UNDP Project Document
UNDP-GEF Full-Size Project (FSP)
Government of NIGER
Project for oasis micro-basin sand invasion control
in the Gouré and Maïné-Soroa provinces
Projet de lutte contre l'ensablement des cuvettes oasiennes
dans les départements de Gouré et de Maïné-Soroa
--- PLECO ---
PIMS No. 3225
Brief description
The objective of this project is to protect the integrity of, and to improve the agro-sylvo-pastoral productivity of
the micro-basin ecosystems in the Gouré and Maïné-Soroa provinces. The project has a budget of US$
2,020,000, financed by the GEF, which is complemented with a co-financing of US$ 13,280,000 from various
Government, municipal, project and donor sources. The project will be implemented over a period of 5 years.
The project responds to the fact that in many parts of the country, sand dune invasion is a major phenomenon,
threatening agriculture, water resources and social infrastructures. In Maïné-Soroa province, roughly 25% of
the land area (some 300,000 ha.) is now affected by sand dune invasion, up from only 5% in 1986, with an
increase rate of approximately 12,000 hectares per year. Sand dune invasion is critical in micro-basins, where
sustainable land and water management are essential for rural livelihoods. Combating sand dune invasion is
not just a technical challenge, but also requires creating institutional capacities (locally and nationally).
The project has 4 components, as follows: (i) Local practices for dune, land and ecosystem management; (ii)
Local capacities and institutions for SLM; (iii) Monitoring system on sand dunes and land degradation; and (iv)
Project management. The project's field activities (components 1 and 2) will be implemented in the provinces
of Gouré (Zinder Region) and Maïné-Soroa (Diffa Region), in the following 8 communes: Bouné, Kellé,
Guidiguir, Gouré (urban), Goudoumaria, Nguelbayli, Foulatari and Maïné-Soroa (urban). Some 35 priority
micro-basins will be targeted by the project with special emphasis. The global environmental benefits to be
realized include consolidating institutional and technical capacities for sustainable and integrated sand dune,
land and ecosystem management, thus protecting ecosystem functions and services.
UNDP will be the executing agency for this project, through the National Execution (NEX) modality. The project
falls under the Ministry for the Environment. The SDR Environment Steering Committee will provide project
steering roles. The Project Management Unit, to be based in Zinder, will be composed by a Project
Coordinator (with both project management and technical advice roles), a Specialist on GIS and Monitoring, an
Admin-Finance officer, and 4 field extension agents. Governmental staff in the beneficiary provinces will be also
engaged to support certain activities and to contribute to monitoring the implementation.
1
Table of Contents
ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................................................ 3
I. SITUATION ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................................... 4
A. BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................................................................4
B. LAND DEGRADATION ISSUES .........................................................................................................................................5
C. THREATS AND ROOT CAUSES OF LAND DEGRADATION AND SAND INVASION, AND BARRIERS TO THEIR CONTROL..............................6
D. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT'S ZONE, BASELINE AND STAKEHOLDERS ..................................................................................8
II. STRATEGY ........................................................................................................................................................ 12
A. POLICY CONFORMITY AND COUNTRY OWNERSHIP ...........................................................................................................12
B. DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS .....................................................................................................13
C. PROJECT'S OBJECTIVES AND DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................................16
Goal, objective and outcomes ............................................................................................................................16
Duration and intervention zone .........................................................................................................................18
Proposed activities .............................................................................................................................................18
Financial modality ..............................................................................................................................................21
D. PROJECT ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................................................21
Cost-effectiveness and sustainability .................................................................................................................21
Global environmental benefits and GEF relevance ............................................................................................22
Value added of GEF financing ............................................................................................................................24
Risk analysis and management ..........................................................................................................................24
E. MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS .................................................................................................................................26
Executing agency................................................................................................................................................26
Project oversight ................................................................................................................................................26
Project coordination and implementation .........................................................................................................27
Additional dispositions .......................................................................................................................................27
F. MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN AND BUDGET .......................................................................................................28
G. LEGAL CONTEXT ......................................................................................................................................................32
III. STRATEGIC RESULTS FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................................. 33
IV. TOTAL BUDGET AND WORKPLAN ................................................................................................................... 35
ANNEXES ............................................................................................................................................................. 37
ANNEX 1. ENDORSEMENT LETTERS FROM THE COUNTRY ......................................................................................................37
ANNEX 2. CO-FINANCING LETTERS...................................................................................................................................40
ANNEX 3. OUTLINE OF TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR KEY PROJECT STAFF....................................................................................53
ANNEX 4. SIGNATURE PAGE...........................................................................................................................................55
2
ACRONYMS
APR
ARRDI
AWP
CBD
COFO
COFOB
COGERAT
CSIF
GDP
GEF
GIS
IEC
IFAD
IR
M&E
MELCD
NAPA
NGO
NAP
NEX
NRM
PAC
PADL
PAGRN
PAN/LCD/GRN
PASAM
PIMS
PIP2
PLECO
PMU
PNEDD
PRS
ROSELT
SIP
SLM
SRD
TPR
TTR
UNCCD
UNDAF
UNFCCC
UNDP
UNDP-CO
UNDP-RCU
WB
Annual Project Report
Agricultural and Rural Rehabilitation and Development Initiative Project
Annual Work Plan
Convention on Biological Diversity
Land Commissions
Local-level Land Commissions
Project for Co-management of Natural Resources in the Aïr-Ténéré
Country Strategic Investment Framework (conceived for SLM)
Gross Domestic Product
Global Environment Facility
Geographic Information Systems
Information, Education, Communication
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Intermediate Result
Monitoring and Evaluation
Ministry of the Environment and Desertification Control
National Action Plan for Adaptation (climate change)
Non-governmental organization
National Action Program to combat desertification
National Execution
Natural Resource Management
Community Action Programme
Programme to Support Local Development
Programme to Support Natural Resources Management
National Action Plan for Desertification Control and NRM
Project to Support Household Food Security
Project Information Management System
Private Irrigation Project (phase 2)
Project for Oasis Micro-Basin Sand Invasion Control
Project Management Unit
National Plan for Environmentally Sustainable Development
Poverty Reduction Strategy
Network of Long-term Ecological Monitoring Observatories
Strategic Investment Programme (for SLM)
Sustainable Land Management
Rural Development Strategy
Terminal Tripartite Review
Tripartite Review
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
United Nations Development Assistance Framework
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
United Nations Development Programme
United Nations Development Programme – Country Office
United Nations Development Programme – Regional Coordination Unit
World Bank
3
I. Situation Analysis
A. Background
Niger is a land-locked country in the Sahel, with a total land area of 1,127,000 km2 and a population
of some 14,297,000 inhabitants. About 70% of the country is located in the Sahara Desert and only
some 12% of the land is considered fertile and arable. Agriculture and cattle rearing are the major
land uses. Niger is one of the poorest countries in the world, ranking 177 out of 177 nations as
regards to the Human Development Index (2005). A population growth rate of 3.3%, as of 2008,
leads to increasing pressure on the natural resource base. Spatial distribution of the population is
highly unbalanced with 75% of the population living on just 25% of the nation’s land area.
Four climatic zones are identified in Niger:




Saharan zone (65% of the country’s surface), characterized by rainfall below 100 mm
annually.
Sahelo-Saharan zone (12% of the country), with annual rainfall between 100-300 mm.
Sahelo-Soudanian zone (22% of the total land area), with rainfall ranging from 300 to 600
mm.
Soudanian zone (1% of the total land area), with rainfall over 600 mm annually.
The most important water body is the River Niger, which crosses the Western part of the country for
a distance of over 550 km. The north-western part of Lake Chad (approximately 3,000 km2) is
situated within Niger’s territory. Although most of the lake basin is desiccated, it remains a major
element of the regional ecosystem shared by four countries (Chad, Cameroon, Niger and Nigeria).
Smaller water bodies exist throughout the country, some of which are seasonal. Two principal winds
sweep the country: the Harmattan (November to April, direction NE to SW) and the Monsoon (May
to October, direction SW to NE). With the steady decline of vegetation cover over the past three
decades, these winds become more destructive, eroding surface soils of their organic matter and other
structuring elements, leading to the creation of mobile dunes and sand encroachment into agricultural
and pasture lands and villages.
The rural sector is the core economic sector in the country. Its contribution is estimated to 40% of
the national GDP. Almost 3 million people are working in that sector (source: National Statistical
Institute). Niger’s agriculture is based on rain-fed food crop production and contributes to 22% of
GDP. The main crops are millet, sorghum, cowpea, peanuts, maize and rice. Only 1% of the total
cultivated area is under irrigation. The area under cultivation has increased sharply in recent years:
from 21% of the arable land (some 3 million hectares) in 1965 to 93% (some 14 million hectares) in
1999. Most soils in Niger are sandy and poor in nutrients and organic matter, which leads to low
productivity and the expansion of the farming area. The main constraints to agriculture in Niger are
lack of water, declining soil fertility, pests and diseases, lack of rural credit and affordable inputs,
and suboptimal traditional cropping techniques coupled with a weak research-extension service. The
commercialization of cash crops beyond the local and regional levels remains weak. Livestock
production of cattle, sheep, goats, donkeys, horses and camels is an important domain of the rural
economy. Although experiencing a prolonged period of decrease in terms of its contribution to the
GNP (from 21% in 1960 to 13% in 1991), livestock production is regaining importance (15% of
GNP in 2005). The main constraints of this sector are the declining quantity and quality of pasture
and water resources. Niger’s forest lands are estimated at 14 million hectares, which is a figure far
4
from reality as most of the forested lands have been cleared for agricultural purposes in the last
decade. In the province of Maïné-Soroa, for example, it is estimated that 75% of classified forests
have been lost, largely due to unsustainable practices. Few financial and/or credit facilities for
funding forestry activities are available to the local population. Firewood provides the main source of
energy for cooking and heating. The agricultural systems still use the traditional slash and burn
practice, which often threatens wooded lands.
Over the past 30 years, average annual rainfall in Niger has declined, with high inter-annual
variability and between different regions. Desertification is a major threat to the country’s economic
development. Desertification in Niger is caused by a combination of climatic factors and humaninduced actions. The prolonged periods of dryness in the past decades are one of the fundamental
causes of the accelerated degradation of natural resources, including declining vegetation cover, high
mortality of certain tree species, modifications in faunal and floral species composition, and low
recharge rates of ground and surface waters. The expanding sand dune invasion is an indicator of the
scale of the desertification dynamics and threats. Lack of vegetation cover combined with high
evaporation rates and strong winds have increased soil exposure to wind erosion leading to largescale desiccation and degradation of landscapes, loss of soil fertility and the development of moving
sand dunes. However, while past observations tended to suggest a southward advance of the Sahara
desert in Niger, data of recent scientific observations show the concentration of desertification
affected areas around human settlements, suggesting the key role of human activity in this process,
leading to a further reduction of the total land area available for agriculture and grazing.
B. Land degradation issues
In many parts of the country, sand dune invasion has become a major phenomenon, which threatens
agricultural lands, water resources and social infrastructures alike. It is especially pronounced in the
region of Agadez, in the northern part of Maradi, and in the Tahoua, Tillaberi, Zinder and Diffa
regions. For example, in Maïné-Soroa province, roughly 25% of the department’s land area (305,000
ha.) is now affected by sand dune invasion, up from 5% in 1986, with an increase of approximately
12,360 hectares per year. In the period 1986-2005, approximately 34,000 hectares of micro-basins
and shallow depressions in the proposed project areas (Gouré and Maïne-Soroa provinces) were lost
due to sand dune invasion, and a significant number of the remaining micro-basins are currently
under high risk. The first sand dune control programs were initiated 30 years ago and several of these
treated sites were technically successful. Nevertheless, efforts to date remain time-bound and
geographically isolated in their achievements in view of the large scope of the phenomenon. A major
challenge nowadays is to tackle the problem on a larger scale and in a manner that ensures the
sustainability of results over the long term. The control of sand dunes invasion has been identified as
a priority under Niger’s National Action Plan for Desertification Control and Natural Resources
Management (PAN-LCD/GRN, 2000). In his speech on Niger’s National Day (3rd August 2006), the
President of Niger reaffirmed the importance of, and his steadfast commitment to implementing sand
dune invasion controls and to protecting the micro-basin ecosystems in the eastern region of Niger.
Human activities are both exposing new areas to erosion and exacerbating degradation where it is
already occurring. With increasing and more concentrated human and animal pressure, the natural
resource base is suffering from various forms of overexploitation, including intense farming,
overgrazing, tree cutting for firewood, expansion of agriculture onto marginal or sensitive lands
(such as dunes and micro-basins), and bush fires. All these lead to the destruction of vegetation, the
erosion of fertile soils, and the exhaustion of the regenerative capacity of the soil, aside from
5
entailing Carbon emissions. This long and large-scale land degradation has resulted in the decrease
of the productivity of pasture and agricultural lands, which in turn has affected food security and
economic development.
However, it is worthwhile noting that various agro-forestry projects have been able to halt or redress
these land degradation tendencies, particularly in Zinder Region during the 1990s. Communities in
such areas have abandoned perverse practices, such as vegetation clearing, and have adopted new,
sustainable ones, such as agro-forestry. These success stories are to be adopted and disseminated by
new interventions.
C. Threats and root causes of land degradation and sand invasion, and barriers to their
control
The key drivers that have impacted on ecosystem stability are mainly population pressure, changes in
land tenure and degrading climate conditions. Niger has one of the highest population growth rates in
the world (3.3%) that poses increasing pressures on a vulnerable ecosystem. In addition, reduction of
available lands for grazing leads to settlement of people and prolongs the periods of herds staying on
a given land area. As a consequence, vegetation cover disappears and erosion advances. The
disintegration and dislocation of social structures and traditional natural resource management
practices causes more people to encroach on new areas and to exploit natural resources without longterm vision. These social processes operate under harsh climatic conditions: droughts are recurrent
and becoming increasingly frequent, thus exacerbating the already vulnerable ecosystems condition.
In general, Niger faces six main threats linked to land degradation, which are all critical in the
proposed project provinces. They comprise as follows:

