AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK GROUP RESPONSE TO STAP REVIEW on the LCB-NREE Lake Chad Basin Regional Program for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Natural Resources and Energy Efficiency 2 November 20111 2011 We appreciate the inputs provided and the support for the proposed program. We have prepared detailed responses below. Please note that most of the proposed actions will be taken during project preparation and incorporated into the FSP documents in order to be in compliance with STAP review. STAP/LD COMMENT Comment A: There is too much focus on the institutional, organizational and management aspects of the LC basin and very little serious scientific assessment of causes and solutions that are needed to inform interventions. AFDB RESPONSE The proposed program actions and interventions are mainly based on the Strategic Action Plan (SAP) produced by the GEF/UNDP/World Bank project. This SAP is the result of a series of studies, consultations and analysis that consider scientific as well as technical aspects. In addition to that previously done analysis, the final interventions identified at project preparation stage will be the result of stakeholder consultations where following your recommendation, scientific community will be invited. It should also be noted that some of the proposed activities of the program and of the baseline project are based on existing studies; optimization of the management of water intakes, rehabilitation of the Vrick Canal and to reduce water losses, etc. Comment B: In the southern basin, the water is permanent in the center of the basin and in some pools of the archipelago, while the northern basin is often inundated. These conditions are significantly impacted by climate variability and change and make management of natural resources in the basin particularly challenging. Such management requires a high level of coordination and co-operation among riparian countries where conservation demands may often be in conflict with the livelihoods functioning Making reference to STAP comment # A: There is too much focus on the institutional, organizational and management aspects of the LC basin. This focus is proposed to ensure that the challenge of managing water is taken in an integrated manner, driven by the regional program coordinated by LCBC. It should be noted that this program builds on improvement efforts undertaken in in the baseline, on-going and previous projects, such as the “Lake Chad Charter” (AWF) and the “Reversal of Land and Water Degradation Trends in the Lake Chad Basin Ecosystem”(GEF/UNDP/WB). Issue 1: Drivers of degradation and loss of ecosystem Indeed, the need to understand the causes of the degradation of the ecosystem of services of LC basin: Given the scale of the project, Lake Chad is LCBC’s primary concern. As a result of this concern, a study is STAP/LD COMMENT AFDB RESPONSE there is a need for a systematic assessment of the ecosystem services provided by the lake, the forest and the agricultural systems and the decline, if any, of the ecosystem services. There is a need for a good understanding of the drivers of degradation of ecosystem services, rather than generic statements of causes of loss of ecosystem services. underway, by CIMA International, to determine the causes of poor water inflows in the Lake Chad and the degradation of its basin. Similarly, in cooperation with the French Fund for Global Environment (FFEM), a project on the preservation of Lake Chad has been developed with the objectives of gathering the best knowledge on the human and environmental dynamics of the Lake, using existing knowledge from socio-economic, environmental and hydrological studies. In addition to that sources of understanding of the drivers ; as part of the baseline PRODEBALT project (AfDB) the diagnostic studies needed to prepare a master plan to control siltation and water erosion in the Lake basin will also establish a map of wind velocity/intensity and gully erosion based on analysis of factors such as topography, land use, soil type, climate, farming techniques involved in the dynamics of the different erosion processes Issue 2: Baseline scenario: A detailed baseline scenario quantifying the extent of degradation and loss of ecosystem services, extent of fuelwood extraction, emissions of CO2 from degradation of forests and projections into the future under the no-project scenario, is necessary Agree. The baseline scenario will be provided for the projects and as confirmed for the GEF Secretariat Review, a baseline will be provided for each focal area. It’s also agreed to show (i) how the incremental funding would build on the baseline project to achieve the GEB (ii) specific carbon emission benefits and other benefits of each intervention for each project. Issue 3 : Transboundary governance: Without LCBC having increased delegated executive authority over decisions affecting relevant catchment management in all participating countries, the potential for success of the Program remains in question. Indeed the PFD appears not to address sufficiently the issue of the adequacy of the mandate and enforcement powers of the LCBC, acknowledged to be amongst the root causes for lack of action since the LCBC's formation. STAP advises that no amount of scientific and technical information will result in achieving the environmental targets without more explicit political support for the LCBC to take difficult decisions regarding for example, water, livestock and agricultural management, and advises the Program proponent to clarify the role and powers of the LCBC and measures to be taken to With regard to transboundary governance, we fully agree that LCBC needs more political will from of its Member States to appropriately carry out its mandate. Nonetheless, LCBC is currently finalizing its institutional reform, and the Water Charter of the basin will soon be