, etc. which
affect disturbances of the land surface that encourage erosion, water pollution, etc. to the
detriment of water courses and water resources management) to identify and propose
amendments as appropriate to those mechanisms that affect sustainable use of water
resources and the management of watersheds within the SFRB. This project will provide a
detailed framework of the allocation and determination of water charges and introductions of
watershed management measures, including proposals for legislation and strengthening of
administrative mechanisms necessary to implement an equitable water pricing scheme. The
results of this project enhance the institutional capability to determine and implement a water
use charges program, contribute to the identification of appropriate mechanisms to place
water resources management within the basin on a sustainable footing, and encourage the
optimization of water resources management policies, practices and programs, thereby
creating a sound economic and legal basis for the sustainable development of the basin and its
coastal zone. Project deliverables will include a documented framework for the

---

65
implementation of water use charges and restructuring of related fiscal, financial and legal
mechanisms for water quantity and quality management in the five basin states consistent
with an holistic concept of the SFRB. GEF: US $ 350,000; co-funding: US $ 300,000; total:
US $ 650,000.
Activity 4.3: Needs Assessment for the Quantitative Evaluation of Water Use and Use
Conflicts in the SFRB. This Activity complements the decision-support system to be
designed under activities conducted under PROAGUA and the determination of an
appropriate economic framework as set forth under Activity 4.2, and seeks to determine the
need for a quantitative framework for identifying and resolving quantitative water use and
allocation conflicts within the basin in a transparent and equitable manner. This project will
identify the need to develop the computational instruments needed to analyze water use
conflicts through an integrated, quantitative, mathematical modeling of natural water flows,
sectoral consumptive uses, projected inter-basin transfers into and out of the basin, and
modifications of natural flows resulting from the operation of dams and reservoirs. It will
develop parameters for models which will allow the quantification of potential conflicts
among water users in various sectors, including fisheries, municipal, agricultural, navigation
and recreational sectors, and contribute to the identification of management alternatives, both
structural (i.e., dam and reservoir construction, inter-basin transfers, etc.) and non-structural
(i.e. institution of water rights and prices, rules for dam and reservoir operation, etc.), that
will contribute to the sustainable management of the river. Project deliverables will include a
documented framework for a system of mathematical models of river hydraulics, hydrology
and water use in the basin, including the use of the decision support systems and related fiscal
and legal mechanisms, allowing for informed decision-making by stakeholders and agencies,
and contributing to the sustainable use of water and development of water resources in the
basin, including its coastal zone. GEF: US $ 250,000; co-funding: US $ 325,000; total: US $
575,000.
Activity 4.4: Determination of Operational Policies for Major Reservoirs in the SFRB. This
Activity will seek to examine the operational policies of the major reservoirs in the SFRB
using hydrological data gathered under Activity 1.1 to develop a framework for implementing
multiple purpose reservoir operating procedures. This project will enhance the capacity of
basin organizations to manage the water resources of the basin, and contribute to the
development of an operational procedure that will optimize economic use of the water
resources in the basin, including environmental use, based upon the Tennessee Valley
Authority (TVA) experience in operating a cascade of multiple purpose impoundments in the
United States of America. The project will strengthen institutional capacities to manage
water flows in a climate of changing water demands and in a manner consistent with
maintenance of environmental conditions at the river estuary so as to conserve biological
resources and minimize deleterious environmental impacts related to river flows. Project
deliverables will include a documented operational framework, setting forth the parameters
necessary for the development of an operational model of the multiple purpose
impoundments in the system, so as to promote sustainable water use and management in the
basin. GEF: US $ 150,000; co-funding: US $ 116,000; total: US $ 266,000.