Sand dune formation and invasion: In the PLECO project zone, sand invasion has become a
generalized phenomenon, threatening the region’s major productive assets and social
infrastructure (roads, villages, etc.). In Maïné-Soroa the surface affected increased from 70
ha. in 1975 to 305,000 ha. in 2005. While it is less severe in Gouré, sand dune expansion
tripled over the last thirty years, reaching 30,000 ha. in 2005. The key economic role played
by the micro-basins and shallow depressions makes their situation even more critical.
Between 1986 and 2005, approximately 34,000 ha. of micro-basins and shallow depressions
in the PLECO project zone were lost due to sand dune invasion. A significant additional
number are currently considered to be at high risk of invasion.

Agricultural soil fertility loss and soil erosion: Soil fertility and erosion have been
dramatically affected by long periods of drought coupled with damaging agricultural and
herding practices in the project zone, particularly as the increasing demographic pressure has
encouraged the conversion of savannah to agricultural lands. The consequent removal of
nutrients during harvesting, overgrazing and overexploitation of natural resources increase
land vulnerability and exacerbates wind erosion. Unsustainable practices include the
cultivation of marginal lands, shortening of fallow periods, inadequate manure input, and
repetitive bush fires that destroy the regenerative capacity of the soil. Although some microbasins and shallow depressions are currently under-exploited, others are showing stress from
intensive use, in particular degradation and sand invasion of the protective outer perimeter of
vegetation, falling water tables, raising salinity due to inappropriate irrigation and drainage
techniques, and a declining nutrient balance due to insufficient input of manure.
6

Pastoral land degradation and soil erosion: The time spent by herds in the north is becoming
increasingly shorter due to a combination of factors that have reduced fodder and drinking
water availability, such as: the desertification process, drier climatic conditions, sand dune
invasion of rangelands, and bush fires. As a result, herds return sooner to the areas
surrounding the micro-basin zone. As animal concentrations rise, overgrazing and parking
increase soil vulnerability to wind erosion and the formation of sand dunes in proximity to
the micro-basins. Vegetation appearing in degraded pastures is of lower forage quality.

Decline in water availability: The prolonged dry period from the late-1970s to the mid-1990s
led to a general drop in the groundwater table. Currently, water withdrawal for livestock and
human consumption and for irrigation continue to threaten to lower groundwater tables below
critical levels. In addition, sand invasion has destroyed many water points.

Loss of biodiversity: Land degradation, overgrazing, tree harvesting, increasingly prevalent
bushfires, and hunting and poaching are serious threats to animal and plant biodiversity in the
project zone. Tree composition in the area, for instance, has undergone a significant
transformation since the 1970s with certain species experiencing high mortality. A number of
unique agricultural plant varieties still exist. Wildlife remains relatively diverse, but poaching
and organized hunting has put dramatic pressure on many species. More than 21 bird species
have been identified in the area, putting the Nigerien side of Lake Chad on the list of
wetlands of international importance. However, degradation of the micro-basins is resulting
in the loss of important refuges for the aviary fauna coming from Lake Chad.

