Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Project Document
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
United Nations Development Program / Global Environment Facility
“Sustainable Development of the Protected Area System of
Ethiopia” (SDPASE).
PIMS ID: 494, Project ID: 00058768, Proposal ID: 00048561
Project Summary: This GEF Biodiversity Project aims at strengthening capacities to manage the Ethiopian
Protected Area estate, in order to improve the sustainability of the protected area system. The project has been designed
to addresses the relatively weak sectoral situation at the moment - whereby the protected area system is under
resourced and marginalized from the national development agenda. Past donor support to the protected areas system
has tended to be piece meal, focusing on individual protected areas rather than the enabling environment. There has
been an acceleration in the rate of habitat loss over the past decades, leading, in turn, to population declines of
threatened flora and fauna. The current Protected Area System provides an inadequate bulwark against these pressures.
Set against this backdrop, there have nonetheless been a number of positive developments in Ethiopia in recent years,
which have created an enabling environment for the interventions planned under the project. This is manifest in the
generally more supportive attitude of the Government to the wildlife sector, evidenced by the approval of national
policies and preparation of the draft proclamation (law) for wildlife. There is the beginning of public- private sector
partnerships to manage protected areas (e.g., African Parks) and stronger institutional linkages with production sectors
(e.g., to watershed conservation and tourism). New structures have been established at the regional level (e.g., Amhara
Protected Areas Authority), which is allowing for a greater level of devolution of management authorities—allowing
management to respond to the situation on the ground. Finally and most importantly, protected areas are being adopted
in the PASDEP indicator matrix – implying their designation by Government as a high priority for development. The
project builds on these gains. A suite of interventions will be spearheaded over a period of eight-years, divided into two
stages: the first stage focusing on the national system in terms of capacity building/ training and integrating the
protected area system into mainstream development. Associated WB led investments in the tourism sector and critical
watershed management offer entry points for such integration. On-ground protected area management models will be
piloted at two – three major protected area landscapes with funding from co-financiers, and will feed into national
capacity building processes. The second stage of interventions, beginning in year 5 will consolidate the capacity gains,
implement the PA business plan, and spearhead the replication of good protected area management practices.
The total GEF intervention is costed at $ 9million. Co-finance of $19 million has been secured, complementing further
funding from Government in kind. MoARD will implement the Project through National Execution (NEX) modalities.
In Stage One, MoARD will sub contract the services of GTZ IS, which will provide administrative services for project
execution.
1
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Table of Contents
Section I: Narrative........................................................................................................................................ 4
Situation Analysis...................................................................................................................................... 4
Project Strategy ......................................................................................................................................... 6
Management Arrangements: Overall Execution and Implementation: ................................................... 11
SPECIFIC ARRANGEMENTS IN STAGE ONE .................................................................................. 12
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget .......................................................................................... 14
Legal Context .......................................................................................................................................... 16
Section II: Strategic Results Framework and GEF Increment .......................................... 17
Logical Framework ................................................................................................................................. 17
Section III: Total Budget and Work-plan ................................................................................................ 24
Section IV: Additional Information ............................................................................................. 28
ANNEX ONE Terms of Reference the Project Management Unit and Key Project Staff ...................... 28
ANNEX TWO: Stakeholder Participation Framework ........................................................ 31
ANNEXTHREE: Monitoring and evaluation framework................................................... 34
ATTACHMENT I: Supplementary Agreements ......................................................................................... 36
ATTACHMENT II: Source Proposal Approved by the GEF Executive Council ....................................... 43
Country: Ethiopia SIGNATURE PAGE ................................................................................................ 210
2
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Acronyms
AAU
ADB
ADLI
CBD
CBNRM
CIDA
CITES
DEX
EFAP
ETC
EU
EWCO
EWCP
EWNHS
FD
FDRE
FPA
FZS
GEFSEC
GTZ-IS
HIPC
IBC
IDA
IFC
IUCN
JICA
KBA
KWS
MDG
METT
MoARD
MoFED
NBI
NBSAP
NEX
NPM
NTEAP
PASP
PDF
PMU
SIDA
SDPASE
SDPRP
SLM
TA
TNC
UNESCO
UNDP
WAJIB
WB
WCD
WCS
Addis Ababa University
African Development Bank
Agriculture Development Led Industrialization
Convention for Biological Diversity
Community-based Natural Resource Management
Canadian International Development Agency
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna & Flora
Direct Execution
Ethiopian Forestry Action Plan
Ethiopian Tourism Commission
European Union
Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Department
Ethiopian Wolf Conservation Programme
Ethiopian Wildlife and Natural History Society
Forestry, Soils and Land Use Department
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
Forest Priority Area
Frankfurt Zoological Society
GEF Secretariat
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit – International Services
Highly Indebted Poor Country
Institute for Biodiversity Conservation
International Development Association
International Finance Cooperation
World Conservation Union
Japan International Cooperation Agency
Key Biodiversity Area
Kenya Wildlife Service
Millennium Development Goals
Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
Ministry of Finance and Economic Development
Nile Basin Initiative
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
National Execution
National Project Manager
Nile Trans-boundary Environmental Project
Protected Area System Plan
Project Development Fund
Project Management Unit
Swedish International Development Agency
Sustainable Development of the Protected Area System of Ethiopia
Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction Program
Sustainable Land Management
Technical Advisor
The Nature Conservancy
United Nations Education, Science and Cultural Organization
United Nations Development Program
The GTZ community-based forest project in Adaba-Dodola
World Bank
Wildlife Conservation Department (of Government of Ethiopia)
Wildlife Conservation Society (Global NGO)
3
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Section I: Narrative
Situation Analysis
Global Importance of Biodiversity, Ecosystems and Ecological Processes. The past international focus
on the scale of poverty and destitution in Ethiopia begs the question: “is there room for a protected area
system in the country”? In order to answer this question, one must consider what such a protected area
system could contribute to society. More precisely, one must consider the economic benefits that can be
accrued from such protected areas. In Ethiopia, the answers are to be found not so much in the direct
benefits that can be accrued from the consumption of ecological goods in protected areas (i.. harvest of
medicinal plans and recreational uses of protected areas), but from the indirect benefits secured through
the production of ecological services. Assessed in this manner, the biodiversity of Ethiopia has significant
economic value. For example, the watershed value of the Ethiopian highlands is of high strategic
importance. The highlands of Ethiopia attract large amounts of orographic rainfall. There are seven major
river basins in the area that provide water for the people, livestock, wildlife and riparian vegetation in the
surrounding lowlands. This is a highland-lowland interaction system where resources are not equally
distributed but are dynamically interlinked. Thus, the people, livestock, wildlife and riparian vegetation in
the arid lowlands – including within surrounding countries – are dependent on the good management and
protection of the watersheds in the highlands—many of which lie in protected areas. Degradation of these
areas would impose significant economic costs on the country, underscoring their economic significance.
The biogeography – and biodiversity – of the country is characterized by two dominant geographical
features. The Ogaden, one of the three centers of endemism of the ancient arid Horn of Africa falls within
Ethiopia. The highland plateaux are the second biogeographical feature. Although they are relatively
young in evolutionary terms and they have experienced relative climatic instability over the past 1.5
million years (both in contrast to the arid Horn), highland isolation has resulted in significant endemism.
Whilst the arid Horn and young highlands are relatively impoverished in species number (compared to
other continents), the levels of endemism are high. Ethiopia has over 6,000 species of vascular plant (with
625 endemic species and 669 near-endemic species, and one endemic plant genus), 860 avian species (16
endemic species and two endemic genera), and 279 species of mammal (35 endemic species and six
endemic genera). While Ethiopia still harbors populations of elephants, lions and even black rhinos, there
are a number of charismatic and endemic flagship species, most notably the gelada (an endemic genus and
the world’s only grazing primate), the Mountain Nyala, the Ethiopian Wolf, the Walia Ibex and the Giant
Lobelia.
The biodiversity of Ethiopia (and the extent to which it is currently threatened) has recently received
appropriate recognition. The majority of the country now falls into one of two Biodiversity Hotspots.
Thus, the Ethiopian Highlands comprise over 50% of the Eastern Afromontane Hotspot. Over 40% of the
Horn of Africa Hotspot falls within Ethiopia. However, the areas are among the most threatened Hotspots
in the world. An estimated 97% of the natural vegetation of Ethiopian Highlands has been lost, with
humans having significant impacts on an estimated 95% of the natural vegetation in the Horn of Africa.
Ethiopia’s Protected Areas. The principal mechanism used by Ethiopia to protect biodiversity,
ecosystems and ecological processes has been through a network of wildlife conservation areas and
priority forest areas. The sum of the area of the wildlife conservation and forest areas – a total of 14% of
the area of the country – is above the global average for protected area coverage. These areas contain sites
set aside mainly for conservation (no take areas), and others for sustainable use of wild resources (timber,
hunting).
Ethiopia contains the oldest records of conservation efforts and the oldest conservation area on the
continent. The Menagesha State Forest, as it is known today, was established by Emperor Zera Yacob in
4
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
the 1450s. More remarkably, in Guassa-Menz, local communities developed a sustainable natural resource
management system in the 17th Century, which still persists today. The system allowed equitable use and
distribution of natural resources (thatching grass, fuel wood and grazing) that are, important for the
livelihood security of the community. By regulating exploitation of the area, the management system has
also effectively protected the rich biodiversity of the Afro-alpine ecosystem of the Guassa-Menz area.
In contrast, the ‘modern’ conservation movement stemmed from the realization that hunting (both sport
and subsistence) was having an adverse impact on wildlife populations. Thus, early legislation (1909 and
1944) was designed to regulate hunting. The Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Organization (EWCO) was
established in 1964 specifically to establish the network of protected areas. From the late 1960s to the
early 1980s, EWCO was pivotal in the formulation of legislation, and the designation, establishment and
management of wildlife conservation areas. These areas focused exclusively on large mammals: the areas
chosen were those that still harbored extant assemblages of mammals or those that harbored remnant
populations of endemic and charismatic species. Since this network of protected areas was designated,
only two of the many ‘national parks’, ‘reserves’ and ‘sanctuaries’ have been legally constituted (or
‘gazetted’): Awash National Park and Simien Mountains National Park. Even in these ‘gazetted’ areas,
human impacts have been high. In addition, a large number of forest priority areas (FPA) were established
in the 1980s; by 1994, the government had classified 58 FPA covering 2.8 million ha. However, forest
resources were in general slated for exploitation rather than protection and thus they were not included in
the relatively more robust (wildlife) protected area network. As a consequence, the FPAs were largely
nominal: only one of three (technically and financially unfeasible) management plans was partially
implemented; delineation of the areas was on maps alone; only a few were demarcated; and none was
gazetted. Forests were not the only gaps in the PA system. Other areas were beyond government control,
or little known (e.g. the Ogaden) and thus never included in the system. Rationalization of the protected
area network (including re-classification and, where necessary, declassification), boundary revision,
incentives for voluntary relocation and buffer zone planning all become critical issues for conservation.
The initial management trajectory for the protected area system in Ethiopia was positive, but two linked
issues have undermined the long-term success and sustainability of the protected areas. First, the
management of protected areas was dictatorial, top-down and state-centric. The inertia of this state-centric
approach has continued until today. Therefore, protected area management was done at the expense and
exclusion of local communities, most notably, but also civil society organizations and the private sector. It
was this approach that led to reprisals by local communities during the 1991 change of government,
causing significant damage to some protected sites. The threats to biodiversity can be characterized as:
Summary of threats to biodiversity
Summary of root causes
Unsustainable use of natural resources
Overgrazing by large livestock population
Conversion of natural habitat, and consequent
fragmentation and isolation
Protected area system is not fully representative of all
ecosystems, there are gaps in coverage.
Increasing demand for natural resources, and an overdependence on natural resources, few alternatives
No regulatory ability, and so open-access resources
Poor agriculture planning, no inter-sectoral coordination,
policy not harmonized, little political will
No incentives for conservation by stakeholders, and no
stakeholder participation
Wildlife damage crops, no rewards
The result of the disconnect between the government and communities is that there are few community –
government partnerships over resource management (but see below) and communities operate at a plane
different from that of the government. This, in turn, leads to de facto open access to resources and their
subsequent degradation. Second, funding and the priority given to the environment (including protected
areas) – with their knock-on effect for successful management – have been undermined by a series of geopolitical events including famines, refugee problems, civil unrest, armed rebellions and war. One byproduct was a significant disconnect between protected areas and the development context in Ethiopia.
In addition to and partly as an extension of these issues, the effectiveness of protected areas – even the
5
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
‘gazetted’ national parks – has been undermined because they were never adequately secured, staffed or
equipped. Thus, legislation designed to protect the wildlife has proved impossible to enforce. With the
(albeit not strong) focus on the national parks, the numerous ‘wildlife reserves’ and ‘controlled hunting
areas’ are little more than nominal paper entities and provide little to no protection for the fauna and flora.
However, if the barriers to effective protected areas management identified in the development of this
project can be overcome – including ensuring that the country’s protected areas (and the gaps in the
system) were fully established and administered, then the protected area system does have the potential to
protect the globally important biodiversity, assemblages of species, ecosystems and ecological processes.
In order to design a project that will sustainably improve the management effectiveness of the protected
area system of Ethiopia, the experience of relatively successful conservation initiatives was examined (as
well as a number of failed conservation efforts). These include the successful efforts of the Ethiopian
Wolf Conservation Programme (EWCP) to stop the decline in numbers and the loss of rangelands of the
endemic Ethiopian wolf. There have been successful attempts to catalogue the biodiversity of the country
– most notably though the Ethiopian Flora Project. The results of this work are being taken forward to
identify Key Biodiversity Areas in the country; these results have obvious and important implications for
the gap analysis incorporated in this project. Third and importantly, the efforts and institutional
restructuring of Amhara Regional State have resulted in the extension of the Simien Mountains National
Park, and stopped the decline in walia ibex and Ethiopian wolve numbers. This is an important lesson and
sets a precedent against which the federal organization and other regions will be measured. Finally, in
response to the hiatus in forest areas there have been a number of successful community-based natural
resource (primarily forest focused) management projects implemented by NGOs. The UNDP-GEF project
“NGO-Government Partnerships” showed that community conservation could be successful (around
IBAs).
In conclusion, the sustained conservation of biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological process in Ethiopia is
far from secure but there are definite opportunities and entry points for interventions, and cause for hope.
Project Strategy
Stages
The cultural barriers that pervades Ethiopian society and the degree of the challenges to the sector mean
that the goal can only be achieved in the long-term – hence the length of the project. Success is going to be
based on the development of sufficient institutional capacity. Therefore, the project intends to use a staged
approach to achieve such capacity and translate capacity into action and impact on the ground.
Simplistically:
First Stage
Second Stage
Four Years
Four Years
Developing institutional capacity and piloting field models
Consolidation of models, up-scaling and replication of good practice.
Each stage will be monitored and evaluated. M & E will ensure that suitable indicators are demonstrably
achieved to trigger the second part.
The first stage will focus on strengthening capacity to ensure the sustainable management of the protected
areas. Thus, the social, environmental, institutional and financial framework for sustainability will be
developed and enhanced during this first stage. In contrast, the second stage will consolidate and ensure
the sustainability of these aspects while replicating the good practice model for protected area
development and management that will be adaptively developed and improved through the first stage.
More specifically, the purpose for the first stage of the project will be:
Enabling frameworks and capacities for managing the system of protected areas that have
biodiversity, ecosystem and biological process conservation as a major objective are
6
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
emplaced
This purpose will be achieved through the following five outcomes:

Protected areas mainstreamed in the development framework of Ethiopia;

Appropriate policy, regulatory and governance frameworks in place;

Institutional arrangements and capacity for protected area planning and management in place;

New protected area management options and partnerships piloted, and replicated through
partnerships catalyzed across protected areas; and

Financial sustainability plan developed and demonstrated/operationalized
Having achieved the above, the purpose of the second stage will be:
Working in an enabled environment, sustainable management of the system of protected
areas that have biodiversity, ecosystem and ecological process conservation as a major
objective is ensured
This second stage results will be achieved through the following four outcomes:

Systemic capacity for protected area management consolidated;

Sustainable financing mechanisms contributing to protected area budgets;

Replication of good practice model across protected area estate catalyzed; and

Protected areas mainstreamed across all relevant sectors.
In implementation terms: the first stage focuses on capacity building and will be undertaken through the
support of GTZ-IS and the second stage will follow the achievement of a number of triggers, this will
focus on consolidation of achievements in stage one and achieve sustainable and effective management
across the protected area system (see below for more details). Triggers are described in the following
table.
Project Objectives. The Project Goal, Objective (Purpose), and Outcomes for stages 1 and 2:
GOAL: Ethiopia’s biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes are effectively safeguarded from humaninduced pressures and adequately represented in a sustainable Protected Area System that is contributing
significantly to economic development, both locally and nationally
PROJECT PURPOSE (stage One): Enabling frameworks and capacities for managing the system of protected
areas that have biodiversity, ecosystem and ecological process conservation as a major objective will be in place
OUTCOME1: Protected areas are mainstreamed in the development framework in Ethiopia and receive greater
political support.
1. The major indicators from this PA plan have been adopted in the PASDEP
2. Increased protected area in major watersheds with secured co-financing
3. Protected areas are adopted as a key area of the sustainable land management program
4. Linkage with and adoption by tourism sector of protected areas as one of the key marketing strategies
OUTCOME 2: Appropriate policy, regulatory and governance frameworks in place, leading to redefinition of protected
area categories and reduced land-use conflict
1. Approval and enactment of amended policy and new legislation
OUTCOME 3: Institutional arrangements and capacity for protected area planning and management strengthened
leading to improved PA management
2. Institutional re-structuring, mandate definition and staffing complete
3. Protected Area System Plan adapted, adopted and implemented
4. Individual protected areas use business planning as a standard tool for protected area management
planning and monitoring
7
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
5. Staff skill level
6. Career development planning for staff within protected areas organization
7. Adoption of good practice model for each category of protected area
8. In-country training institutional capacity built
9. Gap analysis complete
OUTCOME 4: New protected area management options and partnerships trialed, and replicated through
partnerships catalyzed across protected areas (Co-Finance)
1. Management effectiveness of protected areas
2. Joint management committees
OUTCOME 5: Financial sustainability plan developed and demonstrated (for implementation in Stage II)
1. Financial sustainability plan is being implemented
2. Tourism is providing recurrent costs for demonstration sites
3. Co-financing secured for six further sites (beyond the demonstration sites)
4. Trust Fund governance mechanisms discussed and established.
TRIGGERS TO MOVE TO STAGE 2:
i. The Ministry of Water Resources has amended its policy to include a protected area component for watershed
management and protection.
ii. Strategies for implementation of Wildlife Policy and Proclamation in place.
iii. The Sustainable Land Management Program and Blue Nile Development are funding protected area
establishment, development and management in relevant areas
iv. A 16% increase in the METT scores for the four demonstration sites recorded by the end of the first stage
v. Six further sites (including at least two new sites) will be benefiting from co-financing and partnerships and will
be being implemented using the produced and disseminated good practice model
vi. The guidelines for limited harvesting (sport hunting and timber) concessions are agreed, in place and enacted in
four concession areas which will act as demonstration sites for replication in the second stage period.
vii. Decision on components of Trust Fund in place (see Annex 9)
PROJECT PURPOSE (Stage Two): Working in an enabled environment, sustainable management of the system
of protected areas that have biodiversity, ecosystem and ecological process conservation as a major objective is
ensured
OUTCOME 1: Systemic capacity for protected area management consolidated. Indicators below:
1. Area coverage of protected areas in country
2. Representation of ecosystems within protected area system
3. Management effectiveness across protected areas
OUTCOME 2: Sustainable financing mechanisms contributing to protected area budgets. Indicators below:
1. Revenue generated by sustainable financing mechanisms increases
OUTCOME 3: Replication of good practice model across protected areas catalyzed
1. Management effectiveness in protected areas
OUTCOME 4: Protected areas mainstreamed across all relevant sectors
1. Collaborated efforts among different sectors to develop protected areas
8
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Project Indicators, Risks and Assumptions
Key Performance Indicators
System sustainability indicators:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Approval and adoption of the Protected Area System Plan by the Council of Ministers;
Protected Area System Plan adapted, adopted and implemented;
Collaborated efforts among different sectors to develop protected areas;
Protected areas as component of watershed management in Ministry of Water Resources;
Protected areas are adopted as a key area of the sustainable land management program;
Linkage with and adoption by tourism sector of protected areas as one of the key marketing
strategies;
Institutional re-structuring, mandate definition and staffing complete;
Gap analysis complete;
Individual protected areas use business planning as a standard tool for protected area management
planning and monitoring;
Individual protected areas incorporate conservation and livelihoods targets in their plans;
Joint management committees;
In-country training institutional capacity built;
Staff skill level;
Career development planning for staff within protected areas organization;
Adoption of good practice model for each category of protected area;
Co-financing secured for six further sites (beyond the demonstration sites);
Financial sustainability plan is being implemented;
Trust Fund established and capitalization commenced;
Income generated by Trust Fund;
Revenue generated by sustainable financing mechanisms; and
Tourism is providing recurrent costs for demonstration sites.
Impact indicators for ecological processes, ecosystems and biodiversity:
22. Percentage representation of the ten ecosystems within the protected area system;
23. Percentage cover of protected areas in the country;
24. Net improvement in management effectiveness of all categories of protected areas across protected
area estate; and
25. Conservation and livelihood targets established and met for all protected areas.
Triggers to move to stage 2:
i. The Ministry of Water Resources has amended its policy to include a protected area component for
watershed management and protection.
ii. Strategies for implementation of Wildlife Policy and Proclamation in place.
iii. The Sustainable Land Management Program and Blue Nile Development are funding protected area
establishment, development and management in relevant areas
iv. A 16% increase in the METT scores for the four demonstration sites recorded by the end of 1st stage
v. Six further sites (including at least two new sites) will be benefiting from co-financing and partnerships
and will be being implemented using the produced and disseminated good practice model
vi. The guidelines for limited harvesting (sport hunting and timber) concessions are agreed, in place and
enacted in four concession areas, which will act as demonstration sites for replication in the 2nd stage.
vii. All components of Trust Fund in place.
The key risks and mitigation measures
9
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Risk
Significant increases in external
development pressure
(resettlement programs, irrigation
schemes, hydroelectric dams) on
protected areas
The process of amending policy
and strategies, and proclamations
to ensure an enabling
environment, including
decentralization and partnershipallowing governance framework
is delayed
Rating
M
Qualified and dedicated people
are not available from within the
institutions or for recruitment
M
Mortality and morbidity rates
from HIV/AIDS related illnesses
increases among the protected
area staff
L
Delay in the institutionalization of
co-management arrangements
with local communities
Linkages among government
agencies remain poor
L
Continued de facto open access to
resources in protected areas
Trophy hunting and timber
harvesting continue to deplete
wildlife populations and forests
M/S
M
M/S
L
Risk Mitigation Measure
Protected areas will be integrated into land use planning, primarily
through the Sustainable Land Management Program. Linkages at
regional level will be strengthened; joint management committees will
be established at the site level. The M&E and communication system
will provide an early warning of increasing pressure.
Continuous policy dialogue between the UNDP-CO and the GoE; the
project providing the support to ensure progress on and finalizing of
drafts. The risk will also be mitigated through the DAG (donor
assistance group) and thematic TWG (technical working groups) and
the PAC, (project advisory committee), which will include a broad
range of government agencies. Strategic use of lobbying and
communications. Inclusion of protected areas into the SDPRP
indicator matrix has assisted policy acceptance.
Institutionalization of training and incentive mechanisms, coupled with
a stringent performance evaluation system will capacitate existing staff
members. Protected area branding and reclassification of certain posts
will also attract qualified and experienced people
Development of institutional HIV/AIDS policy, and education and
well-being program will improve the welfare of infected staff and
decrease infection rates over a long term. HIV/AIDS succession
planning based on the thorough investigation of the current situation
will minimize the impact on protected area management of staff
mortality and morbidity
Development of clear co-management guidelines, including the
establishment of joint management committees and the selection of
representatives, using the Bale Mountains project as good practice..
Establish and institutionalize new cooperative governance structures
among government organizations. Joint management committees with
appropriate representation at a site level will ensure linkages. Create
posts in key organizations the objective of which will be to maintain
and monitoring linkages.
Negotiation and legitimate agreements signed between local
communities for access to and use of resources; agreement of local
communities to boundaries of protected areas; joint management
committees at a site level which include local community and authority
representatives but also local judiciary and law enforcement
representatives; M&E system will provide warning of use; increased
law enforcement capacity.
M&E system will ensure conservation targets in limited harvesting
areas are met; loss of concession or license to operate in Ethiopia if
conservation targets not met; local communities benefiting from
concession and involved in M&E
Integration of private sector into legal and policy reforms, and
planning processes builds confidence.
Tourism does not develop as
M/S
hoped and tourist levies do not
significantly contribute to the
recurrent costs of the PA system
The protected area-development
L
The DAG and TWG will work to institutionalize the linkages with the
linkage is insufficiently developed
government such that protected areas are built into the policies of
to ensure that protected areas
relevant government agencies. The linkage with the World Bank will
benefit financially
be strong, again providing leverage.
Overall risk rating
M+
*Risk Rating: L - Low; M – Medium; S – Substantial
10
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Management Arrangements: Overall Execution and Implementation:
GENERAL
The project will be implemented over a period of eight years. For administrative and strategic purposes,
the project will be implemented in two stages. The first will focus on capacity and institutional change,
while the second will focus on consolidation, up-scaling and replication of best management practice.
UNDP will be accountable to GEF for project delivery and impact and will have ultimate responsibility
for supervising project implementation. UNDP will provide technical backstopping and it will monitor
adherence to the work plan.
The Project will be executed through National Execution (NEX) modalities. However, different
implementation arrangements will be effected in Stages 1 and 2, allowing for a progressive build up of
capacities within MoARD to administer the project:
In Stage 1, GTZ IS will be contracted through an agreement negotiated with MoARD to provide
administrative support for project execution, including fiduciary management, procurement, staff
recruitment, management of the PMU, and financial and operational reporting. The selection of GTZ-IS in
this role is based on the value added it can provide, experience providing such support to national
Government institutions, and in house capacities. These give it a comparative advantage compared to other
institutions working on natural resources management in the country.
A copy of the agreement negotiated between MOARD and GTZ-IS forms attachment 1.
The second four-year stage would start after capacity has been built (several triggers to be met to
allow second stage to start). Stage two will also be executed by MoARD’s structure that has been created
to manage Protected Areas during the stage 1, subject to independent assurances that requisite capacity is
in place.
MoARD would chair the National Steering Committee. The project will receive overall guidance and
orientation from a National Steering Committee (NSC) that will be chaired by MoARD. In order to
consolidate linkages among cross-sectoral government agencies, the NSC would include representatives
from the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development (MoFED), the Environmental Protection
Authority (EPA), the Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR), and the Ministry of Culture and Tourism
(MoCT). It would also include non-governmental organization (NGO) representative (Ethiopian Wildlife
and Natural History Society), and one representative from an academic institution (Head of Herbarium,
Addis Ababa University), Amhara, Oromia and SNNPRS Representatives and UNDP. It is anticipated
that if institutional re-structuring establishes a parastatal organization for Wildlife, the NSC will transform
into the Board of the new organization. Terms of Reference for the NSC are in Annex 1.
A Project Management Unit (PMU) will be managed by the NPC/NPM designated by MoARD &
supported Administrator/Finance and required staff. The PMU will be managed by GTZ-IS in Stage 1.
The project will also be assisted by a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) that will be comprised of ten
people from the government and civil society organizations (NGOs, private sector organizations and
academic institutions), selected on the basis of their competence and willingness to be involved. The TAG
will meet quarterly during the first year and six-monthly thereafter.
An Inception Workshop will be convened within three months of project start-up *(ie appointment of
core staff {see Annex 1}) the Project will review project documentation and work-plans and budgets in
light of realities on the ground. A detailed Inception Report will be prepared, for validation at the
workshop.
11
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
SPECIFIC ARRANGEMENTS IN STAGE ONE
GTZ–IS will be sub contracted by MoARD under a separate Agreement defining the specific roles and
responsibilities to be annexed to this implementation project document and generally, be responsible for:
-
-
Overall provision of technical, administrative and financial management support under the PMU;
Provision of technical advice to the project management unit in the areas of overall financial and
budgetary oversight to ensure there is no over-expenditure, and track budget revisions and financial and
operational completion of the project,
Preparing reports and ensuring quality and content;
Ensure timely submission of quarterly and annual physical and financial reports under the project; and
ensuring timely completion of project activities and achievements of intended objectives.
GTZ will be responsible for the financial management of the parties of the project and shall be
accountable through MoARD to the UNDP Resident Representative for the entirety of UNDP/GEF
resources under its control. This will include:

Maintenance of an account record keeping system that reflects all financial transactions of the project,
preparation of financial reports and reporting on the receipt and disbursement of UNDP funds. The
purpose of the financial report is to request a quarterly advance of funds, to list the disbursement
incurred on the project by budgetary component a quarterly basis, and reconcile outstanding advances
and foreign exchange loss or gain during the quarter. The financial report contains information that
forms the basis of a periodic financial review and its timely submission is a prerequisite to the
continuing funding of the project. Unless the financial report is received, the UNDP Resident
Representative will not act upon requests for advances of funds from UNDP. Financial reporting will
be quarterly.
Application of appropriate budget control mechanism including financial management, project accounting
and budgeting.

Submitting to the Resident Representative of UNDP a certified annual financial statement on the
status of funds advanced by UNDP. The Project will be audited annually as will be reflected in the
annual audit plan prepared by UNDP Headquarters (Division for Audit and Management Review) in
consultation with the Parties. The audit shall be carried out by a qualified audit firm that will produce
an audit report and certify the financial statement. UNDP Headquarters (Division of Audit and
Management Review) approval is not required in the selection of a qualified audit firm.
Notwithstanding the above, UNDP shall have the right to audit or review such project-related books and
records as it may require, and have access to the books and records of GTZ-IS, as necessary.


Establishment of accounting files (purchases, payment, voucher, e.t.c).
Establishment of a separate bank account to be used solely for the funds received under this project.
SPECIFIC ARRANGEMENTS FOR STAGE TWO:
The transfer from stage one to stage two will be based on satisfactory delivery of Stage One outcomes
as per the indicator triggers referred to in earlier sections. This will be ascertained by the External
Mid-Term Evaluation (see below).
1. The Implementing Authority will be the Wildlife Sector within the Ministry responsible for
Wildlife Protected Areas (at present MoARD)
2. UNDP will undertake Support Services in line with revised NEX procedures.
12
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
3. The same PMU as set up within Stage one will continue with an oversight from UNDP
4. Audit procedures will follow NEX rules and regulations
Project Steering Committee
The Project Steering Committee (PSC) will provide oversight and guidance to the project, including the
political leverage that it will require to ensure its success. It will be comprised of the following:
















State Minister for Natural Resources, MoARD (Chair)
MoFED, Head, Multi-lateral donor Department
Director General, Environmental Protection Authority
UNDP Country Office –Ethiopia, and UNDP – GEF Regional Technical Advisor
Head, Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Department
Head, Ethiopian Wildlife and Natural History Society
State Minister for Tourism, Ministry of Culture & Tourism
Commissioner, SNNPR Tourism & Protected Areas Authority
Head, Amhara Parks Development & Conservation Authority
Head of Aid, Royal Netherlands Embassy
Head, Oromiya Natural Resource Department
Regional representative, African Parks Foundation
Director General, Institute of Biological Conservation
President, Ethiopian Wildlife Professionals Association
National Project Manager - Secretariat.
Chief Technical Advisor - Secretariat
Project Steering Committee: Terms of Reference
The PSC will be ultimately responsible for the successful implementation of the project; the evaluations of
the project will, ultimately, hold these people responsible for the success (or failure) of the project’s
implementation. In addition, the PSC will be responsible for the following:
 To lead the monitoring and evaluation of the project, ensuring timely delivery of results and outputs.
 To provide the political support and will that will be necessary for the success of the project. This will
include championing the project at the highest levels of government and among the donor community
(including the DAG and the Ambassador’s Group), and taking issues to the Council of Ministers and
representing the project at the highest political levels within the government.
 To provide a forum for ensuring an integrated approach to project activities
 To approve annual work-plans and budgets for project activities and consideration of proposed
changes as recommendation
 To approve budgetary re-allocation if greater than 5% of annual budget.
Other points:
1. Minutes of meetings will be kept and decisions will be by consensus.
2. The Project Steering Committee may constitute sub-committees and or task forces on specialist topics,
or to review individual project activities.
3. The National Project Manager will be the Secretary for the PSC.
4. The committee may invite project participating institutions as the need arises.
5. The PSC will meet every three months during the first six months of the project’s implementation;
thereafter, the PSC will meet every six months (or sooner if considered necessary by partners).
Project Technical Committee or Advisory Group
The Project Technical Committee (PTC) will bring together the principal partners in the project to review
13
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
progress in the project and to provide a technical forum for exchanging information and to streamline the
implementation of the project. The following will constitute the PTC:












Head, environment, water and energy unit, UNDP-Ethiopia
Environmental representative, DAG (to be appointed by the DAG)
Project Coordinator, African Parks.
Bale Project Coordinator, Frankfurt Zoological Society
Bale Project Manager, FARM-SOS Sahel
Head, Wildlife Conservation Department, MoARD, plus senior technical staff from the WCD
Head, Forestry & Soil Conservation Department, MoARD
Heads or Major Regional Wildlife Agencies
Representative from Ministry of Culture & Tourism
Representatives from Universities [mainly AAU: Herbarium & Biology Department] and Training
Institutions
National Project Manager
Chief Technical Advisor
The PTC will be responsible for ensuring the technical aspects of the implementation of the project;
through the CTA and the NPM, they will report on the technical aspects of the project to the PSC. The
PTC will meet three times a year throughout the duration of the project. The PTC could establish theme
based sub-committees (e.g. training sub committee and community conservation sub-committee)
New Institution’s “Board”
Once the new (parastatal) protected area organization has been formed, in addition to the above
stakeholder inclusion in the project, the organization’s board will be representative of key stakeholder
organizations (including government – federal and regional, non-governmental, academic and private
sector organizations).
PART IV : Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget
Standard UNDP /GEF M&E procedures will be applied – see detail in Annex 4.
Audit: Standard NEX audit procedures will be applied, as per UNDP procedures.
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget
Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) will provide stakeholders and partners with information to measure
progress, determine whether expected impacts have been achieved, and to provide timely feedback in
order to ensure that problems are identified early in implementation and that appropriate actions are taken.
Monitoring will be an integral activity of all objectives and will assess the project’s effectiveness in
protecting biodiversity; evaluate the benefits accruing to communities and other beneficiaries; appraise the
underlying causes of project outcomes (positive or negative); and track the level and quality of public
participation in conservation activities. The project will be implemented through an adaptive framework
that feeds the findings of M & E into operational planning, thus enabling management strategies and
activities to be adjusted as necessary. A number of impact and progress indicators have been selected (see
Log-frame analysis in Annex 3b) at the goal, objective, and output levels. A detailed M & E Analysis with
emphasis on capacity to overcome threats is given in Annex 12, although core indicators on PA coverage
and major species remain.
The project M & E will includes 2 outside evaluations, 3 internal evaluations, and annual METT
assessments (see below for detailed METT baseline scores with indicators). Specific attention will be paid
to triggers affecting the move from stage 1 to stage 2.
14
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
This project will be subject to program evaluation and financial auditing in accordance with the policies
and procedures established for this purpose by UNDP/GEF, including an independent Mid-Term Review
and Terminal Review. The organization, TOR and timing of the evaluations will be decided upon between
UNDP and the National Project Steering Committee.
A summary of Lessons Learned during the PDF-B process and from other regional projects, and how these
are incorporated into project design, is provided in the full Project Document and Annexes. These
introduce the need to develop a Learning Practice for the growing portfolio of GEF Protected Area
Projects across Anglophone Africa during project implementation.
Table 1 Baseline, end of stage 1 and end of project METT scores across assessed protected areas in Ethiopia
(the predicted METT scores for all sites is not given; scores area given for the demonstration sites and the
average across all sites).
Area
Babile Elephant Sanctuary
Awash National Park
Senkele Sanctuary
Alatish (proposed)
Simien Mountains National Park
Nech Sar National Park
Bale Mountains National Park
Omo National Park
Maze
Guassa-Menz Community Area
Yangudi-Rassa National Park
Gambella National Park
Chebera
Average across all above sites
Baseline
14
33
20
11
38
29
33
33
11
36
16
24
11
25
End of Stage 1
End of Project
33
42
40
39
40
40
48
46
48
46
42
46
32
40
The full M and E plan is in Annex 4. The plan provides funding for Evaluations as follows:
Stage One Half Way Internal Evaluation
End Stage One: Detailed External Mid-Term Evaluation
20,000 US$
40,000
Stage Two Half Way Internal Evaluation
20,000 US$
End Stage Two Detailed External Terminal Evaluation
40,000 US $
Financial Modalities : Budget by Outcome:
Amount (US$)
Total (US$)
Project Outcomes
FIRST STAGE
GEF
Co-finance
1 Protected Areas mainstreamed in development framework.
581,604
200,000
781,604
2 Appropriate policy regulatory governance frameworks in place.
404,156
200,000
604,156
1,327,272
9,500,000
10,827,272
4 New PA management options and partnerships trialed.
890,078
1,000,000
1,890,078
5 Financial sustainability plan developed implement Stage 2.
310,910
500,000
810,910
Project Own Internal Management
485,980
1,100,000
1,585,980
3 Institutional arrangements and capacity for PA planning.
15
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Grand Total Stage One of Project
SECOND STAGE
1 Consolidating systemic capacity for PA management
1,363,000
5,000,000
6,363,000
2 a Sustainable financing / business plan in place.
2 b Trust fund established, with GEF seed money.
1,030,000
2,000,000
3,030,000
3 Catalysing replication of good practice models in PAs
1,114,000
1,000,000
2,114,000
4 Protected Areas mainstreamed across all sectors / levels
1,090,000
529,000
1.519,000
403,000
1,400,000
1,803,000
22,429,500
31,429,500
Project Own Internal Management
Grand Total Stage Two of Project
5,000,000
OVERALL TOTAL FUNDING IN PROJECT
9,000,000
Co-financing
Co-financier source
Ministry of Agriculture
Parks Africa
Bilateral Donors (Netherlands
lead) for Bale Landscape
CI
FZS
Sub-Total Co-financing
UNDP Associated Finance for
Sustainable Development
Co-financing Sources
Classification
Type
US$
Government
In-kind
4,764,500
Private Sector
Grant
7,750,000
Bi-lateral
Grant
7,320,000
INGO
Grant
5,000
INGO
Grant
2,590,000
22,429,500
ALL
IK & G
Multi-Lateral
1,200,000
Status
Committed 8 years
Committed 8 years
Committed 8 years
Committed Stage I
Committed 8 years
Committed in Stage I,
Sustainable Dev to districts
around PAs
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 Ethiopia and the United Nations Development
Programme, signed by the parties on August 1981 and which became operational in November 1985.
The UNDP Resident Representative in Addis Ababa 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-stage 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
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 and Finance manuals. The Audit will
be conducted by the legally recognized auditor of the Government, or by a commercial auditor engaged by
the Government.
16
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Section II: Strategic Results Framework and GEF Increment
Logical Framework
Hierarchy of Objectives
GOAL:
Ethiopia’s biodiversity,
ecosystems and ecological
processes are effectively
safeguarded from humaninduced pressures and
adequately represented in a
sustainable Protected Area
System that is contributing
significantly to economic
development, both locally and
nationally
PROJECT PURPOSE (First
Stage):
Enabling frameworks and
capacities for managing the
system of protected areas that
have biodiversity, ecosystem
and ecological process
conservation as a major
objective are emplaced
Key Performance
Indicators
 Approval and
adoption of the
Protected Area System
Plan by the Council of
Ministers. The plan is
being implemented.
Baseline
Target
No such plan in place
Plan in place and approved
by end Year 2.
17
Means of
verification
Council of Minister
approval for the
Protected Area
System Plan (Yr 2)
Critical Assumptions/Risks
 Ethiopia wishes to fulfill
her international and national
commitments to biodiversity
conservation
 Political stability is
maintained
 Protected areas are valued
and mainstreamed within the
development context of
Ethiopia
 Macro-economic
environment is positive
 External pressures on
protected areas do not
significantly increase
 Private sector, civil
society, communities and
other stakeholders respond
positively to improved policies
and incentives
 Ethiopian government
continues to commit to the restructuring and institutional
arrangements proposed herein
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Hierarchy of Objectives
Key Performance
Indicators
 Percentage cover of
protected areas in the
country
 Percentage
representation of the ten
ecosystems in the
protected area system
 Net improvement in
management
effectiveness of
protected area estate
OUTCOME 1: Protected areas
mainstreamed in the
development framework in
Ethiopia
 The major
indicators from this
plan have been adopted
in the PASDEP
Baseline
Target
 14% of Ethiopia is
currently listed as
nominal protected areas
 Following
rationalization of the
protected area system,
coverage the protected
will decrease. This will
then be taken as the
baseline for growth
 Percentage coverage
of ecosystems will be
assessed following the
rationalization of the
protected areas
 Currently, it is
estimated that three
ecosystems are adequately
represented, four are
partially represented and
three are not at all
represented
 All protected areas in
Ethiopia have a METT
score < 40
 There is no
monitoring of
effectiveness.
 All protected areas,
regardless of their
classification, remain
largely unmanaged.
 PASDEP under
discussion (they have
already been accepted)
 Dependent on the
rationalized baseline;
expected to be between 810% of area of country (end
of stage II)
18
Means of
verification
 Data from
protected areas
organization
Critical Assumptions/Risks
 Linkage between
protected areas and
sustainable development
understood and acted upon
 Innovative management
measures accepted
 Identification of all sites
to ensure adequate
representation (end of Stage
I)
 Minimum of 5%
representation of each
ecosystem (end of Stage II)
 Data from
protected areas
organization
 System METT score
(calculated by the average
METT score across the
system using only the areas
included in the baseline
score, and readjusted once
new areas are assessed or
are designated) increased by
6% (end of Stage I) and by
12% (end of Stage II)
 PASDEP enacted
 Site-level
METT scores
 System METT
score
 Publication of
the PASDEP (Yr
1)
 METT scores

 Linkage between
protected areas and
sustainable development
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Hierarchy of Objectives
OUTCOME 2: Appropriate
policy, regulatory and
governance frameworks in
place
Key Performance
Indicators
 Increased protected
area in major
watersheds with
secured co-financing
 Protected areas as
component of
watershed management
in Ministry of Water
Resources (Trigger for
Stage 2)
 Protected areas are
adopted as a key area
of the sustainable land
management program
 Linkage with and
adoption by tourism
sector of protected
areas as one of the key
marketing strategies
 Approval and
enactment of amended
policy and new
legislation
Baseline
Target
Means of
verification
 Data from
protected areas
organization
 Ministry of
Water Resources
policy
Critical Assumptions/Risks
 0.06% of upper Great
Abbai watershed in
protected areas
 4 % coverage of Great
Abbai watershed
incorporated in new
protected areas (end of
Stage II)
 Sustainable land
management program
under design
 Sustainable land
management program
enacted and implemented
including protected areas as
component (Trigger for
Stage 2)
 Tourism strategy
enacted
 Publication of
the national
sustainable land
management
program
 Publication of
national tourism
strategy
 Focus and marketing of
tourism remains on cultural
and historical sites
 Proclamation for
‘parastatal’ protected areas
organization with
appropriate powers and
with clear definition of
mandate
 Amendment of policy
and legislation i) to broaden
governance types and allow
management partnerships
and ii) to re-define
protected area categories
 The four demonstration
sites are gazetted (end of
stage I)
 The amended
policy and
legislation are
approved and
enacted by the
Council of
Ministers and the
House of People’s
Representatives
 METT scores
for gazetted sites
 System METT
score
 The process to amend,
approve and enact policy and
legislation is not delayed
 Initial discussions on
incorporation of
protected areas in tourism
strategy
 New wildlife policy
& strategy has been
approved; new
proclamation pending
approval
19
understood and acted upon
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Hierarchy of Objectives
OUTCOME 3: Institutional
arrangements and capacity for
protected area planning and
management emplaced
Key Performance
Indicators
 Institutional restructuring, mandate
definition and staffing
complete
 Protected Area
System Plan adapted,
adopted and
implemented
Baseline
Target
 This project
document provides
baseline for PASP
 PASP is being
adaptively implemented
 Individual
protected areas use
business planning as a
standard tool for
protected area
management planning
and monitoring
 Staff skill level
 No business planning
at the protected area site
level
 Business plans and
monitoring systems
adopted in 4 demonstration
sites (end of Stage I) and in
a total of 10 sites (end of
Stage II)
 No staff with
business planning skills
 Recruitment, training
and M&E do not exist
 Career
development planning
for staff within
protected areas
organization
 Career planning does
not occur
 Adoption of good
practice model for each
 Good practice model
uses demonstration site
 Staff with appropriate
business planning skills
(Master’s level business
planners, socio-economists,
and environmental
economists) employed by
protected area organization
(end of Stage I)
 Staff skill levels have
risen to 30% (end of Stage
I) and 60% of potential
(end of Stage II)
 30% and 70% of staff
have career development
plans (including training
opportunities and incentive
mechanisms)(end of Stage I
and II, respectively)
 Good practice model
developed from
20
Means of
verification
 Data from
protected area
organization
 Independent
assessment of
PASP
 Council of
Ministers approval
of PASP
 Existence of
business plans
 Existence of
monitoring plans
Critical Assumptions/Risks
 GoE responds well to
innovative management
measures
 Innovative management
measures accepted
 Independent
survey of skills
using stratified
sampling across
all ranks
 Individual
M&E system and
incentive
mechanisms in
place
 Qualified and dedicated
people are available from
within the system and for
recruitment

 An adequate number of
staff are interested and
capable to advance their
careers in conservation
 Highly experienced staff
remain with the organization
 Acceptance of innovative
management measures
As above
 Plans for six
sites, Stage II
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Hierarchy of Objectives
OUTCOME 4: New protected
area management options and
partnerships piloted, and
replicated through partnerships
catalyzed across protected area
estate
OUTCOME 5: Financial
Key Performance
Indicators
category of protected
area
Baseline
Target
plans as baseline
 In-country training
institutional capacity
built
 Scout training facility
does not exist
 Gap analysis
complete
 No gap analysis
exists
 Management
effectiveness of
protected areas
 METT scores
(demonstration sites)
 METT scores (six
further sites)
 Joint management
committees
 No joint management
committee exists
 Management
effectiveness of limited
harvesting areas
 No limited harvesting
areas using guidelines


Financial
No sustainable
21
demonstration sites used for
planning six sites (in Stage
II)
 Scout training facility
established
 Existing and new sites
prioritized for
development; projects in
six top priority areas
catalyzed (Trigger for
Stage 2)
 METT scores for
demonstration sites
increased by 16% (end of
Stage I; Trigger for Stage
2) and 20% (end of Stage
II)
 METT scores for six
further sites increased by
16% (end of Stage II)
 Joint management
committees established for
all 4 demonstration sites
(end of Stage I) and for a
total of 10 sites (end of
Stage II)
 Four limited harvesting
areas using agreed
regulations (Trigger for
Stage 2)
 Sustainable financing
Means of
verification
Critical Assumptions/Risks
 Independent
assessment of
training
institutions
 Number of
graduates from
training
institutions
 PAS database
established
 Gap analysis
report


METT scores
All
demonstration
sites gazetted
 Local level stability, law
and order are maintained

Minutes of
joint
management
committee
meetings
 Acceptance of innovative
management measures

METT scores
 Local level stability, law
and order are maintained

Production of
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Hierarchy of Objectives
sustainability plan developed
and demonstrated
PROJECT PURPOSE
(Second Stage):
Working in an enabled
environment, sustainable
management of the system of
protected areas that have
biodiversity, ecosystem and
ecological process conservation
as a major objective is ensured
OUTCOME 1: Systemic
capacity for protected area
management consolidated
Key Performance
Indicators
sustainability plan is
being implemented
 Tourism is
providing recurrent
costs for demonstration
sites
 Co-financing
secured for six further
sites (beyond the
demonstration sites)
 Trust Fund
established and
capitalization
commenced

 Area coverage of
protected areas in
country
 Representation of
ecosystems within
protected area system
 Management
effectiveness across
protected area estate
Baseline
Target
financing plan exists
plan is being implemented
 Government
subsidizes protected area
system; 0% offset by
generated revenues
 No lodges within
demonstration sites
 No co-financing for
these sites
 Revenues will offset
20% (end of Stage I) and
60% (end of Stage II)
 Each demonstration site
has appropriate visitor
accommodation in place
 Incremental costs of
projects fully funded


