The World Bank. Key Dates. Project Development Objectives. Components. Public Disclosure Authorized. Implementation Status & Results Report

Transcription

1 Public Disclosure Authorized AFRICA Ethiopia Environment & Natural Resources Global Practice IBRD/IDA Specific Investment Loan FY 2014 Seq No: 4 ARCHIVED on 03-Dec-2015 ISR21446 Implementing Agencies: Ministry of Agriculture Public Disclosure Authorized Key Dates Key Project Dates Bank Approval Date:22-Nov-2013 Planned Mid Term Review Date:20-Jun-2016 Original Closing Date:07-Apr-2019 Project Development Objectives Effectiveness Date:07-Apr-2014 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:-- Revised Closing Date:07-Apr-2019 Public Disclosure Authorized Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document) The Project's Development and Global Environment Objective is to reduce land degradation and improve land productivity in selected watersheds in targeted regions in Ethiopia. Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective? No Sustainable Land Management Project (P133410) Global Environmental Objective (from Project Appraisal Document) The Project's Development and Global Environment Objective is to reduce land degradation and improve land productivity in selected watersheds in targeted regions in Ethiopia. Public Disclosure Authorized Has the Global Environmental Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective? No Components Name Component 1: Integrated Watershed and Landscape Management:(Cost $73.98 M) Component 2: Institutional Strengthening, Capacity Development and Knowledge Generation and Management:(Cost $16.98 M) Component 3: Rural Land Administration, Certification and Land Use:(Cost $12.20 M) Page 1 of 13

2 Component 4: Project Management:(Cost $4.45 M) Overall Ratings Name Previous Rating Current Rating Progress towards achievement of PDO Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Progress towards achievement of GEO Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Overall Implementation Progress (IP) Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Overall Risk Rating Substantial Substantial Implementation Status and Key Decisions The team commends the strong commitment and leadership of the Government of Ethiopia (GoE) to its long-term SLM Program, which the Bank team views as a flagship that demonstrates Ethiopia s leadership globally on resilient landscapes, as well as the high level of regional and local mobilization, action and ownership of SLMP-2 and associated projects. For this reason, Government commitment rating has been upgraded to Highly Satisfactory given the leading role SLMP plays as the flagship for the country s NRM agenda, which is reflected in the name change of the implementing agency to the Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources (MoANR). Some aspects of project implementation, however, should live up to this high level of ownership and visibility, corresponding to the extensive anecdotal evidence of massive success on the ground in transforming landscapes and livelihoods. As of Oct 31, 2015, nearly a third of the funding of SLMP-2 has been disbursed and was slightly above the original target, and this amount has risen dramatically since then as of November 13th. According to the interim financial report (IFR) for the quarter ended July 7, 2015, the cumulative budget utilization is 55 percent, indicating improvement from 36 percent noted in January On-the-ground implementation of project activities started in April Various physical, biological and agronomic land management practices were implemented in selected micro-watersheds of all project watersheds/woredas in the six regions. Some progress was also noted with regard to the on the issuance of the second-level certificates to the individual land/parcels. In addition, different capacity building activities mainly extensive trainings focusing on different topics/thematic areas (watershed management, land administration and certification, safeguard, procurement, financial management, etc) were given to the project staff working at federal, regional and woreda levels including Development Agents (DAs) working in respective micro-watersheds. Moreover, farmers training, awareness raising and farmers field days and knowledge exchange visits were conducted at community level in all selected micro-watersheds of project woredas. Overall, progress has been modest for component 1 (Integrated Watershed and Landscape Management) and component 3 (Rural Land Administration, Certification and Use) to date. It should be noted however that there were delays in the start-up of the planned activities and that the initial project implementation period more or less overlapped with the rainy season which went through October this past year. This can partly explain the lag in achievements. Another key aspect that caused delays is the preparation and approval of the consolidated Annual Work Plan and Budget (AWPB). The task team discussed options with the national and regional PSUs and development partners (DPs) for on time delivery of the AWPB, as each year the AWPB is delivered late resulting in disbursement delays by a quarter on averages and corresponding delays in project execution on the ground. In this regard, agreement reached to resolve this issue by synchronizing the AWPB timeline with the overall Government of Ethiopia (GoE) work planning and budgeting process. Accordingly, the AWPB process should generally start in October as stated in the PIM. For the next AWPB, the draft regional AWPBs should start to be assembled now and into January and, over the following months, refined and aggregated so that the nationwide AWPB can be approved by MoANR and then the WB in May-June for budget release in July at the same time as other Government programs. With regard to the Monitoring and evaluation, the task team appreciates the recent progress made by the Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources (MoANR) in improving SLMP s programmatic long-term M&E system. In this regard, the MoANR has developed and approved the program-wide harmonized M&E framework and implementation manual including standardized reporting templates earlier this year. However, there are still problems with data collection, consistency, reporting and aggregation issues at all levels. The other critical issue is the delay in the finalization and implementation of Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) field manual. The Zero Draft CSA field manual developed by PSU/MoANR through a highly participatory process. In addition, the development of the harmonized national Small-Scale Irrigation (SSI) planning, design and implementation guideline has also been delayed mainly due to the delay in the procurement process of hiring a consultant. The Bank team is closely following up on the finalization of both the CSA and harmonized SSI manuals and provides regular intensive technical and advisory support to the PSU. Page 2 of 13