---

66
Activity 4.5: Formulation of an Integrated Basin and Coastal Zone Management Program.
Formulation of an WMP (WMP) is the principle objective of the project activities. This
program of action consists of the identification and harmonization of development initiatives in
the SFRB and coastal zone, and the strategic integration and rationalization of those initiatives
and proposals for sustainable development in the region. It will include an environmental
evaluation of the basin, emphasizing the analysis of priority problems and socio-economic
issues relating to environmental practices and their relationship with the education, health,
income and organization of local population especially in the coastal zone, as well as the
identification and coordination of organizational arrangements. Support to Government efforts
at introducing environmental considerations into the laws and regulations at the national and
state levels is also part of the WMP. A practical result of the WMP will be the explicit
incorporation of the focal areas of interest to GEF into regional development programs,
incorporating methods and procedures for the solution of priority environmental problems and
obtaining global benefit. Project deliverables will include the documented strategy and program
of action for the integrated management of the SFRB and its coastal zone. Specific strategic
actions to be proposed under subsequent activities will also be identified. GEF: US $ 900,000;
co-funding: US $ 280,000; total: US $ 1,180,000 (inclusive of Administration fees and
Monitoring and Evaluation costs).
Activity 4.6: International Seminar on the Protection of Marine Environment from Land-based
Activities in the São Francisco River Basin. This Activity seeks to inform, consult, and involve
water resources professionals and others in the diagnosis and remediation of environmental
concerns relating to the Rio São Francisco Basin. In the first instance, an international seminar
would facilitate discussion of the water resources issues of priority concern as a means of
building appreciation for the unitary nature of the Rio San Francisco hydrological system and
related coastal zone. Subsequently, one further international seminar would facilitate
dissemination of the experiences gained in the determination and initial implementation of
management actions to a wider audience, enhancing the transfer of knowledge and approaches as
encouraged under Chapter 15 of Agenda 21. This project will strengthen international
communication and cooperation and potentially lead to enhanced international coordination
within the basin of the Rio São Francisco. The results of this project will provide a framework
for addressing the priority issues inherent in the management of the Rio São Francisco Basin.
Project deliverables will include the proceedings of up to three international seminars on the Rio
São Francisco Basin. GEF: US $ 120,000; co-funding: US $ 200,000; total: US $ 320,000.
Activity 4.7: Harmonization of the Environmental and Information Dissemination Network
in the SFB. This Activity seeks to develop a framework to extend and harmonize the existing
hydrometeorological data collection network, unifying data gathering objectives and
methodologies in order to enhance the dissemination of data and information throughout the
basin. Data gathered will include not only surface hydrological data and meteorological data
but also data on groundwater hydrology. Harmonization of the data gathering network will
contribute to the exchange of information between states and agencies, while extension and
upgrading the data collection system will facilitate an holistic overview of hydrological and
water quality conditions in the system that will contribute to flood forecasting, environmental
and hydrological management, and reservoir operations. The results of the project will
enhance transparency and sharing of data throughout the basin, which will promote

---

67
sustainable utilization and management of available water resources, including environmental
use, especially in the coastal zone. Project deliverables will include a documented strategic
framework for integrating the network of data gathering on surface and ground water
hydrology and meteorological data in the basin as well as the design for an integrated archiving
system. GEF: US $ 150,000; co-funding: US $ 254,000; total: US $ 404,000.
15. Table 2 presents an indicative work plan under which this two year project will be
implemented. Related work elements in which activities must be sequenced in order that
relevant information or data might be available for use in later Activities are shown along the
same timeline as the approximate date of activity initiation. It should be noted that specific
activities may be initiated at any time during the six-month period preceding the indicated
start date, as human and financial resources, and prerequisite information availability, warrant.
Further, it is anticipated that each Activity is likely to be executed over the period of at least
a year.
16. The total cost of the project is estimated at US $ 20,214,000. Total funding for the
baseline situation without GEF financing is a minimum of approximately US $ 9,339,000, as
shown in Table 3. For the alternative project, non-GEF financing by the Government of
Brazil, the riparian states and other national, public and private sources, is US $ 6,339,000.
Co-financing by other international institutions is US $ 8,825,000. These investments are
assumed to account for national benefits (Table 3). The requested GEF contribution is US $
4,430,000, as shown in Table 4. Incremental GEF financing will promote consideration of
issues of global environmental concern, such as the mitigation and prevention of land
degradation, protection of aquatic flora and fauna, control and minimization of persistent
contaminants, and protection and rehabilitation of the coastal zone, into this strategic,
sustainable development framework.

---

68
Table 2. Indicative Work Plan showing initiation date for Component activities.
October 1998
March 1999
October 1999
March 2000
October 2000
Steering
Steering
Steering
Steering
Steering
Committee
Committee
Committee
Committee
Committee
Formation
meeting
meeting
meeting
meeting
1.1
4.4
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
3.2
4.2
4.3
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.1
3.4
3.3
3.5
4.1
4.5
4.6
4.7