No Trust Fund exists
 Staff skill levels at
30% of potential (end of
Stage I)
 30% of staff have
career development plans
(including training
opportunities and
incentive
mechanisms)(end of
Stage I)
 Good practice model
being used for planning
22
Trust Fund established
 Staff skill levels have
risen to 60% of potential
(end of Stage II)
 70% of staff have
career development plans
(end of Stage II)
 Good practice model
adapted from data from 10
sites; planning being
carried out across a further
8 sites
Means of
verification
sustainable
financing plan
 Annual audit
reports, protected
area organization
 Agreements
and contracts with
donors
 Trust Fund
annual reports
 System METT
score
 Site level
METT scores
 Maps and
representation
reports
Critical Assumptions/Risks
 Tourism develops as is
hoped
 Linkage between
protected areas and
development understood and
acted upon
 Trust Fund is acceptable
sustainable financing
mechanism
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Hierarchy of Objectives
OUTCOME 2: Sustainable
financing mechanisms
contributing to protected area
budgets
OUTCOME 3: Replication of
good practice model across
protected area estate catalyzed
OUTCOME 4: Protected areas
mainstreamed across all
relevant sectors
Key Performance
Indicators
 Revenue generated
by sustainable
financing mechanisms
 Management
effectiveness in
protected areas
 Collaborated
efforts among different
sectors to develop
protected areas
Baseline
Target
six sites
 No budget offset
 60% of budget offset
by financing mechanisms at
EOP
 At end of first stage,
4 areas operational; six
others being developed
 (From first stage)
Protected areas
incorporated into sectoral
programs
23
 At EOP, 10 areas
operational; a further eight
being developed
 Protected areas in
policy and legislation of all
relevant government
organizations
Means of
verification
 Audited
reports from
protected area
organization
 METT scores
 Production of
sustainable
financing plan
Critical Assumptions/Risks
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
Section III: Total Budget and Work-plan
( See Annex 10 for both Stage I and Stage II of the budget)
24
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
OUTCOME /OUTPUT WORKPLAN
OUTCOME / OUTPUT
STAGE 1
Year 1
1
2
Year 2
3
4
1
2
Year 3
3
4
1
2
Year 4
3
4
Inception report*
1
Protected areas are mainstreamed
in the development framework in
Ethiopia and receive greater
political support.
1.1
The major indicators from this PA
plan have been adopted in the
PASDEP
Increased protected area in major
watersheds with secured cofinancing
Protected areas are adopted as a
key area of the sustainable land
management program
Linkage with and adoption by
tourism sector of protected areas as
one of the key marketing strategies
1.2
1.3
1.4
2
Appropriate policy, regulatory and
governance frameworks in place,
leading to redefinition of protected
area categories and reduced landuse conflict
2.1
Approval and enactment of
amended policy and new
legislation
Institutional arrangements and
capacity for protected area
planning and management
emplaced, leading to improved
PA management
Institutional re-structuring,
mandate definition and staffing
complete
Protected Area System Plan
adapted, adopted and implemented
3
3.1
3.2
Completed NEEDS follow-up and monitoring
25
1
2
Year 5
3
4
1
2
Year 6
3
4
1
2
Year 7
3
4
1
2
Year 8
3
4
1
2
3
4
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
4
4.1
4.2
5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
Individual protected areas use
business planning as a standard
tool for protected area management
planning and monitoring
Staff skill level
Career development planning for
staff within protected areas
organization
Adoption of good practice model
for each category of protected area
In-country training institutional
capacity built
Gap analysis complete
New protected area management
options and partnerships trialed,
and replicated through
partnerships catalyzed across
protected area estate (CoFinance)
Management effectiveness of
protected areas
Joint management committees
Financial sustainability plan
developed and demonstrated (for
implementation in Stage II)
Financial sustainability plan is
being implemented
Tourism is providing recurrent
costs for demonstration sites
Co-financing secured for six
further sites (beyond the
demonstration sites)
Trust Fund governance
mechanisms established and
capitalization commenced
Evaluations, Stage One
Preparing workplan and budget for
Stage Two
STAGE 2
26
Ethiopia Protected Areas: Operational ProDoc Version November 20 2007
6
6.1
6.2
6.3
7
7.1
8
8.1
9
9.1
Systemic capacity for protected
area management consolidated.
Indicators below:
Area coverage of protected areas in
country
Representation of ecosystems
within protected area system
Management effectiveness across
protected area estate
Sustainable financing
mechanisms contributing to
protected area budgets.
Indicators below:
Revenue generated by sustainable
financing mechanisms increases
Replication of good practice
model across protected area
estate catalyzed
Management effectiveness in
protected areas
Protected areas mainstreamed
across all relevant sectors
Collaborated efforts among
different sectors to develop
protected areas
* Following the recruitment of the two key people for this project (the Chief Technical Advisor and the National Project Manager), an inception
report will be prepared. This will present a more detailed workplan which will include details of each activity. It will also re-examine the budget.
On submission of the inception report, the first annual workplan and budget will be submitted.
27
Section IV: Additional Information
ANNEX ONE Terms of Reference the Project Management Unit and Key Project Staff
The project seeks to assist the Government of Ethiopia to strengthen its capacity to manage effectively its
protected areas. The project will be implemented over a period of eight years. For administrative and
strategic purposes, UNDP, as the GEF Implementing Agency, will implement the project in two stages.
The first will focus on capacity and institutional change, while the second will focus on consolidation, upscaling and replication of best management practice. Both Stage One and Stage Two will be implemented
through National Execution Modalities (NEX) modalities, by MoARD to implement the project processes,
under the oversight of the National Steering Committee. A Project Management Unit (PMU) will be central
to the implementation of the project throughout its duration. Detailed implementation modalities (including
TOR) for stage two will be developed as part of the evaluation of stage one and will be adaptive to the
situation in four years time. Note that the Inception Process, within three months of the startup of the
project, will review the timing and detailed ToR for these posts.
Project Management Unit (PMU)
The PMU is seen as the hub in a decentralized, collaborative, multi-faceted initiative. Note that the PMU
from the PDF B project development stage of this project still exists within the MoARD/WCD, and would
evolve in to the larger PMU for the Full Project Implementation (using the already existing resources).
Most importantly, the PMU will organize the training needed to assure the development of Ethiopian
capacity to meet future needs where this capacity is currently lacking or insufficient. The PMU team must
therefore possess both depth and breadth of African experience and technical expertise in order to provide
the range of services required for this project. Details of expected PMU services are provided below, with
more detailed lists of required experience/expertise in the individual ToRs that follow.
Where expertise exists within existing Ethiopian government agencies, NGOs, or private sector entities, the
PMU role is to coordinate and oversee the implementation of project components, where necessary through
sub-contractual arrangements. Where this expertise does not exist, the PMU will assist its government
partners to identify and recruit outside experts to provide the needed skills in a transparent & open process.
The PMU will be based within the Wildlife Conservation Department, with a primary mandate to build
functional capacity of the WCD.
The PMU must:
 Be the mechanism whereby project partners (Government, UNDP) and GTZ IS - first stage Technical
Service Provider for defined components of the project, including support to the Steering/Technical
Committees, organize workshops and conferences, as well as production of diverse reports, technical
papers, etc.
 Ensure linkages among the relevant departments including the current Wildlife Conservation, and
Forestry Departments within the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and the regional
government bodies which are mandated to manage the regional PAs. It should also create linkage with
other key relevant government bodies, including the EPA, MoFED and MoWR.
 Provide (through its staff, support organization, and outside contacts) expertise in: biodiversity
conservation, research and analysis, protected area management, multi-disciplinary training,
conservation finance, ecotourism, sustainable harvesting practices, community-based conservation,
geographic information systems, and monitoring and evaluation
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc







Work collaboratively with government agencies (including those responsible for parks, tourism,
forestry, water, environment, biodiversity, finance, and decentralization at both federal and regional
levels), NGOs (international, national, and regional), local districts and associations, local communities
and the private sector
Negotiate, develop and oversee MoUs with diverse partners to implement project components where
in-country capacity exists
Identify and recruit outside expertise where internal technical capacity is insufficient or non available
Assess capacity building needs (using the studies from the project development stage as a baseline) and
develop appropriate training programs to fill existing gaps
Demonstrate and apply established fiscal management and accounting procedures, subject to regular
external audits and review
Have familiarity with UNDP accounting and financial management procedures
Execute with the support of GTZ IS required project functions for an initial four-year period within the
agreed budgetary limits
The PMU will be located within the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, sitting with the State
Minister for Natural Resources and linking closely with the Wildlife Conservation Department and the
Department for Forestry and Soil Conservation. Once the transition to a new protected area organization
has taken place, the PMU will shift with it.
The PMU will develop specific MoU / Letters of Agreement with Regional Wildlife Authorities over the
use of project support / resources at de-centralised level. Similar MoUs would be developed with training
institutions such as Wondo - Genet Forestry College.
The PMU will begin operations in Addis Ababa as soon as possible after approval of this documentation.
PMU Staff Requirements. The PMU team will consist of a staff of three senior individuals. TOR for these
positions are described below, followed by a list of functions to be filled by the remaining staff.
National Project Manager: TOR
The National Project Manager (NPM) will be the key project position. S/he will be designated by the State
Minister of MoARD; S/he will be an Ethiopian national supported by the project and will be responsible to
MoARD for the following tasks:
 The NPM will be responsible for the overall management and implementation of the project and
ensuring timely delivery of the outputs of the project, in cooperation with GTZ IS TA.
 Together with the TA the NPM will prepare specific work plans, recruit needed expertise, and ensure
integrated delivery of components.
 Together with the Administrative Accounts Officer, the NPM will have responsibility for overall
financial management of the project.
 The NPM will ensure excellent communication and linkages among all governmental, nongovernmental and private sector stakeholders; this will include ensuring adequate representation and
participation in project processes.
 Together with the TA, the NPM will develop TOR, terms and conditions and contracts for staff,
consultants and sub-contracts.
 Maintaining linkages and seeking entry points through national and regional developmental priorities.
 Ensuring the effective functioning of the PMU regarding the PMU Terms of Reference (see above)
National Project Manager: Qualifications
The National Project Manager will be an Ethiopian fully salaried by the project. S/he will work very
closely with MoARD/WCD and will be the primary contact with government and other partners. Required
29
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
skills include:
 Minimum ten years of conservation or related management experience
 Minimum five years project management experience within donor / government programmes
 University degree, Masters in a related field preferred
 English fluency, strong writing skills and computer skills including computer management skills
 Strong collaborative skills, team building skills and coordination skills.
Chief Technical Advisor: TOR
With the National Project Manager, the Chief Technical Advisor (CTA) will oversee the implementation of
the project. S/he will be responsible to NPM and MoARD for the following:
 Overall implementation of technical components of the first stage of the project, including ensuring
delivery against the outputs for the project.
 Production of annual work plans, budgets and milestones for the implementation of the project.
 Ensuring the accountability and transparency of all project processes, and advise on the recruitment of
personnel and consultants and sub-contractual processes
 Ensuring project reporting is timely and adequate, including financial and technical reporting.
 Ensuring the dissemination of lessons learnt, media information, reports and other project outputs.
 Together with NPM, MoARD and UNDP, liaising with the donor community in Addis Ababa to lever
further funding for both system-wide and site-specific work.
 Maintaining linkages and seeking entry points through national and regional developmental priorities.
 Ensuring the effective functioning of the PMU regarding the PMU Terms of Reference (see above)
 Together with NPM, organize workshops, conferences and study tours
Chief Technical Advisor: Qualifications
The Chief Technical Advisor will be someone with considerable technical expertise, African management
experience and diplomatic skills. Particular skills required are:
 Fundamental understanding of the politics, economics and science of the conservation of ecological
services, ecosystem and biodiversity in a context of sector marginalization, rural poverty and
development pressure
 Minimum 10 years conservation and development management experience
 Advanced degree in conservation or related resource management field
 English fluency; willingness to learn Amharic
 Strong “bio-diplomatic” skills team building skills and a collaborative nature
Administration / Financial Officer
The Administrator will be an Ethiopian national, supported by the project. He/she will be a senior person
with at least five years increasingly responsible experience in project budgeting, financial control, and
administration. Computerised accounting experience is essential and knowledge of GoE and UNDP
systems will be an advantage. MoARD will further develop these ToR.
Other senior staff
Additional staff are listed below. Their specific TOR, terms and conditions will be developed by the NPM
and the CTA during the Inception Stage and agreed on during the Inception Workshop.
Regional and Federal Department Technical Advisors
In addition to the three core staff based in the PMU, two Technical Advisors will be deployed to provide
support to the regional governments (Oromiya, SNNPR, Amhara, Somali, Afar, Gambella and Tigray).
They would be accountable to the NPM.
30
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Further advisors will be deployed in federal government organizations (one for community conservation
issues in the Division of Natural Resources – thereby covering Wildlife Conservation Department and the
Forestry & Water Conservation Department both in the Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Development; and
one advisor for Wildlife Tourism in the Ministry of Culture & Tourism). The Inception workshop would
clarify timings and detailed ToR.
Wildlife Scout Training Advisor
The Scout Trainer will be a regional / international position. S/he will be recruited to train scouts in situ
across the country as well as to train trainers. S/He will also be responsible for putting together and training
the ‘mobile scout training unit’.
Institutional and constitutional law advisor.
This is seen as a part-time post. The institutional and constitutional lawyer will be necessary throughout the
duration of the first stage of the project to provide legal advice on institutional restructuring, and to assist
with drafting the policies, legislation, strategies and regulations. This is particularly important with the
analysis of the existing legislation – much of which is contradictory.
Note that shorter term consultant positions and institutional contracts are not described here, they will be
agreed to in the Inception process and followed up by the PMU.
ANNEX TWO: Stakeholder Participation Framework
1. One of the key barriers identified during the project preparation stage was the lack of stakeholder
involvement in the management of the Protected Areas of Ethiopia. This has its root cause in a number of
factors: i) the state-centric focus of the protected area system to date (thus, no legislation or policies
allowing for community managed or public-community partnerships in areas, ii) state-community duality –
state being unable to regulate communities and communities largely operating independently of state, and
iii) a reluctance to decentralize. To this can be added the reluctance to involve stakeholders in policy or
legislation, which is in part related to lack of confidence, institutional competition and poor knowledge
management.
2. As a consequence, one of the key aspects of this project will be broadening governance types to allow
other stakeholders become involved in the planning and management of the protected area system.
Stakeholders
3. In the PDF-B process, the lack of communication, coordination and linkages among government
agencies was identified as a barrier to success and effective protected area management. Linkages are
particularly important as protected areas are mainstreamed in the development framework in Ethiopia.
This requires identification and involvement of the sectoral organizations in the protected area
organization.
4. Other non-state actors can also provide effective services to the protected area system. These include
academic institutions and NGOs that may be able to carry out specific activities such as biodiversity
surveys, GIS analyses, gap analyses, environmental economics analysis, establishment of communitybased natural resource management systems, catalyzing activities in and around protected areas, brokering
relationships among actors and donors – and even the management of protected areas themselves.
5. Because the opportunity costs of protected areas are largely constrained to local communities, they are
key stakeholders in the planning and management of protected areas.
6. However, because of the highland-lowland system of Ethiopia and the watershed of the highlands, the
stakeholders involved in this project are not simply constrained to local communities and a protected area
authority. Instead, the highland-lowland system and the interdependence of communities, means that
31
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
stakeholder identification is complex and can involve people far from the protected area itself.
7. Finally, because of the particular international importance of biodiversity and ecological processes in
Ethiopia, the international community is involved as a stakeholder. In part, the GEF is representing the
international community and its concerns over the internationally important values in Ethiopia by assisting
with the incremental costs for this project.
Project preparation
8. The project preparation, PDF-B stage was a team process, led by National Project Coordinator,
supported by a Technical Advisor with five years’ protected area experience in Ethiopia. The team also
included inputs from five Ethiopian specialist consultants supported by two regional experts from Uganda.
The consultants covered the themes of i) Sustainable Financing (national and regional specialists), ii)
Capacity Development and Institutional Arrangements (national and regional specialists), iii) Gap Analysis
and Policy Review, iv) Community and Stakeholder Analysis and v) Demonstration Sites.
9. Oversight for the PDF-B stage was provided by a National Steering Committee (NSC) of 12 people,
chaired by State Minister for Natural Resources and political support increased over the course of the stage.
Members of the NSC included representative from different agencies of the federal and regional
governments, civil society organizations, and academic organizations. The NSC met three times to date
and is due to meet twice more in the coming months.
10. The project preparation stage included a number of formal meetings, workshops, formal and informal
discussions. Over the course of the PDF-B stage, an estimated 375 people were consulted at the federal,
regional and local levels. They included sectoral ministries, regional governments, protected area wardens
and scouts, local communities, NGOs, CSOs, academic organizations, donors and private sector
organizations.
11. Close relationships were forged among donors, including the World Bank, to ensure comprehension of
the development issues related to protected areas and most importantly the role that protected areas should
play within the development context within Ethiopia. The possibility of co-finance for protected areas
linked with development – such as the construction of hydroelectric dams – was discussed and agreed in
principle.
12. A series of discussions with African Parks ensured the sharing of information and ideas, and led to the
convergence of views.
13. The project development team has been involved in the development of the SDPRP II, particularly in
the development of the indicator matrix. This is the key to the document as it is on the indicator matrix that
the government and donors focus in the forthcoming five years. This will significantly enable protected
areas to take their position in the mainstream of development within the country.
14. Finally, there has been strong links with the tourism sector, not only among private operators within
the country but also with the World Bank led initiative to develop the sector.
15. As a result, a stakeholder meeting was held on 28 July 2005 to discuss the broad root cause and
barriers analysis, and the interventions to be undertaken. The stakeholders endorsed the analyses and the
proposed interventions, as did the NSC on 29 July 2005. In addition, these sectoral approaches have been
presented to the National GEF Committee (chaired by Ministry of Finance and Economic Development,
MoFED) on 30 July.
16. Stakeholder participation will be a core value of the implemented project and will operate throughout
the project at all organizational and institutional levels.
17. At the protected area organizational level, a board for the protected area organization will be
established. This will include representatives from key cross-sectoral governmental agencies (Ministry of
Water Resources, Ethiopian Tourism Commission and Environmental Protection Authority), nongovernmental, academic and private partners. The organization will have representation within the
32
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
regional governments; their main role will be to ensure linkages within the regional government agencies
or bureaus, and to provide oversight to the management of the protected areas within their particular region.
18. It is essential that, in contrast to the current practice, stakeholders are included in the development of
policies, regulations and legislation. In order to facilitate this, until this is integrated into the protected area
organization’s own budget, such stakeholder consultations will be funded by the GEF project
19. At the site level, a number of steps will be taken to ensure stakeholder participation. First, a joint
management committee will be the primary oversight body for the management of a given protected area.
The joint management committees will include key stakeholders – thus possibly including but not limited
to: local communities or representatives thereof, communities further away if they are dependent on the
resources from a particular source (and the best example is water), civil society organizations, local
authorities (at the woreda level and if relevant at the kebele level), local law enforcement authorities,
donors and sectoral agencies. The joint management committee will thus be the primary body for ensuring
linkages among the stakeholders and actors in the areas.
20. The Bale Mountains project will trial and demonstrate effective mechanisms for stakeholder
identification at the site level. Importantly, because the Bale Mountains represents the watershed for the
majority of the southeast of Ethiopia and for Somalia, and because of the international importance of the
biodiversity, the stakeholders are not just local, but they include communities far removed from (but
dynamically interlinked with) the area. The project will then negotiate with the stakeholder communities
(primarily local) for access to and use of resources but taking into account the sustainable needs of other
(downstream) communities and stakeholders.
21. By definition, local communities will be central to the community-based protected areas.
22. However, in the limited harvesting areas, the relationships are less clear but as important. The
inclusion of local communities and the government in limited harvesting areas will be formalized through
legitimate agreements that will be drawn up and signed. These will indicate the roles of these stakeholders
in the management of the area.
23. Thus, stakeholders will be involved in planning and management of protected areas.
24. Stakeholders will not just be involved in the planning and management of areas. Their involvement in
the monitoring and evaluation is also essential to ensure transparency. For example, it will be necessary for
local communities to be involved in the monitoring and evaluation of the limited harvesting areas. In part,
this is to ensure that the community benefits of these areas are realized.
25. In addition, contracts will be awarded for a number of independent assessments as part of the
monitoring and evaluation framework.
26. The Knowledge Management System, developed as a part of Outcome 3, will assist with stakeholder
involvement – thus, ensuring i) the exchange of ideas and experiences among government organizations
both at federal and regional levels and ii) that lessons learnt and the good practice model will be adapted as
a result of monitoring and evaluation practices. The system will not only operate at the federal and
regional government level. The joint management committees that will be established at a site level will
also have the opportunity to share ideas, practices and experiences through the system. In order to ensure
this, the project provides (until such time as the sustainable financing mechanisms are in place and
knowledge management becomes an integral part of the organizational budgets) for exchange programs,
guidance materials, study tours and secondments to ensure knowledge and experiences are widely shared
and replicated.
33
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
ANNEXTHREE: Monitoring and evaluation framework
1. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) will be an integral activity within all outcomes. The M&E
framework will have a number of objectives:
a. Provide stakeholders and partners with information to measure progress
b. Determine whether expected impacts have been achieved
c. Provide timely feedback in order to ensure that problems are identified early in
implementation and that appropriate actions are taken
d. Assess the project’s effectiveness in protecting biodiversity
e. Evaluate the benefits accruing to communities and other beneficiaries
f. Appraise the underlying causes of project outcomes (positive or negative)
g. Track the level and quality of public participation in conservation activities.
2. The project will be implemented through an adaptive framework that feeds the findings of M&E into
operational planning, thus enabling management strategies and activities to be adjusted as necessary.
3. A number of impact and progress indicators have been selected (see Log frame analysis in Annex 3b) at
the goal, objective, and output levels.
4. The project M&E will include:
a. Two independent, external evaluations (one at the end of the first stage specifically to
determine whether the ‘triggers’ for the second stage have been achieved)
b. Three internal evaluations (one during the Inception Stage at the beginning of the project
and one at the mid-term of each stage)
c. Annual METT assessments that will be carried out in each protected area (see detailed
METT baseline scores in full prodoc)
d. Site-level monitoring of key ecological attributes associated with each conservation target
and the threats to them
e. Annual audited accounts for the project throughout its duration.
5. M&E will be carried out at each level within the system, but the primary indicator for the protected area
system – including individual protected areas will be the METT scores.
System-wide monitoring
Key Performance Indicators
 Approval and adoption of the Protected Area System Plan by
the Council of Ministers
 Percentage cover of protected areas in the country
 Percentage representation of ecosystems in the protected area
system
 Net improvement in management effectiveness of protected
area estate
 The major indicators from this plan have been adopted in
the PASDEP
 Increased protected area in major watersheds with secured
co-financing
 Protected areas are adopted as a key area of the sustainable
land management program
 Linkage with and adoption by tourism sector of protected
areas as one of the key marketing strategies
 Approval and enactment of amended policy and new
legislation
 Adoption of good practice model for each category of
protected area
34
Means of verification
 Council of Minister approval for the Protected Area System
Plan (Yr2)
 Data from protected areas organization
 Data from protected areas organization

System METT score

Publication of the PASDEP (Yr 1)

Data from protected areas organization
 Publication of the national sustainable land management
program
 Publication of national tourism strategy
 The amended policy and legislation are approved and enacted
by the Council of Ministers and the House of People’s
Representatives
 Plans for six sites, Stage II
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc

Key Performance Indicators
Gap analysis complete



Financial sustainability plan is being implemented
Trust Fund established, capitalized and income generated
Revenue generated by sustainable financing mechanisms
Means of verification
PAS database established
Gap analysis report
Production of sustainable financing plan
Trust Fund annual reports
Audited reports from protected area organization





Institutional
Key Performance Indicators
 Approval and adoption of the Protected Area System Plan by
the Council of Ministers. The plan is being implemented.
 Linkage with and adoption by tourism sector of protected areas
as one of the key marketing strategies
 Approval and enactment of amended policy and new
legislation
 Institutional re-structuring, mandate definition and staffing
complete
 Protected Area System Plan adapted, adopted and
implemented
 Staff skill level
 Career development planning for staff within protected areas
organization
 Adoption of good practice model for each category of
protected area
 In-country training institutional capacity built

Gap analysis complete

Financial sustainability plan is being implemented
Means of verification
Council of Minister approval for the Protected Area System
Plan (Yr 2)
 Publication of national tourism strategy
 The amended policy and legislation are approved and
enacted by the Council of Ministers and the House of People’s
Representatives
 METT scores for gazetted sites
 System METT score
 Data from protected area organization
 Independent assessment of PASP
 Council of Ministers approval of PASP
 Independent survey of skills using stratified sampling
across all ranks
 Individual M&E system and incentive mechanisms in
place
 Annual reports indicating qualifications of employees
 As above

Plans for six sites, Stage II





Independent assessment of training institutions
Number of graduates from training institutions
PAS database established
Gap analysis report
Production of sustainable financing plan
Site level
Key Performance Indicators
 Individual protected areas use business planning as a standard
tool for protected area management planning and monitoring
 Staff skill level


Career development planning for staff
Management effectiveness of protected areas

Joint management committees
 Proportion of budgets being offset by sustainable financial
mechanisms
Means of verification
 Existence of business plans
 Existence of monitoring plans
 Independent survey of skills using stratified sampling
across all ranks
 Individual M&E system and incentive mechanisms in
place
 As above

Annual METT scores

All demonstration sites gazetted

Minutes of joint management committee meetings
 Annual audit reports, protected area organization

 Sustainable financial mechanisms, including tourism, are
providing recurrent costs for demonstration sites
35
Financial audits
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
ATTACHMENT I: Supplementary Agreements
THE FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
COOPERATION AGREEMENT
Between
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
And
THE GESELLSCHAFT FUER TECHNISCHE
ZUSAMMENARBEIT (GTZ) GmbH-INTERNATIONAL SERVICES
On
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A GEF/UNDP FUNDED PROJECT
Sustainable Development of the National Protected Areas System of Ethiopia
(Date)
36
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Preamble
The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development is the responsible Government entity for the national system of
protected areas. The Government wishes to strengthen management of the protected areas system, to protect the
country’s biodiversity endowment and improve the contribution of the estate to development objectives and strategies.
In order to facilitate this, a project has been developed with financial support from the Global Environment Facility
(GEF). The aim of the project is strengthen national capacities to manage protected areas, in order to improve the long
term sustainability of the protected area system.
GTZ has supported a number of activities in the natural resources management sector in Ethiopia, and is active
throughout the region in this field. GTZ-IS (which is the project implementation branch of GTZ) is providing
implementation support services to the Government of Ethiopia for a number of development projects. GTZ-IS has
therefore been identified as a competent organization that has wide experience in wildlife conservation in Ethiopia.
GTZ-IS is willing to provide its technical services during the implementation of the project, helping to build the
capacity of MoARD to administer the initiative.
The Project will be implemented in two Stages, each with a duration of 4 years. This Agreement covers Project
Activities in Stage 1, and defines the aims, activities and responsibilities of MoARD and GTZ.
Article I. Definitions
For the purpose of this Agreement, the following definitions shall apply:
A. “Parties” shall mean the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and the German Agency for
Development Co-operation through its office for International Services-GTZ-IS.
B. SDPASE shall mean the project: “Sustainable Development of the Protected Area System of Ethiopia”
implemented by GTZ-IS in order to assist MoARD to improve the management effectiveness and
sustainability of the national system of protected areas.
C. “UNDP” shall mean the United Nations Development Programme, a subsidiary organ of the United Nations,
established by the General Assembly of the United Nations.
D. MoARD shall mean the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, tasked with administration of the
National Protected Area System of Ethiopia and Executing Agency for the Project.
E. “GTZ-IS” shall mean the Gesellschaft fuer Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH through its office for
International Services in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
F.
“The Agreement” or the “present agreement” shall mean this Project Corporation Agreement, the Project
Document, which incorporates the Project Objectives and Activities, Project Work Plan, Project Inputs being
provided by UNDP/GEF resources, Project Budget, and al other documents, agreed upon between the Parties
to be integral parts of this agreement.
G. “UNDP Resident Representative” shall mean the UNDP official in charge of the UNDP office in Ethiopia, or
the person acting on his/her behalf.
H. “GEF” shall mean the Global Environmental Facility.
I.
UNDP/GEF” shall mean the United Nations Development Programme as an implementing agency for the
Global Environment Facility.
J.
“Project Work Plan” shall mean a schedule of activities, with corresponding time frames and responsibilities,
which are based upon the Project Document, deemed necessary to achieve project results, prepared at the
time of approval of the project.
37
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
K. “Expenditure” shall mean the sum of disbursements made and valid outstanding obligations incurred in
respect of goods and services rendered.
Article II. Objective and Scope of the Present Agreement
1.
The present Agreement is between the Government of Ethiopia (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development-MoARD), of [INSERT PHYSICAL ADDRESS], Ethiopia as the executing agency for the
project “Sustainable Development of the Protected Area System of Ethiopia” (SDPASE). As specified in the
project document (of which this present Agreement forms Attachment 2).
2.
The SDPASE project has funding support of US$ 9,000,000 from the Global Environment Facility (GEF)
through the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The Project is divided into two stages, each
with a duration of four years. The GEF funding allocation for Stage 1 is US$ 4,000,000.
3.
The Present Agreement covers activities that will be undertaken in Stage 1 of the project.
4.
The aim of this Agreement is to clarify the roles and responsibilities of the parties, in order to achieve the
objectives of the project and ensure that the parties join efforts and maintain close working relationships.
5.
The title of the Agreement is SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROTECTED AREA SYSTEM
OF ETHIOPIA.
Article III. Duration of Project Agreement.
1.
The terms of this Agreement become effective from [1-06, 2007] and end on [31-05-2011].
2.
Should it become evident to either party during the implementation of the project that an extension beyond
the expiration date set out in paragraph 1 of the present Article, will be necessary to achieve the objectives of
the project, the party shall without delay, inform the other party with a view to entering into consultations to
agree on a new termination date. Upon agreement on the termination date, the parties shall conclude an
amendment to this effect, in accordance with Article VII (Amendments).
3.
The scope of collaboration will be centred on the Sustainable Development of the Protected Area System of
Ethiopia as outlined in the project document.
Article IV. Implementing Arrangements
1. The parties agree to carry out their responsibilities in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, and
to undertake the project in accordance with UNDP policies and procedures as set out in the UNDP Programming
Manual.
2.
The MoARD, will be responsible for overall implementation and coordination of the project activities.
In Particular MoARD shall:
i.
Set up a Project Technical Steering Committee under the chairmanship of the Director of Wildlife
Conservation Department. The committee membership will include representatives from the Ministry of
Water Resources (MoWR), the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development (MoFED), the Ministry of
Culture and Tourism (MoCT), the Ethiopian Wildlife and Natural History Society (an NGO), one
representative from an academic institution (Head of Herbarium, Addis Ababa University), Amhara, Oromia
and SNNPRS representatives and UNDP. The Steering Committee will provide oversight to the project and
appoint a National Project Coordinator in the Ministry, who will oversee project progress and government
related issues arising from implementation of the project activities.
ii.
Assist in obtaining the necessary exemption on import licenses, income tax, custom duties, and other charges
in respect of services on motor vehicles, equipment, publications, still and moving pictures, sound recordings
38
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
and other materials imported into Ethiopia or purchased from bond for the use of the project. Provided that in
the event of such goods being sold or disposed of in Ethiopia other than to a person or organization similarly
privileged, duties and taxes shall be payable thereon by such persons or organizations.
iii.



iv.


v.


Provide all possible support to GTZ-IS staff members, technical advisors or consultants on assignment in
Ethiopia to enable the fulfillment of the objectives of this agreement and in accordance with the spirit of cooperation. In particular:
Assist them to obtain permits that allow them freedom of travel, movement and communication necessary for
the satisfactory performance of their duties under the agreement.
Assist them to obtain exemption from income tax, other personal taxes and from social security contribution
on income and emoluments received from GTZ-IS
Assist them to obtain work permits, dependant passes, re-entry permits and identity cards;
In consultation with GTZ-IS and UNDP to second a senior wildlife officer for the time of project
implementation to be the National Project Manager, who will be fully accountable for the delivery of project
outputs as outlined in his /her individual terms of reference.
The activities under the present Agreement are in support of the efforts of the Government, and therefore
GTZ-IS will communicate with the Government through the National Project Manager as necessary.
The day to day monitoring of implementation of agreed activities shall be taken by the National Project
Manager, who will act as the principle channel for communicating with the Government Cooperation
Agreement unless otherwise agreed with the Parties and the Government.
Provide logistical support in the following areas:
Facilitate access to district level agriculture, forestry, wildlife, local government and retention and
community development networks.
Facilitate interactions with all required agencies of government.
vi.
Ensure all expendable and non-expendable property purchased out of the project budget is used only for the
purpose of the project as governed by this agreement. The use of non-expendable material which is no longer
required within the project shall be decided by written consent of the parties of this agreement and UNDP.
vii.
In collaboration with GTZ-IS, ensure that a satisfactory inventory of all non-expendable property maintained.
viii.
Assist GTZ-IS to operate such bank accounts in foreign exchange and undertake such foreign exchange
operations as may be required in order to satisfactorily carry out project activities subject to any exchange
control.
3. GTZ-IS, as Implementing Agency for Stage 1 of the Project, will be responsible for setting up the project and
providing technical support and expertise in accordance with the project document of which this agreement is an
annex.
In particular GTZ-IS shall
i.
In consultation with MoARD and UNDP provide a Technical Advisor who shall be the focal point for
delivery of technical support at the project level.
ii.
In consultation with MoARD and UNDP, as specified in the project document section on implementation,
supervise and ensure the implementation of all project-funded activities in the field, including preparation of
work-plans and their follow-up, preparation of Terms of Reference for studies, reviews and other tasks;
briefing/debriefing of consultants where and when appropriate.
iii.
Provide technical and administrative support to the implementation of the project through its GTZ-IS
Technical Programme and Project Management Department.
iv.
Maintain project accounts according to the project documents ad as elaborated in article V.
39
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Article V. Financial Responsibility and Management
It is mutually agreed between the parties that:
1.
GTZ will be responsible for the financial management of the parties of the project and shall be accountable
through the Ministry to the UNDP Resident Representative for the entirety of UNDP/GEF resources under its
control. This will include:

Maintenance of an account record keeping system that reflects all financial transactions of the project, preparation
of financial reports and reporting on the receipt and disbursement of UNDP funds. The purpose of the financial
report is to request a quarterly advance of funds, to list the disbursement incurred on the project by budgetary
component a quarterly basis, and reconcile outstanding advances and foreign exchange loss or gain during the
quarter. The financial report contains information that forms the basis of a periodic financial review and its timely
submission is a prerequisite to the continuing funding of the project. Unless the financial report is received, the
UNDP Resident Representative will not act upon requests for advances of funds from UNDP. Financial reporting
will be quarterly.
Application of appropriate budget control mechanism including financial management, project accounting and
budgeting.

Submitting to the Resident Representative of UNDP a certified annual financial statement on the status of funds
advanced by UNDP. The Project will be audited annually as will be reflected in the annual audit plan prepared by
UNDP Headquarters (Division for Audit and Management Review) in consultation with the Parties. The audit
shall be carried out by a qualified audit firm that will produce an audit report and certify the financial statement.
UNDP Headquarters (Division of Audit and Management Review) approval is not required in the selection of a
qualified audit firm.
Notwithstanding the above, UNDP shall have the right to audit or review such project-related books and records as it
may require, and have access to the books and records of GTZ-IS, as necessary.


Establishment of accounting files (purchases, payment, voucher, e.t.c).
Establishment of a separate bank account to be used solely for the funds received under this project.
GTZ-IS agrees to utilize the funds and any supplies and equipment provided by UNDP in strict accordance with the
Project Document. GTZ-IS shall be authorized to make variations, in consultation with the WD, not exceeding twenty
(20) per cent on any one line item of the project budget, provided that the total budget allocated by UNDP is not
exceeded.
GTZ-IS shall notify UNDP about any expected variations on the occasion of the quarterly consultations set forth in
Article VI. Any variations exceeding twenty (20) per cent on any one line that may be necessary for the proper and
successful implementation of the Project shall be subject to prior consultations with and approval by UNDP.
GTZ-IS further agrees to return within two (2) weeks any unused supplies made available by UNDP at the termination
or end of this Agreement or completion of the Project. Any unspent funds shall be returned within two (2) months of
this Agreement or the completion of the project.
During meetings, seminars and workshops, GTZ-IS will pay per diems by following the rates of the Government of
Ethiopia for eligible participants with the exception of GTZ-IS staff, who will follow GTZ-IS rates. Guidelines on per
diem payment to participants of international agencies and type of meetings for which per diem is paid will be
finalized by the project team.
2.

The UNDP Country Office will have the responsibility of maintaining, at country level, administrative and general
programme oversight for the implementation of project activities, from the donor perspective. In this respect, the
UNDP Resident Representative in Ethiopia is the focal point within UNDP for the following:
Assisting in the preparation of/and or revision of the implementation agreements.
40
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc



Administration and programming oversight, including participating in the preparation of work plans under this
agreement and monitoring their implementation.
Financial monitoring of the activities under this agreement, including ensuring that advances of UNDP/GEF funds to
GTZ-IS are made in accordance with the detailed work plan, and on a basis of a written request.
Ensuring that GTZ-IS meets its responsibilities, including timely submission of financial and technical progress
reports.
UNDP shall not be liable for the payment of any expenses, fees, tolls or any other financial costs not outlined in the Project
Work Plan or Project Budget, unless UNDP has explicitly agreed in writing to do so prior to the expenditure by GTZ-IS.
Article VI. Reporting Requirements
The reporting requirements are set out in the project document and include:


GTZ-IS shall provide MoARD and UNDP with periodic technical reports on the progress, activities, achievements
and results of the project, as agreed between the parties. GTZ-IS will prepare quarterly technical and financial reports
describing the main achievements during the period and present them through MoARD to UNDP.
UNDP Country office shall provide UNDP/GEF Headquarters with a detailed report on project progress. The report,
known as a Project Implementation Review/Project Performance Evaluation Report (PIR/PPER) shall be drafted by
the project management team.
Article VII. Amendments
The present Agreement may be modified or amended only by written agreement between the parties.
Article VIII. Dispute Resolution
Any matter regarding the interpretation of the provision of this Agreement, including issues relating to the implementation
of the activities as outlined in the detailed work plan, will be settled through consultations between the parties and UNDP.
Any dispute arising out of this Agreement shall be referred to adjudication in accordance with the Ethiopian laws and
rules.
41
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto, have on behalf of the Parties hereto signed the
present Agreement at the place and on the day below written.
This is agreed and signed at Addis Ababa On the ……….day of …….2……
For MoARD
Signature: __________________________
Name: _____________________________
Title:_______________________________
Place:______________________________
Date:______________________________
Witnesses
Signature: _________________________
Name: ____________________________
Title:______________________________
Date:______________________________
For GTZ-IS
Signature:_______________________
Name:__________________________
Title:___________________________
Place:___________________________
Date:____________________________
Witnesses
Signature: _________________________
Name: ____________________________
Title:______________________________
Date:______________________________
42
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
ATTACHMENT II: Source Proposal Approved by the GEF
Executive Council (Updated as to changes in Implementing
Modalities)
Table of Contents
List of tables .............................................................................................................................................. 43
List of figures ............................................................................................................................................ 44
Acronyms .................................................................................................................................................... 2
1
Context.................................................................................................................................................. 46
1.1
Environmental context ................................................................................................................. 46
1.2
Socio-economic and Institutional Context ................................................................................... 53
1.3
Policy Context .............................................................................................................................. 56
2
The Baseline Course of Action & Threat / Root Cause Analysis ......................................................... 57
2.1
3
Barriers to effective protected area system management ............................................................. 59
The GEF Alternative............................................................................................................................. 66
3.1
Goal and purpose ......................................................................................................................... 67
3.2
Outcomes, outputs and activities ................................................................................................. 68
4
Risk analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 88
5
Expected Global, National and Local Benefits ..................................................................................... 89
6
Eligibility and linkages ......................................................................................................................... 92
6.1
Eligibility for GEF funding .......................................................................................................... 92
6.2
Conformity with COP Guidance and GEF Strategic Priorities .................................................... 92
6.3
Linkages with other GEF initiatives and IA ................................................................................ 93
6.4
Linkages with Ethiopia’s priorities, policies and programs ......................................................... 93
6.5
Linkages with the UNDP Country Program and other interventions........................................... 94
7
Sustainability ........................................................................................................................................ 95
8
Replicability.......................................................................................................................................... 96
9
Project Implementation Arrangements ................................................................................................. 98
10
Budgets and Finance
11
Monitoring, Evaluation, and Lessons Learned ..................................................................................... 99
List of tables
Table 1. Summaries of threats to biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes and their root causes. 48
Table 2. Summary of the major protected areas in Ethiopia. ....................................................................... 50
43
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Table 3. The general and specific barriers and their impacts. ...................................................................... 59
Table 4. Possible governance types for different protected area categories. Note that policy currently
allows only those governance types shown in dark grey; policy will be amended to allow governance
types shown in medium grey. Those not shaded are either not possible (because land tenure does not
permit private ownership of land), or because the protected area category does not exist and is not
possible (IUCN categories I and III; some of the transboundary categories). ....................................... 71
Table 5. The key risks and mitigation measures .......................................................................................... 88
List of figures
Figure 1. The broad model for re-defining protected areas within Ethiopia. ............................................... 73
Acronyms
AAU
ADB
ADLI
CBD
CBNRM
CIDA
CITES
DEX
EFAP
ETC
EU
EWCO
EWCP
EWNHS
FD
FDRE
FPA
FZS
GEFSEC
GTZ-IS
HIPC
IBC
IDA
IFC
IUCN
JICA
KBA
KWS
MDG
METT
MoARD
MoFED
NBI
NBSAP
NEX
NTEAP
Addis Ababa University
African Development Bank
Agriculture Development Led Industrialization
Convention for Biological Diversity
Community-based Natural Resource Management
Canadian International Development Agency
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
Direct Execution
Ethiopian Forestry Action Plan
Ethiopian Tourism Commission
European Union
Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Department
Ethiopian Wolf Conservation Programme
Ethiopian Wildlife and Natural History Society
Forestry, Soils and Land Use Department
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
Forest Priority Area
Frankfurt Zoological Society
GEF Secretariat
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit – International Services
Highly Indebted Poor Country
Institute for Biodiversity Conservation
International Development Association
International Finance Cooperation
World Conservation Union
Japan International Cooperation Agency
Key Biodiversity Area
Kenya Wildlife Service
Millennium Development Goals
Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
Ministry of Finance and Economic Development
Nile Basin Initiative
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
National Execution
Nile Trans-boundary Environmental Project
44
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
PASP
PDF
SIDA
SDPASE
SDPRP
SLM
TANAPA
TNC
UNESCO
UNDP
UWA
WAJIB
WB
WCD
WCS
Protected Area System Plan
Project Development Fund
Swedish International Development Agency
Sustainable Development of the Protected Area System of Ethiopia
Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction Program
Sustainable Land Management
Tanzanian Parks Authority
The Nature Conservancy
United Nations Education, Science and Cultural Organization
United Nations Development Program
Uganda Wildlife Authority
The GTZ community-based forest project in Adaba-Dodola
World Bank
Wildlife Conservation Department
Wildlife Conservation Society
45
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
1 Context
Environmental context
Biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes
2. Ethiopia is a landlocked country with an area of 1.13million km² (of which 1.12million km² are land).
It is bordered to the north by Eritrea, to the east by Djibouti and Somalia, to the south by Kenya and to
the west by Sudan (see maps, Annex 5).
3. The biogeography of the country is characterized by two dominant features - first, the ancient, arid
areas of the Horn of Africa, with its three centres of endemism one of which, the Ogaden, falls within
Ethiopia. The mesic highland plateaux are the second biogeographical feature. Although relatively young
in evolutionary terms and has experienced relative climatic instability over the past 1.5million years (both
in contrast to the arid Horn), highland isolation has resulted in significant endemism. Overall, therefore,
while the arid Horn and young highlands are relatively impoverished in species number, the levels of
endemism are high. Therefore, Ethiopia has over 6,000 species of vascular plant (with 625 endemic
species and 669 near-endemic species, and one endemic plant genus), 860 avian species (16 endemic
species and two endemic genera), 279 species of mammal (35 endemic species and six endemic genera)
(see Annex 2 for detailed description of the biodiversity of Ethiopia).
4. The vegetation of the country falls into five recognized biomes: Sudanian, Congo-Guinean, Sahel arid
zone, Somali-Maasai, and the Afrotropical and montane. These can be further sub-divided into ten broad
ecosystems: i) Afroalpine and sub-alpine, ii) dry evergreen montane forest and grassland, iii) moist
evergreen montane forest, iv) moist evergreen lowland forest, v) Congo-Guinean forest, vi) Acacia
woodland and thickets, vii) Acacia-Commiphora woodland, viii) Combretum-Terminalia
woodland/savannah, ix) lakes, wetlands & river systems, and x) arid ecosystems. However, analysis
carried out over the course of the development of this project indicates that there are a total of 17
ecosystems (see Annex 4); of these, seven are not represented at all in the protected area network.
5. There are a number of charismatic flagship species, most notably the gelada (an endemic genus,
Theropithecus, and the world’s only grazing primate), the mountain nyala, the Ethiopian wolf, the walia
ibex and the giant lobelia. The biodiversity is described in more detail in Annex 4.
6. The global significance of the area has been recently recognized through Conservation International’s
Biodiversity Hotspots. The country spans two Hotspots: the Horn of Africa and the Ethiopian Highlands
(which is included in the Eastern Afromontane Hotspot). The areas included in the Hotspots covers the
majority of the country, including the entire eastern area of Ethiopia below 1,100m ASL and all highland
areas above 1,100m ASL (see maps in Annex 5).
7. In addition to the biodiversity, the country contains i) outstanding bio-physical features, including the
standing lava lake of Erta’Ale, the sulphur formations of Dallol, and the spectacular Rift Valley
escarpments of the Simien Mountains and Abune Josef, ii) the well-known historic sites (e.g., Lalibela,
Axum, Gondar), iii) many paleontological and archaeological sites, and iv) a rich diversity of peoples
(with over 200 dialects of 80 distinct languages). Being one of the centers of plant domestication, the
country also harbors rich agro-biodiversity (Harlan, 1992).
8. There is a further critical aspect to the environment – the ecological processes – in Ethiopia that has
important implications for this project. The highlands are the watershed for the surrounding lowlands.
46
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
There are seven major river basins (Webe Shebelle, Awash, Omo, Juba and Blue Nile – comprised of the
Takeze, Baro-Akobo and Abbai; see Annex 5 for map) in the highlands of Ethiopia that provide water for
the people, livestock, wildlife and riparian vegetation in the lowlands. This is the highland-lowland
system where resources are not equally distributed but are dynamically interlinked. Thus, the people,
livestock, wildlife and riparian vegetation in the lowlands are dependent on the good management and
protection of the watersheds in the highlands.
Direct threats to biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes
9. While the threats to biodiversity of Ethiopia are underpinned by high human population pressure (see
below), the exploitation of the area by humans is not a modern phenomenon. It has been estimated that it
has been ongoing for many thousands of years, particularly to the west of the Rift Valley, and this has
destroyed most of the natural vegetation, including most of the forests (Harlan, 1992). Indeed, highlanders
even refer to each vegetation zone in terms of its habitability and the agriculture that can be practiced:
Wurch (Afroalpine, >3,000m, too cold to be habitable, no agriculture); Dega (temperate, 2,300–3,000m,
barley, wheat, potatoes, pulses); Weyna Dega (warm temperate, 1,500–2,300m, tef, maiza, wheat, pulses);
and Kolla (tropical, 800–1,500m, sorghum) (and with Bereha being the hot and dry lower altitudinal areas
<800m, no rainfed cultivation).
10. Several plant species, whose maximum productivity lies between 1,800 and 2,100m, were
domesticated in the Highlands, which includes their centres of diversity and origin. They include khat
(Catha edulis), ensete (Enset ventricosum), noog (Guizotia abyssinica), finger millet (Eleusine coracana
for beer), tef (Eragrostis tef) and coffee (Coffea arabica) (Harlan, 1992). The exact date and location for
the domestication of all these plants is unknown. On the basis of linguistic, historic, geographic and
botanical studies, there is no doubt that, with some variation, they are very ancient crops and most authors
put the date at between 6,000-3,000 years ago. The destruction of the environment, thus, may be
considered to be all the more ironic because of this long tradition of using indigenous natural resources exemplified by the domestication of these plants. However, various authors consider that these
domesticated plants are simply examples of the occasional commodity found to be useful by people a
number of generations ago.
11. Altitude has had a profound effect on human exploitation and so the extent of the original vegetation
that remains. The long history of agriculture means that all productive land in the highlands has been
transformed and the original vegetation that remains only does so because it is confined to the ecosystems
that are extreme and defy human use. These are the steep escarpments of the Rift Valley and the river
gorges, the cold Afroalpine plateaus and a few patches of thick forest. Consequently, a few key areas of
the remaining original vegetation emerge as being critically important to the biodiversity and ecological
processes. These are obviously very limited in size as they are not only geographic islands above the
surrounding lowlands, but also islands in a human-transformed environment. However, as the human
population has increased so too has the pressure on land resorces. In the highlands, people are now tilling
marginal lands: barley is sown up to 4,100m in the northern highlands1 on slopes greater than 45°.
12. Besides agricultural crops, Ethiopia has the largest national herd of domestic livestock and cattle, in
particular, in Africa. Overgrazing is increasingly obvious. In part, the number of cattle in the country
results from the absence of fuelwood (what there was, say, fifty years ago with has largely been removed
through human exploitation for fuel and construction), as most Ethiopian highlanders use cattle dung as
their main source of fuel. As with agriculture and similarly because of land degradation, livestock are
increasingly using the more extreme areas to graze – such as the high altitude Afroalpine area. Thus, in
2002, the livestock in a discrete area of the Bale Mountains reached an unprecedented density of 314
animals/km².
1
Thus, the highest altitude that barley is tilled anywhere in the world.
47
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
13. Besides the biodiversity reducing effects of erosion and increasing the abundance of invasive
unpalatable species (Herlocker, 1990), overgrazing also increases competition between livestock and
wildlife species (e.g., Williams, 1998). In addition, livestock and the domestic dogs that often accompany
them increase the risk of disease transmission to wildlife species. Two rabies epidemics in the past 14
years have occurred among Ethiopian wolves by transmission from domestic dogs (Randall et al., 2004),
and this serves as a constant reminder of the seriousness of this threat. Dogs also pose a further, insidious
threat to wolves through hybridization (Sillero-Zubiri & Macdonald, 1997).
14. Humans have hunted and killed birds and mammals, reducing their populations to a fraction of what
they were 150 years ago. For example, the Grevy’s zebra population in Ethiopia declined by 93% over a
23 year period (1,600 to 110 from 1980 to 2003, Williams et al., 2003). Similar declines in numbers and
range (although with less precise datasets) for many species, including, for example, African wild ass,
Swayne’s hartebeest, mountain nyalas and elephants (reportedly 90.5% declines of elephants in some
populations in the country). The killing of animals has not just been for subsistence use or potentially as a
buffer during famines. During (frequent) political upheavals in the region, the infrastructure of the national
parks has been successively used and then destroyed by armed groups, who also kill animals for food.
Further, because the national parks and wildlife populations held within them have been largely associated
with repressive regimes (particularly the ‘dergue’, the military-Marxist regime of Mengistu Haile
Mariam), the population vented suppressed anger by destroying park infrastructure and slaughtering large
mammals (Yalden et al., 1996). Finally, the transformation of the environment is culturally
institutionalized: an officially sanctioned painting that hangs within the National Museum depicts the
felling of a great tree that symbolizes the people's triumph over “feudalism and backwardness!”
15. The sum of these factors has resulted in a massive transformation of the environment, and it is
estimated that as much as 97% of the original vegetation has been lost in the highlands (Williams et al.,
2005) and that 95% has been degraded in the eastern lowlands (Friis, 2005). The degree to which the
natural vegetation and animal populations have been lost means that the region’s diversity is acutely
threatened. These threats and the root-causes of those threats are summarized below and analyzed in more
detail in Annex 2. Underlying these root-causes is the basic set of pressures on natural resources from a
dense and still growing population of humans, with extensive livestock herds, living with an absolute
reliance on natural resources.
TABLE 2. SUMMARIES OF THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY, ECOSYSTEMS AND ECOLOGICAL
PROCESSES AND THEIR ROOT CAUSES.
Summary of threats
Unsustainable use of natural resources
Overgrazing by large livestock population
Conversion of natural habitat, and consequent
fragmentation and isolation
Protected area system is not fully representative of all
ecosystems, there are gaps in coverage.
Summary of root causes
Increasing demand for natural resources
Overdependence on natural resources, few alternatives
No regulatory ability, open-access
Poor agriculture planning, no inter-sectoral coordination,
policy not harmonized, little political will
No incentives for conservation by stakeholders
No stakeholder participation
Wildlife damage crops, no rewards
Ethiopia’s Protected Area System
16. The historic international focus on the scale of poverty and destitution in Ethiopia begs the question:
“is there room for a protected area system?” In order to answer this question, one must consider what
such a protected area system could contribute to society. More precisely, one must consider the economic
benefits that can be accrued from such protected areas. In Ethiopia, the answers are to be found not so
much in the direct benefits that can be accrued, but from the economic costs that can be saved by
protecting the environment.
48
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
17. From the outset, it must be clear that the government of Ethiopia – not only the present government
but also previous regimes – believes that there is room for such a system. Indeed, the principal
mechanism used by Ethiopia to respond to these threats has been through a network of wildlife
conservation areas and priority forest areas. The sum of the area of the wildlife conservation and forest
areas – a total of 14% of the area of the country – is above the global average. These areas contain sites set
aside mainly for conservation, and others for sustainable use of resources (timber, hunting). Ethiopia has
also expressed her commitment through her Constitution and through the ratification of a number of
international agreements including the Convention for Biological Diversity.
18. Ethiopia contains the oldest records of conservation efforts and the oldest conservation area on the
continent. The Emperor Zera Yacob (1450s) noted the loss of forest cover on what is now called
Wuchacha Mountain. The forest was replenished at his orders using seeds and seedlings of Juniperus
procera to create Menagesha Forest, which stands today (Gilbert, 1970).
19. More remarkably, although not quite as old, in the Guassa-Menz area of North Shoa, local
communities developed a sustainable natural resource management system in the 17th Century. The
system, known as Qero, allowed equitable use and distribution of natural resources (thatching grass,
fuelwood and grazing) that were, and still are, important for the livelihood security of the community. By
regulating exploitation of the area, the management system has also effectively protected the biodiversity
of the Afroalpine ecosystem of the Guassa-Menz area.
20. When the Qero arose, it was supported by the authority of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, a powerful
component of this ancient society. The system declined in 1975 as a result of the Agrarian Reform of
1975, which was introduced under the socialist regime that came to power in the revolution of 1974.
People that were previously excluded from resource use gained uncontrolled access through their
constituent peasant association. When it became apparent that the resource management system was
declining under the land tenure reform, the community responded by establishing the Guassa Committee,
known locally as Idir. The Committee retained significant community representation, but was deemed
acceptable to the political and social order of the socialist regime. The remarkable adaptation and
subsequent persistence of the system suggests that it is resilient even in the face of significant political
change (Tefera, 2001).
21. As elsewhere in the world, modern conservation efforts (Adams, 2004) emerged from the realization
that hunting (both sport and subsistence) was having an impact on wildlife populations. Thus, in 1909
Ethiopia passed its first wildlife legislation designed to regulate ‘sport’ hunting – particularly of elephants.
Despite this and up to 1944, the fauna and flora were still largely viewed as an infinite source of food and
other materials, and as a source of sport for the upper echelons of society and expatriates in the country.
The Preservation of Game Proclamation of 1944 reinforced earlier legislation to regulate hunting and to
prevent the over-hunting of certain species.
22. With interest from international conservation organizations, pivotally UNESCO, the Ethiopian
Wildlife Conservation Organization (EWCO) was established in 1964 (see history in Hillman, 1993a) to
establish the network of protected areas. Because of a lack of wildlife management experience (cf. the
experience that was built in neighboring Kenya and Uganda through their colonial pasts) the majority of
the early work – the production of legislation and the designation of protected areas – was largely carried
out by expatriates. It is only since the first batch of trainees returned from the Mweka Wildlife College in
Tanzania in the early 1970s that Ethiopian nationals started taking senior positions within EWCO.
49
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
23. From the late 1960s to the early 1980s, EWCO has been pivotal in the formulation of legislation to
protect the fauna and flora, and the designation, establishment and management of wildlife conservation
areas. These areas were proposed as a result of various surveys that took place in the 1960s and early
1970s. The wildlife conservation areas focused exclusively on large mammals: the areas chosen were
those that still harbored extant2 assemblages of mammals or those that harbored remnant populations of
endemic and charismatic species. Thus, Simien Mountains National Park was established to protect walia
ibex, Bale Mountains National Park to protect mountain nyala and the Ethiopian wolf, Yangudi-Rassa the African wild ass, Awash – the assemblage of Soemmering’s gazelles and beisa oryx, Gambella – the
white-eared kob and Nile lechwe, and so forth (Hillman, 1993b). The table below lists the most important
Protected Areas; a full list is in Annex 5.
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF THE MAJOR PROTECTED AREAS IN ETHIOPIA.
Name
Status ** =
Gazetted
Size sq km
Region
Importance
Bale Mountains
NP
2040
Oromiya
Simien Mountains
NP **
225
Amhara
Gambella
NP
5061
Gambella
Omo
NP
4068
Southern
Mago
NP
2162
Southern
Awash
NP **
156
Oromiya/Afar
Abiatta - Shalla
NP
800
Oromiya
Yangudi - Rassa
Nech Sar
NP
NP
4731
514
Afar
Southern
Afroalpine, dry montane
woodland, moist montane
forest: Mt Nyala,
Ethiopian wolf.
Afroalpine, walia ibex,
Ethiopian wolf
Swamps, Woodland,
lechwe, kob
Wood–Scrubland, Large
ungulate assemblage,
Elept,
Wood-Scrubland, large
ungulate assemblage,
Elept,
Semi-Arid thorn-bush,
oryx, gazelle
Rift Valley Lakes,
avifauna
Arid
Savannah wildlife;
Swayne’s Hartebeest
Total Area NP
Alatish
Bebille Elephant
Senkelle Hartebeest
Yebello
8 x Wildlife
Reserve
18 x Hunting Areas
(only 2 Gazetted)
NP planned
WLS
WLS
WLS
WR
19757
2000
6982
54
2500
Amhara
Afar
Southern
Oromiya
58 x Forest Priority
Areas
FPA
CHA
Woodland Savannah
Semi-Arid Elephants
Swayne’s Hartebeest
Scrub and Bush Crow
Many regions
All over, many on
concession
Only those with closed
forest
13,863
Despite exploitation and agriculture which had been practiced for a few thousand years – thus, as mentioned above,
these were the areas that humans had found difficult to exploit.
2
50
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
24. In contrast, a large number of forest priority areas (FPA)3 were established in the 1980s; by 1994, the
government had classified 58 FPA covering 2.8 million ha (EFAP, 1994). Reflecting the predominant
view of the time, forests were largely for human exploitation rather than protection. Thus, forests were
not included in the more robust (wildlife) protected area network. However, the FPAs were largely
nominal: three management plans had been written by 1994 for FPAs; only one was in the process of
being implemented at that stage. The plans that had been developed were considered, in 1994, to be
technically and financially unfeasible. The delineation of these areas was done primarily on maps; a few
had been demarcated. None has been gazetted.
25. Forests were not the only gaps in the system. Other areas were beyond government control or little
known (e.g. the Ogaden) and thus never included in the system. The NBSAP for Ethiopia prioritises the
need for a review of gaps in protected area coverage.
26. Since this network of protected areas was proposed and designated, only two of the many ‘national
parks’, ‘reserves’ and ‘sanctuaries’ have been legally constituted (or ‘gazetted’), namely Awash National
Park and Simien Mountains National Park. In reality the gazettement process has not had much impact –
people are still in the parks – illegally in gazetted areas. Further, Simien Mountains National Park is
recognized as a World Heritage Site4 (Hillman, 1993b). It is important to note that whilst protected areas
are declared and two are gazetted, the areas still have people, cattle, cultivation and settlement inside the
borders. Rationalization of the protected area network (including re-classification and, where necessary,
declassification), boundary revision, incentives for voluntary relocation and buffer zone planning all
become critical issues for conservation.
27. The initial trajectory for the protected area system in Ethiopia was positive, but two (linked) pivotal
issues have undermined the long-term success and sustainability of the protected areas. First and largely
reflecting the political climate of the imperial and subsequent militarist-Marxist regimes, the management
of protected areas was dictatorial, top-down and state-centric. As described in detail in the barriers section
later in this document, the inertia of this state-centric approach has continued until today. Therefore,
protected area management was done at the expense and exclusion of local communities, most notably,
but also civil society organizations and the private sector. It was precisely this approach that led to direct
reprisals by local communities during the 1991 change of government. The results were extensive damage
to protected area infrastructure and the slaughter of wildlife populations – particularly in the Bale
Mountains and Abiatta-Shalla National Parks, and Senkele Swaynne’s hartebeest sanctuary.
28. Second, funding and the priority given to the environment (including protected areas) – with their
knock-on effect for successful management – have been undermined by a series of geo-political events
including famines, refugee problems, civil unrest, armed rebellions and war. This insecurity left many
protected areas beyond the control of EWCO for great periods of time. For example, the Simien
Mountains National Park was not accessible for eight years in the late 1980s and early 1990s (Yalden et
al., 1996).
29. One by-product of the cycle of food aid dependency was a significant disconnect between protected
areas and the development context in Ethiopia.
3
As part of the decentralization process, the National Forest Priority Areas have become Regional Forest Priority
Areas; in some regions, decentralization has been taken to the woreda level, thus the areas have become Woreda
Forest Priority Areas.
4
It is notable that protected areas needed to be legally constituted to be eligible for World Heritage Site listing.
Thus, given that other areas of global nature heritage importance were either not gazetted (e.g., Bale Mountains and
Gambella) or were not included in the network (e.g., the Ogaden).
51
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
30. In addition to and partly as an extension of these pivotal issues, the effectiveness of protected areas –
even the ‘gazetted’ national park – has been undermined because they were never adequately secured,
staffed or equipped. Thus, legislation designed to protect the wildlife has proved impossible to enforce.
With the (albeit not strong) focus on the national parks, the numerous ‘wildlife reserves’ and ‘controlled
hunting areas’ are little more than nominal and provide no protection for the fauna and flora.
31. However, if the barriers identified in the development of this project (see later sections) can be
overcome – including ensuring that the country’s protected areas (and the gaps in the system) were fully
established and administered, then the protected area system does have the potential to protect the
globally important biodiversity, assemblages of species, ecosystem and ecological processes.
32. In order to design a project that will sustainably improve the management effectiveness of the
protected area system of Ethiopia, the experience of relatively successful conservation initiatives was
examined (see Annex 7 - Lessons Learnt – for details). A few examples are highlighted here.
33. First, the Ethiopian Wolf Conservation Programme (EWCP), based in the Bale Mountains, has
demonstrated that working successfully in the difficult enabling environment of Ethiopia is possible.
Information on Ethiopian wolves was first collected in the mid-1970s (Malcolm, 1988; Malcolm, 1976,
1977; Malcolm & Sillero-Zubiri, 1997), and the 1980s and early 1990s (Hillman, 1988; Sillero-Zubiri,
1994). These studies gave the EWCP (based from the Wildlife Conservation Research Unit of Oxford
University) a foundation, which was bolstered by the acceptance and implementation of a conservation
action plan (Sillero-Zubiri & Macdonald, 1997). Consequently, the responsibilities of the EWCP have
evolved to ensure the conservation of the Ethiopian wolf and its Afro-alpine ecosystem. This has been
achieved by a two-pronged approach: i) assessing, addressing and counteracting threats to the survival of
Ethiopian wolves; and ii) securing the conservation of areas of Afroalpine ecosystem, their biodiversity
and ecological processes. The result of this ongoing work is to have stopped the decline in range and
numbers (Williams, 2004).
34. Second, the Ethiopian Flora Project was initiated in 1980 (Friis & Ryding, 2001; Hedberg, 1967-1980;
Hedberg, 1984) and has documented the majority of plant taxa in the greater Horn of Africa. This effort
has been complemented by an ongoing compilation, review and assessment of the threatened endemic
flowering plants (the Red List Initiative for Plants of Ethiopia and Eritrea, which, to date, includes 196
species listed as Critically Endangered and a further 135 species as Endangered, and which has added over
300 taxa to the IUCN Red List for Plants (IUCN, 2002)). The results of this work are being taken forward
to identify Key Biodiversity Areas in the country; these results have obvious and important implications
for the gap analysis incorporated in this project.
35. Third and important for this project, the Amhara Regional State has responded to UNESCO’s
conditions to remove the Simien Mountains National Park off the World Heritage Sites in Danger list in a
dynamic way: i) they have created an autonomous parks authority to administer the parks, ii) they have
extended the park through a participatory process to include further Ethiopian wolf and walia habitats, and
iii) they are investing substantial amounts of funding into the site in partnership with the Austrian
Development Cooperation. The decline in walia and Ethiopian wolves in the Simien Mountains are
believed to have stopped as a result of this action. This sets a precedent against which the federal
organization and other regions will be measured.
36. Fourth, the GEF –UNDP regional project (NGO-Government Partnerships), focusing initially on
Important Bird Areas, demonstrated that local communities could, given the right incentives, develop
sustainable conservation constituencies. Local Site Support Groups, in Berghe swamp, for example have
52
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
greatly increased habitat for, and numbers of the white-winged fluff-tail - a wet grassland (semi-)endemic
bird.
37. Finally, in response to the hiatus in forest areas there have been a number of community-based natural
resource (primarily forest focused) management projects, led by FARM Africa, SOS Sahel and GTZ, that
have led successfully to regulation of access to and use of resources. They are largely based on the
identification of resources in a given area, identification of the stakeholders, and subsequent negotiation
and legitimate agreement on access to and use of resources. Incentives are based on sustainable resource
processes.
38. In conclusion, biodiversity conservation in Ethiopia is far from secure but there are definite
opportunities and entry points for interventions, and cause for hope. This project has been designed to
overcome the substantial barriers that have prevented effective management of the protected area system
using i) mechanisms and methodology drawn from the experiences of these successful conservation
programs and ii) the lessons learnt from a number of failed conservation efforts (see Annex 7).
Socio-economic and Institutional Context
39. The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia supports a population of over 73 million people. Over
the past 60 years, the population of Ethiopia has increased ten fold (from seven million in 1940 to an
estimated 70 million in 2004). Current growth rate is over 2.2%. HIV/AIDS is a growing problem.
Accurate information is scarce, but it was estimated in 1999 that 10.6% of the adult population were living
with HIV/AIDS5. People are unevenly distributed in the country, with 85% of the people living in rural
areas; and 80% (over 58 million) of the country’s population live in the highlands.
40. The political history of Ethiopia is characterized by periods of instability and conflict.
41. Currently, the country has a federal form of government. The 1994 constitution (FDRE, 1994)
pledged decentralization of political and economic responsibility from federal to regional governments.
42. The Ethiopian economy is based primarily on subsistence mixed agriculture and pastoralism, with a
huge dependence on the natural resource base by rural communities. This is partly because of the lack of
land tenure security6. The human population has put land, both for agriculture and for livestock
husbandry, at a premium. Of the farmlands in the country, 94% are operated by seven million smallholders
cultivating an average of less than one hectare. The country contains the largest national livestock herd in
Africa, with over 30 million head of cattle, 24 million sheep, 18 million goats, 7 million equids and 1
million camels.
43. Ethiopia had an image in the late 1990s as a persistent centre of drought, famine and poverty. To some
extent this has been overcome – in part by dealing with geo-political problems that underpinned previous
famines – and, while Ethiopia still is subject to drought, there are now strengthened safety net processes in
place with enhanced food security, prioritized in drought prone areas, supporting poorer sections of
society and linked to improving drought early warning systems.
5
Information from UNAIDS, World Health Organization.
Land is allocated to households by the government, usually at the kebele level. Recent developments include the
certification of land – thereby offering some land tenure security – to rural peoples. However, the certification is for
a limited period only and offers no long-term land tenure security.
6
53
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
44. The country is very poor. It is listed as a HIPC country, with average annual GDP of less than US$
100 per capita. The development strategy and poverty reduction program – the Sustainable Development
and Poverty Reduction Program7 (MoFED, 2002) – proposed that economic growth and development in
the country will be achieved through an Agricultural Development Led Industrialization (ADLI) 8.
45. The Government of Ethiopia has made considerable progress in the past few years to freeing the
economy and attracting investors. For example, one sector that has been prioritized for growth over the
past three years is flori- and horticulture. The result has been a boom with exports of flowers, in
particular, to international markets. This has been on the back of major incentives given by the
Government of Ethiopia in this sector and serves to illustrate the freeing of the economy and the
encouragement of the private sector.
1.2.2 The Institutional Setting
46. The Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Organization (EWCO) was at its strongest in the 1970s and early
1980s when it developed much of the legislation that is, at least in theory, in use today9. Through this time,
the centrally based organization managed all wildlife Protected Areas, with staff transferred between HQ
and the field protected areas. Political changes, documented above, hastened the marginalization of the
system. The incoming government developed a federal, decentralized form of governance, creating nine
autonomous regional states.
47. These regional governments were given control over their natural resources, including forestry and
wildlife. There was little institutional linkage from the centre to the regional governments. Regional
governments ran wildlife from within sections in their agricultural bureaus (mirroring, as was expected
from the Constitution, the federal system), including support (staffing, funding, political support). EWCO
only retained responsibility for protected areas which straddled across regional borders – thus, Awash
National Park, Yangudi-Rassa National Park, Babile Elephant Sanctuary and Senkelle Swayne’s
hartebeest Sanctuary.
48. Since this time, EWCO had uncertain responsibility for policy, law, research and training. Most staff
remained at HQ in Addis Ababa with little incentive to move to regional governments. Morale declined,
management efficiency declined, and biodiversity continued to decline. The place of EWCO was
uncertain, successive government proclamations moved the sector into the Institute for Biodiversity
Conservation and out again. Funding was minimal. Staff sought other opportunities when they arose.
49. The year 2004 saw the formation of a Division of Natural Resources under the Ministry of Agriculture
and Rural Development (MoARD). The division brings three closely related government organizations –
the Wildlife Conservation Department, Forestry and Soil Conservation Department and the Institute for
Biodiversity Conservation – together under the leadership of a single State Minister. Whilst some
observers see this as a loss of autonomy (from EWCO to a government department within a division in a
ministry), it has given stability and leadership. This strengthening allowed the passage of policy and law
(that had been stuck under the old EWCO process) and prioritized the development of this project. (Note:
the long drawn-out process in getting the PDF-B activity operational within EWCO).
Ethiopia’s version of the PRSP – the development and poverty reduction action plans to allow country’s to meet the
Millennium Development Goals.
8
In the forthcoming SDPRP II, the ADLI is being reconsidered for a broader approach to development.
9
This will change when the current Proclamation is approved by the House of People’s Representatives.
7
54
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
50. Furthermore, the budgeting for the protected areas and the management organizations has increased.
Over the course of the proposed eight year project (with two stages), the baseline budget will be US$
4,764,500 from government (both regional and federal). It is thus believed that the protected area sector
will have appropriate absorptive capacity for this project.
51. In addition to the state, there is an increasing NGO presence in the protected areas sector.
Historically, this was confined to the Ethiopian Wildlife and Natural History Society (EWNHS), with an
important role in advocacy and awareness creation. EWNHS, as the national BirdLife partner, hosted the
successful GEF project on NGO-Government Partnerships, around community support (Site Support
Groups) to Important Bird Areas.
52. There are also some dynamic, successful and innovative projects in natural resource management
areas developed by NGOs – most notably SOS Sahel and FARM Africa. These are community-based
participatory natural resource management systems that often build upon tradition systems. The lessons
learnt from these important projects have been incorporated into this project design.
53. Academia has also been active, with biodiversity research being carried out in many areas of the
country – including inside (e.g., walia ibex, geladas and Ethiopian wolf) and outside the parks (e.g.,
African wild ass). Addis Ababa University has also hosted several workshops highlighting the critical state
of the biodiversity resources.
54. More recently, the government has entered into agreements to delegate the management of protected
areas to the private sector. To date, only one agreement has been signed (for the management of Nech Sar
National Park) while another is currently under negotiation (for the management of Omo National Park).
The private sector organization is African Parks Foundation, (registered in Ethiopia as a private sector,
commercial organization which largely draws off South African conservation expertise and European
funding). The African Parks – government partnership will spread to include other protected areas over the
coming months; African Parks is currently investigating a number of different options. They are primarily
interested in areas with high tourism potential10. African Parks are providing significant co-finance to this
GEF project, focusing on innovation at Protected Area level, while Stage 1 of this project focuses on the
capacity of the system as a whole.
55. Finally and critically, there is a disconnect between the state and local communities. The results of this
divide are: i) no community – government partnerships over resource management, ii) government wishes
to dictate or impose regulations without consultation, and iii) without regulation and with the perceived
state-centric government philosophy, communities operate at a plane different from that of the government
– often leading to de facto open access to resources and their subsequent degradation.
1.1.3 Tourism in Ethiopia
56. Historically the focus of marketing tourism by the Ethiopian Tourism Commission (ETC) has been the
globally important cultural and historical sites within the country. The link to nature tourism has been
relatively tenuous. In contrast, and arguably a better indicator of its value, private tour operators spend a
considerable portion of their marketing budget focusing on nature tourism. This includes the Parastatal
Ethiopian Airlines, which for years as focused on Parks in its magazines.
57. Importantly, incentives similar to those in the horticulture industries are now being considered for the
tourism industry. Tourism in Ethiopia is currently described as being the sector with the greatest potential
for economic growth (SDPRP II). Indeed, the sector has been steadily growing – and was not affected by
10
See website < www.africanparks-conservation.com> for more details on their Ethiopian Operation
55
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
the recent international conflicts that had a significant impact in other countries. In response to this, the
government has pledged to make tourism one its priorities for development in the coming five years (as
covered by the up-coming SDPRP II). Further, it has pledged to elevate the Ethiopian Tourism
Commission (the federal government body with the mandate to promote and regulate tourism) to the level
of a ministry. In late July 2005, the BBC carried a special travel feature on Nature Related Tourism in
Ethiopia, interviewing the Head of the ETC, and operators, talking about changing images (away from
starvation and degradation!) to a land of huge biological diversity and amazing landscapes.
58. There are considerable opportunities in the tourism sector that have important implications for this
project and for biodiversity conservation. First, the World Bank is developing a large tourism sector
development project (with a budget in excess of US$ 50 million). This project has developed strong links
with the World Bank office in Ethiopia11 and has participated in various discussions regarding linkages
from this conservation of PAS to the tourism project. Second, in the proposed upgrading of the ETC to a
ministry level organization, there has been discussion about consolidating the linkages with the assets on
which tourism in the country is based. This not only includes the historical and cultural sites but also the
protected areas. Thus, it has been proposed and discussed that a ministry be formed that would include the
heritage sectors (both natural and cultural) and the tourism regulatory body. The project development team
and stakeholders continue to provide input to such an institutional change.
59. Tourism has far to go but the signs are encouraging. Tourist visa sales in 2003/04 were estimated to
be 120,000 but have grown consistently since 2000. Up to 70% of these were visitors from the Ethiopian
Diaspora; others were family or visitors to expatriates living in the country. While these visitors may not
have a profound effect on the national economy (they do not use tour operators or hotels), they do visit
tourist sites in the country, including protected areas. Details are in Annex 9 on Economic Analysis.
Policy Context
60. The focus of the Government of Ethiopia for the past 14 years has been largely on the freeing of the
economy and dealing with food security issues. With the economy much more open than it was
previously, and with a safety net food security programme in place, the government is now making
substantial commitments to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) through the SDPRP
process. Thus, while environment issues were discussed in the main document of the first SDPRP
(MoFED, 2002), environmental targets and time-bound actions were not included in its indicator matrix.
61. In contrast and in response to this gap between the MDG and the National Development Policy
Framework (NDPF), the government is refocusing SDPRP and has made the environment a sector in its
own right with up to five main targets in the indicator matrix (as with each of the other development
sectors). These are currently being drafted and will be finalized in the coming weeks but at present they
include i) sustainable land management, ii) biodiversity conservation to be achieved through effective
management of a protected area system that adequately represents the ecosystems, including forests, of
Ethiopia12, iii) management of anthropogenic pollution, and iv) mainstreaming environment in
development initiatives. Because the donor organizations use the indicator matrix as the principal means
to determine the performance of the government, the government must remain committed to ensuring the
achievement of the targets in the indicator matrix. The inclusion of the protected area management
effectiveness and representation presents a profound opportunity for project success and sustainability.
11
Not only regarding the tourism project but also i) the Sustainable Land Management Program and ii) the proposed
hydroelectric dams on the Blue Nile.
12
Obviously the PDF-B team involved with the development of this project has been participating in the
development of the SDPRP II indicator matrix.
56
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
62. In addition, tourism has been also prioritized as a sector of focus for the SDPRP II – and will similarly
have targets in the indicator matrix. Because of the linkage – which will be reinforced in this project – as
these development initiatives, and as tourism and revenues generated from it grow, then protected areas
will receive further attention and political will.
63. While the inclusion of tourism and the environment in the SDPRP II represents an important cusp for
protected areas, in the past 14 years, the government has been making progress towards creating a climate
in which protected areas can play the role that they should within the development framework of the
country. Therefore, many key policies have been developed. From the outset, these include the 1994
Constitution which pledges:
i. “[The] government … shall have the duty to protect the country’s natural endowments … and
objects” (Article 91,2)
ii. “[The] government … shall have the duty to protect the environment” (Article 92, 4)
64. Further key policies include the National Conservation Strategy, 1994; the Conservation Strategy of
Ethiopia, 1997; the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, 2005. The BSAP stresses the need for
protected areas to allow conservation of resources, sustainable use and the equitable sharing of benefits.
65. Government has strengthened the decentralization process, with recent focus on capacity building.
Recent policies recognized the importance of the NGO sector and the need for greater civil society
involvement at grass roots level.
66. In addition to the decentralization process, the government has initiated a large-scale civil service
reform program. The foundation of the reform program is for government agencies to adopt businessplanning principles as a means to ensure cost-effective delivery of results. The service delivery times
across the majority of government agencies have been reduced as a result of the civil service reform
program. These principles are very much akin to the business planning process that will be adopted in this
project.
67. More recently and importantly, the government has taken a major step to provide further policy and
legislative base for protected areas in the country with the adoption of the “Wildlife Development,
Protection and Utilization Policy and Strategy”13 and the passing of the “Proclamation to Provide for the
Development, Conservation and Utilization of Wildlife”14. These policies allow institutional change
within the sector, and specify a partnership approach – from all levels including centre to region, and from
government to private sector (see institutional setting above) and (as a principle) to communities.
The Baseline Course of Action & Threat / Root Cause
Analysis
68. The conservation baseline is around the protected area institutional and policy setting described above.
This scenario has led to a continued land and ecological process degradation, decline in natural habitats
and ecosystems, and resulting in reduction in the distribution and numbers of biodiversity as a whole,
including wildlife species. A simple but important point is the uniqueness of the fauna and flora of
Ethiopia; and once it has gone, this is irreversible!
69. The protected area network has not grown, no gazettement has taken place since 1970s and
conservation planning has not been able to incorporate the results of biodiversity surveys, such as the
13
This was passed by the Council of Ministers in March 2005.
This Proclamation was approved by the Council of Ministers in June 2005 and awaits passage through the House
of People’s Representatives.
14
57
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Important Bird Areas and focus on endemic plants. The sector has not responded to broader policies such
as the National Strategy for Conservation – there still are major gaps in the protected area representation
of ecosystems. This catalogue of sectoral problems is analyzed in Annex 2: the Threats and Root-Cause
Analysis.
70. This period of sectoral decline saw considerable donor support to the wildlife protected area system,
but such project support was not aimed at the political institutional level to put in place a stronger enabling
environment, but usually at a set of Protected Areas15. Whilst projects with strong leadership were able to
achieve local successes (e.g., the EU support to Southern Peoples Region), the gains evaporated after
projects stopped and key staff moved on and success criteria were not mainstreamed in governance
process.
71. Annex 7 presents an analysis of lessons learned from these donor initiatives, and lists most such
interventions. Key lessons include the need to develop an enabling environment within strong institutions
with political will. This requires conservation to have much greater integration in the national
development agenda. Preceding paragraphs show that this is beginning to happen. In 2000 Government
asked UNDP to include environmental issues within the Country Cooperation Framework – previous
priorities were reconstruction of infrastructure and water.
72. The immediate time-span of project development has seen a relatively low level of donor support into
the sector. Many projects stopped in the 2002-2003 period (overlapping with the start of PDF preparation),
the UNDP Emergency Support to Protected Areas of US$ 1.3 million is a good example. Baseline
conservation funding is therefore the ongoing government commitment to protected areas at federal and
regional government level, plus the ongoing Austrian Development Cooperation project in the Simien
Mountains. The baseline funding, therefore, is US$ 4,764,500 of government funding over the eight years
(at US$ 595,556 per year) and US$ 981,499 from the Austrian Development Cooperation over the coming
four years. Note that the government funding is not funding in kind16 but actual funds. Indeed, the
baseline has not considered the funding in kind; if this was to be included in the analysis, the sum would
certainly increase.
73. The Sustainable Development Baseline is also changing. PDF B formulation was cognizant of the
huge dependence of rural communities on natural resources, including within protected areas. In certain
areas, there are communities that are chronically food insecure, with loss of assets undermining their longterm security. Recent changes include greatly increased support to rural development in both food
security (through a safety nets program). In addition, there is increased will for the empowerment of
communities and recognition of civil society. In the project preparation, the full development baseline has
not been calculated despite the linkages in some instances.
74. In conclusion, the above factors present distinct opportunities for this project. The foundations on
which this project can build are in place. But these are foundations alone: the baseline remains
characterized by a number of barriers to an effective protected area system – as these policies and
institutional arrangements do not make a protected area system. In addition, in some instances, there is a
further need to amend the policies – for example, to broaden the types of government and to redefine
protected areas. These barriers are examined in detail in the next section but perhaps the most immediate
of these is the systemic lack of capacity and process to achieve effective management of protected areas.
15
16
This focus on areas was what EWCO wanted this GEF intervention to do, in 1999-2000 at PDF B finalization.
As assumed in the GEF Secretariat Concept Agreement Review
58
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
75. These constraints are widely known and were noted during the development of the PDF B proposal. It
is constructive to note GEF-Sec remarks at that time:
Extracts from GEF Secretariat Review for Pipeline Entry
It is unlikely that the proposed PAs system would be effective over the long-term. The proposal is
full of good intentions for in-situ biodiversity conservation, but if issues of poverty, social unrest
and security, macroeconomic frameworks and incentives, etc., are not addressed, there are few
possibilities for the project to be successful under the conditions outlined in the proposal.
There is also some capacity and infrastructure in place that need strengthening to prevent further
erosion at the national level.
UNDP should carefully explore the real absorptive capacity of EWCO and partners, the potential
of social stability and interest of government to get a project of this size approved. Strategies to
follow-up may include a staged approach with a first stage that tentatively address key capacity
building needs or social issues.
The real possibilities of Ethiopia conserving and sustainably managing its biodiversity
considering the tremendous difficulties the country faces related to poverty, social unrest, limited
absorptive capacity, etc. are of concern.
For financial sustainability, the project could explore the possibility of strengthening a trust fund
already established (it did not start). Social and political issues such as unrest would need to be
carefully considered. Poverty and famine make the Secretariat wonder if biodiversity
conservation is one of the key priorities of the Ethiopian Government at present. Addressing
these underlying causes as part of the baseline will be key to project development.
These barriers are therefore addressed in considerable detail below.
Barriers to effective protected area system management
76. The barriers to effective protected area system management were identified in a highly participatory
way in a number of different forums, and formal and informal discussions during the development of this
project. These barriers (see table below) flow from the Threat – Root-Cause – Barrier Analysis in Annex
2. The main barriers can be summarized as follows:
TABLE 4. THE GENERAL AND SPECIFIC BARRIERS AND THEIR IMPACTS.
Barriers – both General and Specific
Negative Resource Impact
A There is a disconnect between the protected area
system and national development
A1 There is considerable marginalization of protected
areas from society, and vice-versa, due to poor
understanding of the benefits (existing and potential)
from protected areas
Development forces (government and many donors)
have seen little benefit in protected areas
Little political or local institutional support for
protected areas; protected areas are not seen to
contribute to development, but rather they are seen as
a source of conflict
Government at all levels is not aware of the existing
and potential benefit flows from protected areas.
B Systemic capacity weakness at all levels
There is limited capacity to develop and implement
policies and plans to overcome this history of
marginalization
State-community conflict has led to rapid and
continued degradation of resources
Degradation of forest ecosystems and ecological
processes because of focus on mammals; communitybased areas not recognized and thus degraded
Over-lapping and uncertain mandates lead to
B1 Role of the state in protected area management is
in conflict with community rights
B2 Limited categories of protected area and limited
types of protected area governance
B3 Poor institutional organization and coordination
59
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
inefficient use of scarce resources for conservation.
No financial sustainability, costs of protected area
management outweigh revenues; and limited funds are
not used effectively
B5 Little capacity or will to address the poor
Degradation of internationally important biodiversity,
ecosystem representation in the Protected Area
ecosystems and ecological processes outside of
System
protected area network
C Weak institutional capacity in the protected area
Unmotivated staff; poor protected area management
sector at all levels or protected area management and
as a result of no feasible strategies given size of
conservation of biodiversity.
problem. Little funding to implement innovation
D The Poverty – Population Issues Raised by GEFSEC (see box above)
This is less of a barrier as other sustainable development support kicks in. In addition, protected areas in this
project are broadly defined as those areas with biodiversity, ecosystem and ecological process conservation as
their major objective. As such and given the pivotal watershed management role (critical in the mesic highland
- arid lowland system that characterizes Ethiopia) that protected areas should play, the value of protected areas
far surpasses biodiversity conservation alone. The disconnect between the realization of the government and
donors to this role is already highlighted as a barrier and an outcome through which this barrier is overcome.
Finally, while the rural people are still dependent on a natural resource base, recent efforts in community-based
natural resource management systems have taken great steps to finding sustainable solutions to overcome this
barrier. These lessons have been fully adopted by this project.
B4 Limited business planning and financial
knowledge management.
The following pages describe these barriers, and their institutional setting and evolution, in more detail.
This understanding gives greater insight as to where and what sort of interventions are possible. This
analysis is based on the Lessons Learned process– see Annex 7.
Disconnect between the protected area system and development in Ethiopia
Marginalization of protected areas
77. Ethiopia is a very poor country with a burgeoning human population that is almost completely
dependent on the natural resources found within the political boundaries of the country, and most often,
locally. Because the linkages are not immediately apparent or because they have been taken for granted,
the government, the donor community and development workers have overlooked the role that protected
areas have in the development context. In addition, because economic and political forecasts and project
cycles are short-term, they ignore longer-term ecological processes, ecosystems and biodiversity;
primarily because they are little understood.
78. Therefore, in addition to the turbulent history of the protected areas, the environment sector in general,
has been largely marginalized from the development context. Thus, in the Sustainable Development and
Poverty Reduction Program (MoFED, 2002), protected areas were not included in the environmental
section and only mentioned in passing in the tourism development section17. There was no mention of
protected areas in the SDPRP indicator matrix. Given that the SDPRP largely determines in the
development context in Ethiopia, including the areas of principal focus for the Ethiopian Government
which, in turn, determines the focus for the international donor community, it is critically important that
protected areas are including in the forthcoming SDPRP II – as indeed they have been. Inclusion into the
SDPRP is also indicative of a move to mainstream protected areas in the development context in Ethiopia.
79. Protected areas have not been included in many cross-sectoral development projects where they
should have played a critical role. Most significantly, the Ethiopian highlands are critically important as a
watershed for millions of downstream users. Up to the present, despite the international recognition of the
primary role that they can play, protected areas have not appeared as one of mechanisms of watershed
17
The prime environmental focus in SDPRP I (2002) was drinking water. While national parks were mentioned in
the SDPRP (in the tourism sector, in reference to the need to strengthen the parks, there was no mention in the
indicator matrix).
60
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
protection in Ethiopia18. In part, this may be attributable to the lack of linkages among government
organizations, but it is also indicative of the degree to which protected areas have been marginalized.
Thus, they have neither been included in the watershed management or protection plans in any of the
large-scale water development projects such as hydroelectric dams or irrigation schemes within the
country nor have they been included in regional watershed protection plans. Protected areas should
certainly play an important role in the upcoming national sustainable land management program.
80. Government, donor agencies and development workers have historically perceived and assumed that
protected areas are for wildlife protection alone – perhaps justifiably given the rationale that underpinned
their establishment. Thus, the linkage to the role that protected areas and biodiversity conservation should
play in development has not been made.
Poor understanding and marketing of the benefits of protected areas
81. Historically, the benefits of protected areas have been largely neglected or misunderstood – hence
their marginalization from the country’s development context. This remains in stark contrast to the
ancient natural resource management systems of which there are numerous examples in the country where
local communities have worked to protect ecosystems or habitats through regulation of exploitation or
harvesting because of the (usually not monetary) benefits they derive from them.
82. The state has focused solely on monetary benefits from protected areas. These have included: Park
entrance (visitors and vehicles) and camping fees; hunting fees (concession fees, trophy fees); and forestry
fees (mainly timber sales royalties and concession fees)
83. There has been no innovative development and marketing of other revenue-generating activities in
protected areas. With the wealth of endemic and charismatic species in Ethiopia, there should be ample
opportunity to do so. Examples could include i) visits to Ethiopian wolf dens, ii) observing feeding
lammergeiers from hides and iii) trekking to sites of special interest. This, in turn, is underpinned i) in part
by the lack of innovative business planning and ii) in part by the lack of involvement of the private sector.
Innovation and marketing is further undermined by the linkage to the tourism sector is poor, even among
the federal government organizations – the Ethiopian Tourism Commission and the wildlife, forestry and
biodiversity organizations.
84. When services or products have been offered, there has been no market research into their value. The
consequence has been inappropriate valuation relative to the market’s ‘willingness-to-pay’. An excellent
example has been the sport hunting of mountain nyalas, which, with an estimated population of less than
3,000 are the most endangered mammal species available on a sport hunting license in the world. The
current license fee for a mountain nyala is $5,000. Market analysis may, therefore, indicate that there is a
‘willingness-to-pay’ substantially more than this for mountain nyala trophies19. Indeed, given their current
and declining status, it is imperative that the annual quota for mountain nyalas (currently at 30 males) is
reduced; this should be compensated by a significant increase in the trophy fee.
18
Note that the GEF supported Nile Trans-boundary Environmental Project (NTEAP), part of the Nile Basin
Initiative, does see Protection and Sustainable Use as a key issue in watershed management. NBI – Protected Areas
Project linkages are developing.
19
The project preparation team estimated that there is a ‘willingness-to-pay’ up to US$ 100,000 per nyala (thus,
nyala hunts could be auctioned as the most exclusive hunts in the world with a reserve of, say, US$ 80,000); this
would be based on a marketing strategy to make nyala hunting the most exclusive sport hunts in the world. This
would then allow for a reduction of the quota to, say, four nyalas per year – which would increase significantly
revenue from sport hunting.
61
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
85. The lack of vision and long-term business planning (with its associated investment and marketing
plans) have resulted in no efforts to generate sustainable financing for protected areas. Funding was
assumed to be something that the state should provide. With the limited revenues that have been accrued,
in the history of the conservation areas in Ethiopia, they have never covered their own costs. Thus,
somewhat remarkably, in effect the government has been subsidizing the protected areas albeit on very
low budgets20. Yet when emergency rehabilitation was inevitably necessary (because of the other barriers
presented here), the donor community was expected to provide injections of funds.
86. Thus, in conclusion, except for a failed attempt to establish a trust fund in the mid-1990s21, sustainable
financing mechanisms (either through tourism development or through other means such as trust funds,
carbon trading, debt for nature swaps, environmental service charges or even investment plans to attract
partners or donors) have not been sought. In contrast to the lack of innovative planning that has
undermined the above, lack of knowledge of the biodiversity of Ethiopia has undermined any financing
that might come from the field of bio-prospecting.
Systemic capacity weaknesses linking policy reform, sector coordination, business planning and
knowledge management
87. Institutional capacity remains weak despite periodic injections of funding/technical expertise that most
government organizations have received. When this is coupled with i) inappropriate definition of the
optimal roles of the state, ii) institutional mandate drift, iii) periodic institutional re-structuring that has
occurred and iv) the lack of business planning, institutional sustainability is undermined.
Optimal role of the state in protected area management and community resource user rights
88. Throughout the history of protected areas in Ethiopia22, the state has dominated protected area
management, at the expense and exclusion of civil society organizations, the private sector and local
communities23. More recently, the government has taken progressive steps to allow delegation of
protected area management to the private sector24. This is a first and significant step to redefining the
optimal role of the state, and broadening the types of governance and partnerships that are necessary for a
sustainable protected area system.
89. While the private sector may now be involved in protected area management, significant portions of
society remain excluded. Most importantly, this has meant that communities25 and civil society
organizations (both non-governmental and community-based organizations) have been excluded from the
establishment, planning and management of protected areas. Alteration of policy to allow for further types
of governance that involve partnerships is therefore necessary.
20
The average budget across the protected areas is $30/km² (for example, Bale Mts US$ 12.4/km²/yr; Mago NP US$
11/km²/yr; Omo NP US$ 6/km²/year; Gambella NP US$ 2.5/km²/year), with the exception of the Simien Mountains
National Park, the budget of which exceeds the sub-Saharan average of $230/km²; recently, SMNP is also getting
close to the point where it might begin to cover its management and operational costs from tourism revenues.
21
This failed as the person with the mandate to lead the process was appointed elsewhere in the government.
22
Thus, through the Emperor’s time, through the completely centralised Derg and currently through the federal
system; this is with the exception of unique, ancient and community-based natural resource management systems of
which there are numerous examples in Ethiopia and which can effectively be considered as protected areas.
23
And the damage caused in the 1991 change of government was in direct reprisal for this view.
24
See the Wildlife Development, Protection and Utilization Policy and Strategy (MoARD, 2005); and with the
agreement for African Parks to manage Nech Sar National Park.
25
Which in the watershed highland-lowland system in Ethiopia may include communities that are separated from the
protected area by significant distances.
62
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
90. The state-centric nature of protected areas has caused particular antagonism between local
communities and the protected areas: local communities feel that their natural-resource dependent
livelihoods are not only threatened because of the potential for or actual lost opportunities, or loss of
access to resources, but also they perceive that any of the benefits gained from protected areas go straight
to treasury coffers. The lack of transparency also means that the local communities are not aware that the
reality has been that, because of the lack of innovative revenue generation, the actual revenues collected
have been relatively insignificant.
91. The result is a duality: the government systems which do not have the capacity to regulate resources
and the communities, which operate independently at a different level from the government. The
communities respond to the perceived loss of opportunity by treating resources – including within the
nominal protected areas – as de facto open access areas. This, in turn, has led to accelerated degradation
of the resources and land.
92. There is no legislation, regulations or mechanisms to include communities in the management or in
sharing the benefits of protected areas. This includes the recently approved policy and strategy, and the
proclamation that is in progress to approval. It should be clear that benefits do not necessarily have to
come solely in monetary form. Indeed, the examples of successful and ancient natural resource
management systems in the country, none of which have monetary benefits for local communities,
indicate strongly that other benefits are sufficient to lead to the protection of areas (the corollary of which
is regulated access to natural resources). These and the natural resource management systems that have
been recently established in the country26, show that the following can be sufficient to lead to protection of
resources: i) the right of use of or access to resources explicitly linked to the associated responsibilities
and ii) the status and recognition achieved through being involved in the management of natural resources.
Given this, inclusion of stakeholders in the planning and management processes will have significant
effect on local community impacts in protected areas. Further, the same examples show that the process
of inclusion and negotiation is more effective mechanisms of awareness creation than the delivery of
traditional environmental education.
93. Despite the fact that it will take tourism – and other revenue generating activities - a number of years
before it can significantly contribute to the national and local economies, legislation, regulations and
mechanisms should be developed to ensure that as the revenue increases, the mechanisms are already in
place. With stakeholder participation and transparency in the process, the local communities will
comprehend that revenues are currently limited. This will, in turn, ensure that expectations are not
unrealistically built.
Limited and inadequate categories of protected area, and poor ecosystem representation
94. The protected areas of Ethiopia were defined in the 1960s and placed into legislation in the 1970s27.
As stated above, the focus at the time was on large mammal species or assemblages and not on
biodiversity conservation. The recent wildlife legislation28 adheres to these definitions. Similarly, in the
forestry sector, the focus was on exploitation of resources rather than protection – leading to a policy of
clearing natural forests in some areas to replace them with exotic plantations.
95. However, examination of the status of mammal populations in the country (Williams et al., 2003) and
recognition that it is the overall biodiversity of the country that warrants protection (Williams et al., 2005),
26
FARM Africa / SOS Sahel projects in Chilimo, Bonga and Borana; GTZ project in Adaba-Dodola in Bale.
Negarit Gazetta (1972, 1974 and 1980).
28
The Wildlife Proclamation that is waiting to be passed by the House of People’s Representatives.
27
63
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
a shift from the paradigm of a split wildlife and forestry sector to a protected area system that has
biodiversity, ecosystem and ecological process conservation as its major objective is necessary. This
should not only accommodate core conservation areas – akin to the national parks or sanctuaries that exist
under current legislation – but also limited harvest concession areas (for sport hunting and timber
extraction).
96. The focus of the wildlife conservation areas - large mammal species or assemblages – also led to the
exclusion of important biodiversity areas from the protected area network, particularly national parks.
Most notably, these include: i) the forests of the south-west, ii) much of the south Bale forest blocks, iv)
the Acacia-Commiphora woodlands of the east (Friis, 2005).
97. However, there remain profound gaps in knowledge of biodiversity of Ethiopia. Indeed, it can be
justifiably argued that there is a good understanding of one species in Ethiopia: the Ethiopian wolf
(Sillero-Zubiri & Macdonald, 1997; Williams, 2004). All other species, including large and charismatic
species such as the mountain nyala, are poorly known. As an example, there are 20 endemic species of
tree in the southeast of Ethiopia that are known from one individual only (Ib Friis, pers. comm.)! The
knowledge gap will have to be filled before there is a real understanding of the gaps in the representation
and coverage of the protected area system.
98. In addition to this, there has been no recognition and embracement of some of the spectacular and
often ancient community-based natural resource management systems in the country. In many cases,
these went ‘underground’ or disassembled with the Agrarian Reform of 1975. Despite this and perhaps
because the systems are so old and well-founded, there are many successful (de facto) examples that
persist within the country. Current legislation still does not recognize the major role these areas can play
in biodiversity conservation and there is a need to allow for legitimate community-based protected areas.
99. Finally, there has been neither linkage to the other aspects of Ethiopia’s heritage such as the cultural
and historical sites (notably, Lalibela, Axum, Gondar29) nor inclusion of the outstanding biophysical
features or monuments (e.g., Erta’Ale and Dallol) in the protected area system.
Poor institutional organization and coordination
100. Ethiopia is a federal country with regional states having the mandate to manage natural resources. At
present, the majority of the protected areas are managed by regional states (with the exception of four
areas which fall under the management of the federal organization). This is a potential barrier, for
regional objectives in protected area management may not represent those of the nation or the international
community at large. For example, there is no incentive for a regional government to plan tourism develop
that bears any relationship with equally attractive assets but that lie in an adjacent regional state.
Therefore, it is imperative that oversight for the system comes from a single organization that drives the
overall vision for the system.
101. The decentralization of protected area management has had another profound consequence for the
management effectiveness of protected areas. There is significant inequality in capacity and prioritization
of protected areas among the regional states. For example, the Amhara Regional State has established an
autonomous organization for National Park management. This has led to the Simien Mountains National
Park being the best funded (at US$ 357/km²/year, with 58 permanent staff and 4 temporary staff covering
a total of 205km²) and most effectively managed area in the country (see METT scores in Annex 12). In
contrast, other regions consistently under-fund protected areas and their management effectiveness is low
It should be noted that there are gaps in the representation of cultural heritage sites as well – including some of the
ancient terracing in southwest Ethiopia, of which the Konso terraces are the best known.
29
64
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
(again, see METT scores). For example, Gambella National Park is a poorly funded protected area (at
US$ 2.5/km²/year, with 18 staff covering a total of 7,500km²)! This presents a significant barrier and this
inequality needs to be reduced.
102. The isolation of regional organizations relative to one another means that there is no sharing of
information and experiences among regional states. Poor knowledge management is the barrier here.
103. Despite mandate definitions that exist in legislation, institutional confusion and competition has
proliferated and stifled productivity. Institutions have tended, with no consultation of other organizations,
opportunistically to expand their remits beyond their defined role until they are in direct competition with
other organizations.
104. Mandate drift is exacerbated by high staff turnovers as new people bring new ideas and influences. In
addition, the lack of institutional inertia, particularly at a regional level where re-structuring has occurred
frequently, has led to punctuated shifts in mandates. Once institutions have expanded their mandates,
albeit in their own minds, they are reluctant to return to the originally defined mandate – usually because
there is funding involved.
105. Competition is exacerbated by the lack of linkages among organizations. The absence of
communication and linkages exists both horizontally (for example, among federal government
organizations) and vertically (thus, among federal, regional, woreda and protected area levels).
106. Institutional competition has, on occasion, been acrimonious with people making attempts to discredit
their perceived competitors. This, in turn, leads to a further effect: it results in limited stakeholder
participation and involvement, particularly in processes such as developing policies, regulations and
legislation. Thus, the experience and expertise that is available for consultation when undergoing these
processes is not harnessed; on the contrary, it may even be perceived to be a threat.
Limited business planning and knowledge management
107. Many of the institutional capacity weaknesses can be directly attributable to the absence of business
planning or results-based financing in institutions. Most often, institutions do not have staff with the
appropriate training, expertise and experience to carry out the business planning that is necessary.
108. The absence of results-based financing has meant that while budgets for protected area management
have mostly been insufficient, the funds that were available were badly managed and used. Linked with
this, there have been no monitoring and evaluation systems of i) financial cost-effectiveness relative to
results; ii) the effectiveness or efficiency of management in achieving results. The decline of mountain
nyala in hunting concession areas, particularly in the Arsi range, is a good example. Whereas sport
hunting companies pledge to protect ‘their’ resource, populations have declined and in some cases
crashed. This is, at least in part, inappropriate setting of quotas and no monitoring of the areas.
109. Moreover, there has been inefficient use of knowledge. This is based in a number of factors:
i. Within organizations, there is no recognition of the value of their staff as intellectual or
knowledge-based assets. More, there has been a heavy reliance on explicit knowledge, but not
tacit knowledge: the intellectual or knowledge base that is the staff.
ii. Moreover, mandate drift, with the associated recruitment of personnel, has spread expertise across
many organizations. As discussed above, communication and linkage - thus, sharing of
knowledge and information - among organizations is poor, again because of institutional
competition.
65
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
iii. Archival systems are antiquated – and there has been no move to digitise the information or
archives. Further, the antiquated archival system of 40 years of the Ethiopian Wildlife
Conservation Organization (EWCO) has recently broken down, leaving documents in chaos and
irretrievable.
110. Finally, poor knowledge management and institutional competition have had a further negative
effect. There have been no efforts to capture and disseminate knowledge, or replicate good practice
among organizations, both among regions or from regions to federal levels. One consequence has been
limited stakeholder (not only with private, civil society or community stakeholders but even among federal
and regional government organizations) involvement and participation in the development of the policy,
regulatory and governance framework.
Weak institutional capacity
111. There are a number of aspects that relate to management capacity that also undermines institutional
capacity. In general, the majority of these can be attributed to inadequate definition of people’s roles,
responsibilities and the results expected from them – all of which may be linked to a lack of appropriate
planning. In addition, when results are demanded from staff members, the tools to complete the tasks are
often not available; once again, this is linked to poor planning and inappropriate budget allocation.
112. Government human resource policies are also limited and inflexible. Changes to staffing within
institutions is almost impossible and managers do not have the flexibility to spend their often limited
budgets where is most necessary.
113. Further, there is a perverse disincentive for people to carry out their tasks. Indeed, it is perceived to
be a ‘safer’ option to do the bare minimum rather than extend and consequently expose oneself.
114. The result is that among government workers, the following symptoms are frequent:
- Lack of motivation, Personnel not assuming roles or responsibility, and lack of commitment
These, in turn, may stem from any one or a combination of the following:
- Lack of incentives for managers or staff, inadequate or poor leadership, and resistance to change,
and disbelief that change is possible.
The GEF Alternative
115. The development of this project document has been jointly financed through UNDP/GEF (through a
PDF-B grant) and the government of Ethiopia. The preparation of the project has been highly
participative through a number of formal and informal forums and discussions. The preparation
commenced in November 2004. Much of the background information was collected and analyses were
carried out by competitively recruited national consultants. Contracts were awarded for: i) Capacity and
Institutional Arrangements Assessment; ii) Community Linkage Assessment; iii) Demonstration Site
Planning; iv) Sustainable Financing Assessment; and v) Gap Assessment. Further inputs were received
from two international consultants that assisted with the capacity and institutional assessments and the
sustainable financing options.
116. The project development team solicited input from a broad range of stakeholders through the project
preparation, including people at the federal, regional and protected area level. Local community inputs
were also sought from within and surrounding protected areas. A detailed lessons-learnt analysis (see
Annex 7) was carried out as one of the principal objectives was not only to draw on the most recent
international strategic thinking on protected area planning and effectiveness but also to examine i) what
has worked effectively in the context of Ethiopia and ii) what does not work in Ethiopia. Thus, the
solutions to overcome the barriers are strongly derived from good, already functioning practices from
within the country in many cases. In some instances, the practices have yet to be adopted in the country –
66
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
and might even be considered to be radical in the country context. However, in all cases, these are derived
from good practice models elsewhere in sub-Saharan Africa.
117. The project will provide core strategic support to strengthen the protected area system of Ethiopia –
defined as being the system of protected areas that have biodiversity, ecosystem and ecological process
conservation as their major objective. While there are pragmatic and compelling financial arguments to
focus on wildlife (taken in this context to mean, as elsewhere in sub-Saharan Africa, as large mammals)
because of their pull on tourists, the state of wildlife populations in Ethiopia means that the wildlife
spectacles of East Africa do not exist at present. However, the value of the protected areas does not lie in
