Global Environment Facility
Proposed Project Concept And Request For A PDF Block B Grant
Country and eligibility:
Uruguay ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
on May 11, 1993, and the UN Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) on August 18, 1994.
Project:
Integrated Ecosystem and Natural Resources Management in
Uruguay
GEF Focal Area:
Multi-focal area (biodiversity and integrated ecosystem
management)
Operational Program:
OP#12 Integrated Ecosystem Management (OP#12) and Agrobiodiversity (OP#13)
Project Cost:
US$ 35 million
Financing (tentative):
GEF
IBRD
Government of Uruguay
US$ 5 million
US$ 15 million
US$ 15 million
Requesting Agency:
World Bank
Executing Agency:
Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries
PDF Block B Request:
US$ 335,500
PDF Co-financing:
US$ 600,000 (Government of Uruguay, FAO and IBRD through
PRENADER I)
Block A Grant Awarded?
No
Project Structure
Project objective
The objective of the combined IBRD/GEF project is to promote the adoption of
integrated production systems in agricultural and livestock landscapes to increase productivity
within a context of holistic ecosystem and natural resources management while conserving soils,
water, rangelands, and biodiversity. IBRD will finance the productive and competitive
components related to agricultural crop production and livestock development. The GEF
component will finance the incremental costs required to restore or improve the capacity of the
productive rural landscape to maintain and improve ecological processes and conserve
biodiversity. From the perspective of generation of global benefits, the project will promote the
adoption of multiple-use land use practices that conserve biodiversity outside protected areas
within a framework of integrated ecosystem management. Specific project objectives include:
a) To conserve natural resources and biodiversity by developing appropriate
technologies for increasing productivity of agricultural systems (crops, pastures,
livestock) while ensuring biodiversity conservation (financed by IBRD and GEF)
b) Promote the adoption of production systems to conserve soils, reduce grazing impact,
reduce erosion risk and enhance the efficient use of water resources (surface and
groundwater) (financed by IBRD)
c) Understand the carbon sequestration potential of various land-use practices and
delineate a strategy to promote carbon sequestration in Uruguay’s productive
landscapes (financed by GEF)
d) Promote awareness about biodiversity conservation in the productive sectors and
build capacity at the institutional and landowner level for holistic management of
natural resources, integrating biodiversity conservation in productive landscapes
(financed by IBRD and GEF)
e) Develop the management tools required to achieve efficient and sustainable natural
resources management, including the development of new policy and legislation tools
when required (IBRD and GEF)
f) Provide assistance to landowners to attain the efficient use of water, soils, pastures,
and the conservation and sustainable utilization of biological diversity to increase
agriculture and livestock production while ensuring the conservation of natural
resources (IBRD and GEF).
Global Significance
Uruguay is located in the confluence of two major phyto-geographic domains:
Amazonian, and Chaco. Broadly speaking and under natural conditions, the country’s habitats are
dominated by grasslands, interspersed with a mosaic of other habitats, especially marshes, spiny
woodland (“espinal”), gallery forest, and in some cases large bodies of standing water (“esteros”).
The relative importance of these habitats and the clear dominance of the grassland (“pradera”)
ecosystem is shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Principal Natural Habitats and Land Use in Uruguay1
Habitat Type
Extension (ha)
Savanna, currently rangelands
Natural Forest
Wetlands and other Aquatic Ecosystems
Permanent Agriculture
Urban and Infrastructure
Plantation Forests
Other
TOTAL
Percentage
14,000,000
600,000
1,145,397
920,000
300,000
400,000
256,103
17,621,500
79.4
3.5
6.5
5.2
1.7
2.2
1.4
100.0
The country is biologically unique from a global ecoregional perspective: According to
Dinerstein et al. (1995)2, most of the country belongs to the “Uruguayan Savanna” ecoregion,
which also extends to parts of Argentina and Brasil. Because this ecoregion is one of the few
“savanna” ecosystems in the world, it is very important from a global representativeness point of
1
Data from: Anonimo. 1992. Estudio Ambiental Nacional. Organización de los Estados Americanos.
Washington, DC. 328 Pp.; Anonimo. 1999. Propuesta de Estrategia Nacional para la Conservación y Uso
Sostenible de la Diversidad Biológica del Uruguay. Proyecto Biodiversidad, Uruguay. MVOTMA, PNUD,
GEF, Montevideo, 112 Pp.; and from Carolina Sans, background paper on biodiversity.
2
Dinerstein, E, D. Olson, D. Graham, A. Webster, S. Primm, M. Bookfinder, and G. Ledec. 1995. A
Conservation Assessment of the Terrestrial Ecoregions of Latin America and the Caribbean. World
Bank/World Wildlife Fund. Washington, DC. 129 Pp.
2
view. For this reason, these authors consider this ecoregion to be of “bioregionally outstanding”
value. According to the Dinerstein et. al classification, other ecoregions represented in the
country include the Humid Chaco and the Brazilian Atlantic Coast Restingas.
The specific habitats present in Uruguay do not occur in isolation from each other. They
are interspersed among themselves, and with a series of localized geographic features which
include rocks, hills, small ravines and a highly branched hydrological network; it is this “mosaic”
pattern that defines the uniqueness and importance of the ecoregion from a biodiversity
perspective, and, under natural conditions, allows it to maintain its species diversity. The
following are the main ecosystems present in the country:




Savanna. It includes an heterogeneous herbaceous community (2000 species, of which
400 are graminidae), whose diversity is determined by the relative complexity of the
soils. There are also various legumes with importance from a range management
perspective, as well as shrubs.
Native Forests. Including various distinct types, among them gallery forests (along rivers
and other water courses), ravine forests (which appears in patches and benefits from
specific micro-climate conditions), “bosque Serrano,” palm forests (including the
important and endemic “Butia” association covering 70,000 ha), “monte de parque,”
“algarrobal,” and litoral spiny forests (“monte espinoso del litoral”).
Wetlands. Primarily located in the southeast of the country, especially in the Laguna
Merin watershed and the coast of Rocha.
Coastal Ecosystems. Uruguay has productive coastal ecosystems with an important
associated wildlife. These occur along the two main coasts of the country, the River Plate
coast (460 km), and the Atlantic coast (220 km).
At the species level, there are ca. 1,200 species of vertebrates, including 580 fish, 41
amphibians, 62 reptiles, 434 birds, and 111 mammals. Of the 111 species of mammals historically
present in the country, four have already become extinct, and an additional 5 are in danger of
extinction. Under Birdlife International’s Endemic Bird Areas classification3, Uruguay contains
remnants of the original “Argentine Mesopotamian Grasslands,” which includes 3 restrictedrange species (all of the genus Sporophila), one of which is in critical condition, another
endangered, and the third near threatened. From a botanical perspective, Uruguay has over 2,500
species of which the great majority are herbaceous species or shrubs corresponding to the
dominant savanna ecosystems.4
Project Background and Threats
Livestock production (primarily cattle and sheep) has been the main pillar of the rural
economy during the last several hundred years. Due to a historic lack of stimulus for investment,
the sector has been slowly loosing its productivity with the resulting extensification at low
densities and the consequent loss and alteration of natural habitats. The original savanna
ecosystem with associated forests (a product of rich soils and a temperate climate) has thus been
heavily altered and with it, the natural features of the landscape have most likely changed
substantially.