---

69
Table 3. Incremental Cost Analysis (US $).
Baseline
Alternative
Increment
Global Environmental Benefits
Decreased Transportation of Contaminants
Into the LME
Activities 1.2 and 4.9
0
375,000
375,000
Increased Contribution of Nutrients into
The LME
Activities 1.1 and 4.9
0
475,000
475,000
Increased Wildlife Diversity
Activities 1.1 and 1.3
0
430,000
430,000
Decreased Degradation of Soils
Activities 2.1/2.3 and 4.9
0
745,000
745,000
Increased Knowledge of River Behavior
Activities 1.4 and 4.6
0
300,000
300,000
Improved Coordination for River Management.
Activities 3.1/3.4, 4.4, 4.5,
4.7 and 4.8.
2,000,000
4,675,000
1,675,000
Dissemination of Knowledge
Activities 4.1/4.3
0
430,000
430,000
Domestic Benefits
Decreased Transportation of Contaminants
into the LME
Activities 1.2 and 4.9
395,000
395,000
0
Increased Contribution of Nutrients into
the LME
Activities 1.1 and 4.9
409,000
409,000
0
Increased Wildlife Diversity
Activities 1.1 and 1.3
438,000
438,000
0
Decreased Degradation of Soils
Activities 2.1/2.3 and 4.9
1,220,000
1,220,000
0
Increased Knowledge of River Behavior
Activities 1.4 and 4.6
1,070,000
1,070,000
0
Improved Coordination for River Management.
Activities 3.1/3.4, 4.4, 4.5
4.7 and 4.8.
2,136,000
2,136,000
0
Dissemination of Knowledge
Activities 4.1/4.3
671,000
671,000
0

---

70
Table 4. Component Financing (US $).
WORK ELEMENT
GEF
NON-GEF
TOTAL
1.1 River Flow, Water Quality and
Fisheries
in the Lower SFB and Coastal Zone
500,000.00
678,000.00 1,178,000.00
1.2 Impact of Mining on Water Resources
in the Rio das Velhas/ MG
150,000.00
325,000.00
475,000.00
1.3 Fisheries Impacts on Migratory Fishes
in the Middle SFB. MG/BA
180,000.00
99,000.00
279,000.00
1.4 Development of a Water Quality
Montito-
ring System in Lower Middle SFB. BA/PE
160,000.00
816,000.00
976,000.00
Sub-total
990,000.00 1,918,000.00 2,908,000.00
2.1 Determination of Land Use in the
Lower
Middle SFB. BA/PE
200,000.00
584,000.00
784,000.00
2.2 Rehabilitation of Degraded Agricultural
Lands for Water Quality Improvement.
250,000.00
354,000.00
604,000.00
MG/BA
2.3 Vegetative Stabilization of
River Banks
70,000.00
212,000.00
282,000.00
Sub-total
520,000.00 1,150,000.00 1,670,000.00
3.1 Pilot Implementation of Federal Water
Policy in the Maranhao River. MG
150,000.00
195,000.00
345,000.00
4.4 Support to Citizen Management
Commit -
tees in Selected Sub-basins. BA/PE
100,000.00
175,000.00
275,000.00
3.3 Support to the Creation of an
Integrated
Water Basin Committee in the SFB.
150,000.00
205,000.00
355,000.00
3.4 Support to Technical Integration within
the
Framework of the Integrated Commission
50,000.00
270,000.00
320,000.00
Sub-total
450,000.00
845,000.00 1,295,000.00
4.1 Promote Popular Participation in the
160,000.00
217,000.00
377,000.00
SFB
4.2 Harmonizing the Environmental and
Infor -
mation Dissemination Network in the SFB
150,000.00
254,000.00
404,000.00
4.3 International Seminar on the Protection

---

71
of Marine Environment from Land-based
Activities in the SFB
120,000.00
200,000.00
320,000.00
Sub-total
430,000.00
671,000.00 1,101,000.00
4.4 Needs Assessment for the Quantitative
Eval. of Water Use and Conflicts in the
250,000.00
325,000.00
575,000.00
SFB
4.5 Conjunctive Use of Surface and Ground
-
water. BA
250,000.00
480,000.00
730,000.00
4.6 Impact of Agriculture on Groundwater
Resources in the Rio Verde/Jacare. BA
140,000.00
254,000.00
394,000.00
Sub-total
640,000.00 1,059,000.00 1,699,000.00
4.7 Evaluation of Financing Mechanisms
for
Sustainable Watershed Management
350,000.00
300,000.00
650,000.00
Sub-total
350,000.00
300,000.00
650,000.00
4.8 Determination of Operational Policies
for
Major Reservoirs in the SFB
150,000.00
116,000.00
266,000.00
4.9 Formulation of an Integrated Basin and
Coastal Zone Management Program.
900,000.00
280,000.00 1,180,000.00
Sub-total
1,050,000.00
396,000.00 1,446,000.00
Sub-total (4.1 through 4.9)
2,470,000.00 2,426,000.00 4,896,000.00
TOTAL (Project Costs)
4,430,000.00 6,339,000.00 10,769,000.00
Additional Financiation
World Bank Loan
8,600,000.00 8,600,000.00
UNEP
150,000.00
150,000.00
OAS
75,000.00
75,000.00
TOTAL (Agency Contrib.)
8,825,000.00 8,825,000.00
PDF Preparation
GEF Contribution
341,000.00
341,000.00
Government of Brazil
204,000.00
204,000.00
UNEP
25,000.00
25,000.00
25,000.00
25,000.00
World Bank
25,000.00
25,000.00
TOTAL (Preparation Costs)
341,000.00
279,000.00
620,000.00

---

72
GRAND TOTAL
4,771,000.00 15,443,000.00 20,214,000.00

---

73
ANNEX 9
THE GLOBAL PROGRAM OF ACTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE MARINE
ENVIRONMENT FROM LAND-BASED ACTIVITIES

Facts

About 80% of all marine pollution is caused by human activities on land.