its tourism value alone. On the contrary, the value of the ecological processes – and primarily watershed
protection – is far greater than the revenue that tourism could provide.
118. Therefore, the project will move protected area management effectiveness from the low to effectively
managed end of the spectrum. This will be achieved by i) providing an enabling environment (through
mainstreaming protected areas in the development context in Ethiopia, policy amendment and
development that provide for management partnerships, and the production of effective regulations) for
effectively managed protected areas, ii) strengthening institutional capacity to plan, market, manage,
regulate, and monitor and evaluate protected areas through cost-effective means, and iii) securing
sustainable financing for the protected area system.
119. The project will ensure effectiveness by addressing the root causes of threats to biodiversity and has
been designed to overcome barriers to effective protected area management as presented in the Baseline
above.
120. The project is strongly in line with the SDPRP to provide support for economic growth and poverty
reduction. It also confirms Ethiopia commitment to and assists Ethiopia’s efforts to achieve the
Millennium Development Goals (particularly Goal 7), the Convention on Biological Diversity, the
Convention to Combat Desertification, its Constitution, the Conservation Strategy of Ethiopia, the
Environment Policy of Ethiopia and the recent Wildlife Policy.
Goal and purpose
121. The GEF alternative takes its direction from the GEF guidelines for Strategic Priority 2 –i.e.,
“Catalysing the sustainability of the Protected Area System – as a whole”. The preceding analysis clearly
indicates the present non-sustainable state of the system (and how globally important biodiversity is being
lost as a consequence). Analysis then detailed the many and complex barriers which prevent such
sustainability. Barriers were largely related to marginalization, weak institutional mandates, inadequate
policy process, weak capacity, and overall insufficient funding to meet real needs. The goal of this GEF
project therefore is to overcome barriers in order to lead to a sustainable protected area system that
contributes to national development.
122. The goal towards which the project will contribute is:
‘Ethiopia’s biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes are effectively safeguarded from
human-induced pressures and adequately represented in a sustainable Protected Area System
that is contributing significantly to economic development, both locally and nationally’.
123. The cultural barriers and mistrust that pervades Ethiopian society and the degree of the challenges to
the sector mean that this goal can only be achieved in the long-term. Success is going to be based on the
development of sufficient institutional capacity. The project intends to use a “staged” approach, with two
distinct “stages” to achieve such capacity and translate capacity into action and impact on the ground.
Simplistically:
67
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
First Stage
Four Years
Developing institutional capacity and piloting field models
Second Stage
Four Years
Consolidation of models, up-scaling and replication of good practice.
Each stage will be monitored and evaluated. M & E will ensure that suitable indicators are demonstrably
achieved to trigger the second part. Note that GEF has now developed specific terminology for stages and
stages within GEF projects30. (This is a Type II Stage Project, “stages” have different connotations.). The
first period will focus on strengthening capacity to ensure the sustainable management of the protected
areas. Thus, the social, environmental, institutional and financial framework for sustainability will be
developed and enhanced during this first stage of funds. In contrast, the second period, using the second
stage of funds will consolidate and ensure the sustainability of these aspects while replicating the good
practice model for protected area development and management that will be adaptively developed and
improved through the first period.
124. More specifically, the purpose for the first stage of the project will be:
Enabling frameworks and capacities for managing the system of protected areas that have
biodiversity, ecosystem and biological process conservation as a major objective are
emplaced
125. This purpose will be achieved through the following five outcomes:
- Protected areas mainstreamed in the development framework of Ethiopia
- Appropriate policy, regulatory and governance frameworks in place
- Institutional arrangements and capacity for protected area planning and management emplaced
- New protected area management options and partnerships piloted, and replicated through partnerships
catalyzed across protected area estate
- Financial sustainability plan developed and demonstrated
126. Having achieved the above purpose, the purpose of the second stage will be:
Working in an enabled environment, sustainable management of the system of protected
areas that have biodiversity, ecosystem and ecological process conservation as a major
objective is ensured
127. This second purpose will be achieved through the following four outcomes:
- Systemic capacity for protected area management consolidated
- Sustainable financing mechanisms contributing to protected area budgets
- Replication of good practice model across protected area estate catalyzed
- Protected areas mainstreamed across all relevant sectors.
Outcomes, outputs and activities
Outcome 1: Protected areas mainstreamed in the development framework of Ethiopia
128. The environment sector has been largely marginalized from the development focus in Ethiopia. This
is particularly the case with biodiversity conservation in general and protected areas in particular. There is
a need for the role that protected area can and should play in a variety of development work to be
recognized. First and most obviously, because of the link to sustainable financing of protected areas, the
linkage and incorporation of protected areas as a key element of the tourism development strategy for the
country is essential.
See GEF draft advisory note “Types of GEF Projects – 2005”. This project is seen as a Staged Type II Project; ie “Entire
project (including all stages) enters a WP to be approved by Council. Specific approval for the amount of the first stage by the
Council Trustee sets aside from the Council commitment authority the amount of the first stage only. Only one WP entry is
needed. Subsequent approval and setting aside of Council Commitment, is based on CEO acknowledgement that the triggers
which allow movement fro the first to second stage are met.
30
68
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
129. Second, one of the threads running through this document is the role that protected areas can play as
an important component in watershed protection31. This needs to be recognized by all organizations
involved with development in the water sector. Thus, development projects, including irrigation schemes
and hydroelectric dams, that require watershed management should incorporate protected area
identification, establishment, development and management as a key component.
130. There are immediate opportunities which link to sustainable financing of the protected area system:
i. At present, the Ministry of Water Resources is planning the feasibility study for a large
hydroelectric dam on the Blue Nile (and possibly other rivers). This development will be largely
financed by the World Bank. Both the organization that is due to carry out the feasibility study
and the country office for the World Bank has accepted, in principle, the incorporation of
protected area identification, establishment, development and management as a component of the
watershed management plan; if sufficient funds are secured, these could assist with the
capitalization of a Trust Fund for protected areas.
ii. In a similar way, the Nile Basin Initiative (and a developing GEF SLM project for Lake Tana area
– IFAD)has opportunity to advocate for the development of protected areas for watershed
management.
131. Third, a national sustainable land management program is currently being developed. This will be
largely funded by the World Bank, but will include other bi-lateral donors. Once again, protected areas
have an important role in such a program and should feature, not only strategically but also financially
(which could similarly assist with the Trust Fund capitalization).
132. As an extension of this third point to adopt protected areas in the mainstream of development in
Ethiopia, the areas will have to be incorporated into land-use planning frameworks. This is particularly
important given that nominal protected areas currently comprise 14% of the land area of Ethiopia and even
under a process of redefinition and reclassification of protected areas, they would comprise a substantial
proportion of the land area of the country. This alone would warrant their inclusion into the land use
framework.
133. This, in turn, requires the relevant other sectors to incorporate protected areas as part of their policy
and strategies, and legislation. Awareness building, knowledge sharing and institutional linkages are key
activities to ensure that these are fulfilled. The incorporation of protected areas in mainstream
development can be first achieved through the adoption of the following indicators from the PASP into the
SDPRP II32 indicator matrix:
i. A 7% increase in the METT scores33 across the protected area system by the end of the first stage
ii. The protected area system will ensure adequate (≥ 7%) representation of all ecosystems in the
country by 2015
134. However, one pre-requisite is the need for detailed and accurate estimates of the economic value of
the protected area system (see below). This would include many protected area issues, but in the context
of development in Ethiopia, would focus on the environmental services provided by the system. This is a
NBSAP recommendation.
135. The outcome of mainstreaming protected areas in the development framework of the country is not
only that protected areas will increase in coverage and representation, but the sector will also have access
31
Considerable work has gone into developing watershed based negotiations for fundraising tie-ins for hydroelectricity, clean water supplies, beverages and beer sales in many countries, e.g.,: Tanzania, Indonesia ,Philippines.
32
This was discussed and accepted for inclusion into the SDPRP II thus representing a profound opportunity.
33
METT is the Monitoring and Evaluation Tracking Tool for PAs, see Annex 12
69
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
to greater levels of funding, particularly from the donor community. This, in turn, will enhance the
sustainable financing of the system as, for example, capitalization of the Trust Fund increases.
136. The culmination of the mainstreaming of protected areas in the development context of Ethiopia will
be the incorporation of biodiversity within the mandatory Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) both
in development and humanitarian work in the country.
Outcome 2: Appropriate policy, regulatory and governance frameworks in place
137. The recent wildlife policy and strategy, and the wildlife proclamation which is in progress34 form a
good foundation on which to build. Indeed, a majority thrust of the project shall be to assist the
government in the implementation of the policy and legislation. However, as indicated in the barriers
section, there is a need to further develop and amend policy and legislation. Indeed, the other outcomes
for this project define the policy, regulatory and governance requirements. Once the policy, regulatory
and governance framework needs are finalized, a detailed analysis these needs relative to the policies and
legislation that exists will be carried out to ensure that the legislation that needs to be repealed shall be –
thereby ensuring neither a conflict within policies or legislation nor that the policies and legislation being
proposed is unlawful.
138. The key elements that need to be incorporated into legislation include the institutional restructuring
that is necessary35. A key feature of restructuring is the formation of a “parastatal” organization. This
may be defined as being as a semi-autonomous, quasi-governmental, state-owned enterprise or
government-owned company36. They are essentially public sector organizations which incorporate some
elements commonly found in private sector organizations. The organization would have the ability to
become largely or entirely self-financing. However, until self-financing, innovative and sustainable
financing mechanisms are in place, there will be a need for continued and even increased government
funding for protected areas. With the establishment and comprehension of the development linkages from
protected areas, this should be easily justifiable.
139. The resulting parastatal organization would be better managed, more efficient and more
“businesslike”. It would also become more participatory and accountable, with stakeholders other than the
government being involved in setting policy and steering their actions. Most importantly, from the legal
viewpoint, they would have: i) the ability to raise and retain revenue underpinned by transparent
accountability; ii) the ability to enter into legal contracts (e.g., with the private sector), iii) freedom from
government rules of human resource management – thus, the ability to hire, fire, promote, and set salary
levels and other incentives without the involvement of the Civil Service Commission, iv) managers of
protected areas have substantial autonomy but are judged on performance related indicators, v) individual
protected areas work under business plans and principles such that if protected area managers exceed
expected annual revenues, they can retain the excess for their own use (above a set amount that is returned
to the overall protected area system budget to cross-subsidize less lucrative areas), and vi) governance by a
Board whose membership includes government, academic, donor and non-government representatives
using agreed criteria (rather than political or other vested interests). The Board will also be a vehicle to
ensure linkages with cross-sectoral organizations – and, most importantly, tourism, water resources and
land management – through representation of these sectors.
34
The proclamation at the time of writing has been approved by the Council of Ministers but needs to be passed
through the House of People’s Representatives before it is fully binding.
35
Other aspects of the restructuring process are dealt with below; this section deals specifically with those aspects of
the restructuring that requires policy or legislation amendments.
36
The majority of the Protected Areas Authorities in Africa and elsewhere are parastatal organizations, including those of
Tanzania, Kenya, South Africa and the United Stated of America.
70
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
140. Institutional mandates will be re-defined clearly. Once defined, linkages need to be institutionalized
to ensure that current institutional confusion among organizations involved in the environment sector and
conservation in particular does not persist. A strong monitoring and evaluation framework will also
ensure that organizations do not drift off their mandate but remain focused on results-driven strategies.
141. The governance framework should not only include the formation of a parastatal protected areas
organization, but also allow for types of governance beyond those allowed by the current legislation (see
Table 5). This will, therefore, allow for a greater range of protected area management partnerships to be
formed, particularly among public-private-community-civil society37. In short, the partnerships will define
the optimal role of each of the partners in the protected area system and in individual protected areas,
including the role of the state. Given the federal nature of Ethiopia, the role of the federal and regional
governments should also be defined, ensuring that the regulatory role of the federal government is
highlighted (Annex 11).
Local
communities
Indigenous
peoples
Individuals &
corporations
D. Community
Research institutes
& universities
NGOs and
foundations
Type of governance
C. Private
Joint management
Collaborative
management
Trans-boundary
B. Co-management
Delegated
management
Regional
government
A. Government
Federal
government
Protected Area Category
TABLE 5. POSSIBLE GOVERNANCE TYPES FOR DIFFERENT PROTECTED AREA CATEGORIES.
NOTE THAT POLICY CURRENTLY ALLOWS ONLY THOSE GOVERNANCE TYPES SHOWN IN
DARK GREY; POLICY WILL BE AMENDED TO ALLOW GOVERNANCE TYPES SHOWN IN
MEDIUM GREY. THOSE NOT SHADED ARE EITHER NOT POSSIBLE (BECAUSE LAND TENURE
DOES NOT PERMIT PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF LAND), OR BECAUSE THE PROTECTED AREA
CATEGORY DOES NOT EXIST AND IS NOT POSSIBLE (IUCN CATEGORIES I AND III; SOME OF
THE TRANSBOUNDARY CATEGORIES).
I – Strict Nature
Areas/wilderness
II – National Parks
III – Natural monuments
IV- Reserves for habitat or
species protection
V – Landscape protection
VI – Reserves for Natural
Resource Management
A - Limited Harvesting
Areas
142. Re-definition of the protected area categories and, when necessary, re-classification of protected
areas. Current categories include: National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries and Reserves, Controlled Hunting
Areas and Forest Priority Areas. These adhere largely to IUCN Categories II and IV (see table above; the
controlled hunting areas and forest priority areas do not fall under the IUCN categories).
143. However, these categories will be re-defined to provide adequately a conservation and social
framework for protected areas in Ethiopia. One of the products from the project will be a ‘toolkit’ for
social responsibility within protected area; the corollary of this is a good practice model of how protected
areas can contribute to poverty alleviation. This is wholly necessary given the level of poverty in the
country.
37
It is notable that in every consultative discussion that was held by the project preparation team, the inclusion of
local communities in planning and management processes was a priority for effective and, importantly, sustainable
management of protected areas in Ethiopia.
71
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
144. Further, the focus of protected areas in Ethiopia will shift away from the historical division between
forests (with their emphasis on exploitation of timber) and wildlife (with their emphasis on assemblages of
mammals or sport hunting). The resulting protected areas will have the following fundamental principles:
1. They will have conservation of biodiversity, ecological processes and/or ecosystems as
their major objective. Thus, the historic division between wildlife and forests will be
eliminated.
2. They will have a direct or indirect but demonstrable impact on poverty reduction
3. Stakeholders, including local communities and authorities (woredas and kebeles), will be
involved in the planning, management, and monitoring and evaluation. Stakeholder
involvement will be based on partnerships that are formed in each protected area, and
4. They will build upon and, where necessary extend the existing protected areas.
145. Four categories of protected area will be defined (see Annex 11):
1. Landscape protected areas (which will always contain a core conservation area and a
community-based natural resource management area and may also include limited
harvesting areas); these are akin to the Man & Biosphere’s ‘Biosphere Reserves’
2. Core conservation areas (in which there will be no harvesting or use of natural resources;
they will incorporate national parks, wildlife reserves and sanctuaries and identified forest
priority areas of biodiversity conservation importance);
3. Limited harvesting areas (incorporating sport hunting concession areas and limited timber
extraction concessions); and
4. Community-based natural resource management systems (incorporating natural resource
management systems, whether they be traditional (such as Guassa-Menz) or ancient, or
those that are currently fully functional in Ethiopia38).
146. It should be noted that trans-boundary protected areas will effectively fall under one or more of the
above four categories although the management will be carried out jointly by the two nations. There are a
number of potential trans-boundary areas but primarily Boma-Gambella and Dinder-Alatish.
38
For example, the FARM Africa/SOS Sahel and GTZ models of participatory natural resource management.
72
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
FIGURE 1.
ETHIOPIA.
THE BROAD MODEL FOR RE-DEFINING PROTECTED AREAS WITHIN
147. The implementation of protected area management will follow the following principles:
i. Each category of protected area will have its own management guidelines and framework suitable
for the overall goal of the area (Annex 11)
ii. Each area will develop and formalize partnerships (including but not restricted to public-privatecivil society-community). The basis of the partnerships will be the negotiation of the optimal role
for the partners in the management of the area
iii. Protected area management will use conservation targets39 to design eco-regional portfolios, and
develop and prioritize conservation strategies (TNC, 2004). Conservation targets are defined as
being specific components of biodiversity, usually consisting of ecosystems, natural communities
and species within a given area that are identified by biodiversity experts. They are aspects of the
area that if their conservation is assured, then they will ensure the conservation of the whole
ecoregion. As such, they function in a similar way to the ‘keystone’ species concept.
iv. Human-induced threats – both direct and root causes - to the conservation targets will also be
identified. Further, spatial mapping of the threats can identify the areas of the protected area with
the greatest need for focused effort.
39
An example is the agreed conservation targets for the Bale Mountains: i) the riparian systems & watershed, ii) the
Harenna Forest, iii) the Ericaceous belt, iv) the northern grasslands, v) the northern woodlands, vi) the Afroalpine
ecosystem, vii) mountain nyala and viii) the Ethiopian wolf.
73
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
v. The management of the areas will be underpinned by business plans that will be developed for
each protected area. The business plans will define the operational standards for activities. At the
basis of this will be results-based financing – to ensure cost effectiveness. The business plans will
seek strategies for reducing operational costs while also seeking strategies to increase revenues.
Communications documents will be planned and produced to ensure that marketing and
investment is appropriately planned and implemented.
vi. Stakeholders will be identified, taking into account those people both in the local communities but
also those that are dependent on resources far from the actual area (such as downstream water
users who are dependent on effective management of watersheds). When there are ecological
processes, ecosystems and/or biodiversity of international importance, the stakeholders will
include the international community. Stakeholders – or their representatives - will participate in
the planning and management of protected areas. Given that biodiversity, ecosystem and
ecological process conservation is the major objective of the protected areas and given the
conservation targets of any given area are the basis of conservation strategies, any human
activities that undermine the value of the targets will not be negotiable (including use of core
conservation areas where relevant).
vii. The management of the areas will include stakeholder participation through the formation of joint
management committees for each protected area. The committees will include but not be
restricted to representatives from the identified stakeholders (as defined above). One key aspect
of the joint management committees will be to ensure and consolidate linkages among crosssectoral organizations and agencies.
viii. Each protected area will identify relevant cross-sectoral issues and work to strengthen the
linkages. For example, for a protected area that protects a watershed, the linkage will be
established with the relevant water resource organizations (both governmental and nongovernmental). The linkages will be formalized and the relevant representatives will be included
in the joint management committee.
ix. Because there are profound dangers of influxes of people and accelerated degradation during the
planning and negotiation processes, moratoria will be sought on environment modifying activities
(most importantly, agricultural expansion and settlement)40.
x. In all sites and across the system, there will be a strong emphasis on monitoring and evaluation,
and adaptive management. The World Bank/WWF Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool
(METT) will be used as the principal means for monitoring the effectiveness of individual
protected areas and of the system as a whole. The baseline for the system and for the majority of
the existing protected areas in Ethiopia has already been determined through the plan development
stage. The assessment of the areas will be done through re-application of the METT to the
baseline areas every year through the project’s life and will be institutionalized as the mechanism
for monitoring effectiveness thereafter. In each site, there will be further monitoring of the
conservation targets (or the ecological attributes for each target that are identified) and the threats
associated with them. On a site-by-site level, both the METT for the site and the monitoring of its
conservation targets and the threats associated with them will feed back into the adaptive business
plan for the area. Further, lessons learnt in each site will be fed into the development of the good
practice model. At a system-wide level, the METT scores from across the system will be used to
monitor the effectiveness of the system as a whole. Again, the monitoring will feed back into the
adaptive protected area conservation plan.
40
This is based on the principle that all the viable agricultural land is already occupied and that further expansion of
agricultural land into marginal areas will lead: i) to land degradation, and ii) biodiversity loss. Such moratoria are
akin to the moratorium on mining, forestry, agricultural expansion and settlement that has been imposed by the
Madagascan government in all potential protected area sites for two years while the actual protected areas are
identified for a list of potential sites.
74
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome 3: Institutional arrangements and capacity for protected area planning and management
emplaced
148. This section deals specifically with i) developing the capacities of government, training and civil
society organizations to ensure their ability to deliver on their identified mandates, ii) adapting and
implementing the protected area system plan and iii) planning through the production of a detailed
protected areas gap analysis through the identification of Key Biodiversity Areas41. As such, it will
respond directly to the barrier of systemic capacity weaknesses linking policy reform, sector coordination,
business planning and knowledge management.
Institutional arrangements
149. From the outset of the project, a key output will be the successful restructuring of government
organizations to form a fully autonomous, parastatal protected areas organization (as defined above). This
solution represents, in part, a scaling-up of and building on the successful model that has been developed
in the Amhara Regional State. Here, the Amhara government has established an autonomous Parks
Development and Management Authority.
150. Through the process, the optimal role of the state, particularly at federal and regional levels 42, will be
clearly defined. The organization will adhere to the decentralized or regional structure of Ethiopia.
Broadly, the federal organization will have a regulatory role, while the regional organizations will have the
mandate for the implementation of the regulations, policy and legislation43.
151. At a federal level, the organization should have the following mandates:
1. Oversight over the national protected area system
2. Production of policy, legislation and regulations
3. Planning, including developing strategies, annual workplans, managing tenders
4. Monitoring and evaluation, and regulation including of private sector operations (tourism
and limited harvesting concessions)
5. Financial management, including receiving and managing revenues, raising funds,
dispersing budgets
6. Human resource management, including coordinating and incentive based training
7. Oversight of field operations (law enforcement; community liaison)
8. Maintaining linkages with federal and regional organizations
9. Leading trans-boundary protected areas (although implementation may be done jointly
with regional organization).
10. Being the country focal point for CITES and the IUCN
11. Facilitating and brokering research partnerships with international researchers
152. In contrast, the regional organizations should have the mandate to implement the regulations:
1. Oversight of the management of protected areas that fall within the region, including joint
management (with the federal organization) of those protected areas that straddle regional
boundaries
41
For example, globally endangered plants and birds
Noting that at the site level, the management will be executed by the protected area management authority with the
oversight of a joint management committee.
43
Such a structure mirrors situation in the majority of other federal countries – for example, South Africa, India, the
United States and Canada. Further, it is similar to the decentralized structure in Uganda.
42
75
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
2. Identifying, establishing and managing regional protected areas (in contrast to the national
protected areas, oversight, identification and establishment for which will be the mandate
of the federal protected area organization)
3. Ensuring linkages with regional organizations and cross-sectoral agencies, including law
enforcement authorities, including regional police and judiciary
4. Signing natural resource management and use agreements with local communities
Appropriate staff expertise
153. The restructuring process will give the opportunity to staff the protected area organizations will staff
with the appropriate skills, backgrounds and training. Thus, the transition to the new organization will
entail complete deconstruction of existing organization and the construction of a fully planned
organization. This will ensure that there is “quality at the gate 44” – hiring of staff with appropriate skills
and experience through open competition. In order to ensure that there is no management vacuum at any
stage of the process, it will be appropriately planned and executed. The protected area organizations will
include i) business, finance, legal, marketing and investment, and management: typically these people will
fill positions in the federal and regional organization, and they will have the capacity to manage tendering
processes, ii) environmental economists: typically these people will fill positions in the federal
organization, and in non-governmental organizations and academic institutions, iii) biodiversity
conservation and ecologists: typically these people will fill positions in the federal and regional
organizations, at least one per site, and in non-governmental organizations and academic institutions, iv)
socio-economists: typically these people will fill positions in the federal and regional organizations, and in
non-governmental organizations and academic institutions, v) scouts: in the protected areas themselves.
More specifically, at the regional level, the staff needs include managers and accounts, while at the site
level, managers, ecologists and scouts are necessary
154. Not only will the organization be staffed with appropriately experienced people, but they will fill
positions with clearly defined and appropriate remits. The remits will be results-oriented such that they
contribute to the overall business plan for the organization. In addition, positions with appropriate remits
will be created to ensure that linkages among relevant organizations (including vertical – i.e., federal –
regional – protected area – and horizontal at each level) are established and institutionalized.
Capacity development: training
155. While the re-structuring at federal and regional levels will strive to fill the positions will people with
existing expertise and experience, training will be an ongoing institutional development process, not only
within the administrative offices, but also at the protected area site level. Thus, training outputs will
respond to the needs of the different sections along the protected area system chain.
156. The capacity of in-country training institutions shall be strengthened in order to ensure that training
can be cost-effectively delivered and to ensure sustainability. The following institutions will form the
focus of the capacity development:
1. Wondo Genet Forestry College (MSc in Wildlife Conservation)
2. Scout training centre (location to be decided – but possibly in Alledeghi because then cofinancing could be sought from African Parks who are considering submitting a proposal
to manage the area; it is also ideally situated with ease of logistics and travel for trainees).
3. MBA training institutions (marketing, business planning and investment; managing
tendering processes)
44
Similar complete overhauls of staff of protected areas authorities were carried out in similar strengthening projects
in Kenya (WB – PAWS), Uganda (GEF PAMSU) and Rwanda, for example.
76
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
4. Addis Ababa University, Environmental Economics Policy Forum for Ethiopia, and
Ethiopian Development Research Institute (EDRI) (Environmental economics, twinned
with University of Göteborg, Sweden; Socio-economics; plant systematics & surveying Ethiopian Herbarium; vertebrate & invertebrate systematics & surveys – Biology
Department; Law enforcement & judiciary - Law Faculty)
5. Wondo Genet Forestry College (natural resource management – twinned with Mweka
Wildlife College, Tanzania)
Capacity development: tools
157. Training alone is an inadequate form of capacity development. Staff must have the tools to fulfill
their remits, and the institutional and policy environment must be enabling. This section deals with the
tools for capacity development, while the institutional and policy issues are dealt with above.
158. Here “tools” is broadly defined as anything that will ensure i) attraction of experienced and qualified
people to positions within the protected area system, ii) motivation, dedication and professionalism in their
tasks and iii) the ability to complete tasks efficiently.
159. The protected area organization will have institutionalized training and incentive mechanisms. These
will be coupled with a stringent performance evaluation, relative to annually set results or targets. Overall,
this will capacitate the staff members.
160. The project alone will have an effect of re-branding the protected area system. This will help ensure
that working in the system will be attractive to experienced and qualified people.
161. Finally, organizational operational budgets will include maintenance and replacement of equipment.
Therefore, while at present the government may not have the financial wherewithal to purchase the
equipment and tools necessary to capacitate staff (which will, therefore, be covered by GEF funds), the
replacement and maintenance of that equipment will be possible simply through efficient budgeting and
planning.
Capacity development: stakeholders
162. This proposal purports to have a four-stage protected area planning process: i) identification of key
biodiversity areas, ecosystems and ecological processes, ii) stakeholder analysis, iii) negotiation and
agreement with stakeholders, and iv) implementation.
163. The capacity of the stakeholders to enter into negotiations cannot be assumed, particularly in a
country with a history of subjugation of rural communities. Thus, negotiations will be mediated by
independent organization that will ensure that the communities are fully aware of what is at stake,
including the environmental framework in which the negotiations take place.
164. In addition, stakeholders will be involved in implementation of management practices.
capacity to adequately carry out their roles will be developed.
Planning: protected areas system plan adopted and implemented
77
Their
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
165. Having completed the restructuring process and built the capacity of the protected area authority, this
project document will be used as the basis for an adaptive protected areas system plan. The PASP will be
further developed, making use of business planning principles – akin to the business planning already
adopted by the government as part of the civil society reform program – and include (but not be limited
to):
i. Mechanisms for rationalizing the protected area network, including creation and reclassifying
(using the newly redefined protected area categories). The rationalization of the protected area
system includes the further need for developing mechanisms to declassify those areas that have no
functional value whatsoever and exist only on paper. The process for creation of a protected area
will be by definition participatory. However, the process to reclassify and declassify areas will
also need to be participatory and include identified stakeholders or their representatives. Further,
an independent assessment of each reclassification or declassification will be carried out. In this
way, biodiversity of national and/or international importance will not be inadvertently lost through
the reclassification or declassification process.
ii. Mechanisms to establish efficient, effective and financially sustainable private-public-civil
society-community (i.e., stakeholder) partnerships within the framework provided by the
fundamental principles and the guidelines for the categories of protected area (Annex 11). The
mechanisms will include the legal framework for the partnerships, including model agreements
that would be signed among the partners.
iii. The guidelines for the management of the four categories of protected area (see Annex 11) will be
adopted as regulations following a participatory process leading to them being agreed upon.
iv. A model business plan to be adopted (and adapted as necessary) by protected areas (using the
demonstration site plans as a baseline model). The business plan is primarily aimed at describing
the way in which the protected area is to be developed, managed and financially resourced in
order for management to enhance its operational efficiency and optimize its income generation,
thus reducing its dependency on subsidy. The basis of this is the development of results-based
management and financing. The business plan should identify and describe financial resources,
and seek to make financial projections for viable and innovative tourism opportunities that would
benefit biodiversity conservation. There will be an overall sustainable financing plan developed
for each protected area to fit into the system’s sustainable financing plan. Another aspect of the
business plans will be to ensure incentives for protected area managers and staff.
v. Realistic monitoring and evaluation frameworks. The purpose of the monitoring and evaluation
will be i) to demonstrate impact and ii) to provide feedback for adaptive management; the results
of the monitoring and evaluation will be disseminated accordingly. The M&E frameworks will be
dependent on the Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT). In the first year, the METT
will be adapted, as necessary, to the Ethiopian context. The scores will be compared to the
baseline collected over the development of the project document and amended as necessary.
Thereafter, METT scores will be collected for all protected areas in the country. Scores will be
reviewed every year for the duration of the project and, given that it shall be institutionalized, with
continue thereafter. In addition to the application of the METT, conservation targets (for details
see Annex 11) will be developed for each site (primarily as a mechanism for designing the
conservation portfolio at each site). The key ecological attributes and the threats to the targets
will also be monitored in conjunction with the METT to ensure that the management is indeed
having an effect on the biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes.
vi. Plans for knowledge management within and across the entire system – and thus among protected
area managers as well as the administrators. Enhancing, acknowledging and investing45 in
knowledge management shall be one of the principal keys to improving productivity of personnel.
There are a number of key aspects: i) foster innovation by encouraging the free flow of ideas
using appropriate and up-to-date technologies, and dissemination of the outcomes of this project;
45
With the knowledge that knowledge management should cost up to 10% of an organization’s annual budget.
78
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
ii) improve service by streamlining response time; iii) recognizing the value of employees'
knowledge and rewarding them for it; and iv) streamline operations and reduce costs by
eliminating redundant or unnecessary processes. The knowledge management is they key to the
replicability of this project – not only to adopt lessons learnt from within and outside the country,
but also to ensure that the good and poor practices are picked up in the monitoring and evaluation
and to facilitate adaptively the incorporation of such lessons to ensure impact. One key to
successful knowledge management in Ethiopia will be ensuring the exchange of information and
experiences among the protected areas and regional states (through exchanges, study tours, central
training institutes).
vii. An investment and marketing plan coupled with an independent tourism development strategy.
This will develop innovative ideas for attracting investors and donors to the protected area system.
In addition, at the site level, investment and marketing plans should also develop innovative ideas
for generating revenue. At least one lodge (or other appropriate visitor accommodation) should be
developed within or on the edge of each protected area. These should be developed on a publicprivate-community partnership level.
Protected area system gap and prioritization analysis
166. There are two barriers to be overcome in this section. First, the gap in the protected area system that
has resulted from the historical focus of protected area on large mammal assemblages, and the split
between wildlife and forests. Second, the need to fill systematically the gaps in knowledge.
167. The detailed analysis of the coverage and ecosystem representation of the protected areas of the
country (taking into account the rationalization process), with the consequent identification of the priority
gaps in the system will take place over the course of the first stage. However, the gaps analysis will be an
ongoing, dynamic process and will be designed to incorporate new biodiversity data as it is collected.
168. The criteria for prioritization of the gaps (for new areas) or development of (nominal – thus
ineffectively managed) existing areas will be agreed but will include: i) threats to the area, ii) fragility of
ecosystem, iii) level of diversity and endemism, iv) ecological processes and services, v) economic,
cultural and aesthetic values, vi) trans-boundary areas, and vii) areas critical for migratory species.
169. As information is gathered on the coverage and ecosystem representation, a systematic analysis of the
environmental economics of each ecosystem will be carried out. This will ensure that the full value of the
protected area(s) is accurately estimated – to further justify the designation, establishment and financing of
protected areas. This information will, wherever possible, be supplemented by surveys and research for
which the project may act as a catalyst or broker.
170. A small and participatory biodiversity research committee46 will be established to oversee the
establishment of these partnerships. Through networking and facilitation (with the assistance of foreign
delegations in the country and foreign multi- and bilateral and non-governmental organizations), the
partnerships will be actively sought, with invitations to selected institutions to work with Ethiopian
institutions to fill these gaps in knowledge. Training Ethiopian nationals can be linked to the
achievements while filling knowledge gaps.
171. The gaps analysis will have the following features:
46
With membership from government organizations (MoARD, EPA), academic institutions (e.g., AAU and Debub
University), international delegations and NGOs.
79
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
1. The analysis will be based on a number of strategic partnerships established between
Ethiopian institutions and institutions in other countries that have specific expertise in key
areas. The objectives of these partnerships will be i) to ensure technology transfer and
capacity development through training, and ii) to ensure delivery of the expected results
of the analysis.
2. It will use a limited number of taxonomic groups to identify Key Biodiversity Areas
(KBA). When possible existing data will be used. These include: vascular plant data (to
be compiled and analysed by the Herbarium at Addis Ababa University); mammal data
(using the Global Mammal Assessment data that will become available in 2006);
amphibian data, bird data (building on the Important Bird Areas, IBAs, to be compiled
with BirdLife International and the Ethiopian Wildlife & Natural History Society);
invertebrate taxa, most probably including Odonates - chosen on the basis of: i) the
knowledge about the group globally and ii) their use as indicator species. Where existing
data is not available, partnerships will be actively established with foreign institutions,
when necessary, to ensure that the gaps are filled.
3. Gap analysis will also consider the potential for trans-boundary protected areas (e.g.,
Alatish-Dinder, Gambella-Boma, Chew Bahir-Sibiloi).
4. Surveys will be carried out to ground-truth and/or augment these data when necessary
5. The gaps analysis will be designed in partnership and collaboration with the Africa
specialists and Global Gap Analysis specialists in Conservation International.
6. The data will be compiled and analyzed in a GIS unit that is in part established for the gap
analysis (but also for the monitoring and evaluation work).
7. Once a gap is identified, its economic potential and sustainable financing options will be
analysed, including the environmental services that it provides.
172. The outputs of the gap analysis will be as follows:
1. Maps of the prioritized gaps in the protected area system, with the justification of why the
area has been selected on the basis of KBA analysis using all taxonomic groups
2. The prioritization of existing areas in the network; prioritization will occur through agreed
criteria but will include the value of the area (measured through the international, regional
and national value of their biodiversity, ecological processes and/or ecosystems) and the
degree of threat to the area.
3. Maps of the core conservation area in all protected area (because of its outstanding – thus,
internationally, regionally or nationally important biodiversity, ecological process and/or
ecosystem value); these are the areas where use of resources is not negotiable because it
would undermine these values
4. Ground-truthed maps of the protected areas, after the re-classification process.
Outcome 4: New protected area management options and partnerships piloted, and
replicated through partnerships catalyzed across protected area estate
173.
Over the past eighteen months, there have been interesting and important developments across the
protected area estate. These developments give a unique opportunity to test some of the new management
options that are being propounded in this project document.
174.
These include i) developments in Nech Sar and Omo National Parks in which the management
and operation is being delegated to a private sector organization – African Parks; ii) the development of a
landscape-level project in the Bale Mountains in which two civil society organizations – the FARM Africa
/ SOS Sahel Participatory Natural Resources Management Unit and Frankfurt Zoological Society – are
working with the Oromiya State Government to partner with local communities in the identification of the
core conservation area and in the surrounding areas working to develop sustainable natural resource
80
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
management systems; and iii) the development of a legitimate community-based natural resource
management area in Guassa-Menz under a partnership among the Amhara State Government, the local
community and Frankfurt Zoological Society.
175.
The developments in these areas are all independently funded (or co-financed). The partnerships
that are implementing the projects have also been established.
176.
Each of the areas has been included as demonstration sites for a number of reasons. First, Omo
and Nech Sar are among the leading sites for the country for large-mammal orientated tourism,
particularly because of their proximity to the south circuit for tourism – thus, those tourists visiting the
cultural sites in southwest Ethiopia. Second, the Bale Mountains is the most outstanding biodiversity site
in the country (Williams et al., 2005). Finally, the Guassa-Menz area is an Afroalpine area of importance
but it is also the community-based area that is furthest towards legitimate recognition by the (regional)
government.
177.
Because of the management options in each area, they are also being adopted as the trial areas for
the development of a good practice model. For example, the Bale Mountains model is being adopted as
the good-practice model when a private sector organization is not managing the protected area and as an
example of a landscape-level project. Both Nech Sar and Omo will provide feedback for the private sector
management option; similarly, Guassa-Menz will provide the good practice model for a communitymanaged area47.
178.
As a result of the adoption of these areas as good practice, the monitoring and evaluation of the
effectiveness of these areas will prove critical to the success of the protected area system. Lessons learnt
in these areas will thus feed back to adapt the each category within the model for replication in other sites
in the country. It will be interesting to monitor the development in these areas compared to the other areas
in the country where there will be no development over the coming four years. These areas in which there
is no direct intervention will, therefore, effectively act as ‘controls’ for comparison (although there will be
some activity as the capacity of the whole system is affected by the project).
179.
The replication of the good practice model will focus initially in i) the existing and prioritized
areas in the country and ii) the prioritized gaps in the network. The development of the partnerships in the
Bale, Nech Sar, Omo and Guassa-Menz areas, and the mechanisms for securing co-financing for the areas
will also provide be incorporated. The project will act as a catalyst or broker for the development of such
projects in individual sites around the country by bringing partners together and providing the framework
and guidelines for the development of the projects.
180.
Finally, the project will also act as a key catalyst and broker in securing international recognition
(e.g., World Heritage Site or Man & Biosphere) for eligible sites in the country.
181.
In addition to these site-level demonstrations, the project will also aim to replicate good practice
models among the institutions involved in protected area management, particularly at a regional
government level. The current example of this is to replicate the autonomous organization that the
Amhara Regional State has developed for National Park management and operation. This project will
47
In addition to the Guassa-Menz area, the project will work to engage all other de facto community-based natural
resource management systems, whether traditional or not, for inclusion and recognition within this category of
protected area. This includes the Adaba-Dodola area, the Bonga, Chilimo and Borana sites of the FARM Africa/SOS
Sahel Participatory Forest Management Unit (PFMU), the Berge Wetland Sit Support Group, etc.
81
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
take this model two steps further: i) to give it ‘parastatal’ status (thus, allowing it to operate under business
plans, to benefit from revenues generated and to have a positive, incentive-driven human-resources
policy), and ii) to broaden the mandate to oversee all protected area categories. Thereafter, the project will
seek to replicate it as a good practice model among all regional governments and to scale-up to the federal
government.
182.
The above demonstration sites focus primarily on the core conservation areas and communitybased natural resource management systems. In addition to these, over the first stage, the guidelines that
have been developed for limited harvesting areas will be further developed into regulations. These will
then be adopted in at least four limited harvesting concession areas. These areas will, in effect, be
‘demonstration’ sites for this management category with the aim of homing the regulations for replication
across all limited harvesting areas.
Outcome 5: Financial sustainability plan developed and demonstrated
183. This outcome will respond directly to the barrier of inadequate and unsustainable financing for the
protected area system and will produce four outputs: i) a plan of how the funding protected area system
will be dispersed, ii) a Trust Fund for the protected area system of Ethiopia, iii) a marketing and
investment plan for the protected area system and iv) a linked sustainable financing plan for the protected
area system. The marketing and investment plans will be incorporated into business plans for the
protected area system as well as for individual protected areas. The marketing and investment plans will
focus specifically on self-financing, innovative and sustainable financing mechanisms to attract donors
and investors in the system and among the sites.
184. From the outset, one of the principal aims of the project, as mentioned above is to mainstream
protected areas in the development context in Ethiopia. This will be based on an understanding within the
government of Ethiopia of the broad (including economic) values of protected areas for the country 48.
Therefore, while the organization will have the ability to become largely or entirely self-financing and
until it has done so, there will be a need for continued and increased government funding for protected
areas. With the establishment and comprehension of the development linkages that protected areas have,
this should be easily justifiable. Two expected results of this will be i) a greater commitment from the
government of Ethiopia to provide funding to the protected area system at least until the system becomes
self-financing and ii) a greater opportunity for multi- and bi-lateral donors to focus some of the
development aid funding towards the protected area system.
Finance disbursal plan
185. A plan will be developed on how the funding for the protected area system will be disbursed. The
plan will be adaptive to the amount of funding available in any given year. The plan will take into account
that, at least in the foreseeable future, funding for the system is likely to be sub-optimal (although the
mechanisms listed below will ensure its growth over the coming years). The plan will, therefore,
determine the criteria by which (initially limited) funds be dispersed among the protected areas. Criteria
may include i) the degree of threat, ii) the value of the biodiversity, ecosystem and/or ecological process,
and iii) the responsiveness and effectiveness of the management in the area (monitored via the METT)49.
186. Similarly, the plan will ensure that individual protected areas can keep – for re-investment – funds
over a given threshold; before that threshold is reached, the protected area will contribute to the system as
48
49
Implicit in this is that there will be accurate estimates of the economic value of the protected area system.
Akin, thus, to GEF’s Resource Allocation Framework but among the protected areas within Ethiopia.
82
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
a whole. In effect, high-earning protected areas will subsidize low-earning areas; however, revenue above
the threshold will be kept by the protected area for its own development.
A Trust Fund for the protected area system
187. A Trust Fund for the protected area system of Ethiopia will be developed and established. Detailed
planning will have to take place, including how the fund will be managed and, most importantly, how the
revenue accrued from the trust fund through the interest on the capital will be disbursed within the
protected area system (see Annex 9 for details of establishing the Trust Fund).
188. The linkage between the project and the World Bank will be an important component in the trust fund
capitalization. Therefore, importantly, as the linkage between protected areas and development is
consolidated, the protected area system will be a recipient of funding (for example, from the watershed
management component of the Blue Nile hydroelectric dam, from the Nile Basin Initiative, from large
scale irrigation projects, etc). These funds will not only be used to develop protected areas in the target
areas, but also to capitalize the trust fund – thereby ensuring the sustainable financing of the system,
including the target sites.
189. In a similar way, linkages with other funding organizations (e.g., the African Development Bank
(ADB), the European Union, etc) will be sought and consolidated.
Marketing and investment plan
190. The marketing and investment plans must be internationally comparable and competitive. Thus, for
example, if protected areas in Ethiopia are to compete in an international tourism market, products that are
unique (thus, conferring competitive advantage), and when not unique, at least comparable and
competitive in the service that is being provided. This will require the input of international expertise and
national capacity development in each of the fields for the investment and marketing plans that are based
on sound market research. Thus, the products will be rationalized, adequately marketed and matched to
the ‘willingness-to-pay’. For example, the sport hunting of an Endangered species such as the mountain
nyala can only be based upon: i) a demonstrable positive effect on nyala populations (through the
protection that hunting concession areas offer them) and ii) significant revenue for the system (including
key stakeholders). If either of these two aspects does not hold, then sport hunting of nyalas must stop.
191. A further point is that the investment and marketing plans will only be successful if they are
circulated or brokered adequately. Partners50 will be crucial to ensure that investment and marketing plans
reach the most appropriate people.
192. The marketing and investment plans will include mechanisms for seeking and establishing tourism
concessions in the protected areas. The emphasis will be on private-community-public partnerships.
Sustainable financing plan
193. The sustainable financing plan will be investigate determine the mechanisms by which the protected
area system will be funded in perpetuity. The plan will be adaptive. It will also be based on the results of
a study into the economic value of the protected area system and the environmental services that it
provides (see protected area system gap analysis above). The plan will include the following aspects:
50
For example, GTZ-IS, WCS, FZS, African Parks and other partners in the Protected Area System.
83
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
i. It will recognize and forecast government commitments to the protected area system, particularly
as the link between protected areas (including the conservation of biodiversity, ecosystem and
ecological processes) and development is consolidated and funding is demonstrated as a result.
ii. The linkage between development and protected areas will be forged during the project process.
This is expected to lead to sustainable financing for the protected area system as development
budgets increasingly incorporate a protected area component. The financing may come in two
forms: i) identification, establishment and management of specific protected area(s) linked with a
development project (e.g., for protected areas within a given watershed for a particular dam or
irrigation scheme), or ii) for assistance to the protected area system as a whole; including
capitalization of the Trust Fund.
iii. The CBD prescribes mechanisms countries can apply to recover the benefits to the global
community of the pharmaceutical, industrial and agricultural use of biodiversity sourced from
their biodiversity stocks. This project should base on these CBD mechanisms to repatriate global
financial benefits of biodiversity conservation to Ethiopia to fund the proposed Protected Areas
Systems Plan (PASP).
iv. Innovative financing mechanisms linked to the environmental services provided by protected
areas. For example, the Meta Brewery uses clean water that is, in part, provided by Menagesha
State Forest. Such breweries could pay, say, 5% of the price to a conservation fund for watershed
protection.
v. It will determine whether Debt for Nature swaps are possible; given that Ethiopia is listed as a
HIPC and the majority of its debt has been written off, the ‘opportunity’ that debt presents may no
longer hold.
vi. The project will determine the carbon-trading opportunities for standing forests51. There are
mechanisms for the sale of both carbon storage and conservation (off-market), and reforestation,
afforestation and clean energy (on-market) carbon; these will be explored as potential sources of
funds for protected areas management and conservation activities. Analysis during the BSAP
process estimated a total annual carbon sequestration value of Ethiopia’s forest area (including
forest and wildlife protected area) at US$ 73.5 billion (Muramira and Wood, 2003). This amount
of money indicates the bargain the Ethiopian Government has in her argument for international
financing of protected area management in the country
vii. The potential for IFC and IDA loans for partners and investors will be explored.
viii. The sustainable financial plan will recognize that not all aspects of funding will be accrued to the
protected area authority itself. Instead, there is a recognition that protected area or nature-linked
products can contribute to the overall economy; if these can be demonstrated (through detailed
analysis), then the government will be increasingly persuaded of the value of the protected area.
Examples of such private capital flows are curios, artifacts and souvenirs.
ix. Realization of the economic potential of the biodiversity genetic resources in Ethiopia. Studies
have indicated, for example, that the potential international value of the genetic variation in wild
coffee harbored in the natural forests of Ethiopia amounts to between US$0.5 – 1.5billion per
year. However, this does nothing for the protection of the forests or for the protected area system
as a whole if it is not realized. Thus, the marketing and investment plans will take into account
and seek to realize these potentials.
Triggers for the Second Stage
194. A subset of the project’s indicators or triggers from the first stage that will be the key to moving to a
second period. Without achieving these key triggers (as determined by an independent review), the
second stage will not be funded and the project will stop. The triggers will be:
51
As opposed to reforestation or afforestation projects that are currently eligible for carbon-trading. The current
carbon-trading means that there is a perverse incentive to clear-cut standing, natural forests (and investing the profits)
and then to reforest the area using carbon-credits!
84
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
i. The Ministry of Water Resources has amended its policy to include a protected area component
for watershed management and protection.
ii. Strategies for implementation of Wildlife Policy and Proclamation in place.
iii. The Sustainable Land Management Program and Blue Nile Development are funding protected
area establishment, development and management in relevant areas
iv. A 16% increase in the METT scores for the four demonstration sites will be recorded by the end
of the first stage
v. Six further sites (including at least two new sites) will be benefiting from co-financing and
partnerships and will be being implemented using the produced and disseminated good practice
model
vi. The guidelines for limited harvesting (sport hunting and timber) concessions are agreed, in place
and enacted in four concession areas which will act as demonstration sites for replication in the
second stage period.
vii. All components of Trust Fund in place (see Annex 9)
Action plan to ensure triggers are met
195. The triggers have been specifically selected because much of the work to ensure their achievement
has already started during the project preparation (PDF-B) stage. Thus, they are considered to be realistic
and attainable, and with the achievement of the above outcomes, they will be secure. However, detailed
actions to ensure their fulfillment are presented here:
196. Ministry of Water Resources policy. The project preparation (PDF-B) stage has made strong linkages
with the World Bank and the Norwegian Embassy regarding the hydro-electric developments in the
country. They have already agreed that protected areas should be an important component of the
country’s watershed management strategies. Given that these initiatives are driven by the Ministry of
Water Resources, the formal adoption into policy should follow, with leverage from these two funding
organizations. However, to ensure that this is achieved, first, under the new protected areas organization,
people will be specifically mandated to continue to develop linkages with the other government agencies
and donor organizations. Second, the implementation agency for the first stage is GTZ-IS. GTZ has
strong relationships in Ethiopia with the Ministry of Water Resources as GTZ’s environmental and natural
resources programming in the country is specifically watershed management. Third, important crosssectoral organizations such as the Ministry of Water Resources will sit on the board of the protected areas
organization. Consequently, this aspect of the project is considered achievable.
197. Strategies to implement wildlife policy and proclamation. The implementation of this project
represents the single biggest step to ensure the policy and proclamation are implemented – primarily
because it works to increase the capacity of the government to do just that. However, the policy and
proclamation (law) have been adopted by the Council of Ministers over the past five months – following a
wait of a number of years (a draft was published in 1993). Thus, there are significant signs that the
government is beginning to act in this sector.
198. The funding from Sustainable Land Management Program and Blue Nile Development. As with the
hydro-electric developments mentioned above, linkages have been established with the relevant
organizations (primarily, again, the World Bank and the Norwegian Embassy and also the
CIDA/Ethiopian-Canadian Cooperation Office) regarding the Sustainable Land Management Program and
the Nile Basin Initiative with the aim to incorporate protected areas as components. As above, this has
already been agreed in principle. The project will further build on and broaden these linkages.
199. METT score increases in the demonstration sites. The demonstration sites have specifically been
selected because they are underway. Thus, the co-finance for their development is already pledged and
the partnerships involved are already agreed. For example, in the case of the Bale Mountains, FZS has
85
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
been working for a few months (over the course of the project preparation) to start work. Thus, the
increase in the METT scores has been calculated by realistic expectations and results targeted in those
projects.
200. Six further sites (including at least two new sites) will be being implemented. Again, this trigger
accurately reflects current plans in the country, rather than expressing a wish. For example:
- African Parks is currently examining up to seven other (with three priority – Alledeghi, Gambella
and Alatish) sites for development in the country; in addition, the Alatish area is already being
developed by the Amhara Regional State as a protected area.
- Work has started through the project preparation stage to identify the most important area (in
biodiversity terms) in the Ogaden area for a potential protected area; partners are currently being
sought.
- There are a number of people and organizations already working in the southwest forests. Many
of these organizations have expressed an interest to work under the guidelines developed in the
project to establish a protected area in these forests.
201. All limited harvesting (sport hunting and timber) concession areas managed according to
management framework. [This was amendment from the initial draft that we sent to GEF Secretariat in
response to the comments that were received.] Given that the draft guidelines have already been
developed (see Annex 11), the process is already underway and requires adoption in the concessions that
are already established.
202. All components of Trust Fund in place. The process to establish the Trust Fund is given in detail in
Annex 9. This includes the further and specific Trust Fund indicators that will need to be achieved to
trigger its capitalization during the second stage. The achievement of these indicators is considered
realistic given that there are i) lessons learnt (e.g., from the Eastern Arc Trust Fund in Tanzania and the
Mgahinga Bwindi Impenetrable Forest Conservation Trust Fund in Uganda), ii) specific GEF guidelines
for Trust Fund establishment, and iii) lessons learnt in the previous attempts to establish a trust fund in
Ethiopia. It should be noted that this process is also underway, with the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development (Natural Resources Sector) having already submitted a letter to the Council of Ministers to
justify establishing a Trust Fund for protected areas.
Outcome 1, Second Stage: Systemic capacity for protected area management consolidated
203. The triggers that allow the project to move to the second stage are proxy indicators of emplaced
capacity. However, despite this it is apparent that without capacity being developed, the indicators will
not be achieved.
204. It is also recognized that developing capacity is a continuum and that these triggers have been chosen
because they will meaningfully indicate that a level of capacity has been developed and that an enabling
environment is in place. This is important because in the second stage, the project moves from being DEX
to NEX – thus, nationally executed.
205. Assuming that the capacity is in place, it will have profound consequences for the sustainability of the
protected area system in Ethiopia. Therefore, having gone through the process of ‘learning by doing’
during the first stage under the technical guidance of GTZ-IS, the national protected area organization will
execute the project.
206. The protected area organization will then move to replicate the best practice models across the
protected area estate, focusing on improving management effectiveness in the existing but currently
nominal sites and extending the system to fill the priority gaps.
86
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome 2, Second Stage: Sustainable financing mechanisms contributing to protected area budgets
207. The second stage will see the implementation and demonstration of the innovative sustainable
financing mechanisms that were planned in the first stage. As a consequence, funding will be being
generated both at the higher organization but also at the site level. The funding that is being generated
will be offsetting the previous funding that was almost exclusively coming from the government.
208. At a site level, sustainable financing will be sought to cover the recurrent costs of the management
and operation of the protected area. However, protected area managers will be able to retain the excess for
their own use – above a set amount that is returned to the overall protected area system budget to crosssubsidize less lucrative areas.
209. There will be a strong emphasis placed on financial mechanisms that do not need to be continually
renewed (cf. donor funding). Caution will also be taken not to become heavily reliant on fickle sources of
revenue such as tourism; thus, contingency plans will also be developed to ensure that if any given source
of revenue (unless secure) were to fail, the protected area system or any given site would not collapse with
no funding. Thus, wherever possible, the sustainable financing plans and the resulting funding will come
from a variety of sources.
210. Part of this will be the capitalization through the second stage of the Trust Fund the foundations for
which will be established during the first stage (see Annex 9). Thus, by the end of the second stage, the
Trust Fund will be generating significant revenue for the protected area system.
211. As the project moves into the second stage, the demonstration sites will be in a position to
demonstrate the possibly to generating revenue to offset the recurrent management costs that are incurred
by the protected area organization.
Outcome 3, Second Stage: Replication of good practice model in protected area estate catalyzed
212. The good practice models for the different categories of protected area will be honed over the course
of the first stage. First, the guidelines that have been produced in the project preparation (PDF-B) stage
will be improved with additional stakeholder participatory processes and subsequently to produce
regulations for the different categories of protected area. Second, monitoring and evaluation of the
demonstration sites will be used to adapt their management and operations to build on processes that work
and to replace those that do not.
213. As a consequence, the demonstration sites will result in a good practice models for each of the
different categories of protected area that will be replicated across the protected area estate.
214. Just as in the first stage, however, direct funding for such development projects in individual
protected areas will not be undertaken by GEF. Instead, as protected areas increasingly fulfill their role
within the development context in Ethiopia, there will be scaling up not only by the government but also
by donors in the country. It will, therefore, fall to the donors to assist financially with the catalysis process
necessary to lift the protected areas from their current degraded state, including the new protected areas
that will fill the gaps in the system, to the point where they can achieve financial sustainability within the
system52.
This is in recognition that not all protected areas will generate sufficient revenue to cover their recurrent costs –
thus some will need to be cross-subsidized.
52
87
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
215. The protected area organization will engage with potential organizations, both technical and donor, to
establish partnerships across the protected area estate. Once the partners have been found, the established,
best practice planning and implementation process will start: i) rationalizing the protected area, ii)
determining the appropriate scale for the area, including the location of the key biodiversity areas,
ecosystem and those areas important for ecological processes, iii) identifying the stakeholders, iv) entering
into a process of mediated negotiation with the stakeholders regarding the management of the area and the
category of protected area that should be implemented in the area, v) securing agreements with
stakeholders to bind legally the management processes that have been agreed, vi) implementation of the
management practices.
Outcome 4, Second Stage: Protected areas mainstreamed across all relevant sectors
216. Over the course of the first stage, the protected area system will become more visible in the country –
not just within the development context. Marketing and communication practices will be implemented to
ensure this is the case. In addition, the adoption of protected areas in the SDPRP II and in major
development initiatives such as the Sustainable Land Management Program, the Nile Basin Initiative, the
hydroelectric and irrigation developments will be important catalysts to increase the visibility of the sector
and to further demonstration sites.
217. Most importantly, however, will be the demonstration that protected areas can play a role in poverty
alleviation. Thus, the demonstration sites should not only protected the biodiversity, ecosystems and
ecological processes - that are their major objectives (and which will only in the long-term be fully
appreciated by the nation) – but also demonstrably have an impact on poverty alleviation among
stakeholders, including local communities.
218. When this is coupled with effectively managed areas that people can visit and return impressed by
wildlife populations, intact ecosystems and fabulous scenery, then the place of protected areas in the
country will have taken a few steps to becoming more secure and sustainable. Different sectors will, as a
result, be incorporating protected areas as a development strategy when environmental protection and
revenue generation are important.
Risk analysis
TABLE 6. THE KEY RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Risk
Significant increases in external
development pressure (resettlement
programs, irrigation schemes,
hydroelectric dams) on protected
areas
Rating*
M
The process of amending policy and
strategies, and proclamations to
ensure an enabling environment,
including decentralization and
partnership-allowing governance
framework is delayed
M/S
Risk Mitigation Measure
Protected areas will be integrated into land use planning,
primarily through the Sustainable Land Management Program.
Linkages at regional level will be strengthened; joint management
committees will be established at the site level. The M&E and
communication system will provide an early warning of
increasing pressure.
Continuous policy dialogue between the UNDP-CO and the GoE;
the project providing the support to ensure progress on and
finalizing of drafts. The risk will also be mitigated through the
DAG (donor assistance group) and thematic TWG (technical
working groups) and the PAC, (project advisory committee),
which will include a broad range of government agencies.
Strategic use of lobbying and communications. Inclusion of
protected areas into the SDPRP indicator matrix has assisted.
88
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Qualified and dedicated people are
not available from within the
institutions or for recruitment
M
Mortality and morbidity rates from
HIV/AIDS related illnesses
increases among the protected area
staff
L
Delay in the institutionalization of
co-management arrangements with
local communities
L
Linkages among government
agencies remain poor
M
Continued de facto open access to
resources in protected areas
Trophy hunting and timber
harvesting continue to deplete
wildlife populations and forests
Tourism does not develop as hoped
and tourist levies do not
significantly contribute to the
recurrent costs of the protected area
system
The protected area-development
linkage is insufficiently developed
to ensure that protected areas benefit
financially
Overall risk rating
M/S
L
M/S
L
Institutionalization of training and incentive mechanisms, coupled
with a stringent performance evaluation system will capacitate
existing staff members. Protected area branding and
reclassification of certain posts will also attract qualified and
experienced people
Development of institutional HIV/AIDS policy, and education
and well-being program will improve the welfare of infected staff
and decrease infection rates over a long term. HIV/AIDS
succession planning based on the thorough investigation of the
current situation will minimize the impact on protected area
management of staff mortality and morbidity
Development of clear co-management guidelines, including the
establishment of joint management committees and the selection
of representatives, using the Bale Mountains project as the good
practice model.
Establish and institutionalize new cooperative governance
structures among government organizations. Joint management
committees with appropriate representation at a site level will
ensure linkages. Create posts in key organizations the objective
of which will be to maintain and monitoring linkages.
Negotiation and legitimate agreements signed between local
communities for access to and use of resources; agreement of
local communities to boundaries of protected areas; joint
management committees at a site level which include local
community and authority representatives but also local judiciary
and law enforcement representatives; M&E system will provide
warning of use; increased law enforcement capacity.
M&E system will ensure conservation targets in limited
harvesting areas are met; loss of concession or license to operate
in Ethiopia if conservation targets not met; local communities
benefiting from concession and involved in M&E
Integration of private sector into legal and policy reforms, and
planning processes builds confidence.
The DAG and TWG will work to institutionalize the linkages
with the government such that protected areas are built into the
policies of relevant government agencies. The linkage with the
World Bank will be strong, again providing leverage.
M+
*Risk Rating: L - Low; M – Medium; S – Substantial
Expected Global, National and Local Benefits
219. The conservation of the biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes through the protected area
system of Ethiopia provides a range of benefits at the global, national and local levels. At a policy level,
their conservation will assist Ethiopia in fulfilling its Constitutional, policy and international
commitments53.
53
That this statement appears here is a tautology, of course, because Ethiopia made these commitments so as to enjoy
the benefits listed here.
89
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
220. The global community will benefit from the protection of large portions of two important biodiversity
hotspots. The focus is species and genera endemic to Ethiopia that would be otherwise threatened with
local extirpation or extinction.
221. The global community will also benefit from the protection of ecological services provided by the
protected areas. Most notably, the protected areas will contribute significantly to the protection of the
watershed in the Ethiopian highlands, and the slopes and valleys towards the lowlands. These are all
critical and sensitive areas for the watershed. The global impact of watershed protection cannot be
underestimated: millions of people in the lowland and arid countries surrounding Ethiopia are dependent
on good management of these watersheds. Moreover, the benefits are not simply ecological or even
economic but they are also of strategic importance.
222. The corollary of the above is that if ecological services are not protected, then the long-term costs far
outweigh the short-term investments that the government or the donor community will have to make at
this stage. There are numerous examples of this (e.g., the water supply of New York or Antananarivo).
However, as described elsewhere in this document, Ethiopia exemplifies a dynamically interrelated
highland-lowland system, with the lowlands being dependent on good management of water in the
highlands. If the environment in the highlands is badly managed or not protected and becomes degraded,
the flow of water off the eroded landscape is altered. Typically, the flow of water becomes accentuated:
there is rapid flood during the rainy season; in contrast, rivers tend to dry up during the dry season.
Seasonality of river flow, particularly of rivers that were previously perennial, has profound impacts on
people and domestic livestock, and wildlife living in the lowlands. Their dry season range is much
reduced. This concentration rapidly leads to degradation of rangelands surrounding the few areas with
permanent water - which in turn leads to destitute lowland communities. Such a scenario is far from the
realms of theory: in northern Kenya, lowlands communities have been food-aid dependent since 1973 as a
direct result of mismanagement of watersheds in a similar highland-lowland system. The bill for such
food-aid is the cost, therefore, of quick economic gains reaped by the highland people. Other examples
abound – even from the Nile with the rapid siltation of dams and irrigation schemes because of
degradation and erosion in the Ethiopian highlands.
223. The protected areas harbor genetic resources of global importance. One notable example is the wild
coffee found within the forests of southwest and south-central Ethiopia. Given coffee was domesticated in
Ethiopia and that the centre of endemism – and thus genetic diversity – is found within these forests, they
are valuable to coffee growers the world over. Indeed, it is estimated that the annual value of this genetic
stock (for outbreeding seed stocks to ensure diversity of plants in plantations) is between US$ 0.5 – 1.5
billion. For Ethiopia to realize the benefits from this potential, active marketing and investment plans are
required to be implemented.
224. At a national level, on a very broad level, while all humans are dependent on the environment, the
greater proportion (c. 85%) of Ethiopia’s 70 million people live in rural areas and are directly dependent
on natural resources for their livelihoods. In addition, the majority of the exports earning foreign revenue
are dependent on the environment – primarily because they are agricultural and include the production of
leather, coffee, khat, oilseed and pulses. A degraded environment, therefore, increases the vulnerability of
the rural poor, deepens poverty and threatens exports. The conclusion is that protecting or improving the
environment and working for the sustainable use of natural resources will reduce poverty
225. In a country where the cultural and historical heritage forms an important aspect of the strong national
identity, the protected areas harbor much of the natural, living heritage. With a dynamic marketing
program, the protected areas could equally become part of the national identity. For example, national
90
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
symbols could be developed from fauna and flora, and emblazoned across the uniforms of the national
athletics squad!
226. The people of Ethiopia, at a national level, will similarly benefit from ecological services (e.g.,
pollinators, clean water) provided by protected areas.
227. The primary national economic benefits are twofold: i) the payment for the ecological services
provided by the watersheds in the highlands of Ethiopia, and ii) the financial benefit of a functional and
dynamic tourism sector, taking into account that tourism has been identified as a sector with the highest
potential for economic growth.
228. In addition to these revenue generating benefits, there are numerous economic savings to be gained
through effectively managed protected areas at a national level. This includes the above ecological
services examples given above. Further, the development of capacity at all levels will, in time, improve
the efficiency and optimize the impact of management, allowing budgetary appropriations to conservation
to be used more effectively.
229. Across the protected area system, from the federal to local levels, organizations and people (including
local communities) will be capacitated to jointly plan and manage protected areas.
230. At a local level, there are profound benefits. First, the project will institute community-based natural
resource management systems as a protected area category – drawing off the successes of the traditional
and modern examples already established in Ethiopia. Local communities in these areas will be
empowered to have access to and use of resources within the identified areas. The right to use resources –
a benefit in and of itself – also comes with the responsibility to manage them sustainability. Again, having
the responsibility to manage resources is a benefit (cf. the state-centric, top-down approach adopted by the
government to present). Similarly, the inclusion of stakeholders in the planning and management of
protected areas is a benefit for much the same reason.
231. This document has shown that the protected areas are found in the marginal areas of the country – the
areas that humans have found it difficult or impossible to exploit to the same degree as many other areas in
the country. As with the areas, the people living in and surrounding the areas are often marginalized and
always among the poorest people in the country. Thus, even the smallest economic intervention in an area
can have a profound impact on the local economy. For example, despite the fact that the Ethiopian Wolf
Conservation Programme (EWCP) was a relatively small programme with a modest budget, it became and
remains (with the Frankfurt Zoological Society project) the mainstay of the local economy in the Bale
Mountains. When the economic impact of such interventions – or tourism – is planned, then the benefits
can be significant.
232. However, tourism in Ethiopia is far from being developed; indeed, it may take 5-10 years before
tourism is contributing in a substantial way to national or local economies. Thus, it is imperative that the
project does not build unrealistic expectations at either the national or, more importantly, local levels.
Indeed, local communities may have to undergo short-term benefit reductions as the use of resources is
regulated or law enforcement improves in core conservation areas. Developments will focus, therefore, on
the long-term benefits of the interventions. Again, this lessons draws off the successful FARM
Africa/SOS Sahel participatory natural resource management projects in Ethiopia.
233. Finally, the protected areas of Ethiopia, because of the biophysical features and species they harbor,
are of profound scientific interest and aesthetic value. To list these benefits last is somewhat ironic
91
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
because it was for these very values that the protected areas in Ethiopia were originally established in the
1960s.
Eligibility and linkages
Eligibility for GEF funding
234. The Government of Ethiopia ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity in May 1993. As a
recipient of UNDP technical assistance, Ethiopia is eligible for GEF funds under paragraph 9b of the
Instrument. Ethiopia is eligible or funding from the United Nations organisations.
Conformity with COP Guidance and GEF Strategic Priorities
COP 7 Guidance
235. Early in 2004, the CBD COP 7 made a declaration on protected areas that is very supportive of key
elements of the design of this project. First is a general statement concerning their adoption of the new
work program:
“…the COP adopts the annexed work program with the objective of establishing and maintaining