3 Risks Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating Political and Governance -- Moderate Moderate Macroeconomic -- Low Low Sector Strategies and Policies -- Moderate Moderate Technical Design of Project or Program -- Moderate Moderate Institutional Capacity for Implementation and Sustainability -- Substantial Substantial Fiduciary -- Substantial Substantial Environment and Social -- Moderate Moderate Stakeholders -- Substantial Substantial Other Overall -- Substantial Substantial Results Project Development Objective Indicators PHINDPDOTBL 1. Total incremental land area brought under sustainable and climate-smart/resilient land management practices (Hectare(Ha), Custom) Value Page 3 of 13

4 Reported cumulatively. This ISR is using achievement numbers from the national PSU Project Implementation Status Report from SLMP-2 (July 2014-June 2015) sent to the WB in August The target value for December is 600,000 Ha and actual achievement at end June is only at 55% (330,310 Ha) of that with 6 months to go. PHINDPDOTBL 2. Total area of restored or reforested/afforested on both individual and communal land (Hectare(Ha), Custom) Value According to the results framework, data for this indicator is expected after the second year. This indicator continues to lack a target (not in PAD), which will be set when the baseline study is conducted (starting end 2015). Selection of the consulting firm for the baseline survey has been finalized and the contract awarded. The firm will start working end PHINDPDOTBL 3. Increase in the amount of biomass in the intervention areas (Ton/Ha) (Hectare(Ha), Custom) Value According to the results framework, progress data for this indicator is expected at mid-term and at the end of project evaluation. This indicator continues to lack a target (not in PAD), which will be set when the baseline study is conducted (starting end 2015). Selection of the consulting firm for the baseline survey has been finalized and the contract awarded. The firm will start working end The firm will examine the applicability of using Ex-Act as measuring method for Biomass/Carbon. Overall Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) and reporting: The task team placed a strong emphasis on M&E given the strategic importance of: (i) monitoring to assess progress and draw lessons to support quality implementation and scaling up; (ii) reporting for continued and scaled up financing for resilient landscapes throughout the country; and (iii) the past recognition that M&E implementation has been unsatisfactory. To address the above challenges, the task team added value by recommending a series of near-term and medium-term actions as detailed in the October 2015 Aide Memoire and agreed with MoANR. At the same time, the task team recognized the recent progress made by MoANR in improving SLMP s programmatic long-term M&E system, as evidenced by: (i) the development and approval of the program-wide harmonized M&E framework and implementation manual and standardized reporting templates earlier this year; (ii) rolling out of associated training by GIZ and MoANR; and (iii) M&E staffing in place. In addition, a series of recent communication or knowledge products (three films and a new case study) has helped raise the profile and achievements of SLMP but there remains a serious need to provide the accompanying quantitative evidence. This ISR is using achievement numbers from the national PSU Project Implementation Status Report from SLMP-2 (July 2014-June 2015) sent to Page 4 of 13