By the year 2000, 75% of the world's population will live within 60 km of the coast.


Background

Numerous global and regional conventions and events relate to the protection of the marine
environment, such as:


1976 To present:
the Regional Seas Conventions and related Protocols which govern 15
Regional Seas Programmes

1982
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)

1989
Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of
Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal

1992
Convention on Biological Diversity

1992
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

1992
United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
(UNCED) and Agenda 21.


In 1982, UNEP started addressing issues related to impacts on the marine environment from
land-based activities, resulting in the following conventions and decisions:

1995
Montreal Guidelines for the Protection of the Marine Environment Against
Pollution from Land-based Sources

1995
UNEP Governing Council decisions 18/31 and 18/32 pertaining to the
Washington Conference and Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)

1995
Conference to adopt a Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the
Marine Environment from Land-based Activities, Washington, DC,
USA, 23
October-3 November 1995


The Washington Conference

Adopted the Washington Declaration on Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-
based Activities and a Global Programme of Action


One hundred and eight Governments, and the European Commission, declared their
commitment to protect and preserve the marine environment from the adverse environmental
impacts of land-based activities.


They called upon UNEP, in close partnership with the United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP), the World Health Organization (WHO), Habitat, and other releval
organizations, to act as Secretariat of the Global Programme of Action.

---

74

They called upon UNEP, the World Bank, the UNDP, the regional Development Banks,
and all agencies within the United Nations system, to support and strengthen the regional
structures in place for the protection of the marine environment.


The GPA is designed to be a source of conceptual and practical guidance to be drawn
upon by national and/or regional authorities in devising and implementing sustained action to
prevent, reduce, control and/or eliminate marine degradation from land-based activities.


Aims of the GPA

The GPA aims at preventing the degradation of the marine environment from land-based
activities by facilitating the realization of the duty of States to preserve and protect the marine
environment. More specifically, the GPA aims at:

Indentification and assessment of problems:
1. Identifying nature and severity of problems caused by marine pollution. What is the impact
of marine pollution on (i) food security and poverty alleviation; (ii) public health; (iii)
ecosystem health and biological diversity; and (iv) economic and social benefits and uses.
2. Assessing the severity and impacts of contaminants (e.g, sewage, persistent organic
pollutants, radio-active substances, heavy metals, oils, nutrients, sediment mobilization and
litter).
3. Assessing the physical alteration, including habitat modification and destruction, in areas of
concern.
4. Assessing the sources of degradation, including (i) point sources (e.g., waste-water
treatment facilities or dredging operations); (ii) non-point sources (e.g., urban and
agricultural run-off); and (iii) atmospheric deposition caused by vehicle emissions, power
plants and industrial facilities, incinerators and agricultureal operations.
5. Establishment of priorities.
6. Setting management objectives for priority problems for source categories and areas
affected.
7. Identification, evaluation and selection of strategies and measures.
8. Set criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of strategies and measures.


UNEP as GPA Secretariat
UNEP was designated GPA Secretariat, with the task to (i) promote and facilitate
implementation of the GPA at the national level; (ii) to promote and facilitate implementation
at the regional, including subregional, level through, in particular, a revitalization of the Regional
Seas Programme; and (iii) to play a catalytic role with other organizations and institutions in
implementation of the GPA at the international level. UNEP should undertake its role as GPA
Secretariat in an efficient and cost-effective manner, supported largely by the existing resources,
expertise and infrastructure available in all components of UNEP's programmes.
Implementation of the GPA
The implementation is primarily the task of Governments, in close partnership with all
stakeholders.
UNEP, as the secretariat of the GPA, and other implementing agencies will facilitate and assist
Governments in their tasks.