3
Stattersfield, A., M. Crosby, A. Long, and D. Wege. 1998. Endemic Bird Areas of the World. Birdlife
Conservation Series No. 7. Birdlife International, Cambridge. 846 Pp.
More comprehensive descriptions of the country from a biological perspective can be found in: “Estudio
Ambiental Nacional,” and “Propuesta de Estrategia Nacional para la Consveracion y Uso Sostenible de la
Diversidad Biologica del Uruguay” (cited above).
4
3
This alteration has had effects at two levels:
(i)
Localized effects, which include a change in the composition of species
(primarily grasses) due both to invasion of exotic species, such as introduced
grasses, and to the selective effects of grazing which favors certain species
over others and thus alter the natural competitive forces that are present in its
absence. In addition, grazing causes soil compaction, which also distorts the
ecological forces present in the absence of grazing.
(ii)
Ecological effects, which are larger-scale changes resulting from the alteration
(due to range management practices) of flooding patterns, fire cycles, and
natural successional cycles, which in turn create a savanna ecosystem
different from its original natural condition, with the consequent change in
species composition and dominance patterns.
Extensive livestock production systems in natural grasslands in Uruguay confront a
potential trade-off: on the one hand farmers seek increasing productivity levels and therefore,
introduce exotic grasses and legumes and apply fertilizers in the natural rangelands. These
practices result in higher livestock productivity levels and consequently increased farmers
income. On the other hand, alterations of the natural rangelands represent a clear threat to
preserving native species and reducing biodiversity. Sustainable technologies are therefore
needed to contemplate increased productivity and biodiversity conservation within a framework
of market competitiveness.
Another major alteration of natural habitats (directly or indirectly associated with range
management practices) has been the loss of native forests, with the consequent loss of
biodiversity habitats, biological corridors, and ecosystem services. Fortunately, both main habitat
types (savanna and native forests) are fairly resilient and, unlike many tropical habitats, they can
be the subject of restoration efforts that can be cost-effective and feasible in time.
Erosion has also altered natural habitats. Currently, thirty percent of all the agricultural
land suffers from some form of erosion. Nevertheless, soil erosion seems to strongly depend on
the appearance of periodic heavy rain episodes (associated with El Nino), with the resulting
damage being heavily correlated with the type of land-use present, which is minimal under
permanent forest.
In the crop/livestock production systems, the dairy production systems, and the rice based
systems, natural grasslands have been displaced almost entirely. In addition, the farming practices
used in the 1950s and 1960s resulted in severe soil erosion and soil degradation. Although the
current agronomic practices trend to increase soil organic matter levels, recovery rates are slow.
There are clear opportunities to accelerate the soil recovery rates in these systems through the
adoption of integrated management practices including the use of no-till agriculture and the
inclusion of productive pastures in rotation with annual crops.
Wetland loss and degradation has also occurred in a substantial magnitude, due to a
variety of factors, including the expansion of rice cultivation which both replaces the habitats and
degrades them through heavier chemical inputs that result from the application of fertilizers and
pesticides. This effect has been particularly important in Los Bañados del Este.
Finally, invasion by exotic species (both animals and plants) has also caused impacts. For
example, since the 1960s, the growth of the ranching sector has been promoted via the
introduction of “improved” grasses and fertilizers – with the consequent ecological impacts
4
already discussed. Fortunately from a biodiversity perspective, of the 16 million ha. that are
appropriate for livestock production (90% of which is currently under exploitation), an estimated
91% of the area is still covered by natural grasses.
Government Strategy
There are various characteristics unique to the country that have determined the historic
land-use patterns and their impacts on the natural environment. In addition to the alreadymentioned importance of ranching for the economy, additional factors include the low population
density, the early disappearance of indigenous communities, the very high urbanization rate (90%
of the population currently lives in cities), and the very high proportion of lands under private
ownership. These characteristics have prevented Uruguay from developing a “Protected Area
System” of similar characteristics to those of other Latin American countries. Indeed, the existing
protected areas have been created in an ad-hoc manner, primarily following an opportunistic
approach, and under the protection of various distinct laws. The existing areas are therefore
administered by the public organism that owns the land, whether it is the MGAP, MVOTMA,
SEPAE, Municipalities, etc.
As a result, Uruguay lacks a traditional system of protected areas, and the existing areas
cover only 283,000 ha, equivalent to 1.6% of the national territory. In order to correct this
situation, a law that creates the National System of Protected Areas was passed in 2,000, although
its implementation has not yet taken place due to the lack of the complementary regulations and
the required institutional arrangements.
Native forests are protected under law, but this legal protection, although necessary, is
not a sufficient condition to ensure that native forest ecosystems recover their ecological
functionality. This functionality requires the existence of contiguous areas of a minimum size, the
maintenance of habitat quality, the proper configuration of forest patches in biological corridors,
etc. Furthermore, there is a lack of effective incentives for reforestation with native species,
which given the losses already occurred, is a pre-requisite for the recovery of these ecosystems.
At the macro-level, the National Biodiversity Strategy (NBS) has been recently prepared
and approved within the context of the Convention of Biological Diversity as explained below
under section “project rationale.” It contains the principal recommendations and instruments for
the implementation of the CBD in the country and is the result of a participatory process. About
125 delegates representing 58 institutions from the public and private sector (Ministries, local
governments, educational and research institutions, NGO’s, farmers associations, etc) and from
the University, between others, attended the thematic workshops during the period of the project.
The specific themes covered in the NBS are:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Conservation in situ,
Conservation ex situ,
Research, Capacity Building and Information Exchange,
Education and Public Awareness,
Environmental Impact Assessment,
Development Policies and Access to Genetic Resources.
Recommendations under each theme reflect the knowledge and experience of the
stakeholders that participated in the elaboration of the strategy, and support the main strategic
directions of the proposed project, with emphasis on in situ conservation, research, capacity, and
information exchange, and education and public awareness, as explained in detail in section
“Project Rationale” below.
5
Independently of any sector-specific measures, however, it is clear that the future of
biodiversity in Uruguay cannot be analyzed in isolation from the government policy regarding
rural development, and ranching in particular. Thus the important opportunity and the critical
importance of combining this GEF project with the IBRD loan under preparation (second phase
of the ongoing PRENADER project).
Currently, the government ranching strategy (through MGAP) has three main pillars: (i)
sectoral growth based on productivity increases, (ii) equitable sharing of the costs and benefits of
this growth, and (iii) conservation of natural resources. Over the long term, the strategy prioritizes
diversification, increase in productivity, product differentiation, product value-added, and
increase in quality. The fate of Uruguay’s biodiversity is intimately linked to this sector, and it is
thus critical to develop and implement a biodiversity policy that can be effectively applied within
that context. This policy context provides an excellent departing point or “baseline” for the GEF
project.
Project Rationale
This GEF project is fully-blended with an IBRD loan that will promote the adoption of
integrated production systems in agricultural production systems and livestock landscapes to
increase productivity within a holistic ecosystem and natural resources management while
conserving soils, water, grasslands and biodiversity.
The prospects for biodiversity conservation in Uruguay can be divided into two
categories according to the National Biodiversity Strategy : (i) conservation within protected
areas, and (ii) conservation outside protected areas. As in other countries, biodiversity
conservation cannot be achieved via a protected area system alone. Even if Uruguay was able to
place 10-15% of its territory under some sort of protection (as discussed above), this wouldn’t be
sufficient to maintain large-scale ecological processes and to ensure sustainable biodiversity
conservation over the long term. As in other countries, Uruguay will need to complement its
system of protected areas with aggressive conservation efforts outside it.