by 2010 for terrestrial areas…effectively managed and ecologically representative national and
regional protected area systems…”
236. The work program consists of four program elements. Goals for each element that are most relevant
to this project are the following:
Element One:
 Establish and strengthen national and regional systems integrated into a global network;
 Integrate protected areas into the broader land- and sea-scapes;
 Substantially improve site-based planning and management.
Element Two:
 Promote equity and benefit-sharing;
 Enhance and secure the involvement of communities and relevant stakeholders.
Element Three:
 Provide an enabling policy, institutional and socio-economic environment for protected areas;
 Build capacity for the planning, establishment and management of protected areas;
 Develop, apply and transfer appropriate technologies for protected areas;
 Ensure financial sustainability of protected areas and national and regional systems of
protected areas.
Element Four:
 Develop and adopt minimum standards and best practices for national and regional protected
area systems;
 Evaluate and improve the effectiveness of protected area management;
 Assess and monitor protected area status and trends, and;
 Ensure that scientific knowledge contributes to the establishment and effectiveness of
protected areas and protected area systems
GEF Strategic Priorities
237. This project meets the requirements for GEF financing under Strategic Priority I (SP I): Strengthening
National Systems of Protected Areas. It will build capacity at both national and local levels. It places a
strong emphasis on building new public-private partnerships and improving the policy framework for such
partnerships. It seeks to develop a new category of community-managed protected areas in the landscapes
surrounding national parks and to strengthen the management of the existing GMA buffers. These new
92
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
protected areas will be linked with park management and will enhance community incentives for the
conservation of national parks. It will emphasize business planning and sustainable financing at both the
protected area and the system level. Collectively, these actions are expected to make a major contribution
towards progressing management of the protected area system, in terms of assuring management
effectiveness, through capacity building and rationalization.
238. In line with the emerging guidance for SP1, the project has been designed using the following
sequence of analyses:
 Description of the global biodiversity significance;
 Analysis of threats to biodiversity;
 Articulation of the approach used to tackle these threats;
 Analysis of the barriers to implementing the chosen approach;
 Description of the logical objective and outcome tree to address these barriers.
Linkages with other GEF initiatives and IA
239. UNDP has worked closely with the Government in developing GEF capacity (through for example
the OFP support process, and in co-financing some of the recent CDW activity). UNDP Ethiopia works
closely with the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development (MoFED) in the current GEF
Coordination Committee.
240. This project has had close consultation with the World Bank in project development, with synergies
in the fields of tourism and in watershed management.
241. Ethiopia has just completed the final draft of its Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (BSAP), as
required by the CBD, but this has not been adopted yet by the Council of Ministers so it is not yet an
official government of Ethiopia policy document. The BSAP has profited from close collaboration in
addressing the protected area conservation process. The BSAP was developed with UNDP/GEF funding.
242. This project has benefited from experiences with other GEF projects in Ethiopia, most significantly
the regional project NGO-Government Partnerships – which showed the importance of civil society in
conservation. Indeed, one of the primary objectives of this project is to broaden governance of protected
areas to allow communities to partner management and to redefine protected area categories to include
community-based protected areas – in a similar way to the above project.
243. UNDP-GEF has consulted widely in the preparation of the document, and brought in specialist
capacity assessment expertise from Uganda – learning lessons from the WB–GEF PAMSU project. Within
house UNDP-GEF has learned from the development of other national BD1 projects (Namibia, Rwanda
and Zambia).
244. Continued cooperation between the IAs will be important in the implementation of this project. The
GEF Committee of MoFED will be instrumental in this regard. Cooperation will be enabled by asking key
project leaders to be part of the Steering Committee for the project (see section on implementation). In
particular, linkages will be made to APAI (UNEP-GEF) and the suite of other GEF PA projects across
Anglophone Africa; there is potential for a BD1 “Learning and knowledge management practice” –
copying lessons from the International Waters Focal Area.
Linkages with Ethiopia’s priorities, policies and programs
93
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
245. The project supports the Ethiopia’s SDPRP goals of economic development and poverty reduction,
through support to the environment and the protected area system. This support, within a broader
perspective, will contribute directly in achieving the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) No. 7
(ensuring environmental sustainability) at national level. More specifically, the government is refocusing
SDPRP with the environment as a sector. Included as one of four primary environment indicators in the
draft indicator matrix is “biodiversity conservation to be achieved through effective management of a
protected area system that adequately represents the ecosystems, including forests, of Ethiopia.”
246. This project also supports Ethiopia’s developing tourism sector by laying a major foundation for
tourism growth and hence employment. As with the environment sector, tourism has also been prioritized
as a sector of focus for the SDPRP II.
247. The project supports several key goals and objectives of the National Biodiversity Strategy and
Action Plan (2005). The BSAP stresses the need for protected areas to allow conservation of resources,
sustainable use and the equitable sharing of benefits
248. Additionally, there are further linkages with the 1994 Constitution which pledges:
iii. “[The] government … shall have the duty to protect the country’s natural endowments … and
objects” (Article 91,2)
iv. “[The] government … shall have the duty to protect the environment” (Article 92, 4)
249. Further key policies, in which the role of protected areas is highlighted (but to date never
implemented), include the National Conservation Strategy, 1994 and the Conservation Strategy of
Ethiopia, 1997.
250. Finally, the project aims to assist the government with the implementation of the recent Wildlife
Development, Protection and Utilization Policy and Strategy and, if it is adopted, of the Proclamation to
Provide for the Development, Conservation and Utilization of Wildlife.
Linkages with the UNDP Country Program and other interventions
251. The project links to UNDP’s Country Cooperation Framework in the areas of good governance,
decentralization, public accountability, enhanced environmental protection and the sustainable
management of natural resources.
252. UNDP in Ethiopia is playing a key role on overall donor – government coordination, through chairing
the Development Assistance Group (DAG) and contributing to several thematically focused Donor
Technical Working Groups, of which Donor Technical Working Group on Environment is an example.
253. UNDP was instrumental in creating the Food Security Safety Net for the most vulnerable people in
the country. An improved natural base is critical to such support.
254. The project will be a major component in the framework of the developing UNDAF, which is
currently being finalized for the period 2007-2010. Specifically it will contribute in the thematic area of
Vulnerability, which is addressed in UNDAF in the context of the Human Rights Based Approach to
Programming principles. Conservation of resources and diversification of livelihoods have been identified
as country programme outputs in this context.
94
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
255. UNDP-Ethiopia supported capacity building targets for the programme on Emergency Support to
Wildlife Conservation/Utilization & Development of a Trust Fund (ETH/94/006), which ran from 1994 –
2003, with a budget of US$ 1.3 million. This project was conceived in the context of the Scenic Resources
component of the National Programme on Resources and Population – Sustainability Balance signed in
1994. The Wildlife resource intervention had a three-staged approach which included: 1) emergency
support to selected protected areas; 2) restoration of wildlife sub-populations; and 3) the establishment of a
trust fund for meeting recurrent costs of priority protected areas. The programme was implemented by
Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Organization (predecessor of Wildlife Conservation Department, WCD).
The project provided emergency support to ten Protected Areas.
Sustainability
256. The project has been designed to ensure environmental, institutional, financial and social
sustainability. Because of the challenges faced by development in Ethiopia, ensuring sustainability will be
a long process – hence the “staged” approach to the project, with two distinct stages. The first stage will
focus on ensuring an enabling environment and building foundations, while the second stage will focus on
consolidating and ensuring sustainability that is dependent on the foundations built in the first stage.
257. From the outset, the project is working to catalyze a protected area system the major objective of
which will be the conservation of the globally important biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological
processes. Consequently, the project will contribute significantly to environmental sustainability, in part,
by protecting critical environmental services and specifically watersheds in the Ethiopian highlands.
258. The development of innovative mechanisms means that financial sustainability will be improved.
Indeed, the economic fundamentals for the protected area system are good, particularly if the protected
area-development linkage can tie in with sustainable financing mechanisms. This will be most effectively
done through the gradual capitalization of a trust fund (see Annex 9 for details of the process to establish
the Trust Fund) as other sources of funds, including the government, may prove insufficient. Many of the
linkages between development agencies and protected areas will be brokered by the project.
259. The recent prioritization of tourism development bodes well for the economic sustainability of the
protected area system. This will require linkages with the tourism sector to be strengthened and for
innovative revenue generating schemes to be developed and adequately marketed. If this occurs, the
linkage with the tourism sector will be consolidated. However, detailed analysis to determine accurately
the ‘willingness-to-pay’ will be necessary before the fee structures are arbitrarily increased. Nonetheless,
analysis during the study undertaken during project preparation indicted that protected area tourism could
attain revenues in excess of ETB 4 billion per year (or 18% of the GNP). This would make significant
contribution to offsetting the desired recurrent costs of managing the protected area system. Improved
operational efficiencies, driven by business planning, will simultaneously improve protected area cost
effectiveness.
260. As the Protected Area System grows in importance for Ecological Services, so will the government of
Ethiopia’s willingness to continue to cover – and even increase - the recurrent costs of the protected area
system. Currently and somewhat surprisingly given the degree of marginalization of the biodiversity
conservation sector, the government is subsidizing the protected areas of the country, albeit at low levels.
261. The project will also expand and consolidate linkages between the protected area management
organizations, the private sector, civil society organizations and the donor community – thereby increasing
the opportunities for new investments in protected areas.
95
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
262. The financial sustainability of the protected area system will be underpinned by the business planning
principles that will be institutionalized through this project. A marketing and investment plan will ensure
communication with appropriate organizations and people to attract investors and donors. In addition, at
the site level, there will be an incentive for managers to perform optimally. Specifically, the revenue
raised above a certain level (under which the revenue will be used to cross-subsidize those areas that
cannot cover their recurrent management costs) will stay within the area for its development, at the
discretion of the manager and joint management committee.
263. In contrast to financial sustainability, institutional sustainability will be addressed through policy and
regulatory reform, and through ownership of the project. Institutional sustainability has been significantly
increased with the adoption of the protected areas in the SDPRP II. In addition, the creation of a parastatal
protected areas organization will ensure that stakeholders participate in the institutions to a much greater
degree (see also lessons learnt for parastatal organizations in Annex 7). Further, institutional sustainability
will be addressed directly through i) the rationalization of institutional arrangements, ii) the creation of a
business-plan driven parastatal organization, iii) training offered through the project will enhance the skill
base of the organization and to ‘incentivize’ staff, iv) the institutionalization of training within the
protected area organization as an incentive to staff members. The project will introduce a performancebased evaluation system for staff members against annually agreed expected results. The branding of the
protected areas in the country and the reclassification of certain posts will ensure the attractiveness of the
protected area system for experienced and qualified people.
264. Social sustainability is of critical importance in Ethiopia because of the levels of poverty in rural
areas. This is even more the case in the marginal areas in which the protected areas are found. In
addition, it is the marginalized elements of society – women and the extremely poor – who are most
dependent on natural resources for their livelihoods. Detailed planning of protected area management will
ensure that these marginalized elements do not suffer excessive short-term costs through opportunity
losses while waiting for the long-term benefits from protected areas, even if that is in the form of agreed
and regulated access to and use of resources in community-based natural resource management areas.
265. Social sustainability will also be ensured through the participation and involvement of stakeholders in
the planning and management of protected areas; this is described in the comprehensive Stakeholder
Involvement Plan (Annex 10). In the highland-lowland system of Ethiopia, stakeholder identification is
critical because often they are found far from the area itself – as is the case with the downstream waterusers in the lowlands. Stakeholder representatives will participate in joint management committees at the
site-level. Overall, the involvement and participation of stakeholders in the planning and management
processes will increase the levels of ownership in processes – while moving away from a top-down, statecentric approach.
Replicability
266. In drawing off existing projects in Ethiopia – such as the natural resource management systems that
have been established by FARM Africa/SOS Sahel and by GTZ, this project establishes a precedent of
monitoring and evaluation, adopting and adapting lessons learnt (see Annex 7). In addition, the
institutional and capacity analysis (see Annex 6) indicates that the semi-autonomous institutional
arrangement of the Amhara Regional State is proving effective. Thus, this model will be scaled-up to be
replicated among other regional governments and to the federal government. In summary, the replication
of good practices forms the foundation on which the project preparation was built.
96
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
267. The project works across the system. Thus, replicability will occur at different levels but it is based
on two key principles that have been included in the project design: i) knowledge management and ii)
monitoring and evaluation.
268. However, the key means of verification of replication will be government and donor uptake, coupled
with the replication of good practice models through the protected area estate.
System level replicability
269. There are a number of lessons that will be drawn from the system level. First, the project will
mainstream protected areas in the development context of Ethiopia. While there are many reasons why
they should be, it will require some effort to convince various groups within the country that this makes
sense. The groups not only include factions within the government, but also include some donors and
international NGOs working within the country. “Is there room for a concept such as protected areas in a
country so poor and populous as Ethiopia?” is a question often asked of the project preparation team.
While the answer to this question, in the light of this proposal, is obvious, it will be asked many times in
the coming years. Thus, the process of successfully convincing all stakeholders that having an effectively
management protected area system is not only necessary for the project to succeed, but it will also prove
informative for replication elsewhere in developing countries where the same question may be asked.
270. When protected areas have been successfully mainstreamed into the development context, it will also
beg the question of why protected areas were not incorporated into development in the first place. This
may assist with a process of re-evaluation of the development strategies being developed in the country –
thus, which other sectors may have been marginalized and is not a broad development platform better than
one that is focused on Agriculture Development Led Industrialization alone.
271. In the policy framework, the failure of protected areas to deliver revenue and to protect biodiversity,
ecosystems and ecological processes can be largely attributed to the historic, state-centric approach of the
government – resulting in the marginalization of stakeholders, including local communities, from
benefiting54 from the areas. This project will result in policy and practice that will shift governance from a
state-centric process to one that involves stakeholders in planning and management. The results of this,
again, will be widely disseminated to ensure that other agencies can draw off the lessons learnt over the
course of the coming eight years and replicate the practices within their own organizations.
272. Second, Ethiopia is a country that has had a turbulent history – not unlike many other countries in
sub-Saharan Africa. Thus, again, the process of successfully implementing this project and achieving the
targets set out in it will prove informative for other emergent countries that wish to take similar bold steps.
Institutional replicability
273. Within Ethiopia, the project will be trialing new, business-founded management. As mentioned
above, the government of Ethiopia has been going through a process of Business Planning Review - very
much akin to the processes that will be implemented in this project.
274. The Knowledge Management System, developed as a part of Outcome 3, will be the key to
replicability – thus, ensuring i) the exchange of ideas and experiences among government organizations
both at federal and regional levels and ii) that lessons learnt and the good practice model will be adapted
as a result of monitoring and evaluation practices. The system will not only operate at the federal and
54
Benefiting does not necessarily need to mean monetarily only; access and user rights and responsibilities, and
involvement in planning and management processes are all benefits (as determined from the experience of the
participatory natural resource management systems of FARM Africa/SOS Sahel).
97
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
regional government level. The joint management committees that will be established at a site level will
also have the opportunity to share ideas, practices and experiences through the system. In order to ensure
this, the project provides (until such time as the sustainable financing mechanisms are in place and
knowledge management becomes an integral part of the organizational budgets) for exchange programs,
guidance materials, study tours and secondments to ensure knowledge and experiences are widely shared
and replicated.
275. The monitoring and evaluation framework is discussed in Annex 12. The M&E framework’s key
function is to facilitate adaptively impact and accommodate lessons learnt from across the system. The
M&E framework will also be sensitive to emerging experiences elsewhere – not just within the protected
area system in Ethiopia, but also among other organizations (governmental, non-governmental, private and
civil society) within Ethiopia, and also to other practices in protected area systems around the globe. This
will include the replication of good practices and modification of those that are not functioning.
276. The results of the institutional and capacity development will be widely disseminated within the
country; they will be shared among other government institutions to ensure that the lessons learnt through
this project will be incorporated into the development of other government institutions.
Site level replicability
277. Within the system, the demonstration sites will be the key to replication. Four demonstration sites
have been selected for this project, but once the categories of protected area have been broadened, the
currently ongoing community-based natural resource management systems (such as the Bonga, Chilimo
and Borana sites of FARM Africa/SOS Sahel, the Adaba-Dodola site of GTZ, the Site Support Group in
the Berge Wetland) can also adopt the guidelines and become incorporated into the monitoring and
evaluation framework, and lessons can continue to be drawn off them.
278. The project will expressly seek to catalyze or broker partnerships between protected areas, technical
partners (NGO, academic, private), donors55, stakeholders including local communities beyond the
demonstration sites over the eight year period. The target is to catalyze six further partnerships at the sitelevel within the first stage (or stage) with a second stage target of a further eight sites (thus, making a total
of 18 effectively managed areas by the end of the project). The development and design of the projects in
each of these sites will use the good practice model that will be adaptively changed through the course of
the project (and through the course of history thereafter) from the monitoring and evaluation of the
demonstration sites.
279. In conclusion, the demonstration sites will form the foundation of the development of a good practice
model that will be replicated across the protected area estate. The model will include the processes by
which results are achieved; the replication of these processes will be one of the keys to success.
Project Implementation Arrangements
280. The project will be implemented over a period of eight years in two four-year administrative stages.
The first will focus on capacity and institutional change, while the second will focus on consolidation, upscaling and replication of best management practice.
281. Stage One will be implemented through NEX modalities, with Government of Ethiopia contracting
GTZ-IS to implement the project processes, under the oversight of Government of Ethiopia, via the
55
As the majority of the funding necessary to (re)build the sites will not come from GEF; instead, as protected areas
are mainstreamed, the donor community and/or sustainable financing solutions developed in the first stage will be
used to provide funding for these sites.
98
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development to the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development
(MOFED). MOFED chair the National GEF Committee and would chair the National Steering Committee.
282. GTZ-IS has long experience with Project Management in Ethiopia, with a strong focus on capacity
building; GTS-IS has its Africa HQ in Addis Ababa and therefore has ample absorptive capacity to
manage the project. GTZ-IS would sub-contract agencies with comparative advantage to undertake output
based activities within the project.
283. The second four-year stage would start after capacity has been built (several triggers to be met to
allow second stage to start). Stage two therefore would be executed through National Execution
Modalities (NEX), through whatever Ministerial / Parastatal structure has been created to manage
Protected Areas during the first stage.
284. The project will receive overall guidance and orientation from a National Steering Committee (NSC).
This will be chaired by MoARD56. In order to consolidate linkages among cross-sectoral government
agencies, the NSC would include representatives from the Ministries of Water Resources and Finance and
Economic Development (MoFED), and the Ethiopian Tourism Commission. It would also include (but
not be limited to) one non-governmental organization (NGO) representative, one representative from an
academic institution and UNDP. Once the institutional re-structuring has occurred and a parastatal
organization has been established, the NSC will transform into the Board of the new organization. The
NSC will meet six-monthly.
285. The project will also be assisted by a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) that will be comprised of ten
people from the government and civil society organizations (NGOs, private sector organizations and
academic institutions), selected on the basis of their competence and willingness to be involved. The TAG
will meet quarterly during the first year and six-monthly thereafter.
286. Finally, the implementing partners, including co-financers will form a Project Coordination Group
(PCG) that will meet every four months.
287. As the designated organization, the GTZ-IS – government partnership will be responsible for
managing the project including timely delivery of inputs and outputs – thereby ensuring the outcomes of
the project.
10 Finances and Budget
a) BUDGET BY OUTCOME
Amount (US$)
Project Outcomes
FIRST STAGE
GEF
1 Protected Areas mainstreamed in development framework.
581,604
2 Appropriate policy regulatory governance frameworks in place.
404,156
56
Total (US$)
Co-finance
Until such time as the Ministerial/parastatal structure has been created; the chair of the NSC would change, as
necessary at this point.
99
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
3 Institutional arrangements and capacity for PA planning.
1,327,272
4 New PA management options and partnerships trialed.
890,078
5 Financial sustainability plan developed implement in stage 2.
310,910
Project Internal Management
485,980
Grand Total Stage One of Project
4,000,000
SECOND STAGE
1 Consolidating systemic capacity for PA management
1,363,000
2a Sustainable financing / business plan in place.
2b Trust fund established
1,030,000
3 Catalysing replication of good practice models in PAs
1,114,000
4 Protected Areas mainstreamed across all sectors / levels
1,090,000
Project Internal Management
403,000
Grand Total Stage Two of Project
5,000,000
OVERALL TOTAL FUNDING IN PROJECT
9,000,000
B) CO-FINANCING
Co-financier source
Ministry of Agriculture
Parks Africa
Bilateral Donors
(Netherlands lead) for Bale
Landscape
CI
FZS
Sub-Total Co-financing
UNDP Associated Finance
for Sustainable Development
C) Input Budget for UNDP
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Co-financing Sources
Classification
Type
US$
Government
In-kind
4,764,500
Private Sector
Grant
7,750,000
Bi-lateral
Grant
INGO
INGO
ALL
Multi-Lateral
Grant
Grant
IK & G
-
7,320,000
5,000 Committed Stage I
2,590,000 Committed Stage I
22,429,500
Committed in Stage I,
1,200,000 Sus Dev districts by PAs
Detail : Stage ONE
Contract Direct Execution (Outputs 1-5 & implementation)
Evaluation - Mid Term Review
Annual External Technical Advisory Group (years 1-4)
Development of GEF Protected Area Knowledge Practice
Support to Govt Ethiopia – Annual Steering Committees
Provision for external audit.
TOTAL
100
Status
Committed 8 years
Committed 8 years
Committed 8 years
Amount USD
3,900,000
30,000
30,000
15,000
20,000
5,000
4,000,000
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
11 Monitoring, Evaluation, and Lessons Learned
11.1.1 Monitoring & Evaluation
288. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) will provide stakeholders and partners with information to
measure progress, determine whether expected impacts have been achieved, and to provide timely
feedback in order to ensure that problems are identified early in implementation and that appropriate
actions are taken. Monitoring will be an integral activity of all objectives and will assess the project’s
effectiveness in protecting biodiversity; evaluate the benefits accruing to communities and other
beneficiaries; appraise the underlying causes of project outcomes (positive or negative); and track the level
and quality of public participation in conservation activities. The project will be implemented through an
adaptive framework that feeds the findings of M & E into operational planning, thus enabling management
strategies and activities to be adjusted as necessary. A number of impact and progress indicators have
been selected (see Log-frame analysis in Annex 3b) at the goal, objective, and output levels. A detailed M
& E Analysis with emphasis on capacity to overcome threats is given in Annex 12, although core
indicators on PA coverage and major species remain.
289. The project M & E will includes 2 outside evaluations, 3 internal evaluations, and annual METT
assessments. Detailed METT baseline scores are in Annex 12b. Specific attention will be paid to triggers
affecting the move from stage 1 to stage 2.
Evaluation
290. This project will be subject to program evaluation and financial auditing in accordance with the
policies and procedures established for this purpose by UNDP/GEF, including an independent Mid-Term
Review and Terminal Review. The organization, TOR and timing of the evaluations will be decided upon
between UNDP and the National Project Steering Committee.
Lessons Learned
291. A summary of Lessons Learned during the PDF-B process and from other regional projects, and how
these are incorporated into project design, is provided in Annex 7. Annex 7 introduces the need to develop
a Learning Practice for the growing portfolio of GEF Protected Area Projects across Anglophone Africa
during project implementation.
101
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Annex 1: Threats to Biodiversity and Root Cause Analysis (Annex 2 In Proposal Text)
Relevant
to
All
categories
of
protected
areas and
their
surrounds
All areas
All
categories
of
protected
areas and
their
surrounds
Threat
Biodiversity Impact
Root cause
Barrier
Alternative strategy
Land tenure insecurity for
agricultural lands. Limited political
commitment to deal with agricultural
encroachment – squatters in
protected area are rarely prosecuted
Little or no incentive to respect
protected area boundaries coupled
with no monitoring of protected area
encroachment
Little coordination between
government agencies (agricultural
planning, land allocation,
resettlement, refugee, protected area)
Low priority of protected areas in
development context. Little
awareness of economic values of
protected areas
Weak wildlife sector, little linkage to
States, no political will to increase
protected area system. Disconnect
between approved guidance (e.g.
NCS) and reality.
Develop innovative protected area management
partnerships
Adequate capacity (training, tools and funds)
Protected areas mainstreamed in land-use
framework and recognized by resettlement
agencies
Role of protected areas in watershed management
recognized and acted upon
Develop and apply capacities for economic
valuation of protected area/natural areas
Awareness raising targeting policy makers and
decision makers
Mainstreaming of protected area into development
planning
Little or no incentive for local
populations to respect protected area
boundaries and regulations
Little institutional capacity for
protected area management and
enforcement.
Inappropriate policies and laws on
land tenure and resource access
rights
No linkage between law
enforcement, judiciary and protected
area authorities
Little incentive for sustainable use of
Develop protected area management partnerships
with local communities, tourism operators, civil
society institutions and/or local authorities
(including law enforcement and judiciary)
Institutional capacity building for government,
community and civil society institutions for
protected area management and for sustainable use
Improve policy and legal frameworks for land
tenure, community-based NRM, co-management
of Pa, zoning of protected areas and for incentive
systems;
Community-based natural resource management
areas recognized as legitimate protected area
Conversion of
habitat to
agriculture
and settlement
Near total loss of
wild habitats, flora,
fauna and
biodiversity on
converted areas.
Habitat and so
population
fragmentation and
isolation
Greatly diminished
watershed function,
accelerated erosion,
and less carbon
storage
Population growth, poverty,
food insecurity resulting in
people moving into marginal
areas and protected areas
Unsustainable and unproductive
agriculture necessitates clearing
of new fields
Government resettlement
schemes to wilderness areas
including protected areas
Refugee settlements/camps
Large benefits and low risk of
prosecution for protected area
squatters
The protected
area system is
not fully
representative
of ecosystems
there are gaps.
Remaining
habitat under
pressure.
Unsustainable
often illegal
harvesting of
natural
resources
(wildlife, fish,
timber and
non-timber
products and
grassland) for
subsistence or
commercial
use
Core biodiversity has
no legal protection,
e.g. arid
communities of
Ogaden
The wildlife sector has not been
able to develop new areas in
past thirty years.
Deforestation
Loss of habitat
Loss of biodiversity
Population declines
and/or local
extirpation
Loss of ecosystem
integrity
Demographic growth and
increasing demand for natural
resources. Rapidly growing cash
markets for urban firewood and
charcoal supply and for other
products;
Over-dependence of people on
natural resources (particularly
for construction and fuel)
Cultural adherence of
indigenous people to wildlife
products/ traditional natural
resources (medicinal plants)
102
A full program of gap analysis and conservation
planning under revised enabling environment.
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Relevant
to
Threat
Biodiversity Impact
Root cause
Barrier
Limited regulation of use of
natural resources, and de facto
open access to land and
biological resources
Limited risk of prosecution
Poaching by military during
periods of insecurity
resources by local populations.
Lack of proven models for
sustainable use and management
biological resources
Career advancement of protected
area managers is not linked to
effectiveness of protected area
management
Poor governance of management
authority and political entities,
leading to inadequate monitoring and
evaluation, and supervision of
hunting areas
Little biological expertise for
wildlife management and quota
setting following from low
institutional capacities
Limited stakeholder involvement
Hunting
areas
Trophy
hunting at
unsustainable
rates
Reduction of
populations; local
extirpation
Corruption at local levels and
pressures to maintain high
quotas, but little statistically
valid data for quota setting
Limited stakeholder
involvement
No risk of prosecution or
penalties for hunters/safari
companies who don’t respect
quotas and other regulations
Forest
Priority
Areas
Timber use
and/or
extraction at
unsustainable
rates
Loss of habitat and
biodiversity
Loss of forest
integrity and
watershed value
Deforestation
Pressures to increase logging
combined with local corruption,
poor governance and lack of
civil society oversight
Little or no forest inventory data
on which to base sustainable
harvest levels.
Low level of motivation of
forestry officers
No monitoring or supervision of
timber extraction; de facto open
access to areas and resources
Limited stakeholder
involvement
No risk of prosecution or
penalties to license holders who
illegally exceed their quotas
All
categories
of
Overgrazing
& overbrowsing by
Vegetation change
and loss, bare soil &
erosion & loss of
Demographic growth
combined with diminished
areas of range/pastures, de
103
Inadequate systems of monitoring
for forest cover and condition and
evaluation and supervision of
Training of staff to monitor and set
quotas
Career advancement in Forestry
Department is not tied to quality of
forest management or to
enforcement of forestry legislation
No monitoring of forests cover and
condition
No effective for a for civil society
involvement and oversight
Lack of political will for forest
conservation reflected in low budget
allocations
Almost no development of
partnerships with communities,
private sector or NGOs for natural
forest management
Little political will to enforce
grazing restrictions in PA.
No legitimate natural resource
Alternative strategy
category
Develop pilot demonstration models of
community-based management of natural
resources in community-based NRM areas
Participatory zoning of protected area into core
conservation areas, sustainable use areas, etc.
Develop governance systems and incentives for
transparency and accountability.
Involve local communities in monitoring wildlife
populations, in quota setting and in monitoring of
respect of quotas by safari operators
Develop incentives for local communities to
benefit from sport hunting, test community-based
management/co-management of hunting areas
Build government management capacity to
regulate and supervise the private sector and to
develop management partnerships
Development of community-based natural forest
management systems
Development of public/private/ community/ civil
society partnerships for forest conservation and
management
Develop economic valuation tools and awareness
raising to increase political commitment and
budgetary allocations
Increasing the government’s capacity to regulate
and supervise the private sector
Involvement of local communities in monitoring
timber extraction
Mechanisms for local communities to benefit from
timber extraction
Development of a forest sector observatory to
synthesize and publish data on license holders,
payments of license fees and enforcement
measures taken
Joint management of protected area with local
authorities, local communities, and other
stakeholders and partners
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Relevant
to
protected
areas and
their
surrounds
Threat
Biodiversity Impact
Root cause
Barrier
Alternative strategy
domestic
livestock, and
localized
trampling &
erosion
watershed functions
No regeneration of
woodlands/forests
and preferred forage
spp.
Loss of habitat and
wildlife population
declines &
biodiversity loss
Hybridization with
domestic animals &
diseases from
domestic animals
facto open access grazing in
most areas in and around
protected area.
regulation and management systems
for local communities
Poor institutional capacity in
protected areas to enforce
regulations and to manage areas
No linkage between law
enforcement, judiciary and protected
area authorities
Develop local participatory use and management
systems of range/natural resources in communitybased NRM areas
Agreements with local community on boundaries
of core conservation areas
Increasing awareness measures to increase political
commitment of policy/decision makers.
Wildlife
protected
areas: NP,
WR & WS
Exclusion of
wildlife from
critical
resources, e.g.
water
Loss of range and
habitat
Population reduction
Awareness raising, development of political will
Agreed local community use and management of
natural resources in community-based NRM areas:
agreed water sources left open to wildlife
All
categories
of
protected
areas and
their
surrounds
Local
populations
retaliate
against
wildlife for
damages done
Population declines
through retaliatory
steps taken by local
people
Wildlife predation on livestock
– herders don’t invest in night
enclosures.
Wildlife damage crops – people
don’t invest in fencing/
protection of fields
Highlands
Poisoning of
raptors/
wildlife by
pesticides
Encroachment
by
development
projects
Fire bans and
changes to
“natural” or
Population
(invertebrates, small
mammal, bird)
declines
Loss of habitat
Loss of biodiversity
Use of cheap or old pesticide
stocks, and inadequate
environmental impact
assessment
Poor planning
Single sector-based approach to
development
Lack of political will for
enforcement/protection of critical
water points and other resources
No legitimate natural resource
management systems for local
communities
Lack of incentives for local people to
protect/conserve wildlife
Poor land use planning to keep
wildlife areas removed from human
settlements, and lack of political will
for adequate enforcement measures
to control killing of wildlife
Limited technology transfer (use of
enclosures using local materials)
Marginalization of environment
sector
Poor policy/regulatory framework
Protected areas mainstreamed in development
framework and recognized by development
agencies (donor, government and civil society)
Major changes to
ecosystem structure
and species
Breakdown of traditional fire
management systems
Well-intentioned measures by
Inadequate environmental impact
assessments and marginalization of
environment (particularly protected
areas)
No legitimate natural resource
regulation and management systems
for local communities
All
protected
areas
All
categories
of
Little or no risk of prosecution
and/or penalties: people graze
cattle if benefits of grazing
cattle outweigh probability/risk
of penalties;
Dependence on agro-pastoral or
pastoral livelihoods, which have
little support, sustained
pressures: supplemental feeding
during drought maintain high
populations combined with
humanitarian assistance to
rebuild herds.
Tenure systems and/or lack of
enforcement allow
people/groups to take over
water points & other resources
critical to wildlife
104
Develop co-management systems with adequate
incentives for local communities
Develop effective, targeted problem animal control
programs
Improve land use planning and zoning
Measures to develop political will for enforcement
Knowledge management/technology transfer
Improve POP policy and regulations
Mainstreaming of environment sector
Restoration of traditional fire management systems
Joint management of protected area with
communities, local authorities (including law
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Relevant
to
protected
areas and
their
surrounds
All areas :
wetlands,
cultivation,
arid areas
Threat
Biodiversity Impact
longestablished
fire regimes
composition
Loss of biodiversity
Loss of habitat
Invasive alien
species
Loss of habitat and
biodiversity
SUMMARY TABLE
Summary of Threats
Unsustainable use of natural
resources
Overgrazing/browsing by large
livestock population
Conversion of Natural Habitat
Protected area system is not fully
representative of all ecosystems,
gaps.
Root cause
Barrier
authorities lacking basic
understanding of ecological role
of fire in natural ecosystems.
De facto open access to areas
and resources
No control on invasive species
(both historic and present)
Well-intentioned introduction of
highly invasive species
Poor institutional capacity in
protected areas to enforce
regulations and to manage areas
Poor understanding of decision
makers of fire ecology
Inadequate knowledge of alien
species
Lack of systems for prevention and
control of IAS
Alternative strategy
enforcement and judiciary) and other stakeholders
and partners
Agreed local community use and management of
natural resources in community-based NRM areas
Develop national policy on invasive/alien species
Develop prevention and control programs for IAS
Research on alien species and control measures
Summary of Root-Causes
Summary of Barriers
Summary of Interventions
Increasing demand for natural
resources
Overdependence on natural
resources, few alternatives
No regulatory ability, open-access
Poor agriculture planning, no intersectoral coordination, policy not
harmonized, little political will
No incentives
No stakeholder participation
Wildlife damage crops, no rewards
Inadequate institutional capacity in
terms of manpower, funding or
strategies
Biodiversity sector is marginalized
from development process. No intersectoral coordination mechanism
Policy disconnect, no planning or
strategies for implementation of policy
Top-down state-centric input, little
partnership, little involvement of
communities
Mainstream protected areas in development
processes e.g. SDPRP II (already achieved in
PDF-B stage). Awareness of protected area
values.
Policy/law/strategy processes are approved, in
place and harmonized. Innovation in place
Institutional mandates approved and capacity
built at all levels of sector, with public-privatecommunity-civil society partnerships
Financial sustainability plan adopted, with
business planning approaches.
105
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Annex 2: Detailed Description of the Ecological Processes,
Ecosystems and Biodiversity of Ethiopia (Annex 4 in proposal text)
292.
The geography of Ethiopia is dominated by highland mesic plateaus surrounded, particularly to
the east, by arid and semi-arid lowlands. These geographical features have profound influences on the
ecological processes, ecosystems and biodiversity of the region and country.
Ecological Processes
Watersheds
293.
The highlands of Ethiopia attract large amounts of orographic rainfall (Gamachu, 1977). As a
consequence, the highlands are not only prime areas for rainfed agriculture, but they are also the
watershed for the surrounding lowlands. There are seven major river basins: Webe Shebelle, Awash,
Omo, Juba (Genale, Web, Welmel) and Blue Nile (Takeze, Baro-Akobo and Abbai) (see Annex 5 for
map) in the highlands of Ethiopia that provide water for the people, livestock, wildlife and riparian
vegetation in the lowlands. This is the highland-lowland system where resources are not equally
distributed but are dynamically interlinked. Thus, the people, livestock, wildlife and riparian vegetation
in the lowlands (not only within Ethiopia but extending to all the surrounding arid lowland countries) are
dependent on the good management and protection of the watersheds in the highlands.
Other processes of importance for humans
294.
Pollination. Certain crops in Ethiopia are, as elsewhere in the world, dependent on pollinators.
295.
Sanitation. Interestingly, various components of biodiversity play an important role in human
sanitation in Ethiopia. Most noticeable is the role that spotted hyenas play. Indeed, hyenas are largely
tolerated throughout Ethiopia – and even in urban areas. Only 15% of households have latrines or refuse
disposal pits in urban areas with a much lower proportion in rural areas. Hyenas (and domestic dogs)
keep human environments clean by consuming much of the human feces, livestock carcasses and food
preparation waste (Atickem, 2003).
296.
Carbon sequestration. Forests act as carbon dioxide sinks thereby assisting to reduce atmospheric
and global warming CO2.
297.
Bee products. Ethiopia is the third largest exporters of beeswax in the world (only after Mexico
and China); it is also the tenth largest producer of honey – not only for export (10% of an estimated
24,000 tonnes of annual honey production) but also as an important supplement in diets and is used for
the production of tej (the Ethiopian equivalent of mead); and apitherapy is used in a number of tradition
medical practices (for surgical dressings, high fever, burning skin, intestinal and gastric ulcers, colds and
coughs, bronchial disease and diseases of the mouth and mucus membrane).
Ecosystems
298.
The country contains five recognized biomes: Sudanian, Congo-Guinean, Sahel arid zone,
Somali-Maasai, and the Afrotropical and montane. These can be further sub-divided depending on the
classification. Thus, there are into ten ecosystems: i) Afroalpine and sub-alpine, ii) dry evergreen
montane forest and grassland, iii) moist evergreen montane forest, iv) moist evergreen lowland forest, v)
Congo-Guinean forest, vi) Acacia woodland and thickets, vii) Acacia-Commiphora woodland, viii)
Combretum-Terminalia woodland/savannah, ix) lakes, wetlands & river systems, and x) arid ecosystems (
106
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
299.
300.
301.
Table 7). WWF recognizes 12 eco-regions (11 plus the Rift Valley Lakes, which WWF
additionally classifies within its Global 200 categories), whereas an updated Pichi-Sermolli analysis
indicates that there are 20 vegetation types (but this does not distinguish their distribution in the country –
thus, nor their uniqueness or conservation value).
TABLE 7. TYPES OF VEGETATION, ECOSYSTEMS, WWF ECOREGIONS AND CI HOTSPOTS
WITHIN ETHIOPIA.
Pichi-Sermolli ө
Hotspot
Biomes
Ecosystems§
WWF ecoregions
Horn of Africa
Somali-Maasai
Acacia-Commiphora Somali AcaciaSubdesert scrub
woodland
Commiphora
Open xerophilous
Arid ecosystems
bushland and
woodland
Acacia woodland and thickets*
Xerophilous
thickets
Ethiopian xeric
woodland
Lakes, wetlands &
grassland and
Grass steppe
river systems
shrubland*
Various types of
Rift Valley Lakes*
savannah
Desert
Subdesert scrub with
succulents
Shrub steppe
Ethiopian Highlands Afrotropical and
Afroalpine and subEthiopian montane
Afroalpine(part of Eastern
montane
alpine
forests
subafroalpine
Afromontane
dry evergreen
Ethiopian montane
Afroalpine
Hotspot)
montane forest and
moorlands*
Dry evergreen
grassland
Ethiopian montane
montane forest
moist evergreen
grasslands*
Montane savannah
montane forest
Forest with
lakes, wetlands &
Arundinaria bamboo
river systems
Montane evergreen
thicket and scrub
Moist evergreen
montane forest
Sudanian
Moist evergreen
Sudanian savannah* Xerophilous
Sahel arid zone
lowland forest
Victoria basin
woodland
Congo-Guinean
Congo-Guinean
forest-savannah
Various types of
forest*
mosaic
savannah
Acacia woodland and Northern AcaciaWoodland with
thickets
Commiphora
Oxytenanthera
Combretumbushland and
bamboo
Terminalia
thickets*
Lowland dry
woodland/savannah
Sahelian Acacia
evergreen forest
Lakes, wetlands &
savannah
Decidous woodland
river systems
Saharan flooded
Shrub steppe
grassland*
Maasai xeric
grasslands and
shrubland
§
Ensermu Kelbessa, pers. comm.; өPichi-Sermolli (1957); * Included in WWF Global 200
107
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
302.
For the purpose of assessing the degree to which the protected area network is representative of
ecosystems, the WWF eco-regions were adapted to accommodate more detailed areas where they had
been lumped. The best example of this is the WWF-ecoregion Somali Acacia-Commiphora bushland and
thickets (see map section). Critically, this ‘lumps’ the Acacia woodlands and thickets identified by
Ensermu Kelbessa (pers. comm.) and the Xerophilous woodland, ‘various types of savannah’, open
xerophilous woodland, grass steppe and subdesert scrub of Pichi-Sermolli (1957). In biodiversity terms,
this lumping means that the Ogaden centre of endemism is not separated out. Thus, for the purpose of the
project preparation, a further analysis was undertaken to separate out key biodiversity areas such as this.
TABLE 8. THE ECOSYSTEMS DEVELOPED BY THE PROJECT PREPARATION TEAM TO
DETERMINE THE DEGREE OF REPRESENTATION IN THE PROTECTED AREA NETWORK. THE
TABLE ALSO GIVES THE METT SCORES FOR THE AREAS AS SOME MEASURE OF THE STATUS
OF THE AREA.
Ecosystem
If/where represented
Rift Valley Lakes
Abiatta-Shalla National Park
*
Nech Sar National Park
Nech Sar National Park
Awash National Park
Mago National Park
Yabello Wildlife Sanctuary
Abiatta-Shalla National Park
Yangudi-Rassa National Park
29
29
33
*
*
*
16
Wetlands, lakes and rivers (partial representation)
Omo National Park
Awash National Park
Gambella National Park
Bale Mountains National Park
33
33
24
33
Wetlands, lakes and river systems (not represented)
Lake Tana, Abbai, Berghe,
-
Somali Acacia-Commiphora bushland and thickets
(Ogaden centre of endemism)
Not represented
-
Ethiopian xeric grassland and shrubland
Yangudi-Rassa National Park
16
Montane dry woodlands and forest
Bale Mountains National Park
Menagesha State Forest
Bale Mountains National Park
33
*
33
Bale Mountains National Park
Simien Mountains National Park
Bale Mountains National Park
Simien Mountains National Park
Not represented
33
38
33
38
-
Somali Acacia woodland, bushland and thickets
Ethiopian montane moist forests
Ethiopian montane moorlands
Ethiopian montane grasslands
Moist evergreen lowland forest
Congo-Guinean forest
Sudanian savannah (Combretum-Terminalia woodland)
Not represented
Alatish (proposed)
108
METT score
11
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Victoria basin forest-savannah mosaic
Northern Acacia-Commiphora bushland and thickets
Sahelian Acacia savannah
Saharan flooded grassland
Maasai xeric grasslands and shrubland
Gambella National Park
Not represented
Omo National Park
Mago National Park
Gambella National Park
Not represented
Not represented
Not represented
24
33
*
24
-
*Currently not assessed
303.
In addition to these ecosystems, the country contains unique and outstanding bio-physical
features, including the standing lava lake of Erta’Ale, the sulphur formations of Dallol, and the
spectacular Rift Valley escarpments of the Simien Mountains and Abune Josef.
Biodiversity
304.
This diversity of ecosystems and the geographically isolated highlands and arid lowlands to the
east mean that Ethiopia harbors unique and diverse biological diversity. The biogeography of the country
is characterized by these two dominant features - first, the ancient, arid areas of the Horn of Africa, with
its three centres of endemism one of which, the Ogaden, falls within Ethiopia (Kingdon, 1990). Thus, the
arid nature of the Horn means that species abundance is relatively low, but its age (>100 million years)
means that endemism is exceptionally high. The highland plateaux are the second biogeographical
feature. Although the highlands relatively young in evolutionary terms (they have been habitable only for
the past 4.5 million years) and has experienced relative climatic instability over the past 1.5million years
(both in contrast to the arid Horn), highland isolation has resulted in significant endemism. Overall,
therefore, while the arid Horn and young highlands are relatively impoverished in species number, the
levels of endemism are high.
305.
Ethiopia has over 6,000 species of vascular plant (with 625 endemic and 669 near-endemic
species, and one endemic plant genus), 860 avian species (16 endemic species and two endemic genera),
279 species of mammal (35 endemic species and six endemic genera).
306.
There are a number of charismatic flagship species, most notably the gelada (an endemic genus
and the world’s only grazing primate), the mountain nyala (an Afrotropical tragelaphine antelope endemic
to the Afroalpine ecosystem), the Ethiopian wolf (a palaeartic descent from a wolf-like ancestor that
crossed into the Ethiopian highlands just over 100,000 years ago), the walia ibex (another palaeartic
species confined to areas in the Simien Mountains) and the giant lobelia.
307.
The large mammal populations cannot be compared with the wildlife spectacles of Kenya or
Tanzania; few countries have mammal population that can. However, there are remnant populations of
elephant (an estimated 850, including 150 of Loxodonta africana orleansi), lions (an estimated 1,000) and
large ungulates. Spotted hyaenas are abundant; indeed, they flourish and are largely tolerated in Ethiopia.
There is at least one and a possible further two isolated populations of black rhino.
308.
The global biodiversity significance of the area has been recently recognized through
Conservation International’s Biodiversity Hotspots. The country spans two Hotspots: the Horn of Africa
(Friis, 2005) and the Ethiopian Highlands (Williams et al., 2005) (which is included in the Eastern
Afromontane Hotspot). The areas included in the Hotspots covers the majority of the country, including
109
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
the entire eastern area of Ethiopia below 1,100m ASL and all highland areas above 1,100m ASL (see
maps in Annex 5).
Highland biodiversity
309. The Ethiopian Highlands have an estimated 5,200 vascular plant species in an estimated 1,563
genera and 185 families. Of these, 555 species (10.7% of the total) are endemics, with some groups, the
majority of them associated with the open grasslands, dry woodlands and heaths, being very diverse (e.g.,
the Compositae). The genus Senecio is particularly diverse, with 12 of the 24 species being endemic.
There is only one endemic, monotypic genus from the area (Nephrophyllum abyssinicum which is found
on heavily grazed pastures, open ground and on rocky areas on steep slopes between 1,650 and 2,700m);
no plant families are endemic (reflecting that the area has been only habitable for the past 4.5 million
years).
310. Endemism among vertebrates, particularly at the generic level, is relatively high in this region,
especially when one considers the mammals. Thirty-one of the 193 mammal species in the Highlands are
endemic to the area. Remarkably, there are six endemic genera of mammals, and four are monotypic
(three rodent genera, Megadendromus, Muriculus, Nilopegamys, and one primate genus, Theropithecus).
The other endemic genera are Desmomys and Stenocephalymys, both represented by two species each. As
with the plants, these are associated with high-altitude, open grasslands and dry woodlands.
311. An estimated 680 species of bird are found in the Highlands and of these, 29 are endemic. Most
of the bird species that are endemic to the highlands are distributed widely, but five are restricted to tiny
pocket areas in the southern highlands. The latter region is considered an Endemic Bird Area (EBA) in
the analysis of Stattersfield et al. (1998), as is the Central Ethiopian Highlands, with four species confined
to it. There are four endemic genera, three of which are widespread (Cyanochen, Rougetius, Parophasma)
and one of which has a very localised distribution in the south of the area (Zavattariornis). The bluewinged goose (Cyanochen cyanoptera) is interesting because it seems to have resulted from a chance
landfall that has found an amenable environment in the Ethiopian Highlands; the species is closely related
to the sheldgeese of the alpine and temperate grasslands of South America. In contrast, the Ethiopian
bush-crow (Zavattariornis stresemanni, VU), along with the white-tailed swallow (Hirundo megaensis,
VU), and Prince Ruspoli’s turaco (Tauraco ruspolii, VU), are thought to be relics caught at the
confluence of four major biogeographic zones at the southern tip of the Highlands.
312. The amphibian fauna includes six endemic genera (Sylvacaecilia, Altiphrynoides,
Spinophrynoides, Balebreviceps, Ericabatrachus and Paracassina) and a high level of endemism at the
species level (30 species, of a total of 71). The reptilian fauna is less interesting, although of the 58
species, 15 are endemic.
313. Only 64 fish species occur in Lake Tana and the other rivers draining the Ethiopian Highlands.
Lake Tana is the source of the Blue Nile and, with a surface area of over 3,000km², is the most prominent
freshwater feature of the Ethiopian Highlands. Nearly a quarter of fish are endemic to Lake Tana,
including a loach Nemacheilus abyssinicus and 14 large cyprinids barbs. Barbus megastoma is one of the
largest of a number of important food fishes and it can grow to more than 80cm, which is unusually large
for this genus (Nagelkerke & Sibbing, 1998).
314. The number of species in all taxa has been steadily rising over the past 20 years, meaning that the
totals given here are provisional. The Ethiopian Highlands is an area where little systematic collecting has
been done, and many areas, particularly the forests of the southwest (where expeditions to date have been
110
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
limited in duration and poorly equipped), are largely unexplored. As an example, the mountain nyala
(Tragelaphus buxtoni, EN) was one of the last large mammals to be described on the African continent, in
1910. Furthermore, at least five new species of small mammal have been described from the Ethiopian
Highlands in the last 15 years. The final total of both recorded species and endemics will almost certainly
turn out to be much greater. In addition, the recognition of the endemic fauna and flora of Ethiopia
requires adequate knowledge of areas of similar ecology and history (e.g., the Ruwenzori Mountains in
the Albertine Rift) to be certain that presumptive Ethiopian endemics are absent elsewhere (Yalden et al.,
1996).
Biodiversity of the Horn (including areas outside of Ethiopia)
315. Rough estimates indicate that there are about 5,000 species of vascular plants in the Horn of
Africa (including areas outside Ethiopia), and of these about 2,750 are endemic. Many of the species in
the arid Horn have very restricted areas of distribution. There are nearly 60 endemic genera of vascular
plants in the arid Horn (of a total of about 970). Of the 170 families in the region, two are endemic,
Barbeyaceae and Dirachmaceae, both woody, Barbeyaceae with a single species, Barbeya oleoides, which
is relatively widespread in evergreen bushland and dry evergreen forest.
316. A total of 190 mammals in 121 genera are known from the arid Horn and of these 20 are
endemic, the most notable ones being a number of antelopes, such as Beira (Dorcatragus megalotis),
Dibatag (Ammodorcas clarkei), Speke’s gazelle (Gazella spekei), Silver dikdik (Madoqua piacentinii),
and Salt’s dikdik (Madoqua saltiana). In addition, there is an endemic subspecies of the Somali wild ass
(E. a. somalicus). There are five endemic mammal genera in the Horn, all of them monotypic, including
the aforementioned Beira and dibatag, and three small mammal genera (Microdillus, Amodillus and
Pectinator). Indeed, the arid Horn has been identified as an important area for rodent conservation (Amori
& Gippoliti, 2001).
317. There are 802 species of birds recorded from the arid Horn and 31 of these are endemic. One
Endemic Bird Areas (EBAs) falls within the hotspot in Ethiopia: the Juba and Webe Shabelle valleys
(with four species).
318. There are some 240 reptile species in 82 genera recorded from the Horn, and at least 54 are
endemic. Amphibians are poorly represented in the arid Horn, with only 20 species recorded, at least
seven of which are endemic. It is roughly estimated that there are around 100 species of freshwater fish in
about 48 genera and 30 families in the arid Horn, and of these 10 are endemic.
Some other biodiversity aspects important for humans
319. Medicinal plants. The formal medical sector plays a relatively limited role among rural
communities in Ethiopia. Traditional medical practices are widespread and these draw primarily off
plants. It has been estimated globally that 90% of rural communities depend on biodiversity for
healthcare; this percentage is likely to be higher in Ethiopia.
320. Wild foods. Research has shown that wild foods play a role in food security: people incorporate
wild foods into their diet as a buffer during food insecure periods. While research has formally collected
data on wild plants that are used during such periods, a proposal to collect data on similar use of animals
(across all taxa) is currently being developed. Fish are obviously an important source of food.
111
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
321. Biomass fuel. The majority of Ethiopians use biomass for fuel. This primarily comes in the
forms of dung, fuelwood or charcoal.
322. Construction material. This comes in the form of timber and stems of trees or bamboo, and grass
for thatching. Dung is also used for construction.
323. Social and ceremonial use. Leather and skins from various species are used for clothing (e.g.,
lesser kudus are used for clothing by Mursi women) and ceremonial use (e.g., leopard and gelada skins in
various ceremonies).
Knowledge Gaps
324. The number of species in all taxa recorded in Ethiopia has been steadily rising over the past 20
years, meaning that gaps in knowledge still remain. Ethiopia is a country where little systematic
collecting has taken place, and many areas, particularly the forests of the southwest (where expeditions to
date have been limited in duration and poorly equipped), are largely unexplored. As an example, the
mountain nyala (Tragelaphus buxtoni) was one of the last large mammals to be described on the African
continent, in 1910. Furthermore, at least five new species of small mammal have been described from the
Ethiopian Highlands in the last 15 years. The final total of both recorded species and endemics will
almost certainly turn out to be much greater than the numbers presented above. In addition, the
recognition of the endemic fauna and flora of Ethiopia requires adequate knowledge of areas of similar
ecology and history (e.g., the Ruwenzori Mountains in the Albertine Rift) to be certain that presumptive
Ethiopian endemics are absent elsewhere (Yalden et al., 1996).
325. During the project preparation stage, at a technical workshop, participants were asked to list all
the research topics that they thought were important. In effect, they were asked to determine the gaps in
knowledge in the country. Thereafter, the participants were asked to prioritize the most important gaps in
knowledge (see Table below).
326. One of the common themes throughout this project document is that Ethiopia is a country rich in
biodiversity, but poor in funding to protect these resources. The only way these gaps in knowledge will
be filled in the near future, is to build partnerships between Ethiopian and foreign institutions.
327. A small and participatory biodiversity research committee will be established to oversee the
establishment of these partnerships. Through networking and facilitation (with the assistance of foreign
delegations in the country and foreign multi- and bilateral and non-governmental organizations), the
partnerships will be actively sought, with invitations to selected institutions to work with Ethiopian
institutions to fill these gaps in knowledge. Training Ethiopian nationals can be linked to the
achievements while filling knowledge gaps.
TABLE 9. THE GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE IN BIODIVERSITY, ECOSYSTEMS AND ECOLOGICAL
PROCESSES IN ETHIOPIA. NOTE THAT THIS LIST IS NOT EXHAUSTIVE. THE PRIORITIZED
TOPICS ARE SHOWN IN BOLD ALTHOUGH THEY ARE NOT RANKED IN ORDER OF PRIORITY.
Topic
Determine the effect of (over)grazing on plant and animal communities in arid and semi-arid ecosystems
Inventory of small mammals of Ethiopia
Which development activities are dependent on biodiversity and how can they pay for the services?
Mechanisms for determining sustainable levels of human impact on biological resources in protected areas
Investigation of indigenous knowledge of resoruce use and conservation
Biodiversity surveys in the southwest forests
Vegetation description and maps of Ethiopia (including human transformed areas)
Determine the effect of (over)grazing on plant and animal communities in Afroalpine ecosystem
112
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Surveys of desert and semi-arid ecosystems
Population status (size, distribution, structure) of important species
What are the policy and legal instrucments that are necessary for effective protected areas
How to develop tourism in the development of protected areas
Study to determine the regeneration of key species
Vertebrate surveys in unrepresented areas
Investigate the roles of mammals, birds and other animals in the pollination and dispersal of plants
Inventory of amphibians and reptiles of Ethiopia
Gap analysis in the protected area system
Economic value of envrionmental services and benefits provided by protected area system
The economic value of biodiversity in sustainable livelihoods
Utilization schemes such as sustainble sport hunting, ranching and farming
Impact of sport hunting on nyala populations
Systematic surveys of selected taxonomic groups through key areas
Determine endemism and threats to endemics/evaluating the threat level
Determine the effect of wild animals on plant communities in protected areas
Species composition, population status and seasonal movements of key mammal species in and around protected areas
Cost-benefit analysis for local communities: can they benefit more by allowing protected area to exist?
Cost-benefit analysis of centralization/decentralization of protected area management in Ethiopia
The mechanisms of benefit sharing among local communities
Inventory of vascular plants in each protected area
The importance of biodiversity in rural development
The major threats to wildlife
How can existing social structures among local communities be used for conservation purposes
Determine the effect of elephants on woody vs herbaceous plant distribution and dominance
Diversity and distribution of wild mammals in Ethiopia
Mammal surveys in unrepresented areas
What are the detail opportunity costs for local people in each of the protected areas?
Identification of endemic species
Investigate the effect of invasive species on plant diversity
Investigate the effect of water use on birds in the aquatic ecosystems
Socio-economic dependence of local peoples on natural resources: which resources and when?
Modelling the energy requirements of a developed and populous Ethiopia: where will the fuel come from?
Threats to biodiversity and species
The genetic diversity of key species and isolated populations
Ethnobotanical surveys in all key areas
Study the effect of fire in the quality of vegetation
Where are the areas on which migratory birds are dependent?
Use of indigenous 'drugs' by local peoples: possibility of commercial production of hallucinogenics
The population and distribution of major mammal species
How to resolve conflicts with local communities
The ranging behaviour of large mammals in the lower Omo valley
The current status of threatened wild animals
Investigate the roles of mammals, birds and other animals in the pollination commercial plant species
What are the potential community benefits of protected areas in Ethiopia
How can community-based NRM and protected area management parnerships work?
Identification of rare, endemic and endangered species in selected areas of interest
Protected areas, sustainable livelihoods, land tenure and user-fruct
Attitude of local communities to established PA
What indigenous common property resource management practices used by local communities
113
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Distribution and status of Grevy's zebras in Ethiopia
Determine the threats to regeneration of key species
How to assign sport hunting quotas for different species: a modelling approach.
The role of protected areas in poverty alleviation
Landscape level planning using GIS tools
Geographical relationship between protected areas, poverty, eduction, biodiversity: GIS analysis
Status of amphibians
Skills needed to manage protected areas in Ethiopia
What are the long-term costs of overabstraction of water for irrigation on biodiversity?
Distribution, status and trend in each species
What are the long-term costs of fertilizer pollution on biological diversity?
Economic and social value of resoruces in protected areas to nation at large
Surveys of micro-organisms
The current status of endemic species
Harvest, use and value of wildlife and plants as a coping strategy in stress periods
Long-term effects of using dung as fuel on soil productivity
The impact of refugees on Gambella NP
Which species are used by local communities and are there alternatives to these?
Local people's attitudes towards establishing new protected areas
What are the long-term costs of dam construction on biodiversity?
Evolution and history of protected areas in Ethiopia
114
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Annex 3: Protected Area Lists for Ethiopia (all categories)
(Annex 5b in proposal text)
TABLE 10. NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDLIFE SANCTUARIES
Name
Area
Year
Ecosystem Category
No. of Species
(Km2) Established
Mammal Bird
Major species conserved
AbijataShalla
Lakes N/P
800
1970
Acacia-Commiphora
woodland,
37
370
Awash N/P
756
Acacia-Commiphora
woodland & Evergreen scrub
76
451
Bale
Mountains
N/P
Gambella
N/P
2400
Estabilished
in 1966,
gazetted in
1969
1980
67
262
5061
1973
43
327
Mago N/P
2162
1978
81
237
Omo N/P
4068
1966
69
300
Eland, Buffalo, Zebra,
Waterbuck, Greater and
Lesser kudus, Oryx, Grant’s
gazelle and Topi
Simien Mts.
N/P
225
33
125
Walia Ibex, Ethiopian wolf
& Gelada baboon
YangudiRassa N/P
4731
Established
in 1966,
gazetted in
1969
1976
Afroalpine & sub-afroalpine,
Dry evergreen montane forest
& Evergreen scrub
Combretum-Terminalia
woodland &savanna, Lowland
evergreen and Moist
evergreen montane forests,
Desert & semi-desert
scrubland, AcaciaCommiphora woodland &
Combretum-Terminalia
woodland and savanna
Desert & semi-desert
scrubland, AcaciaCommiphora woodland &
Combretum-Terminalia
woodland and savanna
Afroalpine and Sub-afroalpine
& Dry evergreen montane
forest
36
230
African wild ass &
Soemmering gazelle
Babille
Elephant
Sanctuary
6982
1970
22
106
African Elephant
Nech Sar
National
Park
514
1967
Desert & semi-desert
scrubland, AcaciaCommiphora woodland
Desert & semi-desert
scrubland, AcaciaCommiphora woodland &
Evergreen scrub
Lakes, rift valley escarpment,
groundwater forest, hot
springs, grasslands
37
188
Senkelle
Swayne’s
Hartebeest
Sanctuary
Yabello
Sanctuary
54
1971
Acacia-Commiphora
woodland & Evergreen scrub
13
91
Swayne’s hartebeest, plains
zebra, greater kudu,
crocodile, hippo, African
wild dog.
Swayne’s Hartebeest, Oribi
2500
1985
Desert and semi-desert
scrubland & Evergreen scrub
43
280
Abyssinian Bush Crow
115
Great White Pelicans,
Flamingoes, Egyptian
geese, Storks, Eagles,
herons,
Beisa Oryx, Soemmering’s
gazelle, Swayne’s Hartebeest
& Ostrich
Mountain Nyala, Ethiopian
Wolf, Menelik’s Bushbuck
& Giant Mole Rat.
White-eared kob, Nile
lechwe, Roan antelope,
Elephant, Buffalo, Lelwel
Hartebeest
Elephant, Buffalo, Grant’s
gazelle, Greater and Lesser
kudus
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
TABLE 11. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION ON WILDLIFE RESERVE AREAS OF ETHIOPIA
Name
Area
Region
Ecosystem
Major wild animal species conserved
(Km2)
Alledeghi
1,832
Oromiya
Desert and semi-desert scrubland
Oryx, Soemmerring’s Gazelle, Greater &
& Acacia-Commiphora woodland
Lesser Kudu, Ostrich, etc
Awash
1781
Oromiya
Acacia-Commiphora woodland &
Greater and Lesser kudus and Oryx
west
Evergreen scrub
Bale
1766
Oromiya
Dry evergreen montane forest &
Mountain Nyala and Menelik’s Bush buck
Afroalpine and Subafroalpine
Chew
4212
Southern
Desert and semi-desert scrubland
Grevy’s Zebra, Grant’s gazelle, Gerenuk,
Bahir
Ethiopia
Oryx, Lesser kudu
Gewane
2431
Afar
Desert and semi-desert scrubland
Soemmerring’s gazelle, Greater & Lesser
& Acacia-Commiphora woodland
kudus, Ostrich
Mille8766
Afar
Desert and semi-desert scrubland
Soemmerring’s gazelle, Greater & Lesser
Serdo
& Acacia-Commiphora woodland
kudus, Ostrich
Shiraro753
Tigray
Combretum-Terminalia woodland & Elephant, Roan antelop, Greater kudu, Oribi
Kefta
Savanna, Evergreen scrub and
Acacia-Commiphora woodland
Tama
3269
Southern
Acacia-Commiphora woodland &
Giraffe, Burchell’s Zebra, & Lelwel
Ethiopia
Combretum-Terminalia woodland & Hartebeest
Savanna
TABLE 12. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION ON CONTROLLED HUNTING AREAS OF ETHIOPIA
Name
Area
Region
Form of hunting
Major Trophy Species
(Km2)
Hanto
480
Oromiya
Concession
Mountain Nyala
Menelik’s Bush buck
Arbagugu
225
Oromiya
Concession
Mountain Nyala
Menelik’s Bush buck
Munessa Kuke
111
Oromiya
Concession
Mountain Nyala
Menelik’s Bush buck
Ababasheba Demero
210
Oromiya
Concession
Mountain Nyala
Menelik’s Bush buck
Giant Forest Hog
Besmena Odobulu
350
Oromiya
Concession
Mountain Nyala
Menelik’s Bush buck
Giant Forest Hog
Kebena
300
Afar
Concession
Beisa Oryx
Soemmerring’s Gazelle
Blen hertele
1095
Concession
Gerenuk
Beisa Oryx
Soemmering’s Gazelle
Telalk Dewe
150
Afar
Concession
Beisa Oryz
Soemmering’s Gazelle
Lesser Kudu
Murulle
1111
Souther Peoples’
Concession
Topi
Buffalo
Greater kudu
Grants Gazelle
Woleshet Sala
500
Southern people’
Concession
Buffalo
Grants Gazelle
Dindin
110
Southern people’s
Concession
Mountain Nyal
Menelik’s Bush Buck
116
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Gara Gumbi
n.a
Afar
Open
Gara Miti
n.a
Oromiya
Open
Debrelibanos
Aluto Kulito
Jibat
n.a
n.a
n.a
Oromiya
Oromiya
Oromiya
Open
Open
Open
Koka
Gelial Dura
n.a
n.a
Oromiya
Afar
Open
Salts Dik dik
Lesser Kudu
Klipspringer
Dik dik
Gelada Baboon
Greater Kudu
Giant Forest hog
Bush pig
Menelik’s Bush buck
Colobus Monkey
Bohor Reed buck
Warthog
Waterbuck
Kid dik
Bohor
Common Buch buck
TABLE 13. NATIONAL FOREST PRIORITY AREAS OF ETHIOPIA (NFPAS) BY TYPE AND
COVERAGE (HECTARES) (SOURCE: STATE OF ENVIRONMENT REPORT FOR ETHIOPIA, 2003 –
EPA).
Name of area
High Forest (ha)
Man-made
Other
Total area
forest (ha)
forest (ha)
(ha)
Slightly
Heavily
Disturbed
Disturbed
1
Arbagugu
n.a
63000
1600
13500
21400
2
Chilalo Galama
n.a
n.a
1400
20600
22000
3
Munesa Shashemne
7000
10200
6800
74200
98200
4
Neshe-Batu Adaba
n.a
10000
1700
28300
40000
Dodola
5
Logo
5000
16400
900
36700
59000
6
Goro Bele
9800
50000
200
40000
10000
7
Harena Kokosa
20000
70000
n.a
92000
182000
8
Kubayo
5000
17900
300
55200
78400
9
Mena-Angetu
20000
50000
200
119800
190000
10 Bulki Malokoza
n.a
n.a
500
10500
11000
11 Gidola Gamba
15000
5000
n.a
10000
30000
12 Gidole Gamba
n.a
n.a
1200
14800
16000
13 Guwanga Kahitas
n.a
32000
2800
21700
56500
14 Sekela Mariam
n.a
n.a
2000
8000
10000
15 Butiji Melkajebdu
n.a
n.a
3800
41400
45200
16 Dindin Arbagugu
n.a
n.a
5900
57600
66800
17 Gara Muleta
n.a
2600
2000
2400
7000
18 Jalo Muktare
n.a
2500
4100
14700
21300
19 Iaro Gursum
n.a
1500
4500
46300
52300
20 Abobo Gog
150000
45000
100
22900
218000
21 Gebre Dima
50000
82000
n.a
33000
165000
22 Godere
40000
100000
500
19500
160000
23 Sele Anderacha
100000
115000
700
9300
225000
24 Sibo Tale Kobo
28000
50000
1900
20100
100000
25 Sigemo Geba
67700
190000
2300
20000
280000
26 Yayu
20000
100000
300
29700
150000
27 Yeki
10000
100000
500
11500
122000
28 Wangus
329900
n.a
n.a
85100
415000
29 Mesenigo
292350
n.a
650
32000
325000
117
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Abelti Gibe
Babiya Fola
Belate Gera
Bonga
Gura Farda
Tiro Boter Becho
Butajira
Chilimo Gaji
Gedo
Jibate Muti Jegenfo
Menagesha Suba
Wof Washa
Yere Diregebrecha
Zukala
AnderaraWadera
Bore Asferara
Megada
Negele
Yabelo Arero
Dasa
Chato Sengi Dengeb
Gergeda
Gidame
Jurgo Wato
Komto Waja Tsega
Konchi
Linche dali Gewe
Dekoro
Guwobirda Girakaso
Yegof Erike
Total
n.a
n.a
76500
7000
80000
16000
n.a
n.a
2000
n.a
n.a
n.a
300
4700
45000
35200
10000
35100
23300
n.a
2000
3000
5000
3600
2000
3800
1300
900
1100
2100
800
2300
1600
800
n.a
n.a
1300
4200
1700
4000
28400
35700
142300
224100
44200
13400
23200
5000
33500
4900
2700
3800
10000
74300
148500
161400
340000
85800
15000
26000
10000
38500
9800
8900
9600
n.a
n.a
5000
n.a
n.a
n.a
n.a
20000
n.a
n.a
n.a
10000
n.a
n.a
n.a
n.a
1,386,550
13000
33000
10000
1200
8000
n.a
5000
20000
10000
15000
1000
5000
15000
2300
11500
2800
1,385,200
3700
1400
1300
300
150
n.a
60
1000
n.a
200
1200
n.a
n.a
n.a
2200
8400
84860
89900
182900
4500
16300
41750
20000
39800
96400
7000
4700
6900
8000
25000
3000
12300
6800
1,921,250
106600
217300
20800
17800
49900
20000
44860
137400
17000
19900
9100
23000
40000
5300
26000
18000
4,777,860
118
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Annex 4: Detailed Capacity Analysis of the Protected Areas
Sector (Annex 6 in proposal text)
[Note – this is based on a collaborative report by regional and national consultant expertise in the PDF-B
process. This is available as a full report.]
Political and legal framework
1. It is normal procedure to develop national sectoral policies before enacting the required legislation.
The legislation is supposed to provide legal basis for implementing sectoral policies. Once institutions are
set up, then the organizational policies, regulations are developed to guide implementation. The process
has proceeded in reverse order in Ethiopia.
Policy analysis
2. Policy analysis was focused on two aspects – the soundness of the policy framework and how it
enables the institutions to implement it for protected area management.
3. There are several policies and strategies for biodiversity conservation. These include the Conservation
Strategy of Ethiopia (CSE), 1997 (within which is the Federal Policy on Natural Resources and the
Environment); the National Policy on Biodiversity Conservation and Research, 1990, the Ethiopian
Forestry Action Program, 1994, and the recent Wildlife Policy.
4. The Federal Policy on Natural Resources and the Environment is Ethiopia’s umbrella policy on
environment management. Its overall goal is to improve the health and quality of life and promote
sustainable socio-economic development through sound management and use of resources and the
environment. Some of the policy objectives that relate to biodiversity conservation include:
 Ensuring essential ecological processes and life support systems are sustained, biodiversity
preserved and renewable natural resources used in a way that maintains their regenerative
capabilities.
 Incorporating full economic, social and environmental costs and benefits of natural resource
development into planning, implementation and accounting processes.
 Ensuring people’s participation in environment management activities.
 Raising public awareness and understanding of the essential linkages between environment and
development.
 Conserving, sustainably managing and supporting Ethiopia’s rich and diverse cultural heritage.
5. The umbrella policy on environment does give some level of importance to protected area
management as a tool for conservation of genetic, species and ecosystem biodiversity. However, it falls
short in identifying which agency is responsible for protected area management.
6. The wildlife policy provides for protected area management and so does the draft wildlife
proclamation which recognizes “wildlife conservation areas”. Both of these instruments are also rather
silent on the institution that will be responsible for protected area management. The section on
implementation, within the wildlife policy, only refers to development of regional policies and
infrastructure. The draft proclamation does identify the “powers and duties of the ministry” but does not
provide for establishment of an autonomous agency for protected area management.
119
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
7. The wildlife policy also has some inconsistencies and although it is still very new, it needs to be
reviewed not only to remove the inconsistencies but make it stronger on the general principles of
conservation and development.
8. The National Policy on Biodiversity Conservation and Research recognizes the economic importance
of Ethiopia's genetic resources, whether domestic or wild. Its basic aim is to ensure in-situ and ex-situ
conservation of Ethiopia’s biodiversity through research, collaborative management, community
participation, etc.
9. Although there is no formal policy document on forestry, the Ethiopian Forestry Action Program
(EFAP) does have provisions for the establishment of a single conservation agency responsible for
coordinating management of protected areas. It proposes the setting aside of part of the remaining natural
forest estate for protection and conservation purposes.
Legislative instruments
10. There are a number of policy documents and legal instruments that guide Ethiopia’s biodiversity
conservation efforts in general and protected area management in particular.
11. At the international level, the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE) is signatory to a
number of conventions including the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the UN Framework
Convention for Climate Change, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora (CITES), the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, etc. It is in the
process of ratifying the Ramsar Convention and the Kyoto Agreement.
12. The Constitution of the FDRE is the overarching legislation that guides government’s policy. It was
enacted in 1995 and has several articles relating to management of natural resources and the environment
in general but does not specifically refer to biodiversity conservation or protected area management.
13. The Forest and Wildlife Conservation and Development Proclamation No. 192/1980 created the
Forest and Wildlife Conservation and Development Authority out of the former Wildlife Conservation
Organization and the State Forest Development Agency. It repealed a number of the previous
proclamations dealing with wildlife and forest management. It gave the state ownership of “state forests”
which could be deemed as protection to these areas.
14. In 1993 proclamation No. 41 created the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Protection
charged with management of wildlife and protected areas of Ethiopia. This Ministry ceased to exist in
1995 with Proclamation No. 4/1995 which repealed the former and transferred the Ministry’s rights and
obligations to the Ministry of Agriculture (wildlife and forestry management), the Ministry of Water
Resources and the Environmental Protection Authority - EPA (environmental protection). The EPA is an
autonomous institution with powers and responsibilities as defined in Proclamation No. 9/1995 and later
in No. 295/2002.
15. Biodiversity conservation in general is taken care of by Proclamation No. 120/1998 that established
the Institute of Biodiversity and Research as an autonomous body. Wildlife management is to be guided
by the Wildlife Proclamation57 which is still in draft form. However, this proclamation does not give
enough guidance for development of the wildlife sector using current principles of collaboration and
sustainable development.
57
This has been approved by the Council of Ministers but has not yet passed through Parliament.
120
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
16. Clarity in the legal framework although important is rather lacking. It is not just a matter of having
sufficient environmental laws but also ensuring that they compliment each other and the protected area
legislation fits well within the broader national legal framework. Protected areas function within the
constraints dictated by the existing policy framework, inhibiting or overlapping policies can present
significant barriers to protected area management. In addition many of the legislative instruments are
thought to be obsolete as far as protected area management is concerned and the level of awareness and
enforcement remains rather low.
Institutional setup and mandates
17. Sustainable protected area management is an area that requires many different disciplines,
professionals and practitioners who handle different management aspects at different levels. There is thus
need for collaboration and co-operation to ensure that all these efforts contribute effectively to the same
management objectives. In establishing protected area management institutions, the biophysical, protected
area-level science and the policy-level legislation is usually taken into account. However, the institutional
structure and behavior of organizations at all levels tends to be poorly understood and therefore not well
developed. This is the situation that pertains for Ethiopia.
18. Constitutionally, the Ethiopia government is organized at two levels. Having adopted the policy of
decentralization, there is the Federal Government that oversees the administration of the whole country
and there are the regional governments with their own administrative structures. To a certain extent, the
administrative structures at the regional level mirror those at the federal level.
19. Management of the protected areas is under the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
(MoARD) in general. Specifically, wildlife protected areas are under the WCD while “forest priority
areas” are under that of Forest, Soils and Land Use.
20. There have been a lot of changes in the institutional set-up for the environment and natural resources
sector. The former organization responsible for wildlife management, Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation
Organization (EWCO), went under nine different institutions since its establishment! This kind of
continuous change does not give an environment conducive for institutional strengthening and capacity
building.
Mandates
21. The major problems facing protected areas need to be addressed by institutions at the appropriate
scale, within clearly defined roles and responsibilities. The first step in determining appropriate
management responses is to clearly identify the problem being addressed. According to Caldecott (1997),
when the main threat to a protected area arises from cumulative overuse by too many people to meet their
day-to-day subsistence needs, local regulation and social control may be required, along with investments
in improved agricultural practices or alternative livelihoods.
22. However, government conservation institutions have taken the exclusive mandate to manage
protected areas even though they lack adequate human, financial, and technical resource capacities to
carry out this mandate effectively. An over-emphasis on centralized protected area management over the
years, under these circumstances has lead to undermined institutional mechanisms at local scales, e.g.
traditional approaches to conservation based on local knowledge. To counter this, the FDRE has
implemented its decentralization policy. Too much decentralization has led to passing over responsibility
to institutions that have no capability to manage the protected areas effectively. This is not an either-or
situation of decentralization versus centralization, but rather requires creation of new protected area
governance systems with clearly allocated responsibilities at different scales in a balanced manner.
23. Although involving multiple stakeholders in protected area management has its many advantages,
there is the key challenge of specifying appropriate non-overlapping functional roles. Although all
121
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
agencies seem clear about what their mandate regarding protected area management is, there is lack of
clarity as to where this mandate stops and that of other agencies begins (see Table). All agencies are
aware that there is a lot of duplication and therefore a need to streamline the institutional set up.
24. Another problem encountered, which has led to conflict has stemmed from some of the agencies
going beyond their mandate e.g. the EPA has undertaken protected area assessment and demarcation,
piloting community conservation practices, etc. at the regional level. Their excuse is the lack of capacity
within the agencies responsible for this. However, the approach to solving this would have been to make
effort to build the required capacity of the relevant agency instead.
25. Many of the institutions are not aware of the programs of the other institutions in the same sector,
showing lack of collaboration and absence of networking. There is a lot of overlap and some “territorial”
behavior. Examples of areas of duplication include:

Biodiversity conservation, the mandate of IBC, encompasses wildlife and forest management

WCD claims conservation mandate in forest areas that have wildlife “because the forest simply provides
habitat for wildlife”

Both IBC and WCD claim the in-situ conservation mandate and technical back-stopping at regional level

Regulating access to genetic resources handled by IBC, WCD, FD

EPA undertaking some protected area related activities e.g. protected area assessment and demarcation,
piloting community conservation initiatives
122
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
TABLE 9. THE MANDATES OF THE CONCERNED BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION AND PROTECTED AREA MANAGEMENT
ORGANIZATIONS AT A FEDERAL LEVEL
Mandates
Ministry of Agriculture
Prime Minister’s Office
Supervisory
 Draft laws on the conservation and utilization of forest and wildlife resources; follow up and coordinate their The PM is government’s chief
executive according to the Ethiopia’s
Institution
implementation
Constitution charged with:
 Cause the undertaking of studies pertaining to protection of plant genetic resources
 Ensure conducting of quarantine controls on plants, seeds, animals and animal products brought into or taken  Overall supervision, follow up
and ensuring implementation of
out of the country
laws, policies, directives adopted by
the
House
of
People’s
Representatives
 Leading
and
coordinating
activities of the Council of Ministers
 Supervising
conduct
and
efficiency
of
the
Federal
Administration and taking corrective
measures
Wildlife
Conservation Forestry, Land use & Soil Institute for Biodiversity Conservation
Environmental
Protection
Department
Conservation Department
Authority
Autonomous agency
Autonomous agency
Mandates
as Government departments
legally stated
 Ensure proper protection development rational utilisation and  ensure
appropriate
conservation and  Formulating policies, strategies,
management of forest and wildlife resources of the country.
utilisation of the country’s biodiversity
laws and standards that foster social
 Establish and administer national parks, game reserves and  has power and duties related to the and economic development in a
other conservation areas.
conservation, research and utilisation of manner that enhances human
and
sustainable
including
maintaining
and welfare
 Agitate the broad masses to have better and greater biodiversity
environment.
participation in the development, protection, rational utilisation developing international relations with bilateral
and multilateral bodies having the potential to  Ensuring
effectiveness
of
and management of forest and wildlife.
providing technical assistance for the support of implementation process (monitor,
biodiversity conservation and development.
enforce
implementation
of
environmental
instruments).
 has the responsibility and duty to implement
international conventions, agreements and
obligations on biodiversity to which Ethiopia is
a party
Mandates
as  Regulatory role as far  Forest
development
and  Conservation and sustainable utilisation of  Spearheading actions designed
understood by the as management of wildlife protection, soil conservation and genetic resources
for environment protection for
agencies
in regional PAs is fertility, land use planning and land  Access and benefit sharing and associated sustainable development
concerned
administration.
traditional knowledge
 ensuring synergistic approach to
123
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc

Wildlife management
in PAs and outside
 Management
of
wildlife habitat


Conservation research on genetic resources
Ecosystem management.
Functions
as  Technical services to  Preparation
of
guidelines,  initiate policy and legislative proposals,
understood by the the regions e.g. in policies, strategies – provide to the enforce and follow up implementation
agency
assessments, demarcating, regions who implement them
 biodiversity surveys - diversity and
management planning
 Develop projects and channel to distribution
 Training the regional the regions
 Ex-situ and in-situ conservation
experts
 Supervise projects especially  identifying areas threatened with genetic
those funded from government erosion and ensure restoration
capital budget
 implementing international treaties on
 Assist
in
preparation
of biodiversity to which Ethiopia is party
management plans for the forest
 registering germplasm of Ethiopian origin
areas
 `controlling
/
regulating
collection,
 Inventory / survey, analysis and
utilisation, dispatch, import and export of
mapping of the forest resource
biological specimen
124
biodiversity conservation
Developing regulatory systems
and
ensuring
implementation
through monitoring, education and
provision of incentives
 Regulatory
 Policy, Standards, Regulations
 Technical backstopping for the
regions
 Focal point for CCD
 Mainstreaming of environment
concerns into sectoral actions
 Ensure each sector has an
environment unit (legal requirement)

Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Participative management
26. Protected area management in Ethiopia, as indeed in most of Africa has been based on models that
exclude local communities and perceive their concerns as incompatible with conservation. The situation is
beginning to change with the realization that effective protected area management is not possible without
the collaboration of the communities living within and around the protected areas. Some effort has been
put to initiate the process that will lead to communities participating in decision making as far as protected
area management is concerned. This is just the beginning and a lot still has to be done. The policy
framework at the national level is in place. This needs to be developed further into detailed implementable
organizational policies once the institutional framework is agreed upon.
The role of NGOs and bilateral organizations
27. Over the last 10 or so years, NGOs and bilateral organizations have increasingly played a critical role
in protected area management across Africa. There are a number of NGOs and bilateral organizations
involved in activities related to protected area management in Ethiopia. These include the Frankfurt
Zoological Society, University of Oxford, CARE Ethiopia, the German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) and
the Austrian Development Cooperation. Some of these are involved in community conservation while
others are working on ecosystem conservation in general or specifically on conservation of endangered
species. Some of them are trying to increase the conservation area for biodiversity through creating
community awareness and skills building or contributing to the process of formalizing the protected area
system of Ethiopia.
28. The self given mandate of the NGOs seems to be mainly centered on providing an interface with the
local communities. This is done through their roles in promoting community level resource management.
In addition to this, the NGOs should be encouraged to get involved in other areas like promoting
sustainable agriculture, soil and water conservation and community based ecotourism services.
29. Basing on experience from other countries within Africa, NGOs can create partnerships with wildlife
conservation agencies and are most effective in the following areas:
 community based conservation
 community based tourism development
 research and ecological monitoring
 ex-situ conservation especially of big mammals
 building capacity for protected area management through provision of technical assistance /
training / skills building, provision of financial resources
 trans-boundary protected area management
Other agencies & cross-sectoral issues
30. Other relevant agencies, but which were not reviewed in depth include the Ministry of Regional
Affairs (currently handles mostly security related issues and capacity building for the new regions. This
ministry should provide the linkage between the federal and the regional governments); the Tourism
Commission charged with formulation of tourism polices and strategies, tourism promotion / publicity
and encouraging development of tourist facilities; the Science and Technology Commission’s mandate
lies in the area of research promotion in science and technology – formulating policies and plans, carrying
out popularization of research and results, providing incentives for contribution to development of science
and technology – the commission also hosts the ‘Man and the Biosphere’ Program, which is related to
protected area management; and the Authority for Research and Cultural Heritage Conservation
which is mandated to conserve cultural heritage including implementation of relevant international
agreements ratified by the country.
125
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Strengths
31. The heads of the institutions that were reviewed have a clear understanding of biodiversity
conservation in general.
32. There is an understanding of what the problem with the institutional set-up is and what needs to be
done to correct this.
33. There is acceptance of the weakness in functioning as a sector, which gives a good basis for any
desired changes.
34. The will to promote collaboration and develop partnerships is there, at least on the surface
35. Although there are some gaps, the policy and legislative framework is in place
36. The umbrella organization for environment management is in place and seems to be functioning
relatively well.
37. There is the realization that communities have to be brought on board and the efforts to do so have
been initiated.
Major Issues Regarding the Institutional Framework
38. The major issues in terms of the legislative and institutional framework for protected area
management in Ethiopia include:
39. The ad hoc development of policies related to biodiversity conservation that now calls for integration
and harmonization of the policy framework.
40. Weak institution for protected area management – lack the required and appropriate manpower to
function effectively.
41. Inadequate financial resources to implement the policies and inappropriate use of what financial
resources that there are.
42. Departments charged with protected area management (wildlife and forestry management) not well
facilitated to perform their functions.
43. Inadequate information and decision-making tools to support comprehensive policy development
followed by planning and development control.
44. A significant degree of overlap in institutional responsibilities, despite inadequate institutional
capacity.
45. Inadequate enforcement capability; no linkages with law enforcement authorities
46. No functional linkages amongst the institutions whose mandates are protected area related and lack
clear strategy for sharing available expertise
47. The linkage between the Federal and Regional Structures is rather weak – no one being quite sure how
this linkage is supposed to work out.
Current Capacity for protected area Management
48. Capacity is normally taken to refer to the ability of an individual or an organization to identify
problems and be able to manage them. It does not stop at the mere existence of potential. Capacity is used
to manage change towards desired outcomes. It can be looked at from three different levels – that of the
126
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
individual (skills), that of the institution (operating systems) and that of the system as contained within
policies and legislation.
49. This was not an in-depth review covering all the three levels above but rather focused on policy /
legislation and operating systems. It was decided to focus at this level because it would not serve much
purpose to do an individual capacity analysis at this stage. This would come later once the institutional
changes are complete and a staffing and training needs assessment is done. To analyze institutional
capacity called for looking at whether the existing institutions can provide the means of delivering the
required services as dictated by the principles of biodiversity conservation and as established by policy
and legislation. The interests of the various institutions and their capabilities in effective protected area
management were reviewed in the areas highlighted below.
Understanding of the policy framework
50. There is a general understanding (albeit state-centric) of the governance and policy framework,
especially at the federal level and good knowledge of the strength and current weaknesses. However, this
knowledge is not well translated into action. The level of implementation of the existing policies is low,
despite the fact that some good strategy documents e.g. the CSE, the EFAP, the National Biodiversity
Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP), do exist, while acknowledging that others are weak (e.g., the Wildlife
policy).
Strategic and management planning
51. A lot of planning has been done at the federal level, encompassing environment protection in general
and natural resources management (Conservation Strategy for Ethiopia). In addition to this, there has been
effort put into planning for the forestry sector – the Ethiopia Forestry Action Plan. Although the former
has been implemented to a certain extent, all the good intentions of the latter remain just that. At
organizational level, there is lack of strategic, management and operational planning capacity. Some effort
has gone towards protected area management planning but production of the very few plans existing was
not participatory and neither did it take into considerations the current principles of protected area
management such as financial sustainability, contribution to economic development, community
participation, etc.
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
52. M&E is one of the weakest areas for most of the institutions related to protected area management.
The protected area institutions do not have a functional M&E system. Some of the strategy documents
mentioned above have provisions for establishing this system but no effort has been expended in this
direction. The hindrance here is the lack of skills for developing this kind of system that integrates all
relevant sectors; once the skills were in place, whether financial resources were limiting could be
analyzed. These institutions also do not seem to consider this aspect of management as a priority.
53. Many of the protected areas are threatened with degradation and are in danger of losing the values for
which they were established. Assessment of management effectiveness has not been carried out. This sort
of analysis would assist in establishing the exact areas for strengthening at that level.
54. The major issue here is to ensure that as an enhanced awareness develops of the benefits of evaluation,
so too does the willingness to use such systems and capacity to do so.
Information management and communication
55. Information management relates to the collection, analysis, storage and presentation / interpretation of
information. Sound decisions are based on solid, up-to-date information. Given the limited amount of
resources available for conservation, it is critical to ensure that the right decisions are made, for which it is
127
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
crucial to have the right information. Therefore, protected area management cannot be successful in the
absence of relevant, accurate and up-to-date information. This information must be accessible to all who
need to make protected area management decisions including the public sector, private sector, civil
society, communities and individuals. The core skill required here is the ability to acquire and process
information in such a way as to make it useable for decision making.
56. Information needs vary with different situations, but generally, the most important information
required is that which enables decision makers to understand the protected area assets and the options for
their conservation and management. These require a minimum level of knowledge of the biodiversity
resources themselves, the threats to their conservation and the causes of those threats. Availability of such
information enables making of plans for protected area management activities and establishing priorities
for limited resource allocation.
57. Although some considerable information exists, there is hardly any effort towards management of
information and ensuring a system for communication for Ethiopia’s protected area system. A number of
libraries and a few websites do exist but do not have much of the information that would be required to
inform management decision making or to be used for public awareness. There is no overall information
management system for protected area management. Yet this is an important area if the need to have a
variety of stakeholders involved in protected area management is to be achieved. There is need to expose
the stakeholders and the general public to protected area management information thus a need for an
information and communication strategy.
Quantifying resource values
58. We need to quantify the values of protected areas so as to increase political, financial and community
support for these areas. There is not much work that has gone into this area and yet quantifying the values
of Ethiopia’s protected areas can demonstrate that they are productive assets in the economy; build support
for protected area management from policymakers and the public; provide a stronger rationale for
expanding the protected areas system; integrate them into national economic planning and support
requests for funding from government and donors.
Partnership development - institutional networking and collaboration
59. To a great extent, development of partnerships has been ignored both within the sector and across the
various government sectors. This lack of partnership and coordination amongst the stakeholders is a key
weakness in Ethiopia’s protected area management. Some limited work has gone into collaboration with
Non-Government Organization (NGO) and there exists a protected area management agreement with the
private sector for one of the protected areas.
60. Within the sector itself, the various institutions are working in complete ignorance of each others’
programs. To quote one of the heads of the key agencies, “we don’t like each other, so we do not meet nor
talk to one another”. The key partners that need to be brought to work together include the NGO,
communities, private sector (including those that are tourism related), regional administration and
government institutions involved in environment and natural resources management.
61. Among these partnerships, that with local communities is critical and this has already been recognized
through the existing policy on wildlife management and the CSE. Community participation may be
attained through two ways: - having an informed community; and the community being organized. The
strategy here should not only focus in community participation in planning and protected area
management but also on ensuring that protected area management and wildlife conservation do contribute
to rural livelihood development.
62. Guidance for this coordination and forging of partnerships should be spelt out in a “partnership
development policy” once the institutional set up for protected area management has been decided upon.
This policy can draw on experiences from other countries e.g. Uganda and South Africa. Ethiopia would
128
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
therefore do well to forge strategic relationships with other countries that have gone through similar
experiences within the region.
Education and Training
63. Ethiopia still lacks an education policy that adequately caters for integration of environment
management in general and protected area management specifically into the formal education sector.
Although there are academic programs targeting forestry, and of recent wildlife management, there has not
been enough effort towards developing capacity to impart additional skills in protected area management
such as management planning, partnership development, monitoring and evaluation, law enforcement, etc.
Resource mobilization strategies
64. The capacity for mobilization of resources does exist in a number of institutions e.g. the EPA and the
IBC, but is on the whole lacking. The EPA and the IBC seem to have the trust of a number of NGO and
donor agencies and have no critical resource access problems. Actually, the EPA seems to be good at
resource mobilization and could be used to strengthen other institutions in this regard. They are willing to
assist in this aspect. The Wildlife Conservation and the Soil, Land use and Forestry Departments do not
seem capable of mobilizing resources for protected area management. This limitation stems mainly from
government policy restricting financial autonomy of government departments rather than from lack of the
capability to do so.
Tourism Development
65. Tourism has become a major economic activity across the globe. Development of tourism, if not well
managed can lead to conflict with biodiversity conservation. The apparent conflict between tourism
development and biodiversity conservation is not insurmountable. It can be solved by considering
protected areas not only as wilderness areas set aside for conservation purposes, but also as ecosystems
composed of several interacting elements and actors which must live in harmony.
66. Ethiopia’s tourism industry is mainly based on the rich Ethiopian culture. There is need to diversify
into nature based tourism in order for protected area management to contribute to economic development.
Sustainable nature based tourism can generate jobs and revenues, thus providing an incentive for protected
area conservation. This kind of tourism can also raise public awareness on the many products and services
provided by protected areas and the importance of traditional knowledge and practices.
67. Before Ethiopia can tap into this kind of tourism, there is need to develop the required capacity to
manage it so as to offer quality service while avoiding degradation of the protected area system. There is
need for training and infrastructure development both within and outside of the protected area system.
This can be done in collaboration with the private sector and the communities surrounding the protected
areas.
Proposals Based on the Analysis
68. From the above analysis, it can be concluded that the key factors for successful protected area
management in Ethiopia revolve around policy review, institutional strengthening, covering a
reorganization of the current set up and building the capacity for protected area management.
Policy Development
69. In consideration of the policy analysis above, it is clear that the policy revisions required should aim at
improving the system that underpins organizational and individual performance that translates into
effective protected area management. The overall objective of the policy for wildlife is to create an
enabling environment for sustainable protection and development of wildlife and their habitat so as to
129
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
contribute to the country’s economic development. This points to the need to achieve sound sustainable
development by reconciling economic development and conservation of wildlife resources.
Harmonization of policies
70. Ethiopia’s policies relating to environment and natural resources management must be harmonized.
There is need to formulate an overall biodiversity conservation policy that brings together both ex-situ and
in-situ conservation strategies, wildlife and forestry management and conservation both inside and outside
protected areas.
71. The changes in policy and thus legislation should focus on economic development through
improvement in the quality of human life, restoring the equilibrium of ecosystems and maintain ecological
processes and life support systems. The policy strategy should also aim at efficient utilization of the
limited resources and achieving a sustainable level of resource consumption.
72. This would be achieved partly by establishing a policy / legislative framework that caters for effective
coordination in biodiversity conservation, establishment of workable partnerships and involvement of the
primary resource “owners” and users – the local community. The legislation should establish a corporate
body with perpetual succession, a common seal, which in its own name is capable of acquiring property
and holding property, suing and being sued, with financial autonomy and decision making powers
(Uganda Wildlife Statute, 1996).
73. This calls for dialogue across the various sectors relating to or impacting on biodiversity conservation
and protected area management. The policy dialogue would be centered on the following key areas:
- Improving the institutional framework since the mechanisms to coordinate activities between
government institutions at the operational levels is missing. The need to consolidate the country’s PA
under one government agency cannot be over emphasized.
- Strengthening the legislative framework. Despite the many legislative instruments on biodiversity and
wildlife conservation, the legislation remains outdated and is insufficient to address the current and
potential threats to the country’s ecological resources. There is need to draft and enact a new all
encompassing legislation.
- Controlling decentralization of protected area management. Although the policy of decentralization
has been adopted, there is need for it to be reviewed to ensure that protected areas are managed at
appropriate levels depending on their status or level of importance.
- Fostering Participatory protected area management. There is need to cater for delegation of protected
area management responsibility to the private sector, NGOs, communities, etc. This can be done on a
pilot basis. The current adverse relationship between protected area management and the communities
living in and surrounding protected areas poses a significant threat to wildlife conservation and
protected area management. Collaborative management must not only be catered for but also be seen
to be done. Policy should be developed to cover active involvement of the community, benefits
sharing, resource access, etc. Without this, effective protection of the protected areas will not be
possible over the medium to long term.
- Financing protected area management / Wildlife Protection. Revenues generated by PA should be
ploughed back for management purposes and more funding guaranteed by government through
establishment of protected area fund.
130
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
74. In order to achieve the goal of sustainable development, the policy on environment and natural
resources management must pursue broad objectives for protected area management that are
complementary and mutually-reinforcing:
- Maintain the diversity of ecosystems, species and genes.
- Maintain and enhance the natural productivity of ecosystems and ecological processes.
- Optimize the contribution of protected areas to Ethiopia's economic development.
- Optimize the contribution of natural and environmental resources to social and cultural development.
- Prevent and mitigate the negative impacts of development on protected areas and biodiversity in
general.
- Fulfill regional and international responsibilities.
75. Some of the other policy interventions required revolve around developing instruments that will help
address issues such as development of an integrated system of monitoring and reporting on
implementation of national and international policies and instruments.
Requirements for Effective Legislation
76. The implementation of a policy for protected area management must be supported by effective legal,
planning and management instruments. The legislative mandate of the protected area institution should
enable it to implement its identified organizational structure, required systems and procedures for
management, identify issues that need to be addressed, and formulate the desired strategies. The
legislation should therefore clearly define:
 The functions of the institutions.
 What a protected area is and the different categories of protected areas, together with the
procedures for declaration and identify the management authority.
 The relationships with other lead agencies, federal and regional governments, local communities,
etc.
 General management measures including the requirement for management planning,
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and reporting.
 Measures for resource access, wildlife utilization and benefit sharing.
 Measures for development of incentives for biodiversity conservation
 Problem animal control and declaration of protected species
 And other important areas as identified
77. The legislation should allow for development of regulations and guidelines to assist in implementation
of its various provisions.
Land use planning
78. Protected areas are best conceived as parts of a national system of land use. The Convention on
Biological Diversity highlights the need for each country to treat its protected area system as different
parts of a system designed to provide different kinds of benefits to different groups of stakeholders.
Ethiopia’s protected area system needs to be conceived as a national system, with some protected areas
designated to cater for national concerns or obligations, while others are assigned to primarily meet the
needs at local level.
131
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Policy Monitoring and Evaluation
79. Policy making is a continuous process that calls for specific institutional arrangements and mandates
to monitor implementation progress. This monitoring should encompass issues like continued assessment
of trends, needs and issues and evaluation of policy impact.
Institutional Setup
80. A protected area system needs diversity in institutional approaches. There is need for new and
improved institutional arrangements that are efficient and effective and that are based on the principles of
efficiency, cost effectiveness, collaboration, social participation and partnerships. There is also need for
finding a balance between promoting decentralization of protected area management responsibilities and
ensuring effective protected area management. This can be done through effective delegation of relevant
regulatory functions to regional institutions as opposed to complete decentralization of responsibility.
81. Ethiopia follows the conventional model of protected area management and thus needs a substantial
paradigm shift towards more participatory forms of management so as to improve effectiveness and ensure
sustainable conservation and social justice. There is need to increase the role of other stakeholders, notably
the private sector and the indigenous and local communities in the conceptualization and management of
protected areas.
82. The key to effective implementation of national protected area management related policy is effective
coordination and integration, at all levels. It involves coordination and cooperation between state agencies,
the private sector and civil society. There has to be clarity and accountability in the allocation of roles and
responsibilities among the various institutional players.
83. While making institutional arrangements for protected area management, one needs to keep in mind
what the various key institutions’ main roles and responsibilities could be. Some suggestions are made
here below.
TABLE 14. PROTECTED AREA
STAKEHOLDER CATEGORIES
Major
State
role
in
PA mgt
Current
Leadership in policy
roles
and management
Exclusive
role
in
enforcement
Primary and often
exclusive role in all
aspects of protected
area management
Desirable
roles
Continued leadership
role
in
policy
development
Increased facilitating
role
Shared
enforcement
role
Changes
Policy
reform
to
needed to streamline
mandates
MANAGEMENT
ROLES
Community
Civil society
Extremely
limited,
and
dependent
on
initiative
of
NGOs working
with community
leaders
&
government
organizations
Self-regulation
Local initiative
for conservation
outside protected
areas
Partnership
in
protected
area
management
Limited
&
isolated instances
of civil society
involvement
FOR
THE
Private sector
Individual
Extremely
limited
&
dependent
on
individual
initiative
&
ability
to
negotiate
with
government
agencies
Active
Investment
in
involvement
in protected
area
some aspects of management
management
Tourism
Encouraging
development
community
Delegated role in
participation
protected
area
management
Development of Policy reform to Incentives
community
facilitate
ensure
132
GENERAL
Non- existent
Self-regulation
Individual
initiative
for
conservation
outside
protected areas
to Empowerment
through
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
perform
desirable
roles
and
facilitate
partnerships
Review
of
decentralization system
Increased capacity in
coordination
and
partnership
development
organizations
Establishment of
system
for
community
participation
Awareness and
education
community
empowerment and
delegation
of
protected
area
management
Increased capacity
of civil society
organizations
investment
in awareness
protected
area raising
management and
tourism
development
Adapted from the National Environment Policy and National Environmental Management Strategy for
Saint Lucia, 2004.
84. Effective functioning of the different institutional arrangements requires capacity building at all levels
of management within government (federal and regional), civil society, the private sector and local
communities. In some instances, it will also require formal partnership development by way of
memoranda of understanding or agreements. This will improve collaboration, remove duplication of roles
and efforts, thus optimizing the use of resources.
85. The set up of the institution to manage Ethiopia’s protected areas should take into consideration the
various existing mandates and ensure that there is clear indication of who is mandated to do what. The said
mandates in the broadest terms would involve ex-situ conservation, in-situ conservation, protected area
management (forestry and wildlife), research coordination, biodiversity conservation outside of protected
areas, etc.
86. EPA should be maintained as the coordinating and supervisory body for environment management
and should be at such a level as to do this function effectively both at federal and regional level.
87. In creating or strengthening a protected area management institution, several principles that have been
developed over time through experiences across the region and from elsewhere, have to be considered:
- There is need for effective coordination – therefore the institution that is set up must have the ability to
coordinate other institutions or partners with mandates complimentary to its own. Cross sectoral
linkages are required in order to have effective management and harmonize conflicting interests. This
institution must be provided with the power (legal back up) to effectively play this role.
- The enabling policy must be in such a way as to remove any conflicting interests.
- It is necessary to create a new institution or strengthen an existing one and give it a place in
government that would allow it to effectively carry out its mandate.
- Protected area management requires political support at both the federal and regional levels. To obtain
this, protected areas must demonstrate the ability to contribute positively and significantly to
government’s policy of socio-economic development and poverty eradication. In view of this, there is
need for close links with government’s agencies charged with economic development and social
planning.
- The protected area management institution needs to command respect among government agencies,
NGOs, international and other partners. Therefore its management both at the top and the protected
area level must have the required skills and professional management ability to create an institution
that is seen as a professional body whose opinions and pronouncements are considered as such.
- The institution should be flexible, able to respond to changing circumstances. Therefore it must be
given some flexibility within the policy and legislation set-up.
133
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
-
The protected area management agency should also be provided with the necessary legal backing to
enforce compliance as far as protected area management and wildlife conservation are concerned.
Capacity Building
88. Capacity building refers to the development of an organization’s core skills and capabilities which
enable it to perform its functions with effectiveness and sustainability. Effective protected area
management calls for capable management, which in turn depends on effective institutions, trained
professionals, and staff with multiple technical skills. The capacity strengthening process gives institutions
both at federal and regional levels the ability to achieve conservation results by ensuring they have the
technical and financial resources required to address the existing challenges.
89. From the analysis carried out, the current system is ineffective due to weak institutional capacity,
inadequate managerial skills and technical capacity, and lack of resources. Building the ability to foster
greater interagency cooperation is also fundamental for a more strategic approach in addressing
conservation priorities.
The Principle of Good Governance
90. Strengthening capacity for protected area management works within the framework of good
governance. This includes aspects like political will and the regulatory framework. Generally speaking,
policy and governance refer to the processes and systems which determine how power is exercised and
how decisions are made. The relevance of these is in how they influence the way protected areas meet
conservation objectives and contribute to socio-economic development.
91. This relatively new concept of governance in the field of conservation and protected area management
can help design planning and management systems compatible with resident or user communities, whose
presence can be regarded as a conservation asset rather than a liability.
92. The aim is to particularly create effective policy makers, managers, enforcers, etc. In general, the
overall target is to attain quality protected area management. In targeting building capacity one must look
at the willingness of stakeholders to develop and reform. This refers not only to the communities currently
resident within and around the protected areas but also government employees and the civil society. The
required reform involves development of social responsibility of all these people. For society to be able to
change, they need to be empowered to do so. Depending on the target group, empowerment comes from
creating public awareness, training, etc.
Policy Implementation and Law Enforcement
93. There is need to build the capacity of those responsible for protected area management not only to be
able to interpret the law but to also enforce it. For example where poaching of endangered species is a
major problem, like it is in Ethiopia, law enforcement is a critical element. However, it should be noted
that many of the factors leading to Ethiopia’s loss of biodiversity and protected area degradation originate
in national government policies that have been formulated without due consideration to the situation on
the ground. These include national development priorities that focus government priorities on other areas
of economic development, to a large extent ignoring protected area management.
94. Enforcement is a key element of policy implementation. In order to ensure that the laws are properly
enforced, there should be encouragement for voluntary compliance. The public must be made aware of
institutional roles and responsibilities and the capacity of enforcement agencies must be built through
training, resource mobilization and networking. There should also be fostering of coordination and sharing
of resources and information among enforcement agencies; empowering regional government agencies
and selected civil society organizations with enforcement capacity and mandates whenever practicable.
134
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Protected Areas and Economic Development
95. All over the world, the value of protected areas is poorly understood. Because of this, they tend to be
greatly under-valued in the markets, by political decision makers and the general public. The commonly
accepted market-based economic values of protected areas are centered on tourism revenues and income
from extractive utilization.
96. This problem of insufficient quantification of the protected area values usually leads to their low
priority when land use decisions are being made. Quantification provides protected area management with
a powerful tool to make a better case for establishing more protected areas and increasing financial and
political support.
97. The capacity for carrying out such valuation in lacking and should be built both through training and
actual hands on experience.
Skills Based Training
98. The capacity building needs vary at the different levels of management. They vary from preparing
high-level staff to develop policy and participate in complex global negotiations to training park guards on
law enforcement issues. As such, there are many different types of skills required to enable effective
protected area management. They range from leadership, fundraising, and scientific knowledge to
administrative expertise in areas such as human resources and bookkeeping.
99. The challenge for capacity building, especially training, for Ethiopia’s protected area management lies
in ensuring that it is taken up by local institutions who are able to provide the required services in the
long-run. Reliance on donor funding to enable personnel undertake external courses is not sustainable
considering that there will always be staff turn-over and the need for continuous updating of skills.
100. The objective for this aspect of protected area management is to provide technical and other
professional staff with the skills required to carry out protected area management. The skills required for
protected area management include Planning, M&E, information management, awareness rising and
education, community conservation and development, tourism development, law enforcement,
collaboration and partnership development.
101. Emphasis here should be on a hands-on approach to skills building. These skills should be imparted
mostly through short courses and on the job training. This is much cheaper and more effective than
support to long term training aimed at achieving academic qualification.
102. There is also need for qualifications in wildlife management, forestry, HR development, business
administration, environmental law, etc. A system should be established to ensure inclusion of protected
area management subjects in the formal education system, through continued inclusion in school
curriculum both at primary and secondary levels.
103. There should be a revision of the job descriptions to suit the revised mandate and to capture the
functions of the new organizations. New recruitment should be undertaken for ALL the jobs, only
retaining those old staff who measure up to the required standards for protected area management. Rather
than trying to build this kind of capacity within the protected area management institution, effort should be
made to obtain staff that is already qualified in these areas. In order to minimize on expenditure for
building staff skills, the policy of “quality at the gate” should be adopted so that as much as possible, the
new organization gets already skilled staff.
135
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Research and Information Management
104. Research should become a central part of protected area management. This can be through capacity
building and strengthening of research institutions e.g. provision of financial and technical support plus
creation of linkages with external research agencies so as to build up research skills in-country.
105. The national policy for protected area management shall promote and support establishment of a
system for dissemination of information, development of positive attitudes and behavior, and a broadbased appreciation and understanding of issues related to biodiversity conservation in general and
protected area management in particular. A central database for information on protected areas should be
established. This information shall be used for decision making and pubic awareness campaigns.
106. This system shall also target the sensitization and training of media personnel to enhance their
capacity to report on protected area management.
Non-Human Resources Capacity
107. Capacity building does not begin and end with human resource development. There is therefore a
need to look at the required infrastructure development and equipment for effective management of the
proposed PASP. Kidane (2005) has attempted to highlight the required resources to some level of detail. It
should be noted however that there is some level of uncertainty with the anticipated change in the
protected area system for Ethiopia.
108. Financial Capacity - Long-term funding is an essential component to enable effective protected area
management. Currently, Ethiopia lacks the mechanisms to ensure adequate funding levels for her
protected area system. Overall, funding for protected areas is exposed to changes within government
priorities and those established by the MoARD. The lack of guaranteed and adequate funding hampers the
ability to develop and implement protected area management plans. Diversification of funding sources is
needed to provide a buffer against unanticipated reduction in funding stemming from shifts in government
and donor priorities.
109. Infrastructure Development - At this stage in the PASP, it would not be prudent to give detailed
recommendations. What can be said here however is that the infrastructure required will include office and
staff housing, ranger outposts, gates into the protected areas, roads for management and tourism and
tourism trails. These are detailed by Kidane (2005) but will need to be reviewed in light of the new PASP
as approved. Lodges and camp site development should be on concession to the private sector so that the
protected area management authority charges a fee for this without having to develop management
capacity for tourism services beyond playing the coordination role.
Existing Opportunities
110. The FDRE is carrying out what is being referred to as the “Business Process Engineering”. A federal
government led process targeting review of the current government system, assessing the current functions
…. ”what is each government agency doing in reality?” … within this process, the WCD is proposed to be
upgraded to an autonomous authority.
111. The EPA is implementing a “National Capacity Needs Self Assessment Program” funded by the GEF,
where the capacity needs of the various sectors are being assessed in regard to environment management.
The objective is to facilitate establishment of environment units in each government ministry.
112. There are several NGOs operating within the sector, including CARE Ethiopia, FARM Africa/SOS
Sahel, Frankfurt Zoological Society, Ethiopian Wildlife & Natural History Society, etc. The efforts of
these partners should be appreciated. They should be formally brought on board, be well coordinated and
some of the protected area management functions delegated to them.
136
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
113. The above opportunities could be taken advantage of and brought into harmony with what this project
aiming to achieve – strengthening protected area management within Ethiopia.
Conclusion
114. The FDRE must recognize that protected areas are only able to contribute to national economic
development if they are managed in a way that compliments their conservation objectives, encourages
their sustainable use and creates linkages with other sectors of the economy. Conditions must be created
that enables the relevant institutions to meet the costs of protected area management. Government
therefore must ensure the necessary legislation and institutional arrangements for protected area
management. The management of protected areas requires partnerships like those described earlier and
cooperation among managers and users. The current situation offers Ethiopia an excellent opportunity to
institute a workable system and explore the potential of collaborative management
Annex 5: Lessons Learned ( Annex 7 in proposal text)
i. The design of the project has incorporated lessons learnt from other Protected Area projects that have
been fully or partially implemented in the past decade. Given the current poor state of the protected areas
of the country, it must be concluded that these projects have mostly failed.
ii. Most recent projects have included a CARE Ethiopia intervention in Awash National Park; an EUfunded project in the National Parks in the Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples Region; a WWFDGIS project in the Bale Mountains; and the ongoing Austrian Development Cooperation project in the
Simien Mountains National Park, and the UNDP project on emergency support to protected areas. The
UNDP-GEF regional project on community conservation for IBAs (NGO – Government Partnerships)
finished two years ago
iii. In contrast to the failures, there have been a few outstanding successes. These have mainly included
some ancient and effective community-based natural resource management systems, such as Guassa-Menz
(Tefera, 2001). Some recent projects have built on the strong community foundations that exist among
many rural communities in Ethiopia, with success. However, the role of the state in the management of
natural resources has yet to be resolved in some instances, with the state being reluctant to fully empower
traditional structures.
iv. “Lessons Learned” links to projects and institutional processes across Africa. We analysed the pattern
of change within Protected Area Institutions, from countries where we have working experience (East
Africa) and from recent GEF project reviews (Zambia, Rwanda). Whilst financially autonomous
parastatals are recognized as institutional modalities of choice (and are followed here), they are not
without their own internal and external problems. The past five years’ politicizations of Kenya’s Wildlife
Services demonstrates many potential pitfalls. Project management must be aware of this. We note that in
the last 1-2 years the GEF has funded several Protected Areas “BD1” projects – six in Anglophone Africa
(Namibia via Kwa-Zulu Natal and Zambia to Rwanda and Uganda, and this Ethiopian proposal). This
provides sufficient critical mass for a Knowledge Management Network of Project Managers, linked to
GEF process. The GEF IW programme – I Learn offers a useful model.
TABLE 15. SUMMARY OF THE LESSONS LEARNT FROM THE INTERVENTIONS THAT
HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN PROTECTED AREAS. ALSO INCLUDED ARE COMMUNITYBASED PROJECTS IN DISCRETE AREAS THAT FOCUS ON SUSTAINABLE NATURAL
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.
Intervention
Lessons learnt
Summary
of
many Inappropriate definition of the optimal role of the “state”, including both
unsuccessful projects
central and local government.
Duality and parallel systems of state and local communities leading to
profound disconnect between state and local communities
Poor linkages among projects – no coordination, little sharing of experience
137
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Guassa-Menz
National Parks Trust Fund
– UNDP support
WWF-DGIS
Mountains Project
Bale
CARE Ethiopia (Awash
National Park)
EU Southern Region Parks
(various national parks)
UNDP Emergency Park
Rehabilitation
(various
national parks)
FARM Africa /SOS Sahel
(Borana – Chilimo –
Bonga forest projects)
or knowledge, no partnerships, active (but destructive) competition among
projects. No complementarity in activity meant that each intervention was
seeking its own enabling environment.
Little or no monitoring and evaluation attached to interventions
Ancient (c. 17th Century) and effective community-based natural resource
management system rehabilitated. Noting the robust and resilient nature of
the system, except for decline during social and land tenure upheaval of the
Agrarian Reform of 1975.
Little buy in from weak institutional structure in government; responsible
people moving on to other jobs/positions – no institutional sustainability or
planning.
Poor institutional planning undermined the implementation of the project,
particularly the inadequate linkages: federal – region – protected area
organizations. The inappropriate placement of project in the federal
organization did not allow successful implementation. More of the project
should have been seated in the regional organization, mandated to manage
Bale. Project HQ was therefore in Addis Ababa, not in field.
Project staff with inappropriate skills to plan and implement participatory
forest management.
Unwieldy, large Project Advisory Team led to conflicting advice, this
coupled with an inappropriate decision making structure with little
autonomy in the field and no monitoring or evaluation procedures led to no
impact or sustainability
The inefficiencies and ineffectiveness of working in isolation of other
development actors
The need to have considerable committed presence on the ground
Limited linkages between development components and natural resource
conservation
Poor planning of intervention
Leadership with poor experience in Integrated Conservation and
Development Projects and Community-Based Natural Resource
Management
Capacity building should be related to operational requirements
Need for adequate monitoring and evaluation
Poor linkages with park management authority, lack of continuity with
EWCO meant there was no assignment of single, mandated counterpart to
lead the project. Complex interplay between conservation and development
forces, with weak national leadership.
Poor planning; and limited stakeholder participation
Hiatus through decentralization process, and management and training gains
were dissipated.
Poor planning processes leading to inadequate intervention: much of the
infrastructure put into place was not effectively used by parks, some remains
unfinished.
Good stakeholder identification, negotiation and agreement over use of
natural resources
Proved that community-based forest management is possible even in areas
where pressures are extremely high
Proved that working with tradition structures and management systems is
possible; however, government not ready to legitimize and empower
tradition community structures
138
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
GTZ – Adaba-Dodola
project (Bale Mountains)
French
Cooperation
(Yangudi-Rassa NP)
JICA
Austrian
Development
Cooperation
(Simien
Mountains National Park)
Swiss
(Simien)
Cooperation
SIDA (Orgut) support to
CBNRM in Amhara
UNDP-GEF
NGO
Government Partnership
Project (Regional)
Ethiopian
Wolf
Conservation Programme
Previous
attempt
to
establish a Trust Fund
Past New York Zoological
Society (WCS)
Parastatals have failed
elsewhere in Africa. What
are the lessons to ensure
the organization does not
fail in Ethiopia
Focus on long-term benefits rather than short-term costs when use of
resources becomes regulated
Non participatory infrastructure development (grinding mills, clinics, etc),
which was not used and thus wasted
Giving community ownership of natural resources fosters regulation and
protection seemed successful (but model of giving each household 12.5ha
may not be applicable elsewhere; in addition, non-members were excluded
and lost access and user rights – leading to displacement and intensified use
in adjacent areas – thus, more rapid degradation). Legal framework is
essential for security of local communities.
Establishing ‘boundaries’ requires the input and involvement of a number of
government organizations.
Heavily-dependent on external technical advice and funding
No expansion in adjacent non-project areas
Private-community (tourism) partnership should have been initiated from
the outset (not tried post hoc)
Project never started because of changing commitments of French
Cooperation and because of realized lack of capacity to monitor and
evaluate the project. Lack of effective follow-up with the donor by EWCO
Input of JICA volunteers showed that good people could achieve but only
sustainable if integrated into the overall protected area management system.
No planned exit strategy, and little monitoring and evaluation of
management effectiveness in its first stages – Now Improved.
Little attempt to redefine the role of the state in the management of the area,
include no attempts to form partnerships with the local communities
Limited stakeholder analysis or negotiation for access to or use of resources
Whilst there were some strong technical achievements, the project was
dogged by poor relationships with government for some time, as donors
were over-critical in demanding change.
Showed success where there were sufficient incentives for communities to
get really involved.
Showed the success of community based initiatives at 2 out of 3 field sites,
and showed importance of community capacity building and furnishing
incentives for conservation.
Good public-civil society partnership
Good planning; sustainable financing
The previous attempt to establish a Trust Fund in Ethiopia failed primarily
because it was made the responsibility of one person. When that person was
transferred within the government system, the Trust Fund portfolio was not
transferred either with him or to another person.
Inadequate stakeholder participation and state-centric approach
Following extensive analysis, we conclude that establishing a parastatal
organization is the optimum option available to ensure: i) the ability to be
largely or completely self-financing, ii) improve management through
results-based activities and financing, iii) more participatory (both within
the administration as well as at a site level), including through a
management board, iv) more accountable (through the results-based
management, performance related indicators and through financial
transparency), v) their capacity to enter into legal contracts, vi) freedom
from government human resource management, and vii) their capacity to
139
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
monitor and evaluate performance. The principal objective of forming a
parastatal organization is to improve sustainability by making the
organization independent of the vicissitudes and vagaries of the
government.
A parastatal organization will enhance the management effectiveness of the
protected area system by introducing business planning principles. Indeed,
in recognition of the lack of business planning in the civil service, over the
past eighteen months, the government of Ethiopia has initiated a “Business
Planning Review” within its agencies. The aim is to improve service
delivery. Thus, this project pre-empts the changes from the conclusions of
the review within the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. That
the government is driving this process enhances sustainability and country
driveness.
The majority of sub-Saharan African countries have opted to move towards
a parastatal organization to manage their protected area systems. However,
there are lessons to be learnt from these, including:
1.
In the past year, the Board of TANAPA, the Tanzanian protected
area parastatal organization, has become too executive (rather than
advisory) and thus too unwieldy and powerful. To avoid such a situation,
the Board, as with all other institutional arrangements, will have clearly
defined Terms of Reference. In addition, their performance will be
monitored and evaluated against performance related indicators that will, in
turn, be related directly to the management effectiveness of the protected
area system (primarily through the METT).
2.
The Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS), the Kenyan protected area
parastatal organization, has been running efficiently until recently when it
has become highly politicized. The very purpose of the Board (and
stakeholder participation at a site level) is to counteract such politicization
of the protected area system.
3.
Extensive institutional analysis in Uganda led to the formation of
UWA, the Ugandan parastatal organization for the protected area system.
The GEF/WB project to achieve sustainability within the system concludes
that there is no other alternative to ensure business planning principles are
adopted. Indeed, the only other alternative is for the protected area
organization to remain unchanged within the government system. This has
proven to be highly ineffective at managing the protected area system58.
Botswana is one country where the protected area authority still remains
within the mainstream government system – thus, it has not become a
parastatal organization. However, the government of Botswana operates
under similar business principles to those of parastatal organizations
elsewhere in sub-Saharan Africa and, thus, the institutional restructuring
was not necessary.
Annex 6: Demonstration sites (Annex 8 in proposal text)
1. Four sites have been selected to demonstrate the innovative management partnerships proposed in this
project document. They were selected on the basis of the following criteria: i) they all had partnerships
58
Bill Farmer (consultant to PAMSU, the GEF/WB project with UWA), pers. comm. to Alan Rodgers.
140
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
either in place or in the process of being negotiated, ii) they all had secure co-financing and were therefore
not reliant on GEF funding, and iii) they all encompass important elements of biodiversity, ecosystems
and/or ecological processes.
Bale Mountains Project
Biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes
2. The Bale Mountains harbors the finest and most intact remnant of the Highland’s original vegetation
and the largest patch of Afroalpine ecosystem on the continent (2,067km² or 17.5% of all Afroalpine areas
on the continent; S.D. Williams & I. May, unpubl. data). There are 1,321 species of flowering plants, 163
of which are Highland endemics, including the 27 Bale endemics (e.g., Euryops prostratus, Gladiolus
balensis, Maytenus harenensis, and Solanecio harennensis). The Bale Mountains also contain more than
half the global populations of both the Ethiopian wolf and mountain nyala. Of the mammals that have
been recorded in the Bale Mountains, 26% are Ethiopian endemics (including the Bale monkey, Starck’s
hare, Lepus starcki, and eight species of rodent, including the Bale endemics – the giant molerat, the
unstriped grass rat, Arvicanthis blicki, and harsh furred mouse, Lophuromys melanoyx). Among several
rare endemic amphibians, there are four species found in Bale alone, including one monotypic, endemic
genus, the Bale Mountains narrow-mouthed frog (Balebreviceps hillmani, EN) (Largen, 2001), and there
are two chameleons that are Bale endemics (Largen, 1995; M. Largen and S. Spawls, pers. comm.). The
conclusion is that if conservation efforts in the Bale Mountains are not successful and people continue to
exploit the resources in an unsustainable way, more species of mammal (and the analysis remains to be
done for other taxa) would go extinct than any other area of equivalent size on the globe (J. Malcolm,
pers. comm.).
3. Being a highland area, the distribution of fauna and flora is sharply associated with altitude. The
treeline is dominated by Hagenia abyssinica and Hypericum revoltum. Above this, the heathland scrub is
dominated by the heathers such as Erica arborea. Besides the red-hot pokers of the genus Kniphofia, a
distinctive feature of the vegetation in this zone is the giant Lobelia rynchopetalum, which is particularly
characteristic of Afroalpine vegetation. However, the flora is not sharply delineated from that of the
ericaceous belt at slightly lower altitudes (Davis et al., 1994).
4. At the southern end of the Bale Mountains lies the enigmatic Herenna forest. The altitudinal cline on
which the forest grows has resulted in marked vegetation belts. The uppermost belt is dominated by
Rapanea and tree heathers, while the moist slopes of the Herenna forest are typified by a shrubby zone of
Hagenia and Schefflera growing alongside with giant lobelias, Lobelia gibberrosa. Dense stands of
mountain bamboo (Arundinaria alpina) are also found. Below 2,400m, clouds and localized rain support a
dense, moist forest, with trees over 30 m tall, their branches covered with epiphytes. While the Herenna
forest appears to be relatively impoverished, it does harbor endemic species, many of which are at the
higher altitudes. These include the Bale monkey (Cercopithecus djamdjamensis), a little known endemic
primate, and a rich endemic amphibian fauna (Largen, 2001). The very lowest and driest part of Herenna
serves as an example of the sort of forest that once covered a much larger part of Ethiopia (Kingdon,
1989).
Protected areas
5. The Bale Mountains area or landscape contains four different land uses that could be defined as being
‘protected.’ These are: i) the Bale Mountains National Park, which, because of the above factors, is the
single most important conservation area that has been proposed in The Ethiopian Highlands, ii) three
hunting concession areas with further areas under consideration, iii) the Adaba-Dodola community-based
natural resource management system (WAJIB developed with the assistance of GTZ), and iv) a number of
forest priority areas.
141
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
6. Following the redefinition of the areas, there will be a core conservation (which may remain to be
called the Bale Mountains National Park), community-based protected areas, and limited harvesting areas
(incorporating the sport hunting areas and potential timber harvesting areas).
Partnerships
7. There are a number of partnerships that operate in the area. First, the Bale Mountains Natural
Resource Project includes a partnership among the Oromiya Regional State, FARM Africa/SOS Sahel and
Frankfurt Zoological Society with the objective of increasingly including other stakeholders and
particularly the local communities in the planning and management of natural resources and the area. The
interventions are funded by a consortium of bilateral donors (the Netherlands Embassy, the Norwegian
Embassy and Development Cooperation Ireland) and FZS. Second, the hunting concession areas are
operated by their respective private companies. Third, the area adjacent to the project area includes the
Adaba-Dolola WAJIB community-based natural resource management system.
8. The development represents the good practice model (when private sector not involved), including:
a. developing and establishing partnerships among government, civil society, communities
and donors
b. developing conservation targets as the main objective of the protected area, with the
livelihood of communities living in the areas around the core conservation areas
c. working to identify stakeholders in the area, negotiating with the stakeholders on access to
and use of resources, including the responsibility that accompanies this; the baseline of
current levels of access and use of resources is not negotiable as they are not sustainable.
Nech Sar National Park
Biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes
9. Nech Sar National Park includes two ecosystems of importance: i) the Rift Valley lakes, namely Lakes
Chamo and Abaya and ii) the Acacia woodland and savannah mosaic. It contains a small number of
Swayne’s hartebeest but also has populations of plains zebras, greater kudu and Nile crocodiles.
10. It contains two endemic species of bird, including the Nech Sar nightjar, known only from one wing.
11. It also has important hot springs and a groundwater forest.
Protected areas
12. The area is focused on the Nech Sar National Park. This currently stands at 514km² but there are
proposals to extend the area.
13. The area was proposed in 1967 with the boundary being described in 1975 but it is not currently
gazetted.
Partnership
14. The management of Nech Sar National Park has been transferred to African Parks (Ethiopia) Ltd. for a
25-year period in the first instance with the option of a 15-year extension.
15. In financial terms, the company retains all rights to accrue revenue, but once they show profits, 33%
will be paid to the government up to the first US$ 1 million; thereafter, 49% will be paid to the
government
16. The development represents the good practice model when private sector is involved.
142
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Omo National Park
Biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes
17. Omo National Park is found in the southwest of the country and falls within the broad ecosystem area
of the Acacia-Commpihora bush- and shrublands with elements from the Somali and Northern eco-region.
It has riparian woodlands, savannah and deciduous woodlands.
18. It is of less international biodiversity value, but contains important populations of common eland,
tiang, elephant, giraffe and buffaloes.
Protected areas
19. The area is focused on the Omo National Park but the area borders on Mago National Park and Tama
Wildlife Reserve. This currently stands at 4,068km².
20. The area was proposed in 1963 and established in 1966 with the boundary being described in 1975 but
it is not currently gazetted.
Partnership
21. The agreement to confer the management of Omo National Park to African Parks (Ethiopia) Ltd. is
currently under discussion with the Government of Ethiopia. The agreement is expected to be signed
within the coming month.
22. With Nech Sar National Park, the development represents the good practice model when private sector
is involved.
23. There are important local community issues with scared sites and livelihood resource needs found
within the current nominal boundaries – thus, requiring redefining the boundaries or negotiating regulated
level of access to and use of resources in protected area.
Guassa-Menz Community Protected Area
Biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes
24. The Guassa-Menz area of North Shoa is found on the Rift Valley escarpment over 3,100m ASL. It is
therefore a patch of Afroalpine ecosystem – and specifically, Afroalpine grassland and moorland with a
suite of endemic fauna and flora. It harbors an important population of Ethiopian wolves.
25. It is also an important water catchment area for the Great Abbai river (later forming the Blue Nile).
Protected areas
26. Local communities implemented a sustainable natural resource management system in the area in the
17th Century. The system, known as Qero, allowed equitable use and distribution of natural resources
(thatching grass, fuelwood and grazing) that were, and still are, important for the livelihood security of the
community. By regulating exploitation of the area, the management system has also effectively protected
the biodiversity of the Afroalpine ecosystem of the Guassa-Menz area.
27. When the Qero arose, it was supported by the authority of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, a powerful
component of this ancient society. The system declined in 1975 as a result of the Agrarian Reform of
1975, which was introduced under the socialist regime that came to power in the revolution of 1974.
People that were previously excluded from resource use gained uncontrolled access through their
constituent peasant association. When it became apparent that the resource management system was
declining under the land tenure reform, the community responded by establishing the Guassa Committee,
known locally as Idir. The Committee retained significant community representation, but was deemed
acceptable to the political and social order of the socialist regime. The remarkable adaptation and
143
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
subsequent persistence of the system suggests that it is stable and resilient in the face of significant
political change (Tefera, 2001)
Partnership
28. The revival of the natural resource management system in recent years was assisted by the Ethiopian
Wolf Conservation Programme that stems out of the University of Oxford, UK. Much of this work has
been assumed by the FZS under the same project leader, Dr Zelealem Tefera. A management plan for the
area has been developed and the recognition of the area and its management system is being sought from
the Amhara National Regional State.
29. The project is currently being financed by FZS but it is notable that the incentive for local
communities is not monetary; the incentive is to gain access and user rights, with accompanying
management responsibilities, of the area. Thus, there is currently no financial sustainable plan – because
the management of the area does not demand funds. The regulation of use of the area is carried out by the
community themselves – thus, use of the resources is benefit enough to ensure regulation.
The area is scenically outstanding and therefore there is the possibility – currently being explored – of
establishing a private-community partnership for tourism development. This would provide an added
incentive for the local community to sustainably manage the area.
144
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Annex 7: Sustainable Financing Options for Ethiopian
protected areas59 (Annex 9 in proposal text)
1. The purpose of biodiversity conservation in Ethiopia is to sustain the local, national and global value
of Ethiopia’s biodiversity resources. This, however, usually costs money. Funds must therefore be found
to manage the country’s biodiversity resources.
2. The Strategic Priority BD 1 of GEF sees financial sustainability as a key part of an overall sustainable
protected area system. Financial sustainability is defined broadly as when incomes or revenues are
sufficient to meet realistic management needs covering both capital and recurrent costs. Achieving such
financial sustainability therefore needs some balancing of the books – which in itself means an
understanding of incomes and outgoing expenditures. This inevitably requires some level of a business
planning approach to Protected Area Management. Business planning can be at each individual Protected
Area (where each Park balances its books) or at the system level or a combination of the two. This
Protected Areas project addresses financing at the overall system level, and recommends the development
of a Business Plan philosophy and use of business plans within the administration of the sector, as well as
at the site level.
3. One of the key aspects of sustainability is the chicken-and-egg mutual interdependence of protected
area management and tourism development, typical of most African countries.60 Two main types of
investments are needed – investments in enforcement and protected area management to restore wildlife
populations; and investments in infrastructure and promotion that are needed for tourism development.
4. This project will develop tools, including a rationalization, reclassification and protected area system
plan that will strategically guide investments in these two areas. These tools will be developed so that the
investment resources available can have maximum impact on biodiversity conservation of priority sites
and high impacts on tourism development and poverty reduction through management systems and
partnerships that are as financially sustainable as possible.
5. Project activities have been specifically designed to accelerate the uptake of good management
practices across the protected area estate. This cannot be achieved all at once, but in a carefully sequenced
manner, progressively seeking to ensure sound management effectiveness in all priority protected areas.
The assessment and economic analysis of protected area management effectiveness will focus on
identifying the forms of protected area management partnerships that are financially the most efficient,
that provide the greatest incentives for protected area managers and that are financially self-sustainable.
Some promising forms of partnerships will be tested in the demonstration sites. The development of a
clear policy framework for public/private/civil society/community partnerships will simplify and render
transparent the entry conditions for potential private and community protected area management partners.
6. The project will build on Ethiopia’s fledgling experience with public-private partnerships for
management of national parks - seeking to expand on this to also bring local communities into the public/
private partnerships within the redefined protected areas. The overall plan to be developed will seek to
better define the state’s roles and responsibilities in conformity with their absorptive capacity and in line
with the assessed potential for self-financing of protected areas that they will manage in the absence of
partnerships. The government’s commitment to the policy reforms specified in this document and their
timely approval will be key elements to sustainability.
Note – this is based on a collaborative report by regional and national consultant expertise in the PDF B process.
This will be available as a full report.
60
This interdependence will be the subject of analysis across many African countries, within a developing GEFUNEP project “APAI” or African Parks Initiative.
59
145
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
7. The identification of tourism as the one of the highest priority sector in the forthcoming SDPRP II will
contribute to sustainability through increased investments in the sector resulting in increased tourist entry
fees and other sources of revenue that provide incentives and cover protected area management costs
(details below). Preliminary analyses conducted as part of project preparation indicate that investments in
protected areas management can be financially viable in Ethiopia. The project will continue to refine the
conditions under which different forms of management and of management partnerships will yield
positive returns on investments and will use this information to mobilize new management partnerships.
8. In line with the provisions of the CBD, Ethiopia has developed a National Biodiversity Strategy and
Action Plan (NBSAP) (UNDP - GoE, 2005)61. The draft NBSAP indicates that Ethiopia has a large
potential for tourism revenue generation for most protected areas (IBC, 2004; Ethiopian Tourism
Commission, 2002; Muramira and Wood, 2003). The report indicates that tourist receipts are considerable,
with 1998 figures indicating total receipts at about ETB 230.16 million. The report also indicated that the
receipts were growing at the rate of 26 percent per annum. While this level of increase is probably not
sustainable (particularly because of the Eritrea-Ethiopia war in 1998-2000), with a more realistic growth
rate, tourism could make significant contributions to the national economy62.
9. Despite the degree to which biodiversity conservation – and protected areas in particular – have been
marginalized from the development context in Ethiopia, the protected areas have, somewhat surprisingly,
been largely subsidized by the government, albeit at very low rates (at an average of US$ 30/km2/year
across all protected areas). [In contrast, it is interesting to note that the funding from the Amhara Regional
State for the Simien Mountains National Park (SMNP) for 2003/04 is, in fact, in excess of the sub-Saharan
average of US$ 230/km²; this reflects a 45% increase in funding for the SMNP from previous years.] But
despite the potential capacity to generate internal revenue, no protected area in Ethiopia is covering its
recurrent costs (although SMNP is very close to doing so). In part, this has led to further marginalization
of the sector.
10. Factors such as poor management effectiveness, poor use of the available budgets, inadequate
planning, poor human resources management and an absence of results-driven financing have meant that
even the meagre funding for protected areas has been badly used. This has resulted in calls for periodic
emergency injections of funding from the donor community for protected area rehabilitation. For
example, previous support has been provided by UNDP provided support (1996 -2003) to the tune of US$
1.3 million for emergency conservation support to Bale Mountains, Simien Mountains, Abiatta Shalla and
Awash National Parks and Senkele Swayne’s Hartebeest Sanctuary; WWF-UK provided US$ 72,000 for
conservation activities in the Bale Mountains National Park; the Netherlands Government provided US$
1.74 million for conservation activities through WWF in Bale Mountain National Park; the Austrian
Development Cooperation provided US$0.87 (fourth stage) to support integrated protected areas
management and community development initiatives for the Simien Mountains National Park; while
CARE-Ethiopia funded an Integrated Conservation and Development Project in the Awash National Park.
11. This annex analyzes the potential of a number of financing mechanisms to support sustainably
protected areas management in Ethiopia.
Funding Mechanisms and Instruments for the Management of the Protected Areas of Ethiopia
12. This section will highlight both existing and potential funding mechanisms for the management of the
protected areas of Ethiopia. The discussion of the funding mechanisms is done within in four broad
sections including:
61
Being printed in September 2005.
Derived from estimates by Muramira and Wood (2003).Ethiopia’s National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan.
Economic and Option Assessment. Institute of Biodiversity Conservation and Research (IBCR), Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
62
146
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
(i)
(ii)
public funding from the treasury by leveraging equity, grants or credit;
internally generated revenue from ecotourism and tourism fees, levies and payments for
ecosystem services,
(iii)
fund raised resources pooled as grants, trust funds and,
(iv)
private capital flows
13. Revenue or income to the protected area system comes from several sources. The most important of
these are: i) Government Allocation or Contribution at National or Federal Level, ii) Government
Allocation or Contribution at State or Regional Level. Note that currently all tourism revenues (gate fees,
camping fees etc) and hunting fees go to the federal or regional treasuries and not back into protected
areas. This is of course no inventive to managers to increase revenues!
14. This income comes in three categories: i) funding for salaries for substantative posts, ii) funding for
recurrent expenditures such as travel, vehicle running, and iii) funding for developmental infrastructure