---

75
Formulation of national and regional action programmes is the cornerstone for successful
implementation.
Financial sources and mechanisms are to be addressed both at the State level (e.g., polluter
charges, revolving funds, private sector participation) and at international level (e.g., multilateral
loans and dept-for equity swaps).
GPA implementation plan
UNEP prepared a proposal on "institutional arrangements for implementation of the GPA",
with contributions from Governments, regional seas programmes, intergovernmental and non-
governmental organizations, and subsequently presented it to the Commission on Sustainable
Development (1996) and UNEP's Governing Council (1997).
In accordance with the relevant provisions of the GPA implementation plan, UNEP accepted
the offer of the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to host the GPA Coordination
Office in The Hague. The Coordination Office, which is part of UNEP's Water Branch, was
officially opened on 24 November 1997 by the Executive Director of UNEP and is operational
since the beginning of 1998. At present, 3 programme officers work in this office. It is expected
that within the next few months, the professional staff will be 6 persons.
GPA Clearing-House
The GPA recommended the establishment of a clearing-house, as a priority to mobilize
experience and expertise, including facilitation of financial cooperation and capacity-building.
As a first step towards a basic design and structure of the clearing-house and its linkages to
information delivery mechanisms, in 1996 UNEP convened a technical meeting, attended by
representatives of 6 Governments, 3 UN organizations and 5 regional seas programmes. The
global level of the clearing-house should ensure access to scientific and technical information and
experience. Regional clearing-house components are necessary to facilitate user access and to
adapt information to local circumstances, for which the Regional Seas Programmes provide the
institutional framework.
States were called to take action in Governing Bodies of relevant intergovernmental
organizations and programmes to ensure that these organizations and programmes take the lead
in the development of the clearing-house with response to the following source categories (not
listed in order of priority):
· Sewage - the World Health Organization (WHO)
· Persistent organic pollutants - the Inter-organizational Programme for the Sound
Management of Chemicals (IPSMC), the International Programme of Chemical safety
(IPCS), and the Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (IFCS)
· Heavy metals - UNEP, in cooperation with the Inter-organizational Programme for the
Sound Management of Chemicals (IPSMC)
· Radio-active substances - the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
· Nutrients and sediment mobilization - the Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (FAO)
· Oils and hydrocarbons - the International Maritime Organization (IMO)
· Physical alterations, including habitat modification and destruction of areas of concern -
UNEP

---

76
At the regional level, development of clearing-house components was discussed at a series of
workshops.
Regional implementation of the GPA
Governments declared their intention to cooperate on a regional basis to coordinate GPA
implementation efforts.
Development of national and regional programmes of action is of primary importance, and
therefore UNEP's Regional Seas Programmes constitute a fundamental mechanism for
developing and implementing globally and regionally coordinated programmes. In 1996 UNEP
convened an intersecretariat consultation on GPA activities, in which 8 regional programmes
were represented including others from outside the UN system.
A series of regional workshops of Government-designated experts, as well representatives of
relevant international organizations, funding agencies and, whenever possible, the private sector
and non-governmental organizations, are being convened during 1996-1998 in the framework of
UNEP's Regional Seas Programme. The workshops are, inter alia, discussing regional
overviews on land-based activities, discussing and agreeing on the development of regional
components of the clearing-house, and reaching agreement on regional programmes of action to
address land-based activities. Six workshops have been held and three more are planned. With
respect to priority pollutants and sources, the workshops held until now identified sewage,
physical alteration and habitat modification, and oils as having the highest priorities in most of
the regions.
Tasks of the GPA Coordination Office
Based on the Global Programme of Action and the GPA Implementation Plan, the GPA
Coordination Office identified eight priority tasks:
1)
Develop and facilitate preparation of scientific assessments on the
impacts of land-based activities on the marine environment. Utilize existing
mechanisms such as the IMO/FAO/UNESCO-IOC/WMO/WHO/IAEA/UN/UNEP
Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection
(GESAMP) and the GEF funded project Global International Waters Assessment
(GIWA).

2)
Foster/facilitate development and implementation of national and
regional programmes of action on land-based activities. Workshops will be
organized for national experts with involvement of regional seas programmes on subjects
such as development of action programmes in the context of sustainable development,
innovative finance mechanisms, legislation, and drafting proposals for funding.

3)
Establish and coordinate the GPA clearing-house mechanism. This
mechanism must be able to provide information from different lead agencies on source
categories (such as WHO on sewage, IMO on oil and litter, FAO on nutrients and
sediment mobilization; IAEA on radioactive substances; UNEP on Persistent Organic
Pollutants, heavy metals and physical alterations). This mechanism can also be used for
awareness raising, capacity building, exchange of information on availability of expertise,
financial resources, metadatabases, progress in implementation of the GPA, etc.

---

77

4)
Mobilize financial resources. Based on the identified needs for assistance that
requires new and additional financial resources for implementing national and regional
action programmes, the GPA Coordination Office in cooperation with relevant UNEP
in-house units, can provide assistance by identifying potential donors, establish initial
contacts between the potential recipient country and the potential donor and assist in
formulating requests for assistance. Establishment of a Small Project Fund and a GPA
Donor Dialogue are ideas to develop further in the near future. Presently, developing a
global clearing-house mechanism and assisting Governments and regions in developing
programmes of action are beyond the existing human and financial resources and
capabilities of the GPA Coordination Office.