Fortunately, the ecological characteristics of the country, the synergies that can be found
between the types of ecosystems found and the generation of rural income opportunities, and the
resilience and restoration potential of Uruguay’s ecosystems are all very important supportive
ingredients for such an approach. Because of the opportunities for mainstreaming provided by the
IBRD loan, the focus of this proposal will be conservation outside of protected areas. This
approach is fully supported by the economic and sector work analysis (ESW) recently completed
by the World Bank which concluded that there is a large potential to diversify agricultural and
livestock production within the context of integrated natural resources management.
Given that most terrestrial ecosystems in Uruguay are inter-dependent, the development
of such systems does not need to be ecosystem-specific. To a great extent, however, we omit a
discussion about the conservation of the large wetlands and other aquatic ecosystems of the
southeast of the country, since they have particular needs, and are currently the subject of
successful efforts financed through PROBIDES (see below under other Implementing Agencies).
The key focus of this project is the promotion of biodiversity-friendly, multiple-use land
use practices, within a landscape approach. Under this approach, it is possible to promote the
adoption of land-use practices that exploit the synergies that exist between biodiversity
conservation and opportunities for rural income generation.
6
Some of these practices of “integrated ecosystem management” will include a
combination of various land-uses, whose relative emphases will be determined by the local
conditions, the feasibility of implementing an incentive framework, the ability for market-based
mechanisms to support these land-uses, and their relative contribution to conservation. These
possibilities do not need to be implemented in isolation from each other. In fact, even though they
may be relatively modest from an economic perspective when analyzed individually, they can
become a major alternative to inappropriate land-use practices through income diversification and
complementarity to traditional practices. From a biodiversity perspective, what is key is the
promotion of a geographic configuration that maintains the mosaic nature of Uruguay’s original
habitats, restoring biological corridors through a diversified rural landscape.
Obviously, many of these possibilities are still in their infancy. Therefore, they can be
sharpened and would benefit from the establishment of pilot activities. Eventually, and with the
growing internationally trends that are favoring the competitiveness of green markets,
biodiversity conservation offers vast opportunities for the future well-being of Uruguay’s rural
economy and for the regeneration and maintenance of healthy ecosystems in the country. For
these reasons, some of the activities will rely on independent certification systems as has already
occurred in the forest sector. In this sector, forest certification is a major management tool for
sustainable forestry management, together with the requirements for management plans and codes
of conduct. Since January 2001, Uruguay has various plantations certified by the Forestry
Stewardship Council (FSC) covering 62,004 ha in 3 different areas of the country. There are
additional plantations in the process of obtaining certification based on adequate forestry
management and the control of the chain of custody of its products.
Additionally, the discussions at the UNFCCC have stimulated an impressive amount of
activities all over the world, with an increasing involvement of governments, business people, and
scientists giving shape to the development of an international carbon market. There is a clear need
to explore opportunities in the agricultural and forestry sectors of Uruguay to generate additional
income for farmers by establishing farming practices that result in enhanced carbon sequestration
rate, should the UNFCCC eventually allow it.
The proposed project carefully considers the characteristics of Uruguay’s territory in
relation to its natural resources, socio-economic characteristics, and cultural and historical
features. The combination of these features defined the country since colonial times and in
relation to its productive development (primarily livestock), which have made Uruguay famous
worldwide for the production of meat and wool.
Furthermore, the proposal supports a central goal of Uruguay’s NBS by seeking to
harmonize sustainable resource use with biodiversity conservation while promoting the wise use
of resources through alternative production schemes. This is highlighted by the NBS’ emphasis
on “conservation taking into consideration traditional land-use characteristics at the national
level, since they have been to a great extent responsible for today’s diversity of ecosystems, while
allowing sufficient flexibility to accommodate the incorporation of future changes, within the
perspective of sustainable development.”
From this perspective, the project seeks to introduce new production alternatives in the
rural sector based on the concept of multiple land-use options and the ecosystem approach.
Similarly, it promotes the complementary relation that exists between economic growth and
environmental conservation to promote its integration and to achieve the objectives of the NBS.
The project will support the objectives of the NBS through:

“Definition of policy elements to:
7
-

Promote the generation of knowledge and capacity building regarding biological diversity
for its conservation and sustainable use.
Integrate biodiversity conservation within the management and sustainable use of natural
resources in order to ensure its conservation within the short and long term.
Avoid and minimize the effects of works and other development interventions upon
biodiversity.
Promote environmental education at all levels.
Promote the equitable sharing of the benefits derived from biodiversity conservation.
Incorporate the concept of biodiversity conservation and its sustainable use within
national sectoral policies.
Identify effective tools (administrative, legal, and policy) to achieve such objectives,”
At the specific thematic level, the objectives of this project are included into the goals of
“in situ conservation of biodiversity outside protected areas” and “development policies and
sectoral integration” of the NBS, in which it is stated that:
-
“in order to achieve in situ biodiversity conservation within and outside protected areas,
national development policies will be made compatible with conservation objectives,
prioritizing, among others, the restoration and rehabilitation of degraded ecosystems, the
protection of species and populations, and the control of exotic species.”
Similarly, among the required instruments to implement this theme of the NBS, the NBS
document proposes among others:
“To prioritize and promote programs and projects to develop practical solutions to the
issue of sectoral integration and with specific objectives of sustainable resources use
while providing alternatives to resources users; promote these techniques to institutions
and technicians in order to involve them in the sustainable utilization of biological
resources; to attain a proper level of economic valuation of biological resources; to
promote and expand field experiences among ministries, municipalities, and the police, in
order to achieve the implementation of national regulations related to biodiversity
conservation; and to support rural tourism as a mechanism to conserve biodiversity.”
For development policies:
“it is proposed to use economic incentives in all development projects or activities related
to conservation or sustainable use of biodiversity,”,.......”development and
implementation of schemes to provide green certificates for productive schemes that
conserve biodiversity,”........., “support the development of ecotourism and rural tourism
in the country.”
Therefore and based on the NBS’ focus, it is clear that the project will act as a main force
in implementing the NBS, given that the proposed activities directly support its strategic lines. It
is explicitly stated that: “the strategy for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity must
be adopted as a national long-term policy; biodiversity conservation must incorporate local
participation to solve and control existing problems, including both civil society and the entirety
of the public administration system, to coordinate actions and to negotiate solutions among civil
society to achieve decentralization, horizontality, trans-sectorality, participation, and effective
utilization of limited financial resources.”
The proposed project will have the following defining characteristics:
8









Participatory, applying a methodology based on workshops and consultations with
various sectors (ministries, municipal governments, universities, NGOs, farmers, and
local communities), involving all interested stakeholders interested in, and able to
collaborate with the project.
Based on incentives to private landowners, thus increasing the sustainability of the
adoption of these practices.
Educational, through workshops and capacity building courses, training, and awareness
in the various disciplines, and directed to local stakeholders in order to prepare a critical
mass of supporters at the local level.
Strong component of communication and information exchange.
Realistic, by combining scientific criteria with on-the-ground sustainable management of
renewable natural resources.
Executive, by explicitly promoting the policies of the National Biodiversity Strategy
(NBS).
Consensus-based, by developing alternatives based on broad consultation with all
stakeholders.
Emphasis on global-local linkages, through integration of biodiversity conservation
within national-level policies.
Large economies of scale.