Loss of vegetation cover and carbon storage: The decline in vegetation cover, the increase of
sand dunes and the overexploitation of agricultural soils have significantly decreased total
carbon stored in vegetation and soils.
The rainfall pattern and the wind characteristics in the project area will determine the future
conditions of the micro-basins. The micro-basins are fragile ecosystems and are vulnerable to climate
change. The observed trend in rainfall using the modeling shows a future variation of the water tables
of micro-basins water bodies from the drying (micro-basins with surface water) to the deepening
(micro-basins with intermediate and deeper water tables). The impacts will be disappearance of
vegetation and water scarcity. However, the predicted wind velocity will be lower than what is
actually observed today, which will be a favorable situation as the sand dune formation and the micro
basins silting will be reduced.
Poverty and food deficits have also become chronic. To adapt, villagers have modified their
livelihoods and land use strategies, putting additional strain on the resource base as marginal lands
are brought into production and productive ecosystems, such as micro-basins, are more intensively
exploited by different actors. Conflicts between agricultural and pastoral land use systems are
increasing. In many parts of the country, sand dune invasion has become a major threat to
agricultural land, water resources and social infrastructure. For example in Gouré District, 246,203
ha of land have been recorded to be covered by sand from 1986 to 2005. The phenomenon is
especially pronounced in the region of Agadez, the northern part of Maradi, Tahoua, Tillaberi and the
regions of Zinder and Diffa.
7
The main barriers to overcoming the threats from land degradation are summarized in the table
below, which also indicates the project components to address them.
Table 1. Barriers to sustainable land management (SLM) and proposed project's responses
Barriers to SLM
Project
components
Insufficient local capacity in natural resource management planning and decisionmaking at the landscape scale and over the long term;
2
Little progress towards the development of effective land use strategies due to
increasingly frequent conflicts and the lack of efficient communication between
the different stakeholders competing for resource use;
2
The absence of practical strategies at the local, communal, departmental and
regional levels for preserving and managing natural resources;
2
The lack of access at the farmers’ level to improved techniques for agricultural
intensification, soil conservation, livestock feeding and health, and for water
conservation and management;
1
Widespread knowledge gaps at the local, regional and national levels and within
the research community about land degradation dynamics and their implications;
1, 2, 3
Weak capitalization of indigenous and local practices for adapting to changing
ecological conditions that could present important contributions to more efficient
and sustainable natural resource management;
1, 2
Scarce financial mechanisms and economic opportunities for farmers to
commercialize their produce, including a lack of access to rural credit and other
financial instruments at the local, regional and national levels to address land
degradation with appropriate measures;
2
The overall level of extreme poverty, which forces the population to focus on
securing basic, immediate needs instead of looking ahead to the long term; and
1
Unfavorable climatic conditions with consequent water stress triggering short term
reactions and measures.
2
The long term solution to remove the above-mentioned barriers is to provide strategic support to: (i)
catalyse the up-scaling of local practices for dune, land and ecosystem management, coupled with (ii)
strengthening of local institutions’ and stakeholders’ capacity in integrated management of land
resources, plus (iii) strengthening of monitoring systems for assessing impact and for knowledge and
lessons sharing.
D. Description of the project's zone, baseline and stakeholders
Among the areas most threatened by sand dune invasion in Niger are the regions of Zinder and Diffa,
and specifically, the provinces [départements] of Gouré (in Zinder) and Maïné-Soroa (in Diffa),
which have undergone a striking increase in sand invasion over the last 20 years. In Maïné-Soroa,
roughly 25% of the department’s land area (305,000 ha.) is now affected by sand dune invasion, up
from 5% in 1986: this represents an increase of approximately 12,360 ha. per year. While the
8
situation is less dramatic in Gouré, with a slow increase to 3% of the department’s land area, the
surface covered by mobile dunes tripled over the last twenty years to 30,029 ha in 2005. Moreover,
the newest areas under threat are in the agricultural zone in the south of the Department.
Figure 1. Map of Niger with regions and some provincial capitals
The project area is situated within the sahelo-saharian zone with a rainy season of 3 months, followed
by a 9-month dry season. Average rainfall over the past 30 years was 338 mm in Maïné and 309 mm
in Gouré but is unevenly distributed geographically and over time. The project area consists of a
sandy plateau pocketed with productive oasis micro-basins and shallow depressions. Oasis microbasins are circular depressions that can reach several hundred meters in diameter and 10 to 40 meters
in depth. They are characterized by a distinctive microclimate where the quality and quantity of soil
and water are superior to the surrounding plateau area. Shallow depressions along riverbeds and
watercourses are a second characteristic niche of the project zone and are generally composed of
9
localized alluvial soils suitable for rain fed crop production or reserved for pasture. 1 The population
in the two departments depends heavily on these two niche areas for food and cash crop production:
51.3% of local agricultural income comes from micro-basin production of cereals, fruits and
vegetables, compared to 15.3 % from plateau agriculture. Livestock production, often dependent
upon access to the water and vegetation in these areas, accounts for another 25.3%. Finally, the sale
of natron salt, produced in the central section of the micro-basins, and handicrafts together make up
the final 8.1% of household income.2 Because of their relatively high productivity, micro-basins and
shallow depressions are a critical economic resource in the project zone and must be sustainably
managed to avoid land degradation, sand invasion and salinisation.
The surrounding tree and shrub steppe is characterized by Acacia seyal, Acacia nilotica, Balanites
aegyptiaca, Ziziphus mauritiana, and Leptadenia pyrotechnica. The herbaceous cover is composed
of Cenchrus biflorus, Aristida mutabilis, and Pergularia tomentosa. In depressions, the dominant
woody species are Acacia senegal, Acacia raddiana and Acacia seyal in association with the grass
Cenchrus biflorus. The indigenous fauna includes gazelles, monkeys, bustards, hyena, jackal,
cheetah, fennec, hare, jerboa, squirrel and some rare Addax. The micro-basins also serve as a refuge
for a rich community of birds from the Lake Chad region.
Current agricultural practices in the project zone combine rain-fed agriculture with micro-basin
production. On the plateau, farmers, and increasingly, herders, plant rain-fed millet, sorghum and
cowpea. Although plateau soils are sandy with low fertility and low organic matter content,
cultivation of these marginal soils has increased since the drought of 1984; exposure of soils to wind
erosion has increased in many places as a result. The precariousness of rain-fed agriculture in the
project area has also increased the pressure on the shallow depressions and micro-basins, where a
diversity of food and cash crops can be produced because of the shallow water table. The revenue
generated through micro-basin exploitation is an important part of the risk management strategy for
local populations. Regional commercialization offers additional potential but faces certain barriers,
including sand invasion of roads.
Livestock production (cattle, sheep, goats, donkeys, horses, camels) is characterized by both nomadic
and sedentary herding. Three systems can be distinguished in the project zone: the extensive/nomadic
pastoral system, the semi-extensive/transhumance pastoral system and the semi-intensive/sedentary
pastoral system. Livestock numbers have declined in recent years as a result of degraded pasture
land, itself a result of variable and declining rainfall and over exploitation. Herders have adapted by
changing the species composition of their herds and by moving further south into the crop production
zone. At the same time, the expansion of cultivated lands onto rangelands, particularly around microbasins and shallow depressions, as well as land degradation from the movement of herds in and
around these areas, is a clear sign of the growing competition for resources: conflicts between
herdsmen and farmers have become frequent.
Local stakeholders (farmers, herders, municipal authorities) feel overload by the growing phenomena
of sand dune invasion. Adequate knowledge and cooperation mechanisms are missing, hence
impeding any sustainable response to the problem. Capacity building required is not just on technical
grounds (best practices and techniques) but equally on dialogue, planning and cooperation between
the different local stakeholders: i.e. those engaged in land use (farmers, herders) and those
1
2
Report on the Characterization of the Soils of Micro-basins and Shallow, PLECO, September 2006.
Jahiel, 1998 in Capitalization of National Experiences in Dune Stabilization, PLECO, September 2006.
10
responsible for knowledge and governance (leaders, associations, municipalities, decentralised
technicians).
It is worthwhile to note that due to the intervention of various agro-forestry projects particularly in
Zinder Region during 1990s (e.g. the 3M - Magaria, Matamey and Mirriah - Project) local
communities have gained culture of tree husbandry and ownership. It is quite clear nowadays that
communities in such areas have abandoned the habit of clear cutting and land clearing. Trees of agroforestry importance are systematically left on the farm and become the ownership of farmers. With
the spreading of this culture, the agricultural areas of middle and eastern Niger show a very good
vegetation index and satellite surveys and imagery of the zone show an increase in vegetation. In fact
this Assisted Natural Vegetation has been the basis of scientific publication of a collaborative
research work of American and Niger universities. This success story will be capitalized on by
PLECO.
Figure 2. Oasis threaten with sand dunes
Figure 3. Sand dunes surrounding a village
Figure 4. Micro-basin oasis over hanged
Figure 5. Micro-basin protected against
by sand dunes.
sand dunes by "fascines".
11
II. Strategy
A. Policy conformity and country ownership
In line with the principles of the Rural Development Strategy (SDR) and its programmes addressing
SLM, the Government of Niger has requested the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) support to
contribute to improved conditions of poor populations and the terrestrial ecosystem services upon
which they depend. This request has been conveyed through GEF's Strategic Investment Programme
(SIP) for SLM and the TerrAfrica Platform. Under the leadership of UNDP and in close cooperation
with the World Bank (WB) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the
TerrAfrica process will serve to scale up the policy, institutional, program and field responses to the
challenges of desertification and land degradation. This project will thus fit within TerrAfrica efforts,
notably in terms of field practices, local capacity-building and monitoring systems. This will feed the
parallel efforts, under TerrAfrica, to develop a SLM Country Investment Strategic Framework
(CSIF) at national level which will be translated and adapted to sub-national and local levels.
TerrAfrica tools and processes (such as the CSIF and national inter-ministerial committee) will be
aligned and integrated with existing ones created through the SDR.
The three SIP operations in Niger, namely PLECO (this project), ARRDI and PAC, have been
designed and are being implemented in line with the SDR’s priority programs 10 (environmental
sustainability) and 13 (land restoration and reforestation), and as part of the TerrAfrica vision. The
World Bank operation will deliver targeted investments at local level throughout the country. The
UNDP and IFAD operations are geographically focused respectively in the Zinder/Diffa and Maradi
regions. The 3 SIP projects were prepared in close coordination among the three agencies and the
Government to ensure complementarities among the interventions; for instance, for site selection
special caution has been given to avoid overlays of GEF and donor-funded interventions.
The project is consistent with international and national policies and strategies. Niger has ratified,
among others, the following conventions on the conservation and management of the environment:
the U.N. Convention for Combating Desertification (UNCCD), the U.N. Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD), and the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Changes (UNFCCC). To
implement these conventions, Niger has developed several instruments that create a framework of
policy and action plans to address desertification and related issues.
Regarding the UNCCD, the following policy documents are available: The National Plan for
Environmentally Sustainable Development (PNEDD, April 2000), which is part of the Rural
Development Strategy. In addition, the National Action Plan for Desertification Control and
Natural Resources Management (PAN/LCD-GRN) has five priority sub-programs which address
respectively: (i) conservation and restoration of degraded lands and mobilization and management
of surface water; (ii) the fight against dune formation; (iii) community forestry and management of
natural resources, (iv) capacity building of the institutions in charge of monitoring the
environment, drought and desertification (notably the proposed National Ecological Monitoring
Centre); and (v) follow-up and evaluation. The sub-program for the fight against sand dunes seeks to
reduce the risks associated with agro-sylvo-pastoral production. Expected program results of
pertinence for the PLECO include improved productivity of micro-basins and agricultural land and
the protection of socioeconomic infrastructures. The PLECO will contribute directly to achieving all
these results. In fact, the proposed project is part of the operational response to the Niger
12
Government’s PAN/LCD-GRN, as mentioned. It will also serve to realise the PNEDD, as well as
being linked to the Medium-Term Action Plan 2006-2011 on Environment and Desertification
Control in Niger. It will also contribute to both the Poverty Reduction Strategy and the Rural
Development Strategy. This extensive policy framework on land degradation, desertification and
dune control is an indication of the high priority Government gives to these issues. Niger is also part
of the TerrAfrica Platform and participant of its Strategic Investment Programme (SIP) under
which this project will be actually funded.
Regarding the CBD, Niger adopted its Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan in October 1998.
Relevant objectives of this action plan include the development of research activities related to
desertification and land degradation and biodiversity conservation. By working on the protection
of the micro-basins and their related ecosystems, the project PLECO will also contribute to the CBD.
Regarding UNFCCC, Niger adopted a Strategy and Action Plan for Climate Change in 2004 and a
National Action Plan for Adaptation (NAPA) in 2006. Studies related to climate change and
vulnerability show that land degradation is a critical phenomenon in Niger with impacts on all
development activities. It is an indicator of vulnerability for both ecosystems and the population. By
promoting sustainable land management practices, the project will contribute significantly to
reducing the vulnerability of the population as identified in the NAPA, as well as enhancing Carbon
sequestration potential.
The Action Plan of UNDP's Country Programme (2004-2007, valid to present), which comprises an
Environment component, links three core strategic documents: the Millennium Development Goals
(MDG), the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) and Niger's Poverty
Reduction Strategy (PRS). Its Environment component emphasises two key action lines: (i) support
to institutions for environmental management; and (ii) integrated management of water resources. To
realise this component, a substantive number of projects and initiatives from the GEF are already
supporting the country in institutional and operational means. It is important to note that institutional
capacity-building and decentralisation are emphasised as transversal, indispensable axis for poverty
reduction and development, including for the environment and natural resource management.
Accordingly, the way the PLECO is designed fits well these UN, UNDP and country priorities for
development.
B. Design principles and strategic considerations
The project will help Government and other stakeholders to move towards a programmatic
approach to SLM in Niger, in line with TerrAfrica Platform. This will entail: (i) coordinating efforts
at the political, strategic, technical, and programmatic levels, particularly within the SDR framework
within which the WB's and IFAD's SIP projects also fit; (ii) developing and consolidating activities
that support SLM by contributing in the implementation of SDR's Program 13 on Land
Rehabilitation and reforestation; (iii) increasing the quality and quantity of contributions and
exchanges of knowledge, data, and expertise through the framework of the national observatory, and
(iv) mobilizing and channelling financial resources more efficiently in line with SDR and UNDAF
framework. Project components 2 and, particularly, 3 will serve for these goals.
The project has many synergies with the other 2 Niger SIP projects (WB and IFAD). They will all
work together to lift barriers to SLM and implement activities that will help the SLM agenda move
forward in Niger and become fully institutionalized. In this sense, the WB's PAC will support the
13
preparation of the CSIF, which is also financed through core UNDP resources. In addition, capacity
building will be undertaken at local, regional and national levels with each SIP intervention focusing
on a thematic issue or region (in the case of this projects, in the highly vulnerable provinces of Gouré
and Maïné-Soroa. Furthermore, the 3 projects will generate abundant knowledge and best practices,
and the respective project teams will work together through the SDR processes to stimulate
exchanges, enhance synergies and generate the highest level of technical and site-specific
information possible. The proposed project will render the National Ecological Monitoring Centre
operational, which will be done in close coordination with the WB PAC team and the SDR team in a
way that it serves the SLM agenda in Niger as broadly as possible and henceforth informs policy
reforms and adjustments to the SDR strategy.
As a Niger SIP portfolio project, the PLECO will address the priority actions identify in the CSIF.
Specifically, the project will contribute in already identified preliminary CSIF priorities. First, by
building the institutional, technical and financial capacity development of stakeholders, with
emphasis on the local level and on impacts of climate change on SLM (see project's Outcome 2). In
this sense, the project will help local institutions to develop strategies and capacity to address the
imminent threat of desertification through effective and coordinated efforts. In collaboration with the
local population, the PLECO will also elaborate long-term management plans for sand dunes that
will guide local communities in restoring these degraded niches and improving their productivity.
Regarding knowledge management, the project will disseminate best practices and lessons learnt (via
Outcome 2), especially those emerging from field interventions (to be fulfilled under Outcome 1).
The project will also contribute to the CSIF priority of developing pilot actions on SLM taking in to
account national priorities (see Outcome 1).
In terms of global environmental rationale, it is to be noted that oasis invasion by sand dunes is a
priority concern across the Sahel. The PLECO project, which has as objective to protect the integrity
of, and to improve the agro-sylvo-pastoral productivity of the micro-basin ecosystems in the
departments of Gouré and Maïné-Soroa, is an important addition to the portfolio of GEF projects in
the region. No other GEF project in Africa addresses this issue. The project offers the GEF an
opportunity to develop its policy and strategy for responding to this growing threat, including on the
challenge of working primarily with agro-pastoral communities within the oases while also
addressing the needs and access rights of migratory peoples in the wider landscape. Section II below
contains a detailed analysis of the global environmental benefits of this project.
In terms of country rationale, the PLECO intends to become a thematic leader on sand dune
invasion control and SLM in Niger. It will assume the role of catalyzing discussions, thematic groups
and interventions at local, regional and national levels and provide its knowledge to programs and
policy makers working on sustainable development, desertification control and sustainable land
management. At the local level, in the project zone, the PLECO will mobilize communities,
strengthen local capacity, support local and departmental coordination, encourage a participatory
process by which the causes and risks of land degradation are identified, disseminate knowledge
about state-of-the-art sustainable land management practices, encourage information sharing,
technically assist in testing appropriate sand dune invasion control techniques, mobilize co-financing
for additional investments, assist in establishing a participatory monitoring and evaluation strategy
and facilitate the sharing with stakeholders at all levels of project results, lessons learned and best
practices.
The PLECO project will build on the experiences of past and on-going projects in the area but will
bring value-added by adopting a long-term vision of the problematic of land degradation and sand
14
invasion based on an integrated approach that takes into account not only the different characteristics
of local agro-sylvo-pastoral systems but also the socio-economic, legal and institutional factors
affecting land use. The project will also upscale activities by building synergies between other
projects and actors intervening in the region. Concretely, the PLECO will take a lead role in
proposing mechanisms to harmonize approaches and practices for fighting against sand invasion in
the intervention zone and contribute to the creation of a functional network of information exchange
and joint interventions at the local, regional and national levels.
The project will promote best practices in agriculture and livestock management that contribute to
the regeneration of vegetation cover and soil protection in order to prevent sand dune formation. In
collaboration with the local population, the PLECO will also elaborate long-term management plans
for sand dunes that will guide local communities in restoring these degraded niches and improving
their productivity. While the WB/SIP project will address the issue of infrastructure development at
communal level, the project will strengthen capacity in term of knowledge production and
management in the local communities, who will be the primary project stakeholders and
implementers of best practices. In addition, the PLECO will help local institutions to develop
strategies and capacity to address the imminent threat of desertification through effective and
coordinated efforts.
The project will also contribute to achieving larger national, regional and international objectives. In
working to improve sustainable management of the productive capital (soils, vegetation, biodiversity,
water) and the living conditions of the rural populations, the PLECO responds to the main stakes of
desertification control as defined in the Niger’s National Action Plan for Desertification Control and
Natural Resources Management (PAN/LCD-GRN). The project’s focus on the protection and
restoration of biodiversity in the micro-basins and shallow depressions and on the plateau, including
the protection and management of water resources, will also contribute to the larger scale
management of the threatened regional Lake Chad basin. Finally, by reducing wind erosion through
improved management of vegetation cover, the PLECO will also contribute to reducing the impacts
of climate change.
The geographical location of the project is strategic for securing and reinforcing the protection of
the basins of Lake Chad and the Niger River. Oasis basins are a special feature of the regional
ecosystem and are predominant in the project area. Where these oases form part of the catchment
areas for the two major basins (Lake Chad, River Niger) the PLECO will contribute to the benefits of
the International Waters (IW) Focal Area. The micro basins, as a humid environment fill the Gaps
between the two basins and offer a transition humid environment for many migratory birds. In
addition, the protection of these zones will significantly contribute to the protection and conservation
of globally significant biodiversity (fauna and flora) in these fragile ecosystems thus also
contributing to the benefits of the Biodiversity (BD) Focal Area. Finally, the project will extend its
system boundary where relevant; one of the areas already identified is the development of a sand
dune monitoring capacity at the national level (linked to National Ecological Monitoring Centre).
The gap analysis conducted by the GEF operational focal point and the recently established National
GEF Committee confirmed that the PLECO project fills a gap in the overall GEF portfolio in Niger
in terms of both geographical location and thematic focus and will enhance the impact of the other
projects in the GEF portfolio.
15
C. Project's objectives and description
Goal, objective and outcomes
The goal of the project is to ensure sustainable and improved management of land and water
resources in order to improve the livelihoods and incomes of rural populations in Niger's sahelian
zones. The objective of the project is to protect the integrity of, and to improve the agro-sylvopastoral productivity of the micro-basin ecosystems in the Gouré and Maïné-Soroa provinces. The
project has 4 main components, as follows: (1) Local practices for dune, land and ecosystem
management; (2) Local capacities and institutions for SLM; (3) Monitoring system on sand dunes
and land degradation; and (4) Project management. The Project Framework is presented in table 2
below, including components, expected outcomes and outputs, and the allocated budget.
Table 2. Project Framework
Project components
Expected outcomes
Expected outputs
1. Local practices
for dune, land and
ecosystem
management
Sustainable dune, land and
ecosystem management activities
are implemented at the grassroots
level, covering approximately
7,510 ha of land.
• Practices and models for sand dune
prevention or stabilization applied
and assessed
[SIP's IR-1] (*)
2. Local capacities
and institutions for
SLM
3. Monitoring
system on sand
dunes and land
degradation
• Local land tenure and management
institutions are strengthened
[SIP's IR-1 & IR-4] (*)
• Development of ecosystem services
and ecosystem-based livelihoods
leading to 20% increase in
productivity of agro-pastoral areas
A monitoring system on sand
dune and land degradation is
established and implemented at
national level and harmonized
with SIP/TerrAfrica at regional
level
• A National Ecological Monitoring
Centre is created (with a focus on
sand dunes, land degradation and
early warning)
540,000
• Awareness and knowledge on SLM
is enhanced (in at least 50% of
population in the 35 priority microbasins)
• Ecological monitoring protocols at
community level established and
implemented
• An early warning system on
desertification and land degradation
is functional
• National M&E system harmonized
with SIP/TerrAfrica M&E and SLM
indicators system
16
695,000
• Integrated management of dunes,
land and ecosystems in 35 priority
micro-basins (operational plans
elaborated, validated &
implemented)
Technical and managerial
capacity of local stakeholders on
dune, land and ecosystem
management is strengthened in
the 35 priority micro-basins
[SIP's IR-4] (*)
GEF
financing
(US$)
590,000
Project components
Expected outcomes
Expected outputs
4. Project
management
An adaptive and lessons-sharing
management system in place
• Project management is closely
connected to the country's SLM
institutions
[SIP's IR-2 & IR-4] (*)
• Lessons sharing with other
SIP/TerrAfrica projects
GEF
financing
(US$)
195,000
• Project evolves according to the
ongoing SLM work nationally
Total Project Costs
2,020,000
(*) SIP's Intermediate Results (IR) are as follows:
IR-1: SLM applications on the ground are scaled up in country-defined priority agro-ecological zones.
IR-2: Effective and inclusive dialogue and advocacy on SLM strategic priorities, enabling conditions and delivery
mechanisms established and ongoing.
IR-3: Commercial and advisory services for SLM are strengthened and readily available to land users.
IR-4: Targeted knowledge generated and disseminated and monitoring established and strengthened at all levels.
17
Duration and intervention zone
The PLECO will intervene over a period of five years.
The project's field activities will take place in 8 communes in the provinces of Gouré (Zinder
Region) and Maïne-Soroa (Diffa Region), as compiled in Table 3 below:
Table 3. Project intervention zone
Regions
Provinces
Zinder
Gouré
Diffa
Maïné-Soroa
Communes
Bouné
Kellé
Guidiguir
Urban Commune of Gouré
Goudoumaria
Nguelbayli
Foulatari
Urban Commune of Maïné-Soroa
The choice of communes was based on a technical analysis of the sand dune invasion threat and on
the outcome of a participatory consultation process with stakeholders in the two departments. The
criteria for selection were: the severity of the threat of sand dune invasion, the economic importance
of the threat, the engagement and willingness of the population to fight sand invasion, the absence of
significant land tenure conflicts, the objectives defined in the Medium Term Action Program
(PAMT, 2006-2011) for Environment and Desertification adopted by the Government of Niger and
its partners during the 2005 Sectoral Consultation on Environment and Desertification Control and
the objectives of Environment Programs 2, 10 and 13 of the Rural Development Strategy (declination
of the new Strategy of Accelerated Development and Poverty Reduction).
Proposed activities
A number of core activities have been identified, as compiled next.
Component 1 (Local practices for dune, land and ecosystem management) will finance activities
aiming at two core outputs, namely: (i) apply practices and models for the prevention and
stabilisation of sand dunes; and (ii) realise the integrated management of dunes, land and ecosystems
in 35 priority micro-basins. This component will be largely implemented through the recruitment of
local NGOs who have technical experience and are used to mobilise and support beneficiaries. This
will ensure appropriation and smooth implementation. Activities such as the following ones will help
realising these outputs:



Participatory diagnostic of dune invasion and land degradation issues.
Participatory development of local action plans for dune/land management and support to their
implementation.
Help partners develop state-of-the-art techniques and methodologies for the prevention of sand
dune formation and for the reduction of land degradation.
18










Localize and classify the sand dune invasion threats within the project zone in consultation
with the local stakeholders
Provide stakeholders in the project's zone with information, technical advice and training on
long-term management of stabilized dunes, on sustainable agriculture techniques, and on
pasture and water management. (stakeholders include rural communities, local associations,
NGOs, technical services and projects)
Provide technical know-how as well as investment support for sand dune
prevention/stabilisation to local partners and community populations.
Encourage exchanges and collaboration between partners; and disseminate information on
degradation dynamics at the local, communal and departmental level.
Promote the enrichment of newly created landscape niches with species with economic
potential (e.g. for the production of fuel wood, fodder, Arabic gum, etc.).
Support activities for the sustainable management of soils, water, agricultural farms, tree crops
and associated vegetation within the micro-basins.
Strengthen the technical and organizational capacity of local stakeholders to identify, plan and
implement sustainable land and water management activities within the micro-basins.
Improve agricultural and soil conservation techniques promoted taking into account sustainable
management of the resources at the micro-basin level.
Assist communities in the monitoring of water tables in critical micro-basins and advise on
rational water use and management (this can be done in collaboration with the PIP2 project).
Support adaptive tree planting and wood saving measures.
Component 2 (Local capacities and institutions for SLM) is meant to provide technical and
managerial capacity to local stakeholders on dune, land and ecosystem management, focusing in the
35 priority micro-basins. The following potential activities have been identified for project financing:








Support to the existing local, communal and provincial structures on SLM affairs, with the
goal of fostering networks and collaborative initiatives.
Support the Cadres de Concertation that have been, or are due to be created as part of the
decentralization process at the regional, departmental, communal and village levels, including
diagnostic exercises, training and other capacity-building support.
Build capacity in land management and land conflict resolution in the different Land
Commissions (COFO) that were established by the Rural Code, and which remain weak.
Formulate and implement an adapted information, education and communication (IEC)
program in relation to dune, land and ecosystem management.
Provide updated information on land degradation issues and sustainable land management
opportunities to all concerned stakeholders.
Reinforce social and organizational capacities so that local actors use new knowledge to come
to together, plan and implement SLM activities, including beyond project closure.
Elaborate and implement a participatory, thematic training program targeting local structures.
Undertake a participatory assessment with local communities to identify the existing
community-level technical knowledge base.
19



Review and disseminate the knowledge available at the National Ecological Monitoring Centre
on sand dune invasion and land degradation.
Support initiatives for the payment of ecosystem services, as well as the implementation of
sustainable activities linking natural resources management and local incomes.
Oversee and establish standards for the marketing of ecosystem products and services.

Design new funding mechanisms to support grassroots initiatives in SLM and, if successful,
put in place a revolving trust fund.

Support national and regional investment planning efforts for SLM.
Identify and apply incentive measures for replicating best practices in SLM (micro-basins).

Component 3 (Monitoring system on sand dunes and land degradation) aims at establishing a
monitoring system on sand dune and land degradation, at national level and practical also locally.
Accordingly, the project may finance the following activities:










Support to the creation of a National Ecological Monitoring Centre, which will have a focus
and specialisation on monitoring sand dune invasion and SLM, and accordingly provide
practical research and training. This is to be created under the Ministry of Environment and
Desertification Control and sanctioned by decree (note: infrastructure shall not be paid with
GEF funds, but with co-financing).
Set up selected monitoring sites in the project zone and put in place data collection
mechanisms according to state-of-the-art scientific methodologies
Support the training of the technical committee of the National Ecological Monitoring Centre
and of monitoring teams.
Collect, systematize and disseminate SLM and ecological information
Establish a community-level system for dune and land monitoring.
Provide maps of local territories for SLM activities, with joint analysis with local communities.
Collaborate with the departments of Geography, Agriculture and Geology of the University of
Niamey for providing technical assistance and identifying interventions that address land
degradation from the plot to the landscape scale.
Help establish a system of crisis prevention and management (droughts, locust invasions,
flooding).
Develop methodologies and a monitoring framework at national level to monitor the dynamics
of sand dunes.
Ensure community participation in monitoring and exploitation of their indigenous knowledge
to develop efficient and locally adapted strategies for protection against sand dune invasion.
Component 4 (Project management) will aim at putting in place an adaptive and lessons-sharing
management system. This will mean that project management will be closely connected to the
country's SLM institutions, and that the project will evolve towards reinforcing a national and local
SLM institutional structure (so to ensure sustainability of dune and land management after the
project).
20
Financial modality
The project has a budget of US$ 2,020,000. Table 1 above states the allocation for each component
(this has to be respected and, if budget reallocation is needed, due justification will be required as
well as approval at required instances). Detailed budget is presented in Section IV further down.
The GEF resources will serve for investments, technical assistance and specialized technical
assistance. Under Component 1, substantial field interventions with communities in 35 priority
micro-basins will be conducted, with technical assistance support to ensure these are qualitative
interventions. Component 2 will mostly consist on technical assistance to enhance local and
institutional capacities for dune, land and ecosystem management. Component 3 will include
specialized technical assistance to help develop and implement monitoring institutions and systems
on sand dune and land degradation, as well as early warning on their progress. Finally, Component 4
will consist on technical assistance related to project management under an adaptive approach
The project will be supported with co-financing from a number of stakeholders and projects,
amounting to US$ 13,280,000, as described in Table 4 below.
Table 4. Sources of confirmed co-financing for the project
Name of co-financier (source)
Classification
Type
Amount ($)
%
Communes [districts]: Gouré, Kellé, Guidiguir, Boune,
Maine-Soroa, Foulatari, Goudoumaria et N’Guelbayli.
Local Government
Cash
4,000,000
30
Project PADL - Diffa)
Bilateral
Cash
3,320,000
25
Project PADL - Zinder
Bilateral
Cash
560,000
4
Programme Spécial du Président de la République:
Volet Restauration de l’Environnent
Government
Cash
3,200,000
24
Government of Niger
Government
In kind
NGO
Cash
Multilateral
Cash
PASAM Gouré
UNDP
Total Co-financing
500,000
4
1,200,000
9
500,000
4
13,280,000 100
D. Project Analysis
Cost-effectiveness and sustainability
Cost-effectiveness of the project has been considered through the following tasks: (i) conducting of a
risk assessment and a financial appraisal with the key project stakeholders; (ii) conducting of an
“alternative designs” exercise during the participative project’s logical framework, which enabled the
project proponents to select the best options, having in mind past and ongoing experience in the
project area; and (iii) all UNDP requirements for project management, fiduciary responsibility, and
independent oversight have been duly considered. A first indication of project effectiveness results
from the fact that the project is inscribed in the framework of the SDR at the national level, as well as
under the Terrafrica partnership at the African regional level. The national framework ensures the
high impact and uptake of project lessons nationally, while the Terrafrica framework facilitates the
sharing of lessons and exchanges regionally. Furthermore, the fact that there are three SIP operations
in Niger will ensure that GEF investments are mutually supportive, for example in terms of
generating lessons and knowledge products on the regionalization of the SDR.
21
Alternative project approaches could have encompassed the regionalization of the SDR throughout
the Zinder and Diffa regions. This would have entailed working in different ecological settings rather
than focusing on oasis micro-basins. However, broadening the scope of ecological coverage would
have spread the team too thin on the large territory in question. Given that other SIP operations (WB
and IFAD) will be operating in different settings and ecological systems, the project’s focus is
justified in terms of acquiring leadership on oasis micro-basins and their rehabilitation. Such
experience will then feed into the SDR knowledge management products and become replicated in
other oasis micro-basins across the country. The decision that the project will support the
operationalization of the National Ecological Monitoring Center recently created by the Government,
instead of creating a National Observatory, will avoid development of institutions with conflicting
mandates. The PLECO approach will render investment cost-effective and will reinforce local
institutional synergy in tools development, coordination and knowledge development and sharing.
The project's sustainability relies on the set of institutional capacities to be created or reinforced
around sustainable dune, land and ecosystem management. The institutions and cooperation
mechanisms at local level will ensure that sand dune control and SLM practices remain active
beyond the project's scope, as they are meant to be adopted by the different stakeholders in a
cooperative spirit. In addition, all efforts under component 3 will aim at a national-level institutional
capacity for monitoring, responding and disseminating best practices to combat sand dune and land
degradation. The project's heavy institutional support dimension represents a core basis for
sustainability of actions as well as to scale them up across the country.
Global environmental benefits and GEF relevance
Oasis invasion by sand dunes is a priority concern across the Sahel, making the PLECO project an
important addition to the GEF portfolio in the region, both in Niger and across the Sahel. The project
will offer the GEF an opportunity to test policy and operational responses to this major and growing
threat. It will also provide lessons regarding how to work successfully with agro-pastoral
communities living around the oasis, while also addressing the needs and access rights of migratory
peoples under a wider landscape approach. Furthermore, the geographical location of the project is
strategic for protecting the basins of Lake Chad and River Niger. Oases are a special feature of the
regional ecosystem, and they are connected to these two major, international African basins. In this
sense, PLECO will simultaneously contribute to the benefits of the International Waters focal area. In
addition, the protection of these zones will significantly contribute to the protection and conservation
of globally significant biodiversity (fauna and flora) in these fragile ecosystems, thus also
contributing to the benefits of the Biodiversity focal area. Finally, the project will extend its system
boundary where relevant; one of the areas already identified is the development of a sand dune
monitoring capacity at the national level (linked to ROSELT’s regional capacity).
The project will focus on a major challenge in the fight against desertification in some sahelian
zones: the prevention and stabilization of sand dunes. It will do so through three types of
interventions that correspond to components 1 to 3: (i) mobilizing communities for specific actions
on sand, land and ecosystem management; (ii) building capacities of local institutions on sustainable
sand and land management; and (iii) disseminating knowledge and creating national capacities for
sand dune and land degradation monitoring. The engagement of the population will provide a model
for intervention that can be replicated throughout different countries affected by this desertificationrelated problem. Institutional capacity-building on dune and land management, in all senses (from
22
physical to tenure issues) is vital to create long-term processes. The creation of a National Ecological
Monitoring Centre will ensure due knowledge dissemination and monitoring of dune and land issues,
hence institutionalizing the understanding of the problem and the responses required.
The GEF will bring additional resources and a more comprehensive/institutional approach that will
help frame the fight against sand invasion and land degradation over the longer-term and at the
landscape scale. In doing so, GEF resources will enable the project to address some of the key
barriers to SLM; these include: (i) knowledge gaps; (ii) lack of required institutional capacity to
sustain the long-term cooperative effort; (iii) limited links between science and policy, including in
the design of land-use plans and financial incentive measures. As a response to these gaps, the
project will reinforce synergies and harmonization and focus on scaling up lessons learned and bestfit practices. It will support the National Ecological Monitoring Centre aimed at (i) increasing
scientific and land users’ knowledge of the issues and problems Niger is facing and (ii) identifying
solutions to land degradation and (iii) informing policy reform processes.
The global environmental benefits to be realized by the project include: (i) reduction of the
negative consequences of desertification and land degradation, including loss of ecosystem functions
and services, (ii) restoration and improvement of the functional integrity and resilience of microbasin ecosystems in Niger, thereby protecting and enhancing environmental services, such as
increased productivity and increased Carbon sequestration, (iii) improved protection and
management of water resources, thus contributing to the larger scale management of the threatened
Lake Chad basin, (iv) reduction of wind erosion and loss of vegetation through improved
management of vegetation cover, thereby contributing to the reduction of the impacts of climate
change. The project aims to promote practices that will protect, restore, and improve the integrity of
Niger’s micro-basin ecosystems and improve the agro-sylvo-pastoral productivity in these areas.
The project implementation will contribute to lessons learning that will be useful in neighboring
countries (Nigeria, Chad) and throughout west and northern Africa. In this way, the project will
contribute to the GEF/SIP global objective and to the implementation of the UNCCD.
At the national and local levels, the project will contribute to developing and executing interventions
that focus on identifying system-wide, landscape-scale solutions to control and prevent land
degradation, thus supporting Niger’s aim to effectively address desertification in all its dimensions.
As a result of PLECO’s interventions, at least 8 communes: Bouné, Kellé, Guidiguir, the Urban
Commune of Gouré (Gouré District); Goudoumaria, Nguelbayli, Foulatari, the Urban Commune of
Maïne-Soroa (Maïne-Soroa District) and local NGOs in the project area apply sustainable land
management practices on at least 4,150 hectares of micro-basins and 3,360 hectares of pastoral area,
1,000 hectares of previous fixation interventions are consolidated, and a functional National Sand
Dune and Land Degradation Observatory is established in Niger.
These environmental benefits will be tracked through proxy ecosystem indicators agreed to within
the SIP partnership, with the baselines to be refined during project implementation: (i) hectares of
sand-dunes rehabilitated; (ii) presence of indicator species of sound ecosystem status; (iv)
piezeometric level of water table. Indicator species of ecosystem status include: Aristida mutabilis,
Cenchrus biflorus (good site conditions), Pergularia tomentosa (sign of pronounced erosion), Acacia
Senegal, Acacia raddiana and Acacia seyal in association and Calotropis procera (very poor site
conditions).The recolonisation of the old Pleistocene dunes in the Sahel by these species could
indicate that the open savannah ecosystems have been restored that provide important habitats for
birds, small mammals, etc.
23
Value added of GEF financing
Scenario without GEF: The project’s focus would be limited to sand dune stabilization activities in a
discrete project area, building only on local capacity and benefiting the local environment without
attention to longer-term solutions and institutional appropriation (local and national levels) of best
practices. Thus, the project would not be able to adequately address the scope of the problem of sand
invasion and loss of ecosystem stability and integrity. In addition, without the proposed observatory,
the general lack of knowledge will continue, and therefore policy and project responses would not be
devised and deployed on time.
Scenario with GEF: The GEF increment of PLECO will support a comprehensive, institutionalized
and long-term response to sand dunes and land degradation. In doing so, GEF resources will enable
the project to address some of the key barriers to SLM, including: (i) knowledge gaps; (ii) lack of
required institutional capacity to sustain the long-term cooperative effort; and (iii) limited links
between science and policy, including in the design of land-use plans and financial incentive
measures. As a response to these gaps, the project will reinforce synergies and harmonization and
focus on scaling up lessons learned and best-fit practices. It will establish a national observatory
aimed at (i) increasing scientific and land users’ knowledge of the issues and problems Niger is
facing, (ii) identifying solutions to land degradation, and (iii) informing policy reform processes.
There is a lack of coordination of sand dune control activities, not only in the project zone but at the
regional and national levels. However, the newly created Rural Development Strategy, the
Environment programs Steering Committee and various Donor/Government Consultation
Frameworks will help to address the issue. There is limited knowledge in the project zone on the
climate risk and the dynamics of desertification over the long-term and sand dune invasion at the
landscape level, as suggested preliminarily by the CSIF diagnosis (July 2008).
Risk analysis and management
Three inter-related risks for the project have been identified, as follows:

Climate. Periods of pronounced drought are common in Niger. Low or irregular rainfall
could cause an increase in active sand dune formation and invasion leading to accelerated
loss of micro-basins and depressions, an increase in loss of vegetation cover and a decline in
water availability.

Stakeholder participation. Due to poverty and socio-economic stress, local land users often
prioritize individual and immediate livelihood needs rather than engaging in long-term SLM
goals. Effective stakeholder participation represents a challenge in the project zones.

Institutional and political weakness. Weak institutional capacity at both national and local
levels may inhibit project implementation. Niger’s decentralization policy faces a number of
challenges including: strengthening local governance, mobilizing financial resources at the
local-level, developing the concept of local citizenship, and achieving inter-communal and
trans-boundary cooperation.
24
The proposed risk management measures are as follows (summarised in table 5 below):

Climate. The project will focus on SLM approaches and techniques that can be responsive to
prolonged droughts and climatic fluctuations. The project’s duration (5 years) will ease
dealing with climate in view of project impacts. The project will promote climate-resilient
land and water management approaches, including soil conservation practices, monitoring of
water tables, and the promotion of water saving techniques. These activities will contribute to
the improved management of water resources and reduced vulnerability to arid conditions for
the mutual benefit of the vegetation, fauna and people. In addition, the project will financed
the establishment of a National Ecological Monitoring Centre, which will allow the
stakeholders to anticipate climate issues and take adequate policy and program responses.

Stakeholder participation. The project will use participatory approaches to ensure
community involvement and commitment to project goals. The project will promote local
income generation from improved ecosystem services. The project will engage 4 extension
agents to support field activities and community engagement. Component 2 will support local
capacity building, which includes stakeholder engagement and awareness raising on the
importance of SLM in socio-economic development.