5)
Awareness building and education. The GPA Coordination Office will
develop an awareness raising strategy in cooperation with other UNEP in-house units.
This plan will focus on the different target groups and the associated appropriate type
of information and the different types of media. The clearing house mechanism plays a
key-role in this task.

6)
Involvement of non-governmental organizations. These organizations can
contributions significantly to facilitate GPA implementation. They are instrumental in
the dissemination of information to the public. The GPA coordination Office has the
intention to provide "kiosks" on the clearing house Web-site to these organizations.

7)
Reporting and reviewing progress in GPA implementation. UNEP has the
responsibility of reporting regularly on the progress in implementing the GPA. The
primary source of information on the status of activities are the reports received from
Governments. The GPA Coordination Office will develop a procedure and format for
reporting in consultation with Governments.

8)
Continued consultations on GPA implementation. The GPA Coordination
Office will continue to seek advice for its present and future work from a variety of
sources. In addition to the regular formal channels used by UNEP, informal
consultations with Governments, non-governmental organizations and individuals will
be held.

The above eight tasks were discussed in detail during an informal intergovernmental
consultation to review the status

---

78
ANNEX 10
ROOT CAUSES ANALYSIS
1. Background. The Rio Sao Francisco is one of the most important rivers in Brazil, being
known as the "River of National Unity". The basin, which drains across the North East
Brazil Shelf to the South West Atlantic Large Marine Ecosystem (LME), is well endowed
with a rich variety of natural resources, including minerals, fish, wildlife, and lands suitable for
agricultural development. As a consequence, the river and its watershed has been subjected to
intense economic development pressures, including extensive regulation by hydro-electric and
irrigation water supply impoundments, which appear to be increasing. In recognition of these
increasing developmental pressures, the Federal Government of Brazil has initiated several
actions designed to protect the resources of the region and contribute to the sustainable
development of the area. These actions have included the creation of a Senate Committee to
investigate the status of the basin, the creation of a river basin development corporation and,
more recently, an interstate liaison committee activated with addressing some of the more
pressing issues of concern within the basin.
2. Issues. In order to move forward with the resolution of some of the issues identified by
the Senate Committee, the Federal Government of Brazil invited the United Nations
Environment Programme, Organization of American States, The World Bank and the Global
Environment Fund Secretariat to field a reconnaissance mission during 1996, which mission
resulted in the invitation to UNEP to prepare a request to the GEF for a project development
facility grant to develop a WMP for the Basin and its coastal zone as the Latin American
demonstration project under the GEF International Waters Program in support of the Global
Program of Action for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Land-based Activities (GPA).
In the PDF proposal, five issues were identified on the basis of extant documentation and as
the result of discussions between the reconnaissance mission and officials representing local
communities, governmental and nongovernmental agencies, and federal agencies. These issues
were: the need to assess and quantify perceived problems within the basin, inadequate of
stakeholder participation, unsustainable levels of economic development, the need for more
effective institutions and the need for enhanced staffing capacity at all levels, and the need for
an holistic, integrated approach to problem solving in the basin. During the PDF process,
additional issues were identified, including: land degradation, declining fisheries, hydrological
changes in river flows, increasing urbanization and industrialization (mining and agro-
industrial development), and water quality degradation of surface and ground waters.
3. Problems and Symptoms. Each of the foregoing issues is indicative of specific problems
or consequences, identified during the PDF and subject to refinement and quantification
during this project, which have direct impacts on the biological and water resources within the
basin.
3.1 Problems related to poorly quantified environmental impacts. Reported problems
related to poorly quantified environmental impacts include the biological consequences of
modified river flows as the result of river regulation; the contamination of reservoirs and
modification of the near shore marine nutrient balance due to river regulation; the changed