The project includes various social and economic characteristics in rural areas, using an
approach which:


Integrates, by articulating various human activities and emphasizing results based on
efficacy and sustainability,
Changes perceptions, behaviours, and strategies towards new models of management of
natural resources and biodiversity, within the proper socio-economic context of the
country.
The project will be integrated and made compatible with the projects under execution or
planned by the government with environmental management objectives and in support of the
objectives of the NBS, and as such demonstrates the government commitment to mainstream
biodiversity into the sector beyond the scope of the proposed IBRD loan. Many of these projects
are currently under implementation or under design by the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and
Fisheries. Noteworthy among them are: (i) Rural Uruguay Project, financed by FIDA, with a
main objective to reduce rural poverty in the country. It seeks to develop permanent mechanisms
to allow the participation of poor rural communities in the benefits of development; (ii)
PREDEG, financed by GTZ. This is a technical assistance project to promote the farming subsector through and accord between the governments of Germany and Uruguay; (iii)
PRONADEGA, financed by the GTZ to support small-scale farmers, and (iv) the Program of
Agrarian Services, financed by the IDB for technology transfer and research.
Another important characteristic of the project is its emphasis on local farmers and
producers in the process of conservation and natural resources management. This is a key issue,
given the socio-economic characteristics of Uruguay, as explained above.
Project Components
The IBRD loan represents the second phase of the “PRENADER” project, and will build
upon its lessons-learned in implementing its first phase. A major innovation will be the
incorporation of explicit biodiversity and ecosystem management objectives to be supported by
the GEF on an incremental-cost basis. The main objective of the first phase of PRENADER was
9
to “develop and implement a strategy for the sustainable management of natural resources with
emphasis in soils and water. Irrigation was perceived as a way to enhance, diversify, and sustain
agricultural production and exports. PRENADER’s strategies financed by IBRD included: (a)
support to solid investments in the environmental area for rehabilitation and development of
water management; (b) enhance the efficiency of surface and subterranean water use; (c) establish
a balanced policy of operation and maintenance and to recover investment costs; (d)
establishment of the foundation for better practices of management of natural resources by
supporting enhanced soil and water conservation and prioritising projects with horizontal
technology transfer; and (e) provide technical assistance for forest development and support for
non-traditional agricultural activities.
Project components included:
(a)
Natural resources management including: (i) pilot development systems in
the micro-watershed of the Santa Lucía river; (ii) demonstration farms in
selected agro-ecological areas; (iii) a geographic information system (GIS)
(iv) applied research activities; (v) strengthening of the Directorate of Natural
Resources of the MGAP, and Hydrography of MTOP, and (vi) technical
assistance for forestry development.
(b)
Irrigation development, including: (i) rehabilitation and modernization of
public systems; (ii) construction of new irrigation systems; (iii) construction
of an irrigation infrastructure designed for small farmers, and (iv) technical
assistance.
The total surface enhanced by irrigation during PRENADER I was 27,500 ha.
During phase II (under preparation), PRENADER II will promote the adoption of
integrated production systems in agricultural and livestock landscapes to increase productivity
within a context of holistic ecosystem and natural resources management while conserving soils,
water, grasslands, and biodiversity. IBRD will finance the productive and competitive
components related to agricultural productivity and livestock development. The GEF component
will finance the incremental costs required to restore or improve the capacity of the productive
rural landscape to maintain ecological processes and conserve biodiversity. From the perspective
of generation of global benefits, the project will promote the adoption of multiple-use land use
practices that conserve biodiversity outside protected areas within a framework of integrated
ecosystem management. The components of PRENADER II to be financed by IBRD will be
defined in parallel with the Block-B activities. The project will include 3 main components: (i)
Integrated Natural Resources Management, (ii) institutional strengthening (including monitoring
and evaluation), and (iii) project coordination.
(i)
Integrated Natural Resources Management.
Activities under this component will provide technical and financial assistance to project
beneficiaries to promote the adoption of production systems that allow the conservation and
efficient use of natural resources and therefore would be sustainable from the environmental and
financial perspectives. These activities will target actions to promote the conservation and
restoration of soils, the efficient use of water resources, the conservation and restoration of
pastures, the conservation and utilization of biodiversity, or a combination of these targets.
To access the technical assistance to be provided by the project, however, project
beneficiaries will be required to present management plans for integrated natural resources
management at the farm level, independently of the type of assistance that they will be seeking.
10
The application for assistance will be evaluated based on their technical merits and the financial
sustainability of the entire management plan, beyond the particular type of assistance required. In
this way, such a management plan will be accompanied by a commitment to execute all activities
contemplated in the management plan within a given time period. The project will develop a
control system to ensure the execution of these commitments.
Activities under this component will target the various production systems currently in
use in Uruguay. These are: a) Extensive livestock production based on natural grasslands under
semi-natural conditions b) Extensive livestock production based on natural grasslands with small
areas under improved pastures (introduced species and fertilizers); c) Semi-intensive mixed
crop/livestock production based on annual crops in rotation with grass/legume pastures; d) Dairy
production systems based on sown pastures and silage produced with annual crops (maize,
sorghum, wheat, etc.); e) Rice-based production systems (rice/fallow or rice in rotation with sown
pastures); and f) Intensive production systems (horticultural crops and fruits).
Within this component, the GEF will finance, on an incremental cost basis, the following
activities:
Generation of Conservation Experiences in Productive Landscapes. The following is an
indicative list of some of the land-use practices that will be further studied and developed during
preparation:
a) Maintenance of mosaics of natural habitats within the rural landscape through
support for ecotourism and rural tourism. The scenic beauty present in Uruguay’s
rural areas is to a great extent due to the mosaic characteristics of the landscape; as
discussed earlier, these habitat mosaics are also important from a biodiversity
perspective. Within a context of developing land-use options that are sustainable and
support ecosystem management objectives, rural tourism and eco-tourism can
become important building blocks to achieve biodiversity conservation within the
rural landscape and through the diversification of productive activities currently
available to landowners. Sustainability can occur given the rapid growth that these
activities are experiencing in Uruguay and internationally. The detailed incremental
cost analysis will determine the appropriate GEF contribution within a barrierremoval context.
b) Integrated savanna ecosystem management including regeneration of natural grasses
and other vegetation, maintenance and regeneration of natural forests, reduced
impact grazing, and carbon sequestration. These practices can be associated to the
production of ecologically-friendly meats for export, and perhaps rely on the
independent certification of advanced ecological standards with the resulting gain in
competitive edge in international markets.
c) Agro-forestry systems (including silvo-pastoril systems), that would exploit the
synergies between enhanced production due to reduced erosion, diversification of
products, and provision of shade; and the increased ecological value that such
systems provide due to the maintenance of natural habitats and the establishment of
biological corridors. The project will build from the experiences being generated
through the GEF-supported silvo-pastoril project in Colombia, Nicaragua, and Costa
Rica.
d) Sustainable biodiversity use through sustainable wildlife ranching and better
management of game species. Hunting of native game species currently generates
US$6 million per year, and attracts hunters from both Europe and the US. A main
11
comparative advantage of the country lies in the fact that because of its geographic
location, the hunting season is inverted and complements the hunting season in the
northern hemisphere. The project will improve the methodologies to determine bag
sizes and explore the options for landowners to enhance the habitats that would
benefit these species within a context of rural agro-eco-tourism. Similarly, the new
industry of wildlife ranching has grown by 500% in the last 5 years. Some of the
species that can complement traditional ranching practices while allowing for the
regeneration of natural habitats and reducing grazing pressure include the Nutria
(Myocastor coypus), for which there are currently 17 breeding facilities that have
already generated US$53 million between 1976 and 1992; the Nandu (Rhea
Americana), for which there are currently 95 breeding facilities and has great export
potential for both meat and fine leather; and the Carpincho or Capybara
(Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris) for which there are 6 breeding facilities.
e) Forest regeneration. Recently, the forestry sector has shown a very rapid increase due
to incentives for plantation forestry. The area under plantation has grown by close to
800% in the 1990s, and today the total area under plantation forestry covers 400,000
ha. The economies of scale that have been achieved allow for industrial processing
that can be internationally-competitive. The project will not finance forest
plantations, but will explore ways through which forest diversification can increase
the ecological value of farms through native forest conservation and regeneration of
native species.