Institutional and political weakness. A core focus of the project is to build local, regional
and national SLM capacity, as encompassed in components 2 and 3. This risk is precisely
part of the project outcomes.
Table 5. Summary of the project risk and mitigation measures
Risk
Risk rating
•
Climate
Moderate
Stakeholder
participation
Low
Institutional and
political weakness
Low
Risk mitigation strategy
• Project focuses on SLM approaches and techniques that can be
responsive to prolonged droughts and climatic fluctuations.
• Establishment of a National Ecological Monitoring Centre, which will
allow the stakeholders to anticipate climate issues and take adequate
policy and program responses.
•
• Use of participatory approaches to ensure community involvement and
commitment to project goals.
• Promotion of local income generation from improved ecosystem
services.
• Engagement of 4 extension agents (animateurs) to support field
activities and community engagement.
• Support local capacity building, which includes stakeholder
engagement and awareness raising on the importance of SLM in socioeconomic development.
•
• A core focus of the project is to build local, regional and national SLM
capacity (components 2 and 3).
25
E. Management Arrangements
Executing agency
The executing agency for the project is UNDP. The project will thus be executed according to UNDP
procedures in the country and by following GEF guidelines for implementing a medium-sized project
on sustainable land management. The project will be executed under the NEX (National Execution)
modality, and in accordance with the appropriate GEF guidelines. UNDP will work closely with the
Ministry for the Environment and Desertification Control (MELCD), the GEF Focal Point and the
Project Coordinator for the implementation and monitoring of the project.
Project oversight
The project falls within the MELCD. The SDR Environment Steering Committee will provide
project steering roles. A Scientific and Technical Committee (to be later submerged within the
National Ecological Monitoring Centre to be created) will provide technical advisory support.
Provincial structures for project oversight will be defined during the project's inception workshop.
To avoid duplication of institutional mechanisms, the three GEF/SIP projects will report to the same
environment program steering committee of the SDR. This overarching steering committee is
composed of concerned national administrations and development partners. Its role is: (i) to define
implementation modalities; (ii) to coordinate activities and ensure they are coherent and they
conform with the SDR; (iii) to establish a coordination framework; (iv) to supervise, monitor and
evaluate progress; and (v) to report to the SDR inter-ministerial committee and ensure coordination
with other SDR programs. It is through this committee that the three projects will harmonize their
approaches, exchange lessons and transfer knowledge. The National Centre for Ecological
Monitoring (to be established by a national decree and with the financial/technical supported of this
project) will become a repository of information, expertise and best practices for all SIP and SDR
interventions.
As executing agency, UNDP will ensure the overall monitoring of project implementation, the
experience sharing with other relevant GEF projects, and the creation of the necessary synergies with
UNDAF, GEF and other international projects. The UNDP will also be in charge of the following
tasks, among others:










Recruitment of project contractual staff, in collaboration with the MELCD and the PMU.
Recruitment and mobilisation of experts and technical assistants, in consultation with the
PMU.
Transfer of the necessary funds for project implementation and financial co-management.
Participation in the national Steering Committee.
Review and approval of the expenses for interventions recommended by the steering
committee.
Regular monitoring and evaluation of project implementation and outcomes.
Overview of the mid-term and final evaluations of the project.
Approval of the Terms of Reference and of the final drafts of technical and financial reports.
Participation in different supervisory meetings and missions.
Approval of any budgetary revision, and organization of financial audits.
26
Project coordination and implementation
The Project Management Unit (PMU) will be based in Zinder, which is the second city of Niger and
close to the project sites. It will be lodged by the regional unit of the General Directorate of
Environment, Water and Forestry, which belongs to the MELCD. The PMU will be composed by
these professionals:

Project Coordinator, who will be an expert on natural resource management and split the
time between management of the entire project (50%) and technical advice for implementation
of Component 1 (Local practices for dune, land and ecosystem management) (50%).

Specialist on GIS and Monitoring, who will have two major tasks: (i) lead and supervise the
implementation of the project's Component 3 (Monitoring system on sand dunes and land
degradation); and (ii) Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) of the project.

Admin-Finance Officer, who will be in charge of the project's administrative, financial,
fiduciary, accounting and logistical tasks.