---

79
character of the sources, sinks and composition of sediment loads throughout the basin as the
result of interception and downstream scour arising from river regulation; modification of the
water quality (and, thereby, the biological integrity of the system) as a result of human
economic activities (e.g., mining, industrial development, and urbanization in the headwaters
area of the river, and industrial development, agricultural development based on irrigated
agriculture and urbanization in the lower portions of the basin) that discharge untreated or
poorly-treated wastes to the system; and, the cumulative effects of upstream activities on the
coastal and nearshore environment, including changes in fish habitat, populations and species
composition, altered estuarine depositional and erosional dynamics, effects on riverine and
marine transportation, and subtle and explicit impacts on human health and economic activity.
3.2 Problems related to stakeholder involvement. Problems related to stakeholder
involvement historically have been related to the lack of appropriate fora for encouraging
stakeholder participation, and the highly sectoral nature of development within the basin (see
economic development below). In recent years, the efforts of the federal government to
increase the living standards in the previously impoverished basin have focussed on a top-
down style of implementation that has rarely recognized the wider context of social concerns
other than economic development. Recently, a wider appreciation of the success of
community-based, bottom-up development approaches, such as that embodied in Brazil's
federal water law 9433/97, have initiated the process of increasing stakeholder participation
across traditional sectoral lines. This process, in a basin as diverse and complex as the SFRB,
will take some time to evolve and mature.
3.3 Problems related to economic development. Problems related to economic
development include poorly regulated exploitation of lands and natural resources for
commercial purposes, the highly sectoral nature of develop which also is strongly segmented
along geographical lines in this relatively large basin, and the focus on the development of
large, single purpose development areas generally managed (historically) by parastatal or
state-owned corporations. In some cases, despite their geographic proximity, the sectoral
nature of develops within the basin often create conflicts or the potential for conflicts over
rates, timing, and types of water use, the prime example being the conflict between release of
water for hydro-power generation purposes with the natural flooding cycle of the lower
reaches of the river system (at its seaward extent).
3.4 Problems related to institutions and human resources. Problems related to
institutions, both legal and regulatory, and agency structures, historically have been related to
lack of appropriate laws and regulatory regimes for controlling environmental pollution, and
implementing and undertaking compliance monitoring and policing of violators. Related to the
lack of institutional capacity, problems related to human resources include a paucity of
trained staff, lack of authority to control environmental problems, and fragmented and
parochial jurisdictions that have failed to bring a comprehensive and cohesive approach to
watershed management in the SFRB. Initiatives set forth in federal law 9433/97 provide
mechanisms to rectify many of these shortcomings. Funding, which has been in chronic short
supply, has not allowed creation of laboratories, police forces, and other necessary
appurtenances to control and regulate environmental pollution and degradation. Further,
actions that were able to be undertaken were fragmented among agencies and between states

---

80
often resulted in less than effective management of the river and watershed. Currently, local
and national initiatives are strengthening water resources institutions in the basin.
3.5 Problems related to lack of an holistic management approach. Problems related to
the lack of a unified vision of the SFRB as an integrated whole include inter-sectoral conflicts
over water usage, competing rather than complementary demands for water, and a piecemeal
approach to water resources development in the basin. The Senate Committee on the Sao
Francisco Valley identified this lack of an integrated, holistic management approach as the
principle issue facing sustainable development in the basin.
3.6 Problems of land degradation. Problems related to land degradation include draining of
coastal wetlands, conversion of lands for agricultural purposes, and disruption of the land
surface for mining and residential purposes. Industrial farming operations not only disturb
large areas of land, but also the land clearing practices which have resulted in the deforestation
of river banks and uplands, and the water use regimes and types of crops and livestock, have
aggravated the severity of land degradation in the basin.
3.7 Problems of fisheries. Problems related to fisheries include contamination of fishes by
heavy metals and agro-chemicals, and changes in species composition due to modification of
river flow regime, constraints on migratory ranges, and harvesting pressures.
3.8 Problems of hydrology. Problems related to hydrological processes include alteration of
flood regimes due to river regulation and altered land use practices which modify the way in
which water is applied to and lost from the land surface. Changes in hydrological processes
create a cascade of sedimentological chemical, and biological consequences throughout the
system which further modify the structure and functioning of the aquatic ecosystem that is
the river. Likewise, the draining of wetlands and creation of polders in the estuarine reaches
of the river has further altered river flow patterns often in negative ways.
3.9 Problems of urbanization and industrialization. Problems related to urbanization and
industrialization include surface or open cast mining for many metals and minerals, irrigated
agricultural development, agro-industrial product processing (alcohol, vegetable and sugar
processing), and residential area encroachment without adequate wastewater treatment and
solid waste management. Mining operations contribute to sedimentation and contamination
in the river by disturbing the land surface and direct and indirect runoff from slimes dumps
and slag heaps. Poorly regulated use of agro-chemicals and the potential lack of irrigation
scheduling (which affects the quantity and quality of irrigation water return flows) contribute
to the eutrophication and salination of the river.
3.10 Problems of water quality. Problems related to water quality include contamination of
surface and ground waters, including bacteriological contamination, heavy metal
contamination, contamination by synthetic organic (agro-) chemicals, organic matter loading,
and suspended sediment load modification, many of which have a significant anthropogenic
component.