adopted and disseminated among member states and operationalized. New autonomous funding mechanisms of the LCBC Secretariat are being explored as part of the large scope of reforms underway. The last LCBC Summit held in Ndjamena has re-affirmed the good level of coordination among member states for the common cause; and the security situation in the region is improving and has not caused any serious threat to the implementation of project activities. STAP/LD COMMENT AFDB RESPONSE address any shortfall in its executive authority. In addition, LCBC should seek competent technical partners from the region, such as through CORAF in the case of agriculture and livestock improvement Issue 4:.Trade-offs: There is a tendency throughout the Yes, right. We agree that trade-offs need to be managed and considered as part of PFD to imply that in all cases of environmental the preparation of the projects under the program. management whether for use of water, biodiversity or other natural resources there are always win-win outcomes, whereas in fact hard decisions may be necessary to negotiate and to enforce tradeoffs regarding natural resource exploitation. For the five priority Ecosystem Quality and Water Resource (EQWRO) objectives arising from the SAP and the additional objectives taken from the NAPA and other convention-related instruments the proponents are advised to review their assumptions concerning the causal chain and therefore priorities assigned to the proposed projects envisaged under the Program. This is important to enable interventions that can sensibly be conducted in parallel, such as reforestation, cookstove technology, improving power distribution, to proceed, but others such as increased use of irrigation, sustained fishing effort, review of existing dams, are interdependent and require a more structured approach. At project level, the logic of change will be built to ensure not only that the intervention will end in the expected result but also to see how and when the projects interventions will take place. It should be noted that the 2nd category of interventions – increase use of irrigation, sustain fishing efforts – are the ones undertaken by the baseline project and the projects under the proposed program will build on them to ensure that this development is linked to a sustainable management and increase restoration Issue 5: Targets and Indicators: Lack and needs of (i) consistency of the project targets and indicators.. and (ii) of an Action Plan which was to be developed from the SAP. Targets and indicators: Agreed. As per normal AfDB and GEF project preparation procedures and principles, each project under the Program Framework will have a detailed logical framework that includes targets and indicators associated to expected outputs and outcomes. STAP requests that the Program be revised to include the production of an Action Plan which will include the necessary logical framework with indicators necessary The Action plan has not been considered in the proposed program because LCBC to organize the work stated in the Program Result has already committed a consultant to develop an investment plan, which were to STAP/LD COMMENT AFDB RESPONSE Framework. STAP further requests that the necessary be prepared under the completed GEF project in 2008. A five-year Plan of Action SAP Action Plan be peer reviewed as a pre-condition of the interventions in the basin is one of the expected results of this approach. for its implementation. Issue 6: Climate change risks: This issue is not adequately addressed in the current project, except for passing references. There are many studies available which need to be reviewed and if necessary, new modeling studies may have to be conducted to assess the role of changing rainfall and drought in the recent decades as well as projections into the future. Climate change risk has been considered as a risk and will be further considered, following AfDB procedures, during project preparation. Concerning the modelling aspects, we bring to your attention that an IWRM project that LCBC has carried out in collaboration with the European Union came up with a model for water resources allocation in the Lake Basin; IRD has also developed a hydrological model of Lake Chad; same with CIMA that developed a hydrological model as part of the Oubangui water transfer studies. All these initiatives must be refined and coordinated. LCBC has therefore decided to recruit a permanent Modeling Expert to handle this activity. The analysis from those studies will be considered in an integrated manner in the development of the subprojects. Issue 7 : Adaptation to climate change: A few adaptation measures are mentioned. However, given the scale of the problem and the project, there is a need for a systematic assessment of various adaptation options and prioritization of the interventions to address the climate risk challenge. The proposed program is not focused on adaptation and it does not request funds from the adaptation instruments, nevertheless adaptation measures are proposed and improved as a complement to the baseline projects measures and national initiatives that are undertaken in LCBC member countries for the implementation of NAPAS and IWRM Plans. In this regard the adaptation options are prioritized taken into consideration climate risk challenges identified previously (issue 6). Issue 8 : Renewable energy technologies: There is very A wood energy supply master plan will be undertaken to ensure that the proposed little discussion on the extent of contribution of interventions are relevant in addressing the contribution of fuelwood extraction to fuelwood extraction to degradation of ecosystem degradation of ecosystem services services of LC. There is a need for a serious consideration of the renewable energy options, assuming cooking is one of the dominant uses of fuelwood or charcoal leading to loss of forests.