4 field extension agents (animateurs), who will be based in the field (2 in Gouré province and
2 in the Maine-Soroa province) and devoted to support and monitor field activities in the dayto-day.
In addition, the Project will get support of at least 2 MELCD officials from the Gouré and MaineSoroa provinces, respectively. The PMU will also recruit a number of international and national
experts, as well as NGOs, to conduct the many planned activities, from studies to field interventions.
A vehicle, motorbikes for the 4 extension agents and required equipments will be provided to the
PMU to function properly and to be able implement the project. Travel expenses for visits to the
capital city, Niamey, for meetings and other events are scheduled and budgeted.
At the local level, the 4 project extension agents will ensure community engagement, coordinate
activities with the implementing stakeholders and NGOs, and promote and monitor project activities,
notably for components 1 and 2. They will be equipped with motorbikes to perform their communitybased roles. They will work in close cooperation with MELCD officers in their respective provinces,
as well as with local authorities, in order to ensure project ownership and future sustainability.
Since there is a substantial gap between the time of project conception and the likely start of the
project, the implementation arrangements will be reviewed, detailed and finalised during the project's
Inception Workshop, to be also in line with the status of decentralisation and other ongoing
administrative reforms.
Additional dispositions
In order to accord proper acknowledgement to GEF for providing funding, a GEF should appear on
all relevant GEF project publications, including among others, project hardware and vehicles
purchased with GEF funds. Any citation on publications regarding projects funded by GEF should
also accord proper acknowledgment to GEF. The UNDP logo should be more prominent − and
separated from the GEF logo if possible, as UN visibility is important for security purposes.
27
The PLECO will use project resources in compliance with agreed objectives and resources. Funds
will be used efficiently and with transparency. Technical and financial audits will be undertaken on
an annual basis. The monitoring and evaluation system will allow close follow-up of the progress in
project implementation and delivery of expected impacts and global environmental benefits.
F. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget
Project monitoring and evaluation will be conducted in accordance with established UNDP and GEF
procedures and will be provided by the project team and the UNDP Country Office (UNDP-CO) with
support from the UNDP Regional Coordination Unit (UNDP-RCU). The Logical Framework Matrix
(see Section II below) provides performance and impact indicators for project implementation along
with their corresponding means of verification. These will form the basis on which the project's
Monitoring and Evaluation system will be built.
The following paragraphs outline the principle components of the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
and indicative cost estimates related to M&E activities. The project's Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
will be presented and finalized at the Project's Inception Report following a collective fine-tuning of
indicators, means of verification, and the full definition of project staff M&E responsibilities.
A Project Inception Workshop will be conducted with the full project team, relevant government
counterparts, co-financing partners, the UNDP-CO and representation from the UNDP-RCU. The
principal objectives of this Inception Workshop will be to assist the project team to understand and
take ownership of the project’s goals and objectives, to review key design elements and to finalize
preparation of the project's first annual work plan. This will include reviewing the Logical
Framework (components, outputs, indicators, means of verification), imparting additional detail as
needed and, on the basis of this exercise, finalizing the Annual Work Plan (AWP) with precise and
measurable performance indicators, and in a manner consistent with the expected outcomes for the
project. The Project Coordinator and the UNDP Regional Technical Advisor will fine-tune the
progress and performance/impact indicators of the project in consultation with the full project team
and UNDP-CO at the Inception Workshop.
Monitoring responsibilities and events: A detailed schedule of project review meetings will be
developed by the project management, in consultation with project implementation partners and
stakeholder representatives and incorporated in the Project Inception Report. Such a schedule will
include: (i) tentative time frames for Tripartite Reviews, Steering Committee Meetings (or relevant
advisory and/or coordination mechanisms) and (ii) project related Monitoring and Evaluation activities.
Day to day monitoring of implementation progress will be the responsibility of the Project
Coordinator, based on the project's Annual Work Plan and its indicators. The Project Team will
inform the UNDP-CO of any delays or difficulties faced during implementation so that the
appropriate support or corrective measures can be adopted in a timely and remedial fashion.
Periodic monitoring of implementation progress will be undertaken by the UNDP-CO through
quarterly meetings with the project proponent or more frequently as deemed necessary. This will
allow parties to take stock and to troubleshoot in a timely fashion any problems pertaining to the
project in order to ensure smooth implementation of project activities. In order to closely assess
project progress, UNDP-CO (with UNDP-RCU if needed) will conduct field visits annually or more
28
often if required. Any member of the Steering Committee may also participate in these visits. A Field
Visit Report will be prepared by the UNDP-CO and circulated to the project team, all Steering
Committee members, and UNDP-RCU no later than one month after the visit.
Annual Monitoring will occur through the Tripartite Review (TPR). This is the highest policy-level
meeting of the parties directly involved in the project's implementation. The project will be subject to
the TPR at least once every year. The first such meeting will be held within the first twelve months
of the start of full implementation. The project proponent will prepare an Annual Project Report
(APR) and submit it to the UNDP-CO and UNDP-RCU for review and comment at least two weeks
prior to the TPR. The APR will be one of the basic documents for discussion in the TPR meeting.
The TPR has the authority to suspend disbursement if project performance benchmarks are not met.
The Terminal Tripartite Review (TTR) is held in the last month of project operations. The PLECO
proponent is responsible for preparing the Terminal Report and submitting it to the UNDP-CO and
UNDP-RCU. The Terminal Report shall be prepared in draft at least two months in advance of the
TTR in order to allow review, and will serve as the basis for discussions in the TTR. The terminal
tripartite review considers the implementation of the project as a whole, paying particular attention to
whether the project has achieved its stated objectives and contributed to the broader environmental
objectives. It decides whether any actions are still necessary, particularly in relation to the
sustainability of project results, and acts as a vehicle through which lessons learned can be captured
to feed into other projects under implementation or formulation.
Project Monitoring Reporting: The Project Coordinator, in conjunction with the UNDP extended
team, will be responsible for the preparation and submission of the following reports that form part of
the monitoring process. Items (a) through (f) are mandatory and strictly related to monitoring, while
(g) and (h) are optional since they depend on the dynamic and needs of the implementation.
(a) Inception Report (IR): A Project Inception Report will be prepared immediately following
the Inception Workshop. It will include a detailed First Year/Annual Work Plan divided in
quarterly periods detailing the activities and progress indicators that will guide
implementation during the first year of the project. This Work Plan will include the dates of
specific field visits, support missions from the UNDP-CO or the Regional Coordinating
Unit (RCU) or consultants, timeframes for meetings of the project's decision making
structures and the detailed project budget for the first full year of implementation.
(b) Annual Project Report (APR): The APR is a UNDP requirement and part of the UNDP
Country Office’s central oversight, monitoring and project management. It is a selfassessment report by project management to the CO that provides input to the country office
reporting process and the Results-Oriented Annual Report (ROAR), while also forming a
key input to the Tripartite Project Review. An APR will be prepared on an annual basis
prior to the Tripartite Project Review, to reflect progress achieved in meeting the project's
Annual Work Plan (AWP) and to assess the project’s performance in contributing to
intended outcomes through outputs and partnership work.
(c) Project Implementation Review (PIR): The PIR is an annual monitoring process mandated
by the GEF. It has become an essential management and monitoring tool for project
managers and offers the main vehicle for extracting lessons from ongoing projects. Once the
project has been under implementation for a year, a Project Implementation Report must be
completed by the CO together with the project. The PIR can be prepared any time during
the year (July-June) and ideally prior to the TPR.
29
(d) Quarterly Progress Reports: Short reports outlining main updates in project progress will
be provided quarterly to the local UNDP-CO and the UNDP-RCU by the project team.
(e) Periodic Thematic Reports: As and when called for by UNDP, UNDP-RCU or the
Implementing Partner, the project team will prepare Specific Thematic Reports, focusing on
specific issues or areas of activity. These reports can be used as a form of lessons learned
exercise, specific oversight in key areas, or as troubleshooting exercises to evaluate and
overcome obstacles and difficulties encountered.
(f) Project Terminal Report: During the last three months of the project the project team will
prepare the Project Terminal Report. This comprehensive report will summarize all
activities, achievements and outputs of the Project, lessons learned, objectives met, or not
achieved structures and systems implemented, etc. and will be the definitive statement of
the Project’s activities during its lifetime. It will also lay out recommendations for any
further steps that may need to be taken to ensure sustainability and replicability of the
Project’s activities.
(g) Technical Reports (project specific - optional): Technical Reports are detailed documents
covering specific areas of analysis or scientific specializations within the overall project. As
part of the Inception Report, the project team will prepare a draft Reports List, detailing the
technical reports that are expected to be prepared on key areas of activity during the course
of the Project and tentative due dates. Where necessary, this Reports List will be revised
and updated and included in subsequent APRs.
(h) Project Publications (project specific - optional): Project Publications will form a key
method of crystallizing and disseminating the results and achievements of the Project.
These publications may be scientific or informational texts on the activities and
achievements of the Project, in the form of journal articles, multimedia publications, etc.
These publications can be based on Technical Reports, depending upon their relevance,
scientific worth, etc., or may be summaries or compilations of a series of Technical Reports
and other research.
Independent Evaluation: The project will be subjected to at least two independent external
evaluations, as follows. An independent Mid-Term Evaluation will be undertaken at the end of the
second year of implementation. The mid-term Evaluation will determine progress being made
towards the achievement of outcomes and will identify course correction if needed. It will focus on
the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of project implementation; will highlight issues requiring
decisions and actions; and will present initial lessons learned about project design, implementation
and management. An independent Final Evaluation will take place three months prior to the
terminal tripartite review meeting, and will focus on the same issues as the mid-term evaluation. The
final evaluation will also look at the impact and sustainability of results, including the contribution to
capacity development and the achievement of global environmental goals. The Final Evaluation
should also provide recommendations for follow-up activities. The Terms of Reference for this
evaluation will be prepared by the UNDP-CO based on guidance from the UNDP-RCU.
Audit Clause: The Government will provide the Resident Representative with certified periodic
financial statements, and with an annual audit of the financial statements relating to the status of
UNDP (including GEF) funds according to the established procedures set out in the Programming
30
and Finance manuals. The Audit will be conducted by the legally recognized auditor of the Niger
Government, or by a commercial auditor engaged by the Government.
Learning and Knowledge Sharing: Under component 2, the project will finance many information,
education and communication (IEC) activities to raise awareness and knowledge of communities and
local authorities on SLM, sand dune prevention and management, and land tenure issues (conflict
prevention and resolution). Component 3 will serve to create, test and deploy a monitoring system for
sand dune and land degradation. Component 4 will emphasize an adaptive project management
where lessons learnt are used to improve management and to enhance stakeholders' project
engagement. Overall, project activities will include support to establishing the National Ecological
Monitoring Center (which will have a focus on sand dune stabilization and land degradation); the
development of methodologies and a monitoring framework at the national level to monitor the
dynamics of sand dunes; fostering community participation in monitoring and drawing lessons from
their indigenous knowledge in order to develop efficient and locally adapted strategies for the
protection of sand dune invasion; and disseminating Early Warning and Crisis Management System
Results from the project within and beyond the project intervention zone through a number of
existing information sharing networks and forums. In addition, the project will participate, as
relevant and appropriate, in UNDP/GEF sponsored networks organized for Senior Personnel working
on projects that share common characteristics. The project will identify, analyze, and share lessons
learned that might be beneficial in the design and implementation of similar future projects.
A tentative Monitoring and Evaluation Plan, with its budget, is compiled in the table below.
Table 6. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget
Activities
Responsible parties
Budget
(excluding project and
UNDP staff)
Periodicity
Within 3 months after project
start-up.
Inception workshop
Project team, UNDP-CO,
ME/LCD
US$ 15,000
Inception report
Project team, UNDP-CO,
ME/LCD
−
Baseline & measurement
of indicators
Project Team (notably the GIS
and M&E expert)
Annual progress reports
and implementation
review reports
Project Team
Publications on lessons
learnt, Technical reports
Project team and consultants
if necessary
US$ 10,000
To be determined by the
Project team and UNDP-CO
Mid-term evaluation
Project coordinator, ME/LCD,
UNDP-CO, UNDP-RCU.
US$ 20,000
Mid-term (end 3rd year)
Final external evaluation
Project coordinator, ME/LCD,
UNDP-CO, UNDP-RCU.
US$ 30,000
At the end of the project
Audit
Project Team; UNDP-CO
US$ 25,000
Every year
M&E-related field visits
TOTAL indicative costs
Project Team
US$ 10,000
Every year
US$ 130,000
Total Project
To be defined at the
Inception Workshop.
Estimated US$ 20,000
−
31
Immediately after the
inception workshop
Beginning, mid-term and
end of the project (some
activities annually)
Every year
G. Legal Context
This Project Document shall be the instrument referred to as such in Article I of the Standard Basic
Assistance Agreement between the Government of Niger and the United Nations Development
Programme, signed by the parties on [date]. The host country implementing agency shall, for the
purpose of the Standard Basic Assistance Agreement, refer to the government co-operating agency
described in that Agreement.
The UNDP Resident Representative in Niger (Niamey) is authorized to effect in writing the
following types of revision to this Project Document, provided that he/she has verified the agreement
thereto by the UNDP-GEF Unit and is assured that the other signatories to the Project Document
have no objection to the proposed changes:
a) Revision of, or addition to, any of the annexes to the Project Document;
b) Revisions which do not involve significant changes in the immediate objectives, outputs or
activities of the project, but are caused by the rearrangement of the inputs already agreed to
or by cost increases due to inflation;
c) Mandatory annual revisions which re-phase the delivery of agreed project inputs or increased
expert or other costs due to inflation or take into account agency expenditure flexibility; and
d) Inclusion of additional annexes and attachments only as set out here in this Project Document
32
III. STRATEGIC RESULTS FRAMEWORK
Component
Indicators
Reference situation
305,000 ha under risk of sand
invasion in Gouré and MaïnéSoroa provinces
Project objective:
Extension under dune
protection and SLM
practices
To protect the integrity of,
and to improve the agrosylvo-pastoral
productivity of the microbasin ecosystems in
Gouré and Maïné-Soroa
provinces
Improvement of agropastoral productivity in the
35 priority micro-basins and
5 sylvo-pastoral spaces that
receive project support
Outcome 1:
Sustainable dune, land
and ecosystem
management activities
are implemented at the
grassroots level, covering
approx. 7,510 ha of land.
[SIP's IR-1]
Multi-annual operation plan
for the protection of 35
strategic oasis micro-basins
Number of experimentation
sites for best NRM
practices in agro-pastoral
systems installed
There is a serious sand
invasion problem, exacerbated
by non sustainable land and
natural resource management
practices; this problem is
confirmed in development
district plans.
Millet productivity:
Gouré: 261 kg/ha
Maïné: 410 kg/ha
Targets
7,510 ha protected in the microbasins and on sylvo-pastoral
spaces, as follows:
PLECO: 4,410 ha
PADEL/ZR: 400 ha
PADEL/DA: 750 ha
PAGRN: 800 ha
PIP2: 150 ha
Other actors: 1,000 ha
Productivity of agro-pastoral
areas increases by at least 20%
by the end of the project
Bean productivity:
Gouré: 109 kg/ha
Maïné: 70 kg/ha
Verification
sources
Activity reports
of the different
projects
Technical
services
monitoring
reports
Project M&E
surveys and
reports
Reports from
the food and
agricultural
campaigns
Hypothesis
No drought or climatic
hazards
Engagement of local
stakeholders
(authorities, technicians
and the population) on
SLM
No major land conflicts
No drought or climatic
hazards
Project's M&E
surveys
No operational plan available
(meanwhile 580 and 287
villages are subjected to sand
invasion in Maïné-Soroa and
Gouré, respectively)
Operational plan for the
protection of 35 strategic microbasins is elaborated and
validated during 1st year, and is
implemented from 2nd year
Poor knowledge on best NRM
practices in agro-pastoral
systems
90 sites of pilot experimentation
and demonstration of agricultural
and pastoral good practices are
installed with full population
engagement
33
Pluri-annual
operation plan
Project reports
M&E reports
Beneficiary
surveys
Engagement of local
stakeholders
(authorities, technicians
and the population) on
SLM
Engagement of local
stakeholders
(authorities, technicians
and the population) on
SLM
Component
Outcome 2
Technical and
managerial capacity of
local stakeholders on
dune, land and
ecosystem management
is strengthened in the 35
priority micro-basins
[SIP's IR-1 & IR-4]
Outcome 3
A monitoring system on
sand dune and land
degradation is
established and
implemented at national
level and harmonized
with SIP/TerrAfrica at
regional level
[SIP's IR-4]
Outcome 4
An adaptive and lessonssharing management
system in place
[SIP's IR-2 & IR-4]
Indicators
% of the population that
acquire practical knowledge
on sand, land and
ecosystem management in
the priority 35 micro-basins
Number of COFOs (land
tenure committees) that
improve dissemination of
SLM practices and conflict
resolution efforts
Reference situation
Poor awareness and training
opportunities on SLM-related
knowledge and practices
High levels of illiteracy
Targets
At least 50% of the rural
population in the 35 priority
micro-basins has improved their
practical knowledge on sand,
land and ecosystem
management
At least half of the COFOs in the
Gouré and Maïné-Soroa
provinces improve their
functioning thanks to the project
COFOs show very weak
capacities and poor
functioning
Verification
sources
M&E reports
Beneficiary
surveys
Project reports
Beneficiary
surveys
Development of a sand
dune and land degradation
monitoring system (national
scope) and application in
Goure and Maine-Soroa
provinces
No such monitoring system
exists
Sand dune and land degradation
monitoring system is established
through the new National
Ecological Monitoring Centre
Number of projects and
institutions that use the
sand dune and land
degradation indicators to
plan/monitor their activities
No indicators on sand dune
and land degradation in place
At least 6 projects and/or
institutions in the country use the
new Centre's indicators to
plan/monitor activities
Number of non-project
stakeholders that visit
project sites and activities
for learning/replicating
The Gouré and Maïné-Soroa
provinces receive no much
visits in relation to best
practices or SLM innovations
At least 8 non-project
stakeholders from other
departments or abroad visit
project sites to learn from
project's best practices and
innovations.
Project reports
Few publications and IEC
materials available
MTR and Final Evaluation rate
publications and IEC materials
produced as "satisfactory" based
on criteria of quantity, pedagogic
quality and usage level.
MTR and Final
Evaluation
reports
Publications and IEC
materials to disseminate
sand, land and ecosystem
management practices
Project reports
34
National
Ecological
Monitoring
Centre's reports
Hypothesis
Engagement of local
stakeholders
(authorities, technicians
and the population) on
SLM
Institutions and actors
engaged in COFOs are
committed to make
COFOs work
The National Ecological
Monitoring Centre
recruits competent
professionals to
elaborate indicators and
a sound monitoring
system
Projects' reports
−
Final Evaluation
Security conditions in
Gouré and MaïnéSoroa are stable
−
IV. TOTAL BUDGET AND WORKPLAN
GEF
Outcome /
Atlas
Activity
Award ID
00058216
Business Unit
NER10
Project ID
00072224
Project Title
Oasis Micro-Basin Sand Invasion Control in the Gouré and
Maïné-Soroa provinces (French Acronym: PLECO)
Award Title
GEF: PIMS 3225 - LD - FSP - Niger
Sand Dunes
Implementing Partner (NEX)
MELCD
Fund
Donor Name
ID
Outcome 1
GEF
Atlas
Budgetary
Account Code
ATLAS Budget Description
UNDP
Outcome 2
Year 3
(USD)
Year 4
(USD)
TOTAL
(USD)
Year 5
(USD)
Observations
7 000
7 000
7 000
7 000
7 000
35 000
Project Coordinator - NRM expertise (25%)
71400 Contractual services ind.
15 000
15 000
15 000
15 000
15 000
75 000
2 community animateurs (for 1 department)
72100 Contractual services cies.
40 000
45 000
45 000
40 000
35 000
205 000
Technical/community support (NGO engagement)
72200 Equipment and furniture
20 000
45 000
45 000
40 000
30 000
180 000
Materials for dune, soil and landscape management
71600 Travel
10 000
10 000
10 000
10 000
10 000
50 000
71300 Local consultants
20 000
20 000
20 000
20 000
20 000
100 000
74500 Miscellaneous
10 000
10 000
10 000
10 000
10 000
50 000
122 000
152 000
152 000
142 000
127 000
695 000
Travel for fieldwork
Environment & local development (80 weeks at US$ 1,250)
Miscellaneous, especially community support
71400 Contractual services ind.
7 000
7 000
7 000
7 000
7 000
35 000
Project Coordinator - NRM expertise (25%)
71400 Contractual services ind.
15 000
15 000
15 000
15 000
15 000
75 000
2 community animateurs (for 1 department)
72200 Equipment and furniture
12 000
1 250
1 250
1 250
1 250
17 000
Motorbikes for animateurs (4) for fieldwork (maintenance included)
34 000
23 250
23 250
23 250
23 250
127 000
71200 International Consultants
12 500
12 500
5 000
5 000
0
35 000
SLM capacity-building (14 weeks at US$ 2,500)
71600 Travel
15 000
15 000
15 000
15 000
15 000
75 000
Travel
72100 Contractual services Cies
20 000
20 000
20 000
20 000
20 000
100 000
Capacity-building on land conflict resolution
72100 Contractual services Cies
15 000
25 000
25 000
25 000
20 000
110 000
Support to environment-based livelihoods and PES
72100 Contractual services Cies
GEF subtotal
25 000
50 000
75 000
40 000
30 000
220 000
IEC activities, capacity building, community awareness
87 500
122 500
140 000
105 000
85 000
540 000
72100 Contractual services Cies
UNDP subtotal
10 000
15 000
15 000
10 000
10 000
60 000
10 000
15 000
15 000
10 000
10 000
60 000
UNDP subtotal
GEF
Year 2
(USD)
71400 Contractual services ind.
GEF subtotal
UNDP
Year 1
(USD)
35
IEC activities, capacity building
Total Budget and Workplan (continuation)
Outcome 3
GEF
Outcome /
Atlas
Activity
Fund
Donor Name
ID
GEF
Atlas
Budgetary
Account Code
ATLAS Budget Description
Outcome 4
GEF
UNDP
Year 2
(USD)
Year 3
(USD)
Year 4
(USD)
Year 5
(USD)
TOTAL
(USD)
Observations
71200 International Consultants
12 500
12 500
0
0
0
25 000
Specialised technical assistance/advise (10 weeks at US$ 2,500)
71600 Travel
12 500
12 500
5 000
5 000
5 000
40 000
Travel (int'l consultants, monitoring activities)
71400 Contractual services ind.
20 000
20 000
20 000
20 000
20 000
100 000
72100 Contractual services Cies
15 000
25 000
25 000
20 000
10 000
95 000
Technical advice for monitoring systems (specialised)
72800 I T Equipment
20 000
20 000
20 000
10 000
10 000
80 000
Equipment, satellite images
72500 Office Supplies
3 000
3 000
3 000
3 000
3 000
15 000
Office supplies
71400 Contractual services ind.
13 000
13 000
13 000
13 000
13 000
65 000
GIS and M&E expert (50%)
74200 Audio visual & Print Prod Costs
10 000
15 000
15 000
15 000
15 000
70 000
Publications, cartography
72100 Contractual services cies.
10 000
10 000
10 000
10 000
10 000
50 000
Meetings, events for creating the Observatory
72400 Communications
5 000
5 000
5 000
5 000
5 000
25 000
Website, IT, communications
74500 Miscellaneous
5 000
5 000
5 000
5 000
5 000
25 000
Miscellaneous
126 000
141 000
121 000
106 000
96 000
590 000
13 000
13 000
13 000
13 000
13 000
65 000
13 000
13 000
13 000
13 000
13 000
65 000
71400 Contractual services ind.
11 000
11 000
11 000
11 000
11 000
55 000
Administrative-Finance Officer (50%)
71400 Contractual services ind.
6 000
6 000
6 000
6 000
6 000
30 000
Secretary
71400 Contractual services ind.
7 000
7 000
7 000
7 000
7 000
35 000
Project Coordinator - Coordination (25%)
71200 International Consultants
0
0
10 000
0
15 000
25 000
MTR and Final Evaluation
71600 Travel
GEF subtotal
10 000
34 000
10 000
34 000
10 000
44 000
10 000
34 000
10 000
49 000
50 000
195 000
71400 Contractual services ind.
11 000
11 000
11 000
11 000
11 000
55 000
Administrative-Finance Officer (50%)
71400 Contractual services ind.
7 000
7 000
7 000
7 000
7 000
35 000
Project Coordinator - Coordination (25%)
71400 Contractual services ind.
5 000
5 000
5 000
5 000
5 000
25 000
Driver
75 000
5 000
5 000
5 000
5 000
95 000
Office equipment, vehicle, maintenance
72500 Office Supplies
6 000
6 000
6 000
5 000
5 000
28 000
Office supplies
72400 Communications
2 000
2 000
2 000
2 000
2 000
10 000
Communications
106 000
36 000
36 000
35 000
35 000
248 000
GEF subtotal
UNDP
Year 1
(USD)
71400 Contractual services ind.
UNDP subtotal
72200 Equipment & Furniture
UNDP subtotal
GEF
2 020 000
UNDP
OTHER CO-FINANCING
500 000
12 780 000
PROJECT
15 300 000
AGENCY FEE
213 000
36
Monitoring systems and activities on sand dune & land degradation
GIS and M&E expert (50%)
Travel (project management, int'l consultants)
ANNEXES
Annex 1. Endorsement letters from the country
37
38
39
Annex 2. Co-financing letters
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Annex 3. Outline of Terms of Reference for key project staff
These ToR will be reviewed and completed by the time of recruitment
between MELCD, UNDP-CO and UNDP-RCU.
Project Coordinator
Roles and Responsibilities
Core function 1 (50% of time): Project Management.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Responsible for the overall implementation of the Project, under the joint supervision of the
MELCD and UNDP.
Supervise project staff, partners, consultants and operators.
Planning, coordination and supervision of all Project activities.
Ensure sound financial management of the Project, supervising the administrative and financial
aspects.
Ensure attainment of project objectives.
Management of relationships with project partners and stakeholders.
Ensure due Information, Education and Communication praxis.
Contribute to organisation and conduction of Steering Committee meetings.
Organise regular meetings with the key Project partners.
Prepare and organise the different Project evaluations and internal audits.
Core function 2 (50% of time): Technical advisor on dune, land and ecosystem management
•
•
•
Lead and supervise the implementation of Component 1 (Local practices for dune, land and
ecosystem management).
Provide advice to project stakeholders on best practices and techniques for dune, land and
ecosystem management.
Lead and supervise the 4 field extension agents plus the provincial and municipal officials that
may be engaged in project implementation.
Competencies required
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
University degree (5+ years) in natural sciences, agronomy or related discipline.
10 years of experience in rural development and/or environmental issues, and at least 5 years
experience in project coordination (implementation).
Specialist in the environment, desertification control, ecology or related matter.
Available to work in desert and dryland zones.
Organising and coordinating skills.
Experience in community-level work.
Experience in GEF and/or UNDP projects and operations will be an added value.
53
GIS and Monitoring Specialist
Roles and responsibilities
•
•
•
•
•
•
Lead and supervise the implementation of the project's Component 3 (Monitoring system on sand
dunes and land degradation).
Conduct the overall Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) of the Project.
Provide advice on institutional and policy making for desertification control and SLM.
Oversee the creation and initial functioning of the National Ecological Monitoring Centre.
Provide technical advice on tools, GIS and related techniques for an effective
assessment/monitoring of sand dunes and land degradation, both at nation-wide level and in the
project's intervention sites (35 micro-basins and 8 communes).
Review technical studies produced during project implementation.
Competencies required
•
University degree (5+) in engineering, geography, biometry or related scientific discipline.
• At least 8 years experience in environmental information and monitoring systems/tools.
• At least 3 years experience in project M&E.
• Knowledge of GIS, computing tools, and participatory assessment tools.
Admin-Finance Officer
Roles and responsibilities
•
Project administrative tasks (reports, correspondence, tenders, contracts, archive keeping, etc.).
Project financial, fiduciary and accounting needs (financial planning and information, annual
budgets, accounting duties, ensuring sound management of project's funds, project compliance with
GEF, UNDP and national administrative and accounting procedures, etc.)
• Project logistical tasks (purchases, supplies, office and equipment maintenance, etc.).
•
Competencies required
•
•
•
•
•
University degree or qualitative diploma (3+) in economics, accounting, financial management or
related discipline.
At least 5 years practical experience in administrative and financial management (projects,
enterprises or organisations with budgets over US$ 1 million).
Skilled in Excel and basic accounting software.
Demonstrate integrity, as well as being an organised and methodical professional.
Knowledge of GEF or UNDP financial management procedures is a valuable asset.
Field extension agents (4 in total)
The field extension agents will be based in the field and devoted to support and monitor field activities
in the day-to-day (Components 1 and 2), particularly: to ensure community engagement, to promote
and monitor project activities, and to coordinate activities with the implementing partners and NGOs.
54
Annex 4. Signature Page
Country: _Niger_
UNDAF Outcome(s)/Indicator(s):
Local populations improve their food safety and diversify their sources of revenue
(Link to UNDAF outcome., If no UNDAF, leave blank)
Expected Outcome(s)/Indicator (s):
−
−
−
−
Sustainable dune land and ecosystem management activities are implemented at the grassroots level,
covering approximately 7,510 ha of land.
Technical and managerial capacity of local stakeholders on dune, land and ecosystem management is
strengthened in 35 priority micro-basins.
A monitoring system on sand dune and land degradation is established and implemented at national
level
An adaptative and lessons sharing management system in place.
(CP outcomes linked t the SRF/MYFF goal and service line)
Populations participate in the sustainable safeguarding of environmental resources and water.
Expected Output(s)/Indicator(s):
−
Practices and models for sand dune prevention or stabilization applied and assessed
−
Integrated management of dunes, land and ecosystems in 35 priority micro-basins (operational plans
elaborated, validated & implemented)
−
Local land tenure and management institutions are strengthened
−
Awareness and knowledge on SLM is enhanced (in at least 50% of population in the 35 priority
micro-basins)
−
Development of ecosystem services and ecosystem-based livelihoods leading to 20% increase in
productivity of agro-pastoral areas
−
A National Ecological Monitoring Centre is created (with a focus on sand dunes, land degradation
and early warning)
−
Ecological monitoring protocols at community level established and implemented
−
An early warning system on desertification and land degradation is functional
−
National M&E system harmonized with SIP/TerrAfrica M&E and SLM indicators system
−
Project management is closely connected to the country's SLM institutions
−
Lessons sharing with other SIP/TerrAfrica projects
−
Project evolves according to the ongoing SLM work nationally
(CP outcomes linked t the SRF/MYFF goal and service line)
_____________________________________
Implementing partner: Ministry for the Environment and Desertification Control (MELCD)
(designated institution/Executing agency)
Other Partners:
_________________________
_________________________
55
Programme Period: 2009-2013
Programme Component: Programme 3
Project Title: Oasis Micro-Basin Sand Invasion
Control in the Gouré and Maïné-Soroa provinces
(French Acronym: PLECO)
ATLAS Project / Award ID: 00072224 / 00058216
Project Duration: February 2010 – January 2015
Management Arrangement: NEX
Total budget:
Allocated resources:

Government

Regular (GEF)

Other:

15,928,300
15,300,000
3,200,000
2,020,000
o UNDP 500,000
o Local Gov: 4,000,000
o PADL 3,880,000
o PASAM 1,200,000
In kind contributions 500,000 (Gov)
Agreed by (Government): _______________________________________________________
Agreed by (Implementing partner/Executing agency):________________________________
Agreed by (UNDP):_____________________________________________________________
56
Notes:
UNDAF Outcome and Indicator(s)
The signature page details the UNDAF outcome(s) as well as the Outcome(s) and Output(s) related to the project. If
the UNDAF lists outcomes, they should be included in the signature page. When UNDAF outcomes are not clearly
articulated, country teams may decide to either revisit the UNDAF to clarify the outcomes or leave the field blank.
UNDAF Outcome indicators should be listed here.
Expected Outcome(s) and Indicator(s)
Expected Outcomes are Country Programme (CP) outcomes. They should reflect MYFF/SRF outcomes and ACC
sector, which will be in the ERP).
Outcome indicator(s) should be listed here.
Expected Output(s) and Indicator(s)
Expected Outputs are Country Programme outputs. They should reflect MYFF/SRF outputs.
Output indicator(s) should be listed here.
Implementing partner:
Same as designated institution in the simplified project document – name of institution responsible for managing the
programme or project (formerly referred to as executing agency). Implementing partners include Government, UN
agencies, UNDP (see restrictions in Programming Manual Chapter 6) or NGOs.
Other partners:
Formerly referred to as implementing agencies in the simplified project document—partners that have agreed to carry
out activities within a nationally executed project. This would include UNDP when it provides Country Office Support
to national execution. Private sector companies and NGOs hired as contractors would generally not be included. The
agency (i.e. Government, UN agency) that contracts with the private sector company and/or NGO is the responsible
party. ‘Other partners’ can also apply to other execution modalities.
When an NGO contributes to an output, it can be noted along with the responsible party with which it contracts (e.g.,
UNDP/NGO, Govt/NGO). Consistent with current practice the rationale for selecting an NGO as a contractor, must
be documented.
Programme period: Refers to the Country Programme period
Programme component: MYFF Goal
Project title, project code, project duration (self explanatory)
Management arrangement: Indicate NEX, AGEX, NGO Execution, DEX
Budget: Total budget minus the General Management Services Fees
General Management Services Fees: This was formerly COA (Country Office Administrative fee) for cost sharing
and UNDP Administstative Fee for Trust Funds.
Total budget: Includes the budget and General Management Services Fees. In-kind contributions can be listed
under ‘other’ resources. Unfunded amounts cannot be committed until funds are available.
Signatures:
The Implementing partner is the institution responsible for managing the programme or project. (The institution now
commonly referred to as the “executing agency” but will now be referred to as the “implementing partner”)
UNDP is the UNDP Resident Representative.
The Government counterpart is the government coordinating authority.
57