---

81
4. Root Causes. Despite the apparent proliferation of problems in the SFRB, there would
appear to be relatively few root causes which contribute to the majority of the problems
observed. These root causes will be quantified during this project.
4.1 Anthropogenic causes. People have contributed almost exclusively to the degradation of
the SFRB. Although increased economic development in the basin has succeeded in
improving the quality of life for many of the citizens of the basin (as intended), rates of
exploitation of the natural resource base have increased, while primary extractive industries
continue to deplete the reserves of minerals and metals that underlie these industries. In the
first instance, the redistribution of population in the basin has led to increased urbanization
throughout the basin, which in turn has contributed untreated human wastes and other
contaminants to the system. These populations have also created an increased demands for
foodstocks which have been met by overfishing and (potentially) cultivating marginal lands
(through expansion of irrigation schemes and increasingly large additions of agro-chemicals to
maintain soil fertility). Superimposed on these causative factors are modifications of the
natural hydrological regime of the river which, while contributing to the production of "clean"
energy for use by the people and industries of the basin and throughout Brazil, have proven
especially destructive to organisms dependent on the quantity, quality, timing and rate of
water flows for reproduction and survival (especially in the estuarine and coastal marine
endpoints of the basin), and to groundwater sources dependent upon surface water flows for
recharge.
4.2 Legal and institutional causes. While human land use activities have contributed
significantly to the degradation of the Rio Sao Francisco ecosystem, legal and institutional
shortcomings have historically exacerbated these problems by failing to control or regulate
human actions in the watershed, and by the failure of existing mechanisms to view the basin
as a unit, in which actions taken at specific sites have a cumulative effect throughout the
system. While most of these shortcomings have been, or are currently proposed to be,
rectified through state, federal and external interventions and initiatives, substantial and costly
actions are needed to overcome the historic lack of regulation, and lack of an holistic approach
to ecosystem and economic development.
5. Actions Identified to Address Root Causes. To help in overcoming the historical inertia
inherent in the causative factors identified above, emphasis in project design has been given to
those actions which address root causes that can be humanly managed; i.e., those
anthropogenic causes and legal and institutional causes that can be modified through planning
and subsequent implementation of corrective actions. Natural root causes generally cannot be
effectively controlled by human actions and hence are of lesser importance from a watershed
management perspective (although knowledge of these causes is an essential starting point
from which to implement interventions to address human and institutional causes). The
following actions have been proposed to address the human causative factors of
environmental degradation in the SFRB.
5.1 Acquisition of basic scientific information and dissemination of knowledge. Project
activities have been developed to acquire supplementary baseline information to support
determination of root causes (e.g., the interactions between hydrology, sediments, nutrients

---

82
and biological responses in the lower reaches and coastal zone of the SFRB), provide
quantitative insights into specific watershed management practices (e.g., sewerage system
needs and reservoir operations, respectively), and investigate alternative courses of action to
ensure sustainable use practices (e.g., stabilization of river banks impacted by hydrological
variability in river flows, and rehabilitation of mining lands). In addition, a further group of
activities has been proposed as a means of synthesizing and disseminating information
gathered through diagnostic studies. These include, inter alia, activities which demonstrate
ways in which citizens can contribute to the protection of community water resources, which
address the need for public informational programming to enhance citizen participation in the
decision-making process, and which train community-based extension agents to disseminate
information on issues and mitigation measures to citizens.
5.2 Promotion of financially-sound, integrated watershed management. Project
activities have also been developed to identify alternative, sustainable economic activities
which will contribute to the maintenance of the ecological integrity of the SFRB. These
projects include, inter alia, activities which address the conjunctive use of water resources in
the SFRB, which investigate alternative means to achieve a sustainable fishery in the basin,
and which strengthen local government water resources management capabilities in specific
sub-basins as a prototype for use elsewhere in the basin.
5.3 Development of an holistic institutional watershed management framework.
Project activities have been developed to provide an integrated management framework within
which river basin management activities can be identified and carried out. Project activities in
this category include, inter alia, activities which address the needs to harmonize technical
approaches for data acquisition and share information within the basin of the Rio Sao
Francisco, and which encompass the synthesis and integration of the strategic elements of the
foregoing project activities in the WMP, or integrated watershed management plan.
5.4 Support to river basin management and regulatory agencies. Finally, project
activities have been developed to provide directed support to create and strengthen the
operational capabilities of river basin committees and related civic organizations. These
activities include, inter alia, activities which promote the establishment of a basin committee
and refine the role of the existing agencies within the basin.
6. Concluding remarks. Significant progress has been made in the definition of issues and
problems (and their root causes in some instances) within the SFRB. Work proposed under
the GEF International Waters focal area builds on this progress in seeking to extend local
actions to the basin and contiguous coastal areas of the Rio Sao Francisco. This work is
predicated upon the principles of civic involvement, public participation, and responsible
governmental action at all levels of government, and embodies a comprehensive program of
research, demonstration projects, and information dissemination designed to identify a
framework for subsequent remedial measures and management actions that will result in the
sustainable economic development of this region.

---

---

---

---