5 PHINDGEOTBL PHINDGEOTBL the WB in August The methods used to aggregate these numbers from the six regions has not been sufficiently documented or explained by the client. Overall, the results framework for SLMP-2 shows modest progress in terms of tangible achievements. However, in particular in the third component some progress was noted for the number of targeted communal lands issued with geo-referenced map-based land certificates (Rural Land Administration, Certification and Use). There has also been positive progress with regard to the training activities both for key service providers and land users in component two (Capacity Development, Knowledge Generation and Management). These numbers are now also gender disaggregated. Overall progress has been modest for component 1 (Integrated Watershed and Landscape Management) to date. It should be noted however that there were delays in the start-up of this program and that the initial project implementation period more or less overlapped with the rainy season which went through October this past year. This can partly explain the lag in achievements. Another key aspect that caused delays is the timing of the planning process. Furthermore, the October 2015 visits made in selected watersheds/woredas confirmed good progress on the ground and also noted problems with data collection, data consistency in reporting and data aggregation issues. Also, some indicators can only be measured once baseline data becomes available. Going forward a concentrated effort is required to ensure timely, consistent and accurate data collection and a number of action points have been included in this Aide-Memoire to that effect. The October 2015 mission noted that the domestic firm hired by the MoANR to carry out the baseline survey did not participate in the mission, which was an opportunity lost. Global Environmental Objective Indicators 2. Total area of restored or reforested/afforested on both individual and communal land (Hectare(Ha), Custom) Value Same as indicator 1 in PDO. 3. Increase in the amount of biomass in the intervention areas (Ton/ha) (Hectare(Ha), Custom Supplement) Value Overall For indicator 3 above, it is the same as indicator 3 in PDO. Intermediate Results Indicators Page 5 of 13

6 1. Land users (households) adopting at least three additional sustainable and climate-smart/resilient land management practices on individual lands disaggregated by gender (Percentage, Custom) Value Data for this indicator is due December 2015 according to the results framework. According to the current watershed plans, households are now adopting at least one practice, but within the context of the new watershed plans, next data collection will include households adopting at least three practices. Not reported on (July 7, 2015). Reporting due December Total land area in hectares (individual and communal) brought under a catchment management system as a result of the project (Hectare(Ha), Custom) Value No new data. This indicator will be reported on annually after the second project year as per the results framework. 3. Amount of carbon accumulation in 10 selected watersheds below and above ground as a result of the project (Tones/year, Custom) Value This indicator continues to lack a target (not in PAD), which will be set when the baseline study is conducted (starting end 2015). Selection of the consulting firm for the baseline survey has been finalized and the contract awarded. The firm will start working end Formal reporting on this indicator is expected after the fourth year of project implementation given the long latency for terrestrial carbon accumulation, interim reports will be provided in the meantime. Page 6 of 13

7 4. Increase in per cent of households adopting and applying backyard livestock management practice in the targeted watersheds (Percentage, Custom) Value According to the results framework, data is expected after the second year of project implementation. 5. New technologies (sustainable and climate smart/resilient practices) applied on a large scale in the project intervention areas (Number, Custom) Value "Large scale" implies at least a 10% adoption rate by households. Reporting on this indicator is not due until December Direct project beneficiaries (Number, Core) Value The direct beneficiaries of the project are 234,598 of which 36% are female beneficiaries (84,455). Page 7 of 13