Integration of Biodiversity Conservation within Productive Landscapes. The
biodiversity-friendly land-use practices to be identified and generated under component 1, will be
promoted at the producer level through a variety of mechanisms, including:
a) Workshops, seminars, and extension
b) Training courses
c) Targeted technical assistance
d) Financial assistance
Carbon sequestration. There is a clear role for the agricultural sector to help reduce the
enhanced greenhouse effect by introducing agronomic practices that result in increased removal
of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (carbon sequestration). Carbon fixed by plants can remain
in the form of wood for several years, and/or return to the soil as plant residues increasing the soil
organic matter content.
Past and recent research has evidenced that reduction in atmospheric carbon dioxide
content can be achieved by large-scale applications of land management practices. Among others:
reduced tillage, use of pastures (e.g., clover, alfalfa) in rotation with annual crops, improved
strategies to enhance fertilizer use efficiency of animal feed and return of animal waste,
establishment of forests and grasslands in former croplands and degraded soils. Most importantly,
increasing sequestered carbon in the soils will provide additional benefits to farmers such as
improvement in soil fertility, water holding capacity and tilth, as well as reduction in soil erosion.
Land-use changes in Uruguay in the last 20-30 years have had a positive but slow
impact on the estimated total carbon balance. There are clear opportunities to accelerate the soil
recovery rates through the adoption of integrated management practices including the use of notill agriculture, and the inclusion of productive pastures.
12
However, methane (CH4) and nitrous oxides (N2O), two significant green house gases
with high global warming potential (respectively 21 and 310 times the warming potential of CO2)
are emitted in significant amounts. Methane and nitrous oxide result mostly from cattle and
farming practices and consequently significant improvements in animal and land husbandry have
to be extended to the majority of the rural area to make Uruguay a significant contributor in
combating in combating global warming. Since the emission of both gases are the result of
inefficiencies in the production system, a reduction of the emissions would also lead to better
results for the farmers (higher nitrogen use efficiency, and more efficient conversion of animal
feed into milk, meat, and wool.)
Research conducted in Uruguay has reached two important conclusions regarding global
warming. First, methane is the most important emitted greenhouse gas due to its high warming
potential, and to the large ruminant population in Uruguay (more than 10 million heads).
Secondly, the studies revealed that there is a huge potential to mitigate the greenhouse effect in
Uruguay through increased carbon sequestration due to increased afforestation as well as land use
changes (mainly with improved pastures and no-till agriculture). Recent studies indicate that the
amount of carbon being sequestered in the forestry sector and through land use changes are
greater than the equivalent emissions from the energy and industrial processes sectors of
Uruguay.
Improving the natural rangelands with introduced species and fertilizer application results
in animal diets of higher quality, and therefore in more efficient livestock production systems.
Thus, breeding herds increase the number of produced calves, and beef production herds reach
slaughter at earlier ages. These improvements also result in lower methane emissions per unit of
product (calves, beef, wool).
It is therefore crucial that any effort oriented to define rational management of the natural
resource base in Uruguay must contemplate these issues: (a) changes in carbon sequestration
associated to improved land uses; and (b) methane emissions from livestock and the effects of
changing the animal diet (e.g., with improved pastures).
The project will build upon the experiences of other GEF projects in the region, in
particular the “Oaxaca Hill-side management.” It will determine the carbon balance of the various
land-use practices to be supported under the project, and will delineate a strategy to support
Uruguay’s carbon approach.
Discussions around the establishment of carbon markets have identified as a possible
bottleneck the need for accepted methods to measure, monitor, and verify the amounts of carbon
actually being sequestered in the various projects. This project will establish pilot studies in the
different agricultural production systems of Uruguay to test and implement such methods.
The GEF-financed activities will be tailored to each production system and will interact
with the IBRD-financed activities by production system as defined above.
(ii)
Institutional Strengthening.
Under this component, the project will finance the training of professionals and
technicians within both the public and private sectors and the technical assistance to the
institutions associated with project execution to allow them to manage their responsibilities
within the project. In parallel, the project will finance the development of the policy, legal, and
information tools required so that these institutions can not only promote the efficient and
sustainable management of natural resources, but also monitor their status. The various
13
institutions involved with project execution would, with project assistance, develop a monitoring
and evaluation system for soils, water resources, pastures, and biodiversity.
Within this component, the GEF will finance, on an incremental cost basis:
Biodiversity Capacity Building. The project will support the strengthening of Uruguay’s
capacity to identify and address issues of biodiversity conservation outside protected areas though
the mainstreaming of these issues within Uruguay’s national and local institutions responsible for
agriculture and livestock promotion. Additionally, a strong effort will target landowners via
training and awareness.
Seminars and workshops will be organized with local landowners to increase their
awareness and technical capacity regarding biological diversity values and to promote the
sustainable management of natural resources within a context of integrated ecosystem
management. These seminars will include legal aspects, conservation and sustainable biodiversity
use, identification of local flora and fauna, planning and management of recreation activities
based on nature, environmental interpretation, organic farms, and native plantations, among
others.
The project will also support the development of policies related to biodiversity
management outside protected areas with emphasis on endemic fauna, native species ranching,
and similar topics. Training of government officials will target technicians in wildlife
management, wetland conservation and the Ramsar convention, management plans for
sustainable hunting, rural tourism based on natural ecosystems, support in legal aspects,
rhizobium, etc.
Biological Monitoring. A biological monitoring and information system will be
developed, taking advantage of the existing collaborative activities between the research groups
of INIA/IFDC (GRAS) and DNRN-MGAP in geographical information systems, simulation
models, remote sensing and decision support systems to develop and establish methodologies to
monitor and evaluate the system. These activities will document the impacts on biodiversity of
the various integrated natural resources and ecosystem management practices to be promoted by
the project.
Monitoring will involve data gathering for the early detection changes in state and use if
biological diversity in order to improve its management. Towards this end, an information
database will be constructed to be expanded on a continuous basis with new data and through the
identification of information gaps. This will be an incremental process within a context of
interaction with decision-makers. Baseline information will include habitats and species, as well
as other resources of conservation relevance.
The monitoring system will be fully developed during project preparation, specifically:



Definition and justification of resources to be monitored and field data to be gathered
when needed.
Involvement of producers and local communities in data gathering (species, flora,
changes in habitats, etc.).
It will build upon the existing capacity of DGRNR/PRENADER regarding GIS and
remote sensing. Results will be analyzed annually.
(iii)
Project Coordination.
