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.