8 Female beneficiaries (Percentage, Core Supplement) Value Number of land users (small holder farmers disaggregated by gender) trained in (a) planning and implementation of techniques of sustainable and climate-smart/resilient land management practices; ( (Number, Custom) Value The Client disaggregated the number by gender. Overall 32% of people trained are female. Number of land users (small holder farmers disaggregated by gender) trained in planning and implementation of techniques of sustainable and climate-smart/resilient land management practices (Number, Custom Breakdown) Value Number of land users (small holder farmers disaggregated by gender) trained in entrepreneurship, business development/management (Number, Custom Breakdown) Value Page 8 of 13

9 Number of land users (small holder farmers disaggregated by gender) trained in land rights and registration awareness (Number, Custom Breakdown) Value Number of woredas with well-equipped information centers on sustainable and climate-smart/resilient land management practices as a result of the project (Number, Custom) Value Reporting due in December Number of SLM related strategies developed or improved (Number, Custom) Value Identification of best SLM practices and updating of participatory watershed guidelines are underway and the Climate-Smart Agriculture field manual will is yet to be finalized. The indicator will be reported by the client in December 2015 according to the approved result framework. 10. Key service providers (disaggregated by gender) trained in (a) community-based watershed mgt; (b) cadastral surveying, rural land administration, certification and land use planning; (c) M&E (Number, Custom) Value Page 9 of 13

10 The client disaggregated the number by gender. Overall 19% of people trained are female. Key service providers (disaggregated by gender) trained in community-based watershed management (Number, Custom Breakdown) Value Key service providers (disaggregated by gender) trained in cadastral surveying, rural land administration, certification and land use planning (Number, Custom Breakdown) Value Key service providers (disaggregated by gender) trained in M&E and financial planning/management and procurement and other cross-cutting issues (Number, Custom Breakdown) Value Page 10 of 13

11 11. Total number (and area) of targeted communal lands issued with geo-referenced map- base land certificates. (Hectare(Ha), Custom) Value The total number of parcels of communal land issued with 2nd level certificate as of March, 2015 is 510 and as of end June, 2015 is 1,841. The amount in terms of Ha was not provided by the client due to a change in the government's procedures for acquiring maps (only EMA can provide mapping services), and is due to be reported in December Total number (and area) of targeted communal lands issued with geo-referenced map- base land certificates. (Number of Certificates) (Number, Custom Supplement) Value Number of individual land parcels covered with geo-referenced maps (Number, Custom) Value The October 2015 mission notes inconsistency in the way the PSU is reporting the data regarding 2nd level certification in its progress report. One problem is the way the intermediate-level indicator #12 is formulated. However, this indicator was originally intended to report on 2nd level certificates issued for individual holdings and not merely individual holdings covered by maps as it currently reads. 85,053 is the number of 2nd level certificates not maps. The number of individual holdings covered by maps is actually 196,754 according to the PSU progress report dated August This issue will have to be rectified through the restructuring. Page 11 of 13

12 13. Number of households in the intervention areas issued with geo-referenced map-base certificates disaggregated by gender (Number, Custom) Value The October 2015 mission noted there is an error in the PSU progress report page 16: 21,263 is the number of households (not individual holdings) with 2nd level certificates (Annex 1 of the PSU M&E report has it correctly reported, other sections do not). In February, the issuance of second-level certificates for individual parcels was 34,253 and is now up to 85, Local level participatory land use plans prepared and implemented at kebele level within the project intervention areas (Number, Custom) Value Overall Data on Financial Performance Disbursements (by loan) Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed P IDA Effective USD % P TF Effective USD % P TF Effective USD % P TF Effective USD % Key Dates (by loan) Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date P IDA Effective 22-Nov Dec Apr Apr Apr-2019 Page 12 of 13

13 P TF Effective 10-Dec Dec Apr Dec Dec-2018 P TF Effective 10-Dec Dec Apr Apr Apr-2019 P TF Effective 10-Dec Dec Apr Apr Apr-2019 Cumulative Disbursements Restructuring History There has been no restructuring to date. Related Project(s) P Sustainable Land Management Project Page 13 of 13