14
The project will finance a project coordination unit with the following responsibilities: (i)
the financial and administrative management of the project, (ii) the evaluation of the proposals for
technical and financial assistance to be presented by project beneficiaries, (iii) the approval for
financing of such proposals that meet project requirements, (iv) the coordination of the various
institutions to participate in the project, (v) the preparation of the annual execution plans and
project progress reports, and (vi) the monitoring and evaluation activities including the proper
information management systems.
Within this component, the GEF will finance, on an incremental cost basis, such activities
required to support the execution of the GEF-financed activities.
Expected Project Results
Expected project results include:








Development of ecosystem management experiences that integrate biodiversity
conservation within productive systems in Uruguay.
Increased productivity through the enhanced application of appropriate technologies,
sustainable biodiversity and natural resources use, implementation of strategic alliances
among producers, and enhanced human resource development.
Enhanced rural management via increased income generation at the household level.
Local producers and local communities better trained in biodiversity conservation and
sustainable use as well as carbon sequestration through non-formal education.
Existence of demonstration and educational tools for the sustainable management of
biological diversity and enhanced carbon sequestration that are easily replicable in other
regions.
Development of a public participation program and agreements for effective management
of biological diversity and for increased carbon sequestration in private lands.
Increased creativity and innovation in relation to non-traditional resource use of
biological resources.
Sustainability based on emphasis on capacity building, integration approach, participation
of all stakeholders and in particular local producers.
Eligibility
This project is consistent with the guidelines of GEF’s Biodiversity Operational Program
12: Integrated Ecosystem and Natural Resource Management and 13: Agro-biodiversity. The
project focuses on managed ecosystems and biological habitats that provide a broad range of
goods and services important to human development and the global environment, as well as on
maintaining diverse farming systems and conserving biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. The
project will achieve these goals by assisting local partners in their country driven efforts to
address constraints preventing introduction, dissemination and widespread use of ecologically
sound and socially responsible management concepts that have good prospects for sustainable,
multiple focal area benefits. The proposed project approach is that the management system would
be replicated widely in other regions where these concepts have similar potentials to generate
multiple local area benefits. Therefore, the project includes systematic reviews of experience
gained, documentation of good practices, and dissemination of lessons and know-how.
Uruguay ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) on May 11, 1993, and the
UN Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on August 18, 1994.
National Level Support and Country Ownership
15
Uruguay ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity on May 11, 1993 by Law nº
16408. The Operational Focal Point for the CBD is DINAMA, and the national agency
responsible for the implementation of the CBD in Uruguay is MVOTMA/DINAMA5 according
to the National Government Decree 487/993. The GEF Operational Focal Point is also DINAMA
(Ing. Luis Santos).
The National Biodiversity Strategy (NBS), according to the art. 6 of the CBD, was
carried out during 1998 and 1999 (Project URU/96/G31) by DINAMA (GEF/PNUD). The
Uruguayan NBS was published and officially presented by MVOTMA on December 29, 1999
and sent to the CBD Secretariat. Further details about the NBS can be found under sections
“Government Strategy” and “Project Rationale.” above.
A letter of endorsement has been provided by Uruguay’s GEF focal point on November
7, 2001. The Government of Uruguay has expressed its support and interest in the development
and implementation of this project to be executed by the MGAP and explicitly recognizes that is
consistent with, and supportive of the NBS.
Implementation Arrangements
The project is supported by the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, and has
been endorsed by the Ministry of Environment, Housing, and Land-Use Planning (GEF’s focal
point). The project enjoys a strong level of support within a traditional productive sector in
Uruguay (agricultural and livestock), thus demonstrating GOI’s interest in mainstreaming
biodiversity considerations within a traditional productive sector.
The Government of Uruguay has requested an FAO TCP to assist in project preparation.
The project will be executed by the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries. Additional
stakeholders include the Ministry of Housing, Environment, and Land Planning, INIA/IFDC
(GRAS) and DGNRN-MGAP, municipalities, local NGOs, academia, and farmers.
The ministries in Uruguay that have competence in natural resources, environment, and
biodiversity are the Ministry of Environment, Housing, and Land Use Planning (MVOTMA), and
the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MGAP). As explained above, the MVOTMA is the
focal point for the CBD and is responsible for the “formulation, execution, supervision, and
evaluation of the national plans for environmental protection and the national policies related to
this matter” in accordance with law 16112 of 1990, which created it.
The General Directorate of Renewable Resources (DGNRN) of the MGAP “is
responsible for the promotion of the wise management of renewable natural resources in order to
achieve the sustainable development of the agriculture and livestock sector, and to support the
conservation of biological diversity. Among others, RENARE’s responsibilities include:





5
Advice in the formulation of policies related to sustainable natural resources use
Control the regulatory framework for activities related to renewable natural resources
Promote and regulate the use and conservation of soils and water
Promote the rational utilization of faunal resources and control its use and
management
Promote the use and integral management of natural resources and watersheds
MVOTMA: Ministry of Housing, Land Planning and Environment
DINAMA: National Environmental Office
16

Develop strategies for the conservation of biological diversity
The MGAP is aware of, and committed to the need of promoting the sustainable use of
biological diversity and natural resources within its competencies, and as a response to the NBS’s
mandate that “planning in all action areas will be the commitment that all institutions must
assume independently of the periodic changes in government within a policy of state.”
To accomplish this goal, the MGAP as the project’s executing agency will commit efforts
and technical and financial resources to ensure the proper development of the project and will
coordinate actions with the MVOTMA, the University of Uruguay (in particular with the Faculty
of Agronomy), the Botanical Garden, INIA, NGOs, production cooperatives and municipal
governments. All these institutions and organizations have already committed their cooperation
through workshops and consultation meetings.
The MGAP will be responsible for identifying the technical team that will oversee the
implementation of the project.
Fit with other GEF Implementing Agencies Programs
As explained earlier, the project will tailor activities to each of the production systems
currently in use in Uruguay. Such systems will be used as a first “filter” to define the type of
mainstreaming activities to be financed by the GEF. Nevertheless, the geographic areas of
implementation have been broadly defined, and do not overlap with any of the other GEFfinanced projects in Uruguay.
This project is fully blended with the IBRD PRENADER-2 project under preparation.
There is also coastal management project under preparation (GEF-financed and implemented by
the World Bank), but there will be no relations with this project.
UNDP has been implementing the PROBIDES project for freshwater conservation in the
north-east coast. There has been various meetings with PROBIDES, and this project will build
from PROBIDES’ experiences. There will be no geographic overlap between the projects.
Justification for Block-B Grant and Description of PDF Activities
The IBRD components will be prepared through a technical cooperation grant provided
by FAO and by resources provided by the GOU. Given the full integrative and mainstreaming
nature of this project, the GEF components needs to be prepared in an integrated fashion both in
terms of timing and staffing. Therefore, a Block-B is requested from the GEF to finance the US$
335,500 incremental costs of developing the biodiversity aspects of the joint IBRD/GEF project.
As described earlier, the GEF component of the project will finance the incremental costs
required to restore or improve the capacity of the productive rural landscape to maintain, improve
or restore ecological processes and conserve biodiversity by promoting multiple-use land use
practices for biodiversity conservation.
The Block-B will finance the elaboration of the project proposal, including following
preparation activities:
1) Technical and pre-feasibility studies. Several technical studies will be contracted to better
understand the potential of the various land-use practices upon biodiversity and their
economic, social, and ecological sustainability. These will include both international and
local consultancies that will build upon the national and international experience. Of
particular interest are:
17






Forest regeneration and forest products
Wildlife ranching and sustainable hunting
Ecosystem management through rural tourism
Agro-forestry systems including silvo-pastoril initiatives
Integrated savanna ecosystem management
Watershed land use planning
2) Consultations. Two types of consultations will take place:
i. Stakeholder consultations with potential beneficiaries in the field, via
workshops, visits, and meetings.
ii. Technical consultations in the field and in Montevideo with local NGOs
and academic institutions via workshops and presentations.
3) Social assessment of project beneficiaries. Stakeholders will be identified as a first task
following standard World Bank methodologies.
4) Evaluation of the effects of introduced/improved pastures on total methane emissions and
emissions per unit product (beef, calves, milk, wool) and develop methodologies for
estimating and monitoring carbon balances (losses/ sequestration) in natural and
improved pastures.
5) Design of the monitoring and evaluation system via international and local consultancies.
6) Coordination. Hosted in the Ministry of Livestock, Agriculture and Fisheries
(PRENADER offices), a general coordinator with thematic coordinators and national and
international assistance will manage the project preparation process.
These six main activities will provide the needed inputs to the combined IBRD/GEF
project to establish the philosophy of integrated management practices in agricultural production
systems to increase productivity within a context of holistic ecosystem and natural resources
management which will result in turn in conserving soils, water, grasslands, and biodiversity.
Main Block-B milestones
For the implementation of Block-B development and for facilitating evaluation and
monitoring of the evolution of the project proposal preparation, the main Block-B milestones will
be (achieved in the following sequence):
1) Selection and contract of personnel involved in the Block-B for the positions of
general and thematic coordinators. This process will be carried out following the
standard procurement guidelines from the World Bank. The formal structure and
organization of the Block-B will be established. The office will be based in the
Ministry of Livestock, Agriculture & Fisheries (where PRENADER carries out its
activity presently), although some office facilities will be provided by the Ministry.
The national experts on carbon balances will also be hired during month 1.
Exploration of areas or regions within the national territory where proposed activities
are feasible, by production system. As mentioned earlier, there are six main
production systems already identified: a) Extensive livestock production based on
natural grasslands under semi-natural conditions b) Extensive livestock production
based on natural grasslands with small areas under improved pastures (introduced
18
species and fertilizers); c) Semi-intensive mixed crop/livestock production based on
annual crops in rotation with grass/legume pastures; d) Dairy production systems
based on sown pastures and silage produced with annual crops (maize, sorghum,
wheat, etc.); e) Rice-based production systems (rice/fallow or rice in rotation with
sown pastures); and f) Intensive production systems (horticultural crops and fruits).
Once the potential of each proposed activity is identified by production system, a first
approximation to the precise geographic focus of the project will be explored
according to the following criteria: biodiversity importance, renewable natural
resources, sociological, economic, historic, and cultural factors. An assessment will
be made of biodiversity and ecosystem richness, its conservation status, and potential
sustainable use.
In addition, an assessment will be made of natural resources’ use, current level of
utilization, and alternative uses that are compatible with biodiversity conservation
objectives and ecosystem management. Also, an assessment will be made of local
traditions, including handcrafts and popular believes. The scale will be at the
watershed level6 and the production systems to be identified by the project. (month
2).
2) The general coordinator and the thematic coordinators (managerial team) will discuss
and outline the specific issues under their responsibilities, including national and
international experience, to bring the most updated expertise into the project
development, this will be done through interpersonal consultations nationally and
internationally and internet. At the same time, a calling for the thematic consultants
will be carried out. (month 2)
3) Final selection of areas and/or regions. Areas will be selected by the above
mentioned criteria. Prioritization of areas/regions using as criteria the objectives of
the loan and of the NBS. (month 3). Once the areas were prioritized, the thematic
consultants will be contracted based upon World Bank requirements, for the
consolidation of the Block B preparation team. Based on the outputs expected for
each of the six areas of interest or thematic areas, consultants will prepare their
appraisals, which will be used by the managerial team for the next step of socializing
the results obtained. (month 3). During month 3, 4 and 5 the thematic consultants
will prepare their appraisals and cost-associated analysis.
4) Visit by project preparation team to producers, involving local and regional
authorities, in the selected areas in order to explain the various potential alternatives
for project management and invite them to participate at a workshop, were the local
needs will be raised. At the same time, consultations with state and private
organisms, producer guilds, and NGOs will take place. (months 4 and 5).
5) Technical workshop led by the two national experts on carbon balances inviting the
national researchers and a few regional experts on carbon balances aimed at
presenting the initial carbon balances and discussing methodology and outputs
obtained mainly in natural and improved pastures and other natural communities as
forests, riparian areas, etc. Estimates of the effects of introduced/improved pastures
on total methane emissions and emissions per unit product in different production
systems and watersheds will be given (month 5). During month 6, the international
Six main watersheds are already identified for the country (1999, Dirección de Recursos Hidrografía,
División de Recursos Hídricos – Aprovechamiento de los Recursos Hídricos Superficiales – Inventario
Naconal 1997-1998)
6
19
expert is invited and by the end of the month the national results, the workshop
outputs and the international expertise will be achieved. During moth 7, the national
experts develop the final documentation to be incorporated to the proposal after
consultations with the managerial team.
6) Organization and development of workshops with local producers and local
stakeholders in each selected project site to generate dialogue and avoid potential
conflict. The objective of these workshops will be to understand the needs and
situation of the producers and to define the manner in which they will be
incorporated and participate in the proposed multiple land-use schemes. (months 6
and 7).
7) Identification of limitations, strengths, and potential of proposed participants and
potential project partners together with stakeholders that may act as part of a coalition
building strategy. (month 7)
8) Based upon the above mentioned scenario, the subsequent step is the definition of
methodology and strategies of action to be developed during project implementation,
which will be outlined by the thematic coordinators and discussed with the general
coordinator as the basis for the full proposal development. (month 8)
9) Workshops to present project proposals and strategies with local stakeholders
including local and regional authorities to raise recommendations and suggestions on
the results. A web site will be developed to disseminate the results and used as
another mechanism to have civil society participation and consultation. (month 9)
10) Preparation of draft IBRD/GEF document integrating local interests, commitments,
and expectations, as well as specific proposals for technical consultancies. (moth 10)
11) Workshop to present the draft document targeted to local, regional and national
authorities, participants of the previous workshop sessions (or representatives of
them) and organizations of the civil society. At the same time, the draft document
will be published in the website to receive comments and recommendations. (month
11).
12) Preparation of final IBRD/GEF project document. (month 12).
13) Preparation of the Project Implementation Manual (biodiversity and ecosystem
management aspects on an incremental cost basis).
Throughout the process, the various local and national actors and stakeholders will be
consulted to understand their differential interests and expectations.
PDF Block-B Outputs
The expected output from this PDF-B grant will be a GEF Project Document, including
detailed component design, a financing plan, and agreed arrangements for management,
monitoring, and evaluation.
Other outputs will be:
20





Technical and pre-feasibility studies on native forest regeneration and forest
products, wildlife ranching, sustainable hunting, ecosystem management through
rural tourism, agro-forestry systems, and integrated savanna ecosystem management.
Support from civil society and the technical and scientific communities in Uruguay
Agreement on carbon balance methodology and baselines.
Social assessments of project beneficiaries.
Design of the monitoring and evaluation system via international and local
consultancies.
Timetable according to milestones
The PDF Block-B activities will be completed by February, 2003 in accordance with the
following time-table for the activities explained in section “description of proposed PDF activities
above”:
Table 1: Timetable with the milestones specified during a 12 month period.
1
2
o3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12
t
h
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Budget
Total preparation costs are estimated at $1,035,500 including the IBRD loan and the GEF
incremental cost activities.
Table 2: Budget by activities segregated by GEF incremental costs and FAO & GOU matching
funds.
ACTIVITIES
1 Technical and pre-feasibility studies
PDF
160,000.00
Native forest regeneration
Wildlife ranching
Hunting potential
Rural tourism
Agroforestry systems
Integrated savanna management
24,000.00
15,600.00
15,600.00
24,000.00
24,000.00
24,000.00
21
FAO and GOU
350,000.00
Guidelines for watershed land use planning
In-country travel
Operational assistance
2 Consultations
Website for consultation
Stakeholder consultations
Technical consultations
3 Social assessment of project beneficiaries
4 Emission and carbon balances
3,000.00
9,800.00
20,000.00
30,500.00
1,500.00
24,000.00
5,000.00
30,000.00
35,000.00
5 Design of the monitoring and evaluation system
20,000.00
100,000.00
6 Coordination, final report writing
60,000.00
50,000.00
335,500.00
600,000.00
935,500.00
Total
Grand Total
50,000.00
50,000.00
Table 3: GEF-funded incremental costs segregated by budgetary lines
Activities
Consultants
Travel
Workshop &
Consultations
Operational costs
Subtotal
1
150,200
9,800
160,000
2
3
15,000
4
18,600
2,100
5
6
5,000 44,000
10,000
Total
232,800
21,900
29,000 12,500
11,500 2,500
40,500 30000
7,000
7,300
35,000
2,500
2,500 6,000
10,000 60,000
51,000
29,800
335,500
Total
335,500
1.- Technical and pre-feasibility studies. To address the native forest regeneration,
wildlife ranching and sustainable hunting, ecosystem management through rural tourism, agroforestry systems, integrated savanna ecosystem management and watershed land use planning
issues, technical and pre-feasibility studies will be carried by contracting specific coordinators
and consultancies aided by legal, extension, economic and field assistances. Operational costs and
in-country expenditures are included in this item.
a) In forest regeneration and forest products, a coordinator during 12 months and two
consultants during 3 months will be working to provide the projects with inputs on forest
products, alternative uses of species and non-traditional uses of forests. This component will also
include potential areas for reforestation with native species, identification and selection of native
species and healthy populations, and guidelines for propagation and plantations with cultural
cares.
b) In wildlife ranching and sustainable hunting, a coordinator during 12 months and two
consultants for wildlife ranching and two consultants for sustainable hunting will be working to
provide the projects with inputs on the present ranching operations and hunting on wild ranging
species in the country, together with the identification and proposals of preliminary actions in
22
favor of the known and others species with potentials for ranching and wild hunting. Species as
the American Rhea (Rhea Americana), the coypus (Myocastor coypus), the broad-nosed caiman
(Caiman latirostris), the capybara (Hydrochoeris hydrochoeris), and the red tinamou (Rhynchotus
rufescens) as well as other tinamou species are currently under use in the country. The
information will build upon the experience in the country as well as methodology of law
enforcement and official follow-up actions.
c) In ecosystem management through rural tourism, a coordinator during 12 months and
two consultants during 3 months will be working to provide the projects with inputs on a
diagnosis about the situation of rural tourism in Uruguay targeted to biodiversity impacts and
other natural resources and the identification of guidelines to improve upon the experience and
address the weaknesses identified.
d) In Agro-forestry system, a coordinator during 12 months and two consultants during 3
months will be working to provide the projects with general integration overviews on the
agricultural, livestock and forest landscapes in a combination of them. The diversification and
combination of productive systems within the three axis (crops, livestock and forest) in a
framework of ecosystem management will enhance the potential of a better rural landscape in
harmony with natural resources. The potential of this knowledge in the country, in the region and
at the international level will be included in this diagnosis for an integrated ecosystem
management.
e) In integrated ecosystem savanna management, a coordinator during 12 and two
consultants during 3 months will be working to provide the project with inputs on present prairie
management in the country and potential for improving, maintaining and restoring the present
savanna landscape for a better and eco-friendly scenarios for grazing and livestock production.
This component will provide the basis for a certification process based on a livestock production
in harmony with nature.
f) In watershed land use planning, a consultancy will be incorporated to analyze the
watershed management in the country and in the areas selected by the project. The diagnosis
expected from this component will address the deterioration of the macro and micro-watersheds
and their consequences, together with the effects of the areas where knowledge is needed, the
action of social, economic and political forces. This consultancy will also analyze the regulation
of the hydrological systems and the benefits for the agriculture and livestock production together
with the community-level development.
g) In-country travel will cover the expenditure of the project team analyzing the current
situation in the field and also getting the first-hand information during the pioneer steps of the
project development. These travels will also allow to bring into the project development
information on the areas to be included, analyzed and prioritized.
h) The operational assistance included in the block B involves a) particular consultancies
in legal, economic and extension issues based on a legal advisor during two months, a economist
during two months and an extensionist during five months; b) four field technicians to cooperate
and assist the managerial team in field actions in favor of facilitating data gathering and extension
work.
2.- Consultations
Stakeholder consultations will include the information gathering with beneficiaries and
stakeholders directly involved in the productive systems in the field. This item also includes the
23
consultation processes during project preparation through workshops in different critical sites of
the country.
A website will be available to divulge the advances of the project and this will be updated
regularly. Consultations, recommendations and comments will be possible through the internet.
Technical consultations will include visits and advice from state and private organisms,
universities and faculties, producer guilds and civil society organizations to receive from them
inputs in the project development ideas both at the beginning of the Block-B as well as at the end.
3.- Social assessment of project beneficiaries
An international consultancy will be hired to identify the social actors and stakeholders
and carry out the social assessment of the project beneficiaries. This consultant will broadly work
based in Montevideo and the identified sites of the project aided by the managerial team.
4.- Emission and carbon balances
Two national experts will be working during 6 months with the managerial team to
develop and estimate carbon balance for major production systems of Uruguay using a
combination of remote sensing, simulation model and existing data. Based on the initial balance
estimate an international expert will be joined to the team to improve the carbon balances with
special emphasis on emission components.
5.- Design of the monitoring and evaluation system
An international consultancy will be hired to develop the monitoring and evaluation
system according to the World Bank requirements and will develop a Manual of Procedures for
the GEF project in combination within the global projects in consultation with the managerial
team.
6.- Coordination, final report writing
A general coordinator based in Montevideo will be hired for project development during
12 months. This coordinator will conduct the different stages of the project and coordinate within
the global project as well as coordinate the thematic coordinators and the international
consultancies. A program of activities will be prepared and also will investigate projects of
similar nature being carried out in the country. Two international consultants will be hired to
support the general coordinator throughout the process and to prepare the final project proposal.
One international consultant will visit periodically the managerial team and will do the follow-up
activities and project advances based upon the outlined activities described for Block-B. This
consultant will also help in the writing the GEF proposal. A second international consultant will
be hired to review the general framework of integrated ecosystem management from a strictly
scientific and technical perspective.
The World Bank will provide the project with a consultant to elaborate the procurement
plan based on the final full proposal in agreement with the requirements of the Institution.
24