such as new vehicles, new scout posts, staff housing etc. Training opportunities such as scholarships may
be an occasional extra category (e.g., overseas MSc degrees, Mweka Diplomas etc).
15. At the federal level, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development provides funds for central
administration costs (the old EWCO and now the WCD in Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development), plus management costs for four protected areas. These are protected areas are those which
straddle regional state boundaries: Awash National Park, Babile Elephant Sanctuary, Senkelle Swayne’s
hartebeest sanctuary and Yangudi-Rassa National Park.
16. The funding to regionally managed protected areas comes from the federal ‘grant’ to each regional
state; thereafter, the allocation to the administration and protected areas is decided by the regional state
government themselves.
17. In contrast, expenditures can be classified in several ways. First, the ACTUAL expenditure, which is
the amount of funding received from the government for the protected areas. Second, is the requested
amount in the form of a BUDGET. Finally, there is the estimate of what efficient and effective
management would cost.
Public Funding from the Treasury
18. Public funding (thus, revenues provided by the state) for protected areas may be the easiest leveraged
and most reliable source of funds for Ethiopia’s protected areas. In part, this is because protected areas
should be net generators of income and jobs (particularly important in the marginal areas in which the
protected areas are found) – but they can only be so after sustained investment and support from their
governments (Scholes et al., 2005).
19. Public funding may be leveraged as equity from the national treasury, or as grants or loans from
donors. Public funding, however, requires visibility of the sector with clear demonstration of the sector’s
potential to contribute to economic growth and poverty reduction (Emerton and Muramira 1999). There
are two primary ways in which these contributions may come in: i) through revenue generated from taxes,
levies, fees or other payments, and ii) from savings, usually long-term, through the protection of
environmental services (see below).
20. Muramira and Wood (2003) estimated that tourist receipts, tourist accommodation, transport and
miscellaneous purchases contributed over ETB 2.3 billion to the economy in 1998 (thus, greater than 10%
of GNP). However, little effort has been made to make accurate estimates on an annual basis of these
figures – and it is probable that the contribution is proportionally greater at present. As a consequence of
the lack of information, no effort has been made to communicate these figures to policy and decision
makers despite the fact that doing so would greatly improve the visibility of the sector. Sectoral visibility
147
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
is clearly an important criterion in prioritizing sectors during budget allocations (Sgobi and Muramira,
2003).
21. There is another, effectively public, mechanism for funding protected areas: Debt for Nature Swaps.
This allows bilateral donors to write off debt on the condition that the government provides some
proportion of the funding that it would have otherwise used for servicing the debt for the protection on the
environment – in this case, for protected area management. The Ministry of Finance and Economic
Development (MoFED) Debt Department reported that the majority of Ethiopia’s debt had been written
off (as a HIPC), but that five debts were outstanding with one country and four banks. The Ethiopian
government was happy for the project to take up negotiations with these lenders to form Debt for Nature
Agreements – on the condition that over 92% of the debt was written off. Under this mechanism, instead
of servicing the remaining debt with the lender, the lender would agree that the country could use the
equivalent of the debt service in local currency for protected area management.
Internally Generated Revenue Tourism and Eco-Tourism Based
22. Ethiopia’s share of tourist arrivals to Africa is still low compared to Kenya or Tanzania where tourism
has been nurtured over a much longer time. Tourist receipts (thus, unlike the analysis above, do not
include many of the other revenue generated from tourism) are, therefore, correspondingly low and are
estimated at ETB 3.76 million in 2003 (US$ 470,000) mostly from park entry fees and sport hunting. This
can be compared with about US$ 650 million for Tanzania in the same year63. But this is only park entry
fees and sport hunting, which, with appropriate reforms (a marketing study would indicate that there is a
‘willingness-to-pay’ higher rates64, if these were related to park management and growth), will grow.
TABLE 16. PROTECTED AREA REVENUE GENERATION ESTIMATES-PARK ENTRY FEES
1999 - 2003
Year
Awash Simien
Abiatta Bale
Gambella Omo Nechsar Mago
TOTAL
NP
MNP
Shalla
MNP
NP
NP
NP
NP
Eth Birr
1999
117,719 120,857
50,428 53,047 62,480
53,803 458,334
2000
175,053 120,303
77,278 64,886 2,003 67,587
91,450 598,560
2001
104,148 136,608
77,609 55,220 1,280 58,398
66,297 499,560
2002
119,395 302,614
102,060 55,000 161
4,970 148,420 178,462 911,082
2003
138,528 346,771
53,849 1,209
980
218,409 759,720
TOTAL 654,843 1,027,153 361,224 228,153 1,370
9,233 555,294 390,012 3,227,276
Source: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Wildlife Conservation Department, Addis
Ababa.,
TABLE 17. TOURISM ENTRANCE FEE PAYMENT STRUCTURE FOR VARIOUS
PROTECTED AREAS IN ETHIOPIA
National
Types of Entrance fees
Fees
Fees (S
Hours stay
Parks
(Birr)
US)
Foreigners
70.00
8.10
48
Ethiopians (Nationals)
10.00
1.25
48
63
These figures should be considered in context: the Tanzanian figure represents all tourism associated receipts,
while that for Ethiopia represents only park entrance and sport hunting fees. As indicated above, total tourism
receipts in Ethiopia in 1998 was estimated to be approximately US$ 26.8 million.
64
While there may be a ‘willingness-to-pay’ higher rates, the challenge of sustainable financing is to cover
sustainably the ‘consumer surplus’ – thus, the difference between the amount that consumers (in this case visitors)
are willing to pay, and the actual cost of managing the protected area.
148
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Local People
5.00
0.65
48
Camping
20.00
2.50
48
Mogo &
Vehicle fee up to 6 personal
20.00
2.50
48
Nechsar
Vehicle Fee above 6 Personal
40.00
5.00
48
Travel agent (Nationals)
30.00
3.60
48
Travel agent (Foreigner)
60.00
7.20
48
Scouts for accompanying tourists
50.00
6.00
48
-Adult
3.00
0.40
48
- Child
2.00
0.25
48
Omo
A) Ethiopian per person
Abiyata &
B) Foreign Resident
Bale
-Adult
30.00
3.60
48
Senkele
- Child
10.00
1.25
48
-Adult
50.00
6.00
48
- Child
25.00
3.00
48
C) Tourist /personal
TABLE 18. REVENUE GENERATION - SPORT HUNTING PERMITS 1998- 2004
Year
Wildlife
Oromia
SNNPR
Afar
TOTAL
Conservation
Eth Birr
Department
1998
272,334
689,454
550,087
303,686
1,815,561
1999
358,921
718,105
444,552
324,223
1,845,801
2000
242,387
650,982
213,494
295,846
1,402,709
2001
429,838
1,330,046
526,551
468,375
2,754,810
2002
445,807
1,535,565
395,974
11,397
2,988,744
2003
458,139
1,521,197
398,100
24,153
3,001,591
2004
414,516
67,205
552,668
29,032
2,763,443
TOTAL
2621.942
6512,554
3081,426
1456,712
20,234,021
Source: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Wildlife Conservation Department, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
23. The above revenue capacity, though still modest, demonstrates that with stepped up investments and
innovative ideas, particularly in tourism infrastructure including tourist accommodation (within protected
areas – there is no functional accommodation within a protected area in Ethiopia!), hotels, lodges, bandas,
roads and advertising, the tourism sector in Ethiopia could greatly improve. In addition, protected areas
could market the unique opportunities of viewing endemic or charismatic species (e.g., visits to Ethiopian
wolf dens; visits to hides at lammergeyer feeding sites; safaris to observe African wild asses and Grevy’s
zebras; ornithological tours to see the endemic avifauna). It is also extraordinarily apparent that the
current hunting license for mountain nyalas is extraordinarily undervalued – but that the numbers being
harvested at present are unsustainable. Indeed, mountain nyalas are the most threatened large mammal
still being sold on a sport hunting license in the world. This in itself could be used as a marketing tool: a
149
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
small number of animals (say, four) could be auctioned each year in exclusive safaris, with a reserve of,
say, US$ 80,00065. This is simply a question of marketing.
24. However, there are a number of challenges to this optimistic view that need to be addressed. They
touch on the institutional setups in the sector, the institutional capacity, and basic marketing expertise,
plans or strategy for the sector. This project will therefore, need to fund a restructuring exercise aimed at
re-engineering the sector into a modern and upbeat one, with new and appropriate staff expertise in
business planning, tourism development and marketing, and conservation economics. Once this is done
and the Ethiopian tourism sector is in tandem with the other tourism sectors in the region, a regional
approach to tourism circuit development can be adopted to further benefit Ethiopia’s tourism revenue
generation potential.
Payment for Ecosystem Services
25. Other sources of internally generated revenue include payments for ecosystem services including
payments for carbon sequestration, watershed protection, biodiversity conservation and bio-prospecting.
These funding mechanisms are now well understood at the international level, but have yet to be explored
in Ethiopia.
Carbon sequestration
26. Payments for carbon sequestration are now online following the coming into force of the Kyoto
Protocol on Wednesday 16 February, 2005and the establishment of the European Emissions Trading
System (ETS).66
Box 1. Carbon Sequestration Potentials
The recent coming into force of the Kyoto protocol and signing by Russia brings online a big
opportunity for carbon trading. A carbon credits market place was launched in Hong Kong early this
year, followed by an e-based market information system called the Ecosystems Market Place. These
mechanisms for the sale of both carbon storage and conservation (off-market) and reforestation,
afforestation and clean energy (on-market) carbon, could be explored as potential sources of funds for
protected areas management and conservation activities. Source: The Ecosystems Place, Issue 15, 2005.
e-based Newsletter of the Katoomba Group
27. Analysis during the NBSAP process estimated a total annual carbon sequestration value of Ethiopia’s
forest area (including all protected areas) at US$ 73.5 billion (Muramira and Wood, 2003). This amount of
money indicates the bargain the Ethiopian Government has in her argument for international financing of
protected area management in the country.
Watershed Management
28. The Abbai (Blue Nile) river watershed covers an area of over 250,000km² of the land area of Ethiopia.
This includes both the Semien Mountains and the Guassa-Menz areas. Only 180 km2 of this entire
watershed falls within a protected area (of any definition); this is in the Semien Mountains National Park.
Recently a further 150 km2 has been proposed to be added to the protected area estate as the Guassa-Menz
protected area. If this succeeds, the total protected area within the Blue Nile watershed area will then
increase to 330km². Nonetheless, this represents only 0.13% of the total watershed area – despite the fact
that it is this part of the country that slopes are steepest and most fragile.
29. While watershed management and protection can take many forms, its basis – as with protected areas
– is the regulation of human activities to ensure environmental values are not eroded or degraded.
Protected areas can form the foundation in two key areas of watershed management: i) the areas in which
the majority of the rainfall occurs (thus, by ensuring that indigenous vegetation remains intact, the
65
This favourably compares with black rhino hunting in southern Africa with asking fees of over US$ 200,000.
Updates on carbon credits performance, value and sales may be obtained from the e-based Newsletter, The
Ecosystem Market Place see http/www.ecosystemsmarketplace. com/
66
150
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
protected area, first, keeps the water clean and, second, regulates its flow – thereby reducing seasonal
variation or flooding), and ii) protection of fragile areas (thus, by regulating human use of fragile areas,
erosion and associated loss of soil is reduced).
30. The main challenge to increase the cover of protected areas as a form of watershed management is
availability of funds to offset the short-term opportunity costs of the decision against the long-term need to
ensure the environmental stability of the watershed. The costs also include developing sustainable
livelihoods among communities that incur the short-term opportunity costs. Therefore, this decision
should be taken with the participation and agreement of stakeholders, including local communities;
without such agreement, the regulations will not be enforceable.
31. Considerable work has gone into developing watershed based negotiations for fundraising tie-ins for
hydro-electricity, clean water supplies, beverages and beer sales in a number of countries including
Tanzania, Indonesia and the Philippines.67
32. As part of the project preparation process, discussions were held with the World Bank and the
Norwegian Embassy in Ethiopia regarding the potential to link the upcoming hydro-electric developments
on the Abbai, the sustainable land management program and the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) to the
development, establishment and management of protected areas. This has been accepted in principle.
33. Further, the NBI provides a good platform and funding opportunity for tie-in negotiations for transboundary protected area negotiations.
Biodiversity Conservation and Bio-Prospecting
34. This section will focus on rent capture from commercial use of biodiversity resources in
pharmaceutical, industrial and agricultural businesses as a mechanism for raising funds for biodiversity
conservation68.
35. Ethiopia has a large potential for her biological resources and ecosystems to be used in the recreation,
pharmaceutical, industrial and agricultural advances of the future. The country is one of the centers of
plant domestication and is therefore a primary source of original genetic material for key crops including
coffee, teff and khat, among others (Muramira and Wood, 2003). Various studies actually indicate that the
partial global value of the conservation of crop genotypes for coffee alone is about US$ 0.5-1.5 billion per
year69.
36. The CBD prescribes mechanisms that countries can apply to recover the benefits to the global
community of the pharmaceutical, industrial and agricultural use of biodiversity sourced from their
biodiversity stocks. This project should determine which of these CBD mechanisms can be applied to
repatriate global financial benefits of biodiversity conservation to Ethiopia to assist with financing the
Protected Areas Systems Plan (PASP).
67
Breweries that depend on the watershed for the supply of clean water may pay 5 % of the price into a conservation
fund for watershed protection.
68
See the CBD formulation of rent capture as the co-efficient or factor of total profit commercial use mostly in
pharmaceutical developments.
69
These figures have been suggested by a number of professionals in this area including Franz Gatzweiller, Manfred
Penich, Tadesse Woldemariam. They argue that the figures represent the amount of money that should be paid by
global coffee farmers whenever they access original coffee genotypes from Ethiopia to buffer problems associated
with the genetic erosion in their coffee crops.
151
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Box 2: Examples of Access and Benefit Sharing Schemes in Africa
Protocols to manage access and sharing of the benefits of genetic resources in Uganda and Kenya were
recently established by national regulations on the matter. The protocols prescribe the authorities, fees
and permit structures third parties must go through or expend before they can utilize genetic material
sourced from Uganda and Kenya. The protocols also designate the National Councils for Science and
Technology in the respective countries as the competent authorities on all matters on the protocols.
Source: NEMA (2000). National State of the Environment Report for Uganda 2000. National
Environment Management Authority, Kampala, UGANDA.
Conservation Trust Funds
37. The previous sections of this report presented a variety of financial resources that may be leveraged to
fund biodiversity conservation including protected areas. However, leveraging funds requires a practical,
intermediary mechanism to manage and disburse financial resources to users. Conservation trust funds
have emerged as one of the most efficient, flexible and cost effective institutional instruments for this
purpose. Conservation trust funds are regional, national or community based instruments for financing
sustainable development or the conservation of biological diversity. They manage money and disburse it
to people or projects that help protect the environment. The best ones help build local capacity for
managing financial resources while leveraging existing funds to generate additional financing (Bayon and
Deere, 1998).
38. The key aspect of conservation trust funds is that they are locally driven and locally managed
mechanisms designed to address the priorities of the region, country, province or community in which
they are based.
39. The structures of these funds vary. Some are set up to address a specific environmental issue or a
specific locale. Others provide finance for a broad range of environmental activities. Still others are set up
to address issues of “sustainable development” including poverty alleviation and the well-being of
children (Bayon and Deere, 1998). Some devise their own strategic plans and define the issues for which
they will provide money, others finance activities called for by a national or provincial conservation
strategy. Trust funds thus vary according to the needs, priorities and desires of their creators. Moreover,
they may serve as important vehicles for bringing together representatives of government and civil society,
promoting participation by civil society in the formulation of policy, and building national capacity
(Bayon and Deere, 1998).
Box 3: The Bwindi Impenetrable Forest Conservation Trust Fund
The Bwindi Trust was established as a private, non-governmental, endowment fund with a mixed board
in 1995. The fund’s initial capitalization by the GEF was US$ 4.3 million. This has increased through
market appreciation and re-investments to US$ 6.5 million. This amount affords conservation an annual
flow of about US$ 400,000 per year. Source: Moyini, 2005. UNDP-GEF PDF B Debriefing Notes for
the Protected Areas System Planning process for Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda.
40. Conservation trust funds may be distinguished based on their approach to providing finance for
environmental activities. Endowments act as foundations that invest their capital or principal, and use only
the interest on the capital to support activities, consistent with the objectives of the foundation (i.e., grantmaking foundations like the Mgahinga Bwindi Impenetrable Forest Conservation Trust Fund in Uganda,
which was established by GEF). Sinking funds avail both the capital and interest to finance conservation
activities until they are fully liquidated. Revolving funds on the other hand, function as banks or microcredit lending facilities, providing small loans at concessionary rates to individuals or organizations
carrying out environmental activities. The interest obtained from these loans is either put back into the
fund or used to finance the fund’s management and operation. The GEF supported Eastern Arc Forest
Trust Fund in Tanzania will use a mixture of these modalities.
152
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
41. Previous discussions have indicated a willingness by the GEF to consider supporting the creation and
some level of initial capitalization for a trust fund for Ethiopia’s Protected Areas. This opportunity should
be immediately pursued, with the view to setup the structure (see Table below) in the first stage and to
capitalize it at the onset of the second stage.
42. The most important rationale and basis for establishing a Trust Fund is a strong enabling environment
for it. Government is starting to put in place a series of complementary measures to support the
development of mechanisms for improving biodiversity conservation and management, and sees the Trust
Fund as an important opportunity for introducing another approach outside of the public sector to do this.
These include Government’s strong support for the development of partnership in protected area
management, and support for NGOs and private sector who are capable of delivering on the biodiversity
management agenda
43. Recognizing the constraints inherent in donor-financed initiatives and public sector investment for
protected areas, the government’s strategic choices with respect to biodiversity conservation require the
promotion of a diverse range of instruments, institutions, and mechanisms for financing. Support for the
establishment of a Trust Fund as a privately managed and independently financed institution has to be
understood in this context, and a reflection of a concern that long term sustainability should increasingly
be integrated into biodiversity conservation initiatives (see NBSAP, 2005).
44. Most promising, however, are the linkages that have been developed during the project preparation
(PDF-B) stage with the World Bank, the Norwegian Embassy and the Nile Basin Initiative. These
organizations are key players in both the upcoming Sustainable Land Management Program in the
country, large-scale hydro-electric developments and watershed management initiatives under the Nile
Basin Initiative. These organizations have agreed in principle that funding protected area establishment
and management will be provided as components of these programs.
Lessons learnt from the previous attempt to establish a Trust Fund
45. The previous attempt to establish a Trust Fund in Ethiopia failed primarily because it was made the
responsibility of one person. When that person was transferred within the government system, the Trust
Fund portfolio was not transferred either with him or to another person.
46. However, in this project, sustainable financing will be a central feature in the protected area system.
This has not been the case up to now. As such, one of the five outcomes from the first stage will be
focused on developing sustainable financing plans, including the trust fund.
TABLE 19.
THE PROCESS TO ESTABLISH A ETHIOPIAN PROTECTED AREAS
CONSERVATION TRUST FUND BASED ON EXPERIENCES IN TANZANIA WITH THE
EASTERN ARC TRUST FUND
Step Activity
1.
Following GEF best practice for trust funds, the Trust Fund would be launched outside of the
framework of government, though with Government’s clear and explicit endorsement.
2.
Satisfy four critical prior conditions (as identified in the 1998 GEF Evaluation of Experience with
Conservation Trust Funds): i) ensure that the policy and institutional framework could support the
establishment of a Trust Fund, ii) it could be justified on the basis of the globally significant
biodiversity values found in Ethiopia, iii) that a Trust Fund working group should be established,
iv) that a profile of the fund should be prepared
3.
During the first stage of the GEF project, there should be a focus on further development of the
design of the fund
4.
A Trust Fund specialist would be employed by the project to begin the process of designing and
establishing the Fund, and to work with key stakeholders and interests in the Fund
5.
Support for establishment and operation of the Fund will be done in two stages
153
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
6.
7.
8.
Stage 1, which is expected to last four years, will build the capacity within Ethiopia to carry out
their respective roles in the management of the Trust Fund, and the coordination and
implementation of activities.
At the end of year 4, an assessment of the achievement of the agreed indicators of institutional
capacity and readiness will serve to trigger the release of capital into the Fund. Indicators will
include:
 Successful design of the Secretariat (i.e., TOR for key positions in the Secretariat have
been drafted, costed etc), following GEF best practice
 A 2-year work plan is developed
 A fund-raising strategy and fund disbursement strategy agreed
 Finalization of the Financial, Operations, and Management Manual which defines and
clarifies procedures and operations for the Trust Fund
 Establishment of the Trust Fund Board
 Documented significant co-financing
Stage 2 will deal with implementation, which will begin at the start of year 5.
Private Capital Flows
47. Private capital flows into conservation come in a number of forms. They may be direct investments in
the management of protected areas (such as in Nech Sar National Park and the proposed management of
Omo National Park) or indirect investments in downstream/supportive segments of the tourism sector.
They may also be direct investments in various biodiversity use options including wildlife farming, timber
harvesting, ranching and/or sport hunting. One of the downstream segments of the tourism sector in
Africa is tourism curio shops that sell artifacts and images of wildlife. Most such shops in Ethiopia,
however, currently sell artifacts and images based on culture and history. This portfolio has to be
expanded.
48. The agreement between the government of Ethiopia and African Parks for the management of Nech
Sar National Park (and potentially for Omo National Park as well) is a progressive and encouraging step in
i) redefining the optimal role of the state in the management of protected areas and ii) ensuring broad
governance types for protected areas70. African Parks plans to rehabilitate, develop and manage Nech Sar
and potentially Omo National Parks with the ultimate objective of transforming the currently dilapidated
parks into model facilities with viable bases for tourism activities (Hall-Martin, 2004).
49. Further liberalization, financial integration and globalisation of the broader national economy will
stimulate more private flows into the protected area system of Ethiopia. Once more opportunities avail
themselves, deals like those for Omo and Nechisar National Parks should be negotiated and implemented.
Ideally, if more organizations become interested in such management agreements, then this would be done
through a transparent tendering process (that would, itself, require capacity development).
50. The parks that should be taken for private sector management should be those with the highest
potential for revenue generation; in contrast, the government and/or NGOs should backstop to manage
those where the revenue generation potential is low. This way, the financial revenue accrued with be
optimized.
51. However, throughout this, it is imperative that well thought out and transparent guidelines are
developed and strictly followed during the negotiations when entering management agreements with any
organization.
70
African Parks has pledged to spend up to US$ 30.5 million in the management of national parks in willing
countries in Africa, and a specific budget portfolio of over US$ 875,000 per annum for Nech Sar National Park
(African Parks Management Plan and Budget for Nechisar National Parks, 2004).
154
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Community conservation and natural resource use rights
52. The Convention on Biological Diversity specifically requires parties to integrate the conservation and
sustainable use of biological resources into national decision making (Article 10). It also requires parties
to adopt measures that support/promote the sustainable use of biological resources to avoid or minimize
adverse impacts, and to contribute to poverty reduction (IBC, 2004). This, by definition, demands the
inclusion of local communities and other stakeholders in biodiversity conservation processes.
53. Although Ethiopia ratified the CBD and also captures the above sentiments in her National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP), conservation of biological diversity mostly remains a
state-centric activity. Involvement of stakeholders is minimal and community-based natural resource
management systems are not fully recognized by the government (IBC, 2004). Communities, therefore,
benefit little from the protected areas of the country. This may be remedied by levying a ‘community
charge’ over and above the normal entrance fees for a protected area. The community charge can be
pegged to the opportunity costs incurred through the protected areas71.
54. Yet de facto successful examples of community natural resource management and use programs exist
in Ethiopia. The community-based natural resource management systems of Guassa-Menz, and the
systems supported by the FARM Africa/SOS Sahel programs testify to this.
55. In addition, civet farming by local farmers (for the production of civet musk) generates considerable
financial resources (see table below). Similar resources could be mobilized if Ethiopian farmers were
assisted to replicate the Kipepeo Project of Kenya, and the integrated cinnamon and natural forest farms of
Madagascar. The certification of such products (as organic, environmentally friendly, as contributing to
conservation in Ethiopia, as environmentally and socially sustainable, as adhering to the highest levels of
animal welfare) are good marketing tools for such products.
TABLE 20. REVENUE GENERATED FROM CIVET MUSK SALES AND SALES TAX, 19982004
Year
Sales (kg)
Sales Tax (Birr)
Export Earnings
(US$)
1998
1,162.0
84,826
552,900
1999
1,131.0
82,592
509,130
2000
530.0
48,180
238,500
2001
632.5
46,172
234,625
2002
1,559.0
113,807
701,550
2003
702.0
51,289
316,170
2004
573.0
62,200
258,214
TOTAL
6,291
489,067
2,861,089
Source: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Wildlife Conservation Department, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia
56. This project proposes the institutionalization of sustainable use systems through requisite legal and
policy reforms, and well planned community conservation and natural resource use programs. Examples
of community conservation programs, and requisite policy and legal reforms are available in the region
(e.g., Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania), and include development of National Regulations on Wildlife Use
71
But see below (Annex 11) for the problems of such a mechanism because these communal benefits rarely if ever
offset the costs that are incurred by individuals. Therefore, equity of benefits is essential for such mechanisms to
work.
155
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Rights; National Policies on Community Conservation, special Export Permits and other instruments
permitting the utilization of natural resources including wildlife.
Business Planning for Conservation
57. In order to organize the many ideas and sources of funding, the Protected Area Sector must be well
organized and focused. One of the key instruments that can help the sector to achieve this is a business
plan. The concept of business planning for conservation in Africa is now well entrenched through the
Conservation Finance Program of the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and The World Conservation
Union (IUCN). Conservation business plans have been developed for the wildlife sectors of Madagascar
and Rwanda, and the forest sectors in Uganda and Rwanda (GoU, 2003; Moyini, 2005). This should also
be done for the protected areas system of Ethiopia.
58. The proposed project should therefore fund the preparation of a protected areas business plan for
Ethiopia as an integral and first part of the proposed Ethiopian Protected Areas System Plan (PASP).
Similar logical organization is however, also necessary at the protected area level. The project will
therefore need to replicate business plans at the individual protected area levels.
Box 4: Contents of a Business Plan
A typical protected areas business plan includes an Executive Summary highlighting the enabling national
legislation, mission statement and inventory of the protected area or protected area system. It also
describes the management, resourcing (funds), operating expenditures and investments taking place in the
protected area. A business plan therefore elaborates the financing situation, gaps and options for the
protected area in question. It is also a key management, strategic planning and communication tool for the
strategic planning and management of the protected area. Source: Moyini, 2005
59. The key elements of protected area business plans include articulation of the sustainable funding
options for the sector with detailed elaboration of the funding situation, gaps and options; and a strategic
framework for ensuring cost effectiveness through enhancing revenue generation and the cutting of costs.
Business plans are management, strategic planning and communication tools which inform key
stakeholders including government agencies, local communities, the private sector, investors and donors
of the vast potentials in the sector. They are also effective marketing instruments that should be widely
utilized (Moyini, 2005).
Conclusions and Recommendations
60. The economic benefits associated with the conservation of Ethiopia’s biodiversity are high and accrue
throughout the economy. Ethiopia’s protected areas, for instance, generate revenue through tourism, the
harvest of timber and non-timber forest products (NTFPs) including wild coffee. They also have potential
to generate revenue through development of eco-tourism, and the sale of natural resource and ecosystem
based products and services. Currently this revenue is not tapped.
61. Currently, the government cannot fund protected area development or conservation alone, or provide
all the necessary funding for biodiversity conservation. Funding partnerships, involving private sector
partners, local communities and donor contributions and probably a Trust Fund are necessary.
62. To mobilize such funding partnerships, however, requires re-organization of the sector including
institutional reforms and restructuring. The analysis points to the need to create a new, autonomous and
business like parastatal organization capable of generating, managing and spending resources according to
sound business principles. There is also an urgent need for new staff, and new terms and conditions of
service to bring in needed expertise in conservation finance, economics and tourism development and
marketing. A number of proposals emerge from these conclusions:
(i)
Develop a Protected Areas Business Plan as part of the ongoing process for developing the
Protected Areas System Plan (PASP).
156
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
(ix)
(x)
(xi)
Plan and
facility.
Create an autonomous protected area authority charged with the generation, management and
use of both external and internally generated resources. This will be appropriately staffed, self
accounting and business-like parastatal organization.
Develop protected area based business plans specifying in detail, protected area level revenue
and expenditure options;
Explore various financial mechanisms/options within the framework of the proposed business
plans
Develop well thought out communication and marketing strategies, specifically targeting
policy and decision makers, and donors. They will also support various activities aimed at
further demonstrating the contribution of protected areas to economic growth and poverty
reduction through, for instance, studies to estimate the protected areas’ sector contribution to
GDP and employment, the accurate value of the environmental services provided by protected
areas and other indicators of sectoral performance. This will improve the visibility of the
sector.
Develop communication and marketing strategies to target the emerging tourism markets in
the middle and far East
Determine whether Debt for Nature Swaps are a possibility with the remaining five bilateral
donors.
There should be strong incentives for development within the tourism sector (akin to those
offered to the emergent flori- and horticulture industries). The WB/IFC could be instrumental
in facilitating this.
There is a need for an independent tourism development strategy within protected areas in the
country.
Develop innovative revenue generating activities such as accommodation concessions within
parks, user fees, levies, and sale of new and augmented products like trekking, tracking,
mountain climbing, white water rafting and other nature tourism based products
Design and implement access and benefit sharing mechanisms among local communities, and
implement a Protected Areas Conservation Trust Fund for Ethiopia, with GEF capitalization
157
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Annex 8: Protected area categories, planning processes and
guidelines (Annex 11 in proposal text)
27. As mentioned in the main body of the project document (section 3.2.2), the current categories of
protected areas in Ethiopia are limited and require redefinition. Most importantly, they are state-centric
and do not allow for other governance types, with the exception of the recent progression to allow for
private sector management. Thus, even with the new policy and the law that is in progress, the definition
of protected areas and the possibilities for governance types is not clear. Thus, the current categories and
the guidelines associated with them are not clear about the roles and responsibilities of different
stakeholders and on the mechanisms to ensure that these roles and responsibilities, with their biodiversity
conservation implications, are legally binding.
28. One key shift in the redefinition of protected areas envisaged in this project is to move from the
historic division between wildlife and forest areas to focus more on the governance type of a given area.
This will give a unified approach to the areas with a focus on the management effectiveness of the areas.
29. A second key shift will be that the redefinition of the areas will provide a conservation and social
framework for protected areas in Ethiopia. Thus, while the major objective of the areas will be
biodiversity, ecosystem and/or ecological process conservation, given the socio-economic situation in
Ethiopia, they will have a demonstrable, direct or indirect, impact on poverty reduction.
30. Further, a key barrier to effective management of protected areas in Ethiopia has been the overtly
state-centric structure. This will be overcome not only through the redefinition of governance types but
also inclusion of stakeholders in the management of the protected area system. At a site level,
stakeholders, including local communities and authorities (primarily woredas but, where pertinent,
kebeles), will be involved in the planning, management, and monitoring and evaluation. Stakeholder
involvement will be based on partnerships that are formed in each protected area.
Planning processes
31. As also mentioned in the body of the project document, there is a need to rationalize the protected
areas of the country. This will entail reexamining all existing protected areas and reclassifying them
according to these protected area categories. Part of this process will include declassification of those
areas whose conservation value is irreversibly eroded. Alternatively, if only a sub-section of the existing,
nominal area retains conservation value and efforts must be focused on these areas, including legal
recognition and securing agreements from stakeholders on those areas. A good example is the Borana
Controlled Hunting Area, which covers the majority to the far south of Ethiopia. Much of this area is
heavily impacted by human use and has lost its conservation value. Within the area, however, there are
areas that are important for their biodiversity, ecosystem and/or ecological process value. The process of
reclassification would, in this case, declassify those areas where human impacts are great and the cost of
their rehabilitation cannot be justifiably covered but focus on identifying the areas where conservation
efforts should be focused.
32. As such, the process will build on current protected areas, albeit that many of them are nominal. In
addition, the gap analysis will examine in detail the areas of significant conservation value that are not
currently included in the protected area system. As in the Bale Mountains area planning process, where
possible (i.e., when the boundaries of the area are not immediately definable through geographic or human
created features) the process thereafter will entail zooming out from the existing (nominal) boundary to a
landscape level. The process thereafter will involve a landscape level planning process to identify those
areas of outstanding value. In this context, ‘value’ will be measured by: i) its conservation value from the
biodiversity, ecosystem(s) and/or ecological process(es) harbored within the area and ii) its socioeconomic value.
158
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Protected area costs, values & compromises
33. In the project preparation process, the team was often confronted with the question: “protected from
whom?” This question reflects two main things: i) that protected areas are seen to be in conflict with local
communities and ii) that protected areas are rarely, if ever, seen in their regional, national or global
context.
34. In turn, this reflects that the opportunity costs of protected areas are localized but their values are
often regional or global. Thus, the costs of human-wildlife conflict (e.g., depredation by large carnivores
of livestock or crop damage by large herbivores) are most often incurred at a household level. Similarly,
the costs of reduced or loss of access to and use of natural resources can also be incurred at a local level.
These costs to local communities are rarely offset through financial benefits, whether it be through
community conservation fees that might be charged in addition to other protected area fees or through
community-based tourism initiatives. These financial benefits are often communal and thus do not offset
the individual or localized costs of protected areas. There is also the propensity to focus only on the
(measurable) financial gains for local communities – arguing that the costs (whether livestock or crop or
opportunity losses) can be indirectly quantified into currency. However, experiences in Ethiopia indicate
strongly that local communities perceive that there are numerous other benefits to be gained (see table
below). Moreover, the benefits, whether they be financial or otherwise, are likely to be long-term gains
which need to be weighed up against the short-term costs.
35. In contrast, the costs of not protecting the biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes can be
widespread – thus, not just local. As has been mentioned extensively through the document, in Ethiopia,
the watershed values extend well beyond even the borders of the country. Thus, local overexploitation
can lead to significant long-term costs to stakeholders far removed from the source of the resources. The
value of such environmental services needs to be accurately estimated to make convincing arguments for
decision makers.
36. In addition, a simple but important point is the uniqueness of the biodiversity of Ethiopia. Once it is
gone, this is irreversible!
37. Resolving the local, regional, national and international costs and benefits of protected areas
obviously demands a compromise depending on the values involved. Making the decision on the relative
value of the protected area with appropriate categorization is, therefore, not simple and done properly
would involve complex cost-benefit analyses that would include some parameters (e.g., responsibility,
inclusion in planning processes) that are difficult to quantify.
38. Finally, it is recognized that protected areas require financial resources to ensure their management
effectiveness72, with different categories requiring different levels of funding. Up to now, in Ethiopia, the
financial resources that have been made available for protected area management have been low: across
the protected area estate in Ethiopia, only 5% of the globally estimated average requirement per unit area
is provided73. It is futile to decide to protect an area before some level of sustainable financing planning.
One of the main objectives of the GEF is to offset environmental incremental costs. These are the
additional costs to ensure that global benefits of the environment – and in this case of the protected area
system – are realized. This assumes that the system is currently fulfilling its national or local objectives.
This is not the case because of the root causes and barriers (see the analysis elsewhere in this document).
TABLE 21. THE POTENTIAL COSTS AND BENEFITS OF PROTECTED AREAS TO BOTH LOCAL
AND REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITIES. NOTE THAT THE COSTS ASSUME POOR
72
cf. the Guassa-Menz area of Ethiopia which has operated as a successful community-based natural resource
management system that has effectively protected the biodiversity of the area as well as contributing to the livelihood
security of the local community – without the need for financial inputs.
73
cf. the Simien Mountains National Park, where the funding is currently higher per unit area than this global
average.
159
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
MANAGEMENT WHILE BENEFITS ASSUME EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT OF PROTECTED AREAS
WHICH INCLUDES AGREEMENT BY STAKEHOLDERS
Costs
Benefits
Locally
Regionally, internationally
- Poor management leads to de facto open
access to resources – and subsequent
degradation
- Human-wildlife costs (loss of crops or
livestock)
- Loss of responsibility, control and/or
decision-making ability; no stakeholder
involvement
- Opportunity loss (restricted access to or
use of resources)
- Economic benefits are diffuse and accrue
to society in general; local costs not offset by
economic gains
- Economic benefits (community-based
tourism and associated service provision,
community-conservation fees)
- Sustainable natural resource base
- Rights of access to and use of natural
resources with associated responsibilities
- Involvement in decision making
processes
- Development, usually infrastructure,
inputs (roads, power)
- Capacity development (individual and
across community)
- Improved livelihood security through
diversification
- Increased natural capital
- Reinforced socio-cultural values
- Sense of local pride
- Loss of internationally valuable
biodiversity, ecosystems and/or degradation
of ecological processes
- Economic benefits are diffuse and accrue
to society in general
- Protection of internationally important i)
endemic and/or threatened species, ii) areas
of outstanding natural beauty, iii) areas with
ecological processes that are valuable beyond
the local surroundings and iv) unrepresented
ecosystems
Stakeholder participation
39. Therefore, there are costs and benefits that need to be considered before reaching the compromise that
determines whether or not a protected area is warranted and, if so, the category of protected area that
should be implemented. It would be both arrogant and undemocratic to impose the conclusion of this
decision making (if, say, it were based on an academic exercise to determine the ecological or biodiversity
values alone). Indeed, it is implicit in a compromise that some negotiation has occurred.
40. As described elsewhere in this document, the highland-lowland system that characterizes Ethiopia
means that stakeholders may not just live in the near vicinity of an area but they may be far removed from
the source of the resources on which they depend. Water is the most obvious example of this, but GEF is
willing to consider funding the protected area system in Ethiopia because of the global value of its
biodiversity alone.
41. Stakeholder identification is therefore an important step in the process of protected area planning and
it needs to be as exhaustive as possible. All stakeholders (or representatives thereof) will be consulted in
planning processes to arrive at the compromise position through negotiation. One important issue in the
negotiation process is that the participants have sufficient capacity to enter into the process; capacity
development and awareness creation are important parts of the process. No community representative
160
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
will accept core conservation areas before being aware of the regional, national and international benefits
of the area – and hence over which values the compromise will be reached.
42. The objective of categorizing protected areas is to allow for three options or generalized compromise
positions at which to arrive following negotiations: i) community-based natural resource management
systems, ii) the core conservation area, and iii) the limited harvesting areas. Each of these categories sets
the management framework for realizing social and environmental goals; the corollary of this is that the
categories set the environmental or conservation framework for use of the area. From the point of view of
local communities, these represent, respectively: i) rights of access to and use of resources with the
associated responsibilities, ii) no access to resources but participation in management and planning
processes, and iii) a partnership with the private sector over limited harvesting of resources with
negotiated and agreed benefits.
Protected area categories and their guidelines
43. All protected area management will use conservation targets74 to design eco-regional portfolios, and
develop and prioritize conservation strategies (TNC, 2004). Conservation targets are defined as being
specific components of biodiversity, usually consisting of ecosystems, natural communities and species
within a given area that are identified by biodiversity experts. They are aspects of the area that if their
conservation is assured, then they will ensure the conservation of the whole ecoregion. As such, they
function in a similar way to the ‘keystone’ species concept.
44. Human-induced threats – both direct and root causes - to the conservation targets will also be
identified. Further, spatial mapping of the threats can identify the areas of the protected area with the
greatest need for focused effort.
45. In all sites and across the system, there will be a strong emphasis on monitoring and evaluation, and
adaptive management. The World Bank/WWF Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) will be
used as the principal means for monitoring the effectiveness of individual protected areas. The assessment
of the management effectiveness in each area will be done through re-application of the METT every year
through the project’s life and will be institutionalized as the mechanism for monitoring effectiveness
thereafter. In each site, there will be further monitoring of the conservation targets (or the ecological
attributes for each target that are identified) and the threats associated with them.
46. The following guidelines for the management of the three categories of protected area will become
regulations following a participatory process to secure their amendment, as necessary, and agreement in
Yr 1.
Community-based natural resource management systems
47. These areas are those with the objective of achieving sustainable use of natural resources by local
communities.
48. They incorporate natural resource management systems, whether they be traditional or ancient, or
those that are currently fully functional in Ethiopia. Examples of ancient or traditional natural resource
management systems abound in Ethiopia, one being the Guassa-Menz system in north Shoa. They also
incorporate the recent attempts to achieve sustainable natural resource management systems; in fact, many
of these ‘modern’ examples build on existing or traditional systems that, often, have declined under the
social reform of the militarist-Marxist regime of the Derg (1974-1991). Examples of these include the
FARM Africa/SOS Sahel and GTZ models of participatory natural resource management.
74
An example is the agreed conservation targets for the Bale Mountains: i) the riparian systems & watershed, ii) the
Harenna Forest, iii) the Ericaceous belt, iv) the northern grasslands, v) the northern woodlands, vi) the Afroalpine
ecosystem, vii) mountain nyala and viii) the Ethiopian wolf.
161
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
49. Where possible, they will incorporate the current wildlife reserves and a number of forest priority
areas.
50. In general, they will incorporate those areas that do not warrant becoming core conservation areas
(thus, the loss of opportunity costs outweigh the national, regional or international benefits) - or,
alternatively, these benefits can be justifiably attained through this governance type.
51. They will focus on the complete range of natural resources on which rural people are dependent –
thus, could incorporate local communities using fish, forests, wildlife, wild plants, grazing, etc. This
precludes agricultural areas because of the irreversible effect that it has on biodiversity.
52. In an ideal world, they would extend throughout the country – therefore, working to the goal of
sustainability for the country. However, this project aims to produce good practice products; these will be
replicable and may be scaled-up to other areas in the country.
53. By their definition, they will be included in the landscape areas (see below), but they may also be
independent of landscape areas.
54. The Guassa-Menz example demonstrates that financial inputs and recurrent costs can be minimal
even in effectively functioning community-based protected areas. This requires comprehending the
linkages between the regulated use of natural resources and sustainable livelihoods for local communities.
It also requires the comprehension that the rights of access to and use of resources comes with the
responsibility to manage the resources sustainably.
55. Many ‘modern’ examples around the country that build on or rebuild (because of their decline during
the Derg) traditional systems require some level of financing because of the process needs: i) to identify
accurately stakeholders, ii) to renegotiate access to and use of resources, and iii) to arrive at and prepare
agreements (to be signed between the local community representatives and the government) that permit
legitimate access to and use of resources.
56. Because of the current disconnect between the government and local communities and until such
actions become mainstreamed, arriving at, drawing up and implementation of agreements between the
government and local communities will have to be brokered or mediated, usually by a technical partner.
Current examples show that this is the case.
57. The process that will be used to establish natural resource management systems will be based on the
good practice model developed by the FARM Africa/SOS Sahel Participatory Natural Resource
Management Unit (Tache & Irwin, 2003). This is a four-step process of: i) stakeholder identification, ii)
resource identification, iii) mediated negotiation and agreement and iv) implementation.
58. Environment modifying activities will be minimized in these areas, if not altogether stopped. In
addition, because there are profound dangers of influxes of people and accelerated degradation during the
planning and negotiation processes, moratoria will be sought on environment modifying activities (most
importantly, agricultural expansion and settlement) during these stages. This is based on the principle that
all the viable agricultural land is already occupied and that further expansion of agricultural land into
marginal areas will lead: i) to land degradation, and ii) biodiversity loss. Such moratoria are akin to the
moratorium on mining, forestry, agricultural expansion and settlement that has been imposed by the
Madagascan government in all potential protected area sites for two years while the actual protected areas
are identified for a list of potential sites.
162
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
59. The sustainability of the system rests, in part, on the legitimate recognition through signed
agreements of the natural resource management system that results from the process.
60. Care will be taken to ensure that if sustainable natural resource practices are implemented in a given
area then the unsustainable practices are not simply displaced to adjacent areas – thereby accelerating
degradation. In order to reduce this, planning will take place at a landscape level whenever possible.
61. Each community-based protected area may develop its own business plan (based on the model
business plan that will be developed for the system). The business plan is primarily aimed at describing
the way in which the protected area is to be developed, managed and financially resourced, as necessary,
in order for management to enhance its operational efficiency and optimize its income generation. The
plan would identify mechanisms for ensuring equity among stakeholders with regard to sharing the
benefits, whether economic or not. The basis of this is the development of results-based management and
financing. The business plan should i) identify and describe financial resources, ii) seek to make financial
projections for viable and innovative tourism opportunities (including accommodation development
within the protected area) that would benefit biodiversity conservation and iii) include an investment and
marketing plan that will identify innovative ideas for attracting investors and donors to the protected area
system, and for generating revenue. Thus, there will be an overall sustainable financing plan developed
for each protected area to fit into the system’s sustainable financing plan.
62. Monitoring and evaluation will be carried out by the local community in partnership with the
technical partner until such time as the community has the capacity to do it itself.
Core conservation areas
63. These will be identified when the results of the cost-benefit analysis indicate that the national,
regional and international benefits outweigh the opportunity costs to the local communities, even in a
sustainable natural resource management system. The benefits may include: i) endemic and/or threatened
species, ii) areas of outstanding natural beauty, iii) areas with ecological processes that are valuable
beyond the local surroundings, iv) potential tourism value for the nation as well as local community, and
v) unrepresented ecosystems.
64. Human activities will be limited in these areas to scientific research and tourism and even these may
be zoned within the area.
65. As a result of the above guideline and because people live in all protected areas in the country at
present, those people will need to move out of the identified core conservation areas. This resettlement
will be strictly undertaken on a voluntary basis; it will, therefore, be as a result of: i) a mediated
negotiation where the reasons why people will need to move with not only be clearly understood by those
people, but they will agree to move, ii) ensuring that there is appropriate ‘pull’ for people to move – this
could include access to services and secure land tenure, and iii) access to other benefits including
involvement in the planning and management of the protected area. The movement of people will not be
planned without their consent.
66. The category will include those currently listed as National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries and those
forest priority areas that warrant this level of protection because of the biodiversity, ecosystem and/or
ecological process values. Subdivision and splitting these categories is not justified because the
mechanisms of management are the same.
67. The boundaries of the areas will be agreed on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis of the key
biodiversity areas and the needs of stakeholders. The boundaries will be agreed through mediated
negotiation with the stakeholders.
163
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
68. As with all areas, the core conservation areas will work towards the conservation of identified
conservation targets.
69. They will be managed under formalized partnerships including but not restricted to public-privatecivil society-community. The basis of the partnerships will be the negotiation of the optimal role for the
partners in the management of the area
70. Management oversight will be carried out under a joint management committee that may include but
not be restricted to representatives from local authorities (at least at woreda level and where advantageous
at kebele level), local community representatives (possibly harnessing traditional systems), technical
partners (NGOs), private sector (tourism), donors, cross-sectoral organizations (e.g., water resources
authorities where watershed management is an important issue) and the management authorities.
71. The management of the areas will be underpinned by business plans that will be developed for each
protected area. The business plans will define the operational standards for activities. At the basis of this
will be results-based financing. The business plans will seek strategies for reducing operational costs
while also seeking strategies to increase revenues. Communications documents will be planned and
produced to ensure that marketing and investment is appropriately planned and implemented.
72. Where the management of an area is undertaken by an organization other than the state, the tender for
the concession will be advertised in standard advertising newspapers. Private sector organizations or
other organizations (thus, including but not restricted to NGOs, academic institutions, indigenous people
and/or local communities) may bid for the management of the areas. Bids will be judged on agreed
criteria that demonstrate the commitment of the organization to ensure the environmental and social
sustainability of the area. Bids will also be subject to a detailed Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).
Monitoring and evaluation – and how stakeholders and primarily local communities are incorporated into
it – will be a key criterion on which the bids will be judged. Bids will be managed transparently. In the
circumstances that there is only one bid, the proposal will be judged on its merits to achieve conservation
targets, and environmental and social sustainability for a given area. The management of areas, whether
by the private sector or civil society organization such as NGOs, academic institutions, indigenous people
and/or local communities will be done through a legally binding contractual agreement with the
government (akin to the agreements into which African Parks has already entered into with the
government).
73. Trans-boundary protected areas will be managed and operated in the same way as any other protected
area with the added agreement being sought between the government of Ethiopia and the adjacent nation
state. Representatives from the adjacent state will be included in the joint management committee for the
area.
74. Each core conservation area will develop its own business plan (based on the model business plan
that will be developed for the system). The business plan is primarily aimed at describing the way in
which the protected area is to be developed, managed and financially resourced in order for management
to enhance its operational efficiency and optimize its income generation, thus reducing its dependency on
subsidy. The basis of this is the development of results-based management and financing. The business
plan should i) identify and describe financial resources, ii) seek to make financial projections for viable
and innovative tourism opportunities (including accommodation development within the protected area)
that would benefit biodiversity conservation and iii) include an investment and marketing plan that will
identify innovative ideas for attracting investors and donors to the protected area system, and for
generating revenue. Thus, there will be an overall sustainable financing plan developed for each protected
area to fit into the system’s sustainable financing plan.
164
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Limited harvesting areas
75. Limited harvesting areas may or may not be part of a landscape protected area (i.e., they could be
encompassed by area of landscape area but other areas could be further away and independent of
landscape areas.
76. Limited harvesting areas will incorporate sport hunting concession areas and limited timber extraction
concessions.
77. As with all areas, the limited harvesting will have the legal obligation to achieve identified
conservation targets. The identification of conservation targets, as with other areas, will be carried out in
cooperation with biodiversity or ecological expertise within the country. The conservation targets will be
related to the abundance and population structure of the target species.
78. Thereafter, the concessionaire will be able to set the quotas for the area and will have to take into
account the conservation targets. This again should be taken in the context of the above: the
concessionaire will be legally obliged to achieve identified conservation targets. Failure to do so will
result in loss of the concession, loss of the license to operate in Ethiopia and, potentially, legal
proceedings. Hence, they should be conservative.
79. The areas can be proposed by any interested person (including sport hunting companies, timber
companies, NGOs, etc) so long as they fall outside core conservation areas.
80. Once identified and delimited (in agreement with stakeholders including local communities), the
tender for the concession will be advertised in standard advertising newspapers. Private sector
organizations or other organizations (including NGOs) will bid for the management of the areas. Bids
will be judged on agreed criteria that demonstrate the commitment of the organization to ensure the
environmental and social sustainability of the area. Monitoring and evaluation – and how stakeholders
and primarily local communities are incorporated into it – will be a key criterion on which the bids will be
judged. Bids will be managed transparently.
81. Management concessions will be awarded on the basis of the above process. Legitimate agreements
will be drawn up and signed between the organization that submitted the winning bid and the government.
The partnership between the concessionaire and the local community will also be formalized through a
similar agreement (and may be the same agreement as that signed with the government).
82. The concession agreements will run for a period of six years; these will be shunted forward every
second year depending on the demonstration of achieving the conservation targets for the area. Thus, in
theory, the concession for the area could run ad infinitum so long as the conservation targets were being
met and the environmental and social sustainability was being ensured. The fee for the concession will be
re-negotiated every six years.
83. However, if the targets are not met or if there is a demonstrable loss of environmental or social
sustainability, the concessionaire will lose the concession to the area and will lose the license to operate in
the country. The concession will then be re-advertised.
84. Funds may be raised by the concessionaires to assist with ensuring the effective management of the
areas.
85. The concessionaire will be eligible to set harvesting quotas for the area bearing in mind that the
conservation targets and environmental and social sustainability is dependent on their management of the
area. There is, therefore, much responsibility attached to setting the quotas.
165
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Landscape areas
86. As mentioned above, where possible, further planning protected areas (including those that exist) will
be carried out at a landscape level – thus, at an eco-region or ecosystem level. An eco-region is defined as
a large unit of land and water typically defined by climate, geology, topography and associations of plants
and animals and/or ecological processes. Eco-regions, not political boundaries, provide a framework for
capturing ecological and genetic variation in biodiversity across a full range of environmental gradients.
Eco-regions encompass more than one ecosystem such as in the Bale and Simien Mountains areas. This
will ensure that i) core conservation areas will be surrounded by community-based natural resource
management systems and ii) accelerated degradation does not occur in adjacent areas when overexploitative practices are simply displaced.
87. Landscape areas will always include a core conservation area and community-based protected areas
(following the guidelines mentioned above), and may include a limited harvesting area. There will be an
overarching oversight joint management committee for the landscape area that will be drawn from the
committees for the core conservation area, the community-based areas and, where relevant, from the
limited harvesting concession areas.
88. Moratoria will be sought on environment modifying activities (most importantly, agricultural
expansion and settlement) within landscape areas.
166
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
ANNEX 9: METT Scores
Yangudi-Rassa National
Park
Gambella National Park
3
1
1
0
2
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
2
1
1
0
1
1
2
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
2
1
0
1
0
1
2
0
2
2
2
0
0
1
1
3
2
1
1
2
3
2
2
1
3
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
0
1
1
1
2
2
0
1
1
2
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
2
2
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
Simien Mountains
National Park
Senkele Sanctuary
167
Chebera
Guassa-Menz
Community Area
2
Maze
0
Nech Sar National Park
3
Alatish (proposed)
Omo National Park
Legal status: Does the protected area have legal status?
Protected area regulations: Are inappropriate land uses and
activities (e.g. poaching) controlled?
Law enforcement: Can staff enforce protected area rules well
enough?
Protected area objectives: Have objectives been agreed?
Protected area design: Does the protected area need enlarging,
corridors etc to meet its objectives?
Protected area boundary demarcation: Is the boundary known and
demarcated?
Management plan: Is there a management plan and is it being
implemented?
Additional points
Regular work plan: Is there an annual work plan?
Resource inventory: Do you have enough information to manage
the area?
Research: Is there a programme of management-orientated survey
and research work?
Resource management: Is the protected area adequately managed
(e.g. for fire, invasive species, poaching)?
Staff numbers: Are there enough people employed to manage the
protected area?
Personnel management: Are the staff managed well enough?
Staff training: Is there enough training for staff?
Current budget: Is the current budget sufficient?
Security of budget: Is the budget secure?
Management of budget: Is the budget managed to meet critical
management needs?
Awash National Park
0
Babile Elephant
Sanctuary
Bale Mountains
National Park
TABLE 22. THE DETAILED METT SCORES FOR PROTECTED AREAS IN ETHIOPIA
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Equipment: Is equipment adequately maintained?
Maintenance of equipment: Is equipment adequately maintained?
Education and awareness programme: Is there a planned education
programme?
State and commercial neighbours: Is there co-operation with
adjacent land users?
Indigenous people: Do indigenous and traditional peoples resident
or regularly using the PA have input to management decisions?
Local communities: Do local communities resident or near the
protected area have input to management decisions?
Additional points
Visitor facilities: Are visitor facilities (for tourists, pilgrims etc)
good enough?
Commercial tourism: Do commercial tour operators contribute to
protected area management?
26. Fees: If fees (tourism, fines) are applied, do they help protected
area management?
Condition assessment Is the protected area being managed
consistent to its objectives?
Additional points
Access assessment: Are the available management mechanisms
working to control access or use?
Economic benefit assessment: Is the protected area providing
economic benefits to local communities?
Monitoring and evaluation:
TOTAL SCORE
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
3
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
3
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
3
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
3
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
2
0
1
0
2
0
1
0
2
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
14
0
1
33
0
0
20
0
0
11
2
1
38
1
1
29
2
0
2
1
0
0
11
3
2
36
1
1
16
1
0
24
0
0
11
168
33
33
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
TABLE 23. OUTLINE DATA FOR THE BALE MOUNTAINS NATIONAL PARK METT. SIMILAR
DATA FOR ALL ASSESSED PROTECTED AREAS ARE AVAILABLE AND HELD IN A DATABASE
THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL
DEVELOPMENT.
Name of protected area
Bale Mountains National Park
Location of protected area (country
Ethiopia; UTM 37N 585000E 751000N (approximate central point)
and map reference)
Date of establishment
1969 (established), 1974 (boundary description), 1986 (revised boundary
description), not gazetted
Ownership details
State owned
Management authority
Managed by Oromiya Regional State
Size (ha)
247,100ha
Number of staff
40 permanent
Budget
ETB 263,740 ≡ US$ 30,525 (or US$ 12.4/km²/year)
Designations
Reason for designation
Brief details of all relevant projects
DGIS-WWF project (1999 – 2004; failed); FZS Bale Mountains Project
in protected area
(ongoing); BMNRMP (proposal being finalized; funding pledged)
List the two primary objectives of
the area
Objective 1
Biodiversity conservation
Objective 2
Watershed management
List the top two most important
threats to the protected area
Threat 1
Agricultural expansion
Threat 2
Unsustainable exploitation of natural resources
List top two critical management
activities
Activity 1
Negotiating and implementing agreements with local communities on
management (including core conservation area) and resource use
Activity 2
Monitoring and evaluation of management practices
169
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
TABLE 24. DETAILED METT FOR THE BALE MOUNTAINS INCLUDING ‘NEXT STEPS’. SIMILAR DATA FOR ALL ASSESSED
PROTECTED AREAS ARE AVAILABLE AND HELD IN A DATABASE THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN THE MINISTRY OF
AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT.
Issue
Criteria
1. Legal
status
Does the
protected
area have
legal status?
Context
2. Protected
area
regulations
Are
inappropriate
land uses and
activities
(e.g.
poaching)
controlled?
Context
3. Law
enforcement
Can staff enforce
protected area rules
well enough?
Score
Next steps
The protected area is not gazetted
0
The government has agreed that the protected area should be gazetted but the
process has not yet begun
The protected area is in the process of being gazetted but the process is still
incomplete
The protected area has been legally gazetted (or in the case of private reserves
is owned by a trust or similar)
1
Agree on boundaries to core
conservation area; draw up
management plan; assemble joint
management committee with
appropriate terms of reference;
submit for gazettement
There are no mechanisms for controlling inappropriate land use and activities
in the protected area
Mechanisms for controlling inappropriate land use and activities in the
protected area exist but there are major problems in implementing them
effectively
Mechanisms for controlling inappropriate land use and activities in the
protected area exist but there are some problems in effectively implementing
them
Mechanisms for controlling inappropriate land use and activities in the
protected area exist and are being effectively implemented
0
The staff have no effective capacity/resources to enforce protected area
legislation and regulations
There are major deficiencies in staff capacity/resources to enforce protected
area legislation and regulations (e.g. lack of skills, no patrol budget)
The staff have acceptable capacity/resources to enforce protected area
legislation and regulations but some deficiencies remain
0
2
3
1
Negotiate and implement
agreements with local
communities for regulated
access to and use of natural
resources
2
3
1
Establish linkages with local law
enforcement agencies, including
judiciary, police, etc. Train local
law enforcement agencies.
2
170
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Issue
Criteria
Score
The staff have excellent capacity/resources to enforce protected area
legislation and regulations
3
Context
4. Protected area
objectives
No firm objectives have been agreed for the protected area
0
The protected area has agreed objectives, but is not managed according to
these objectives
The protected area has agreed objectives, but these are only partially
implemented
1
Have objectives been
agreed?
Planning
The protected area has agreed objectives and is managed to meet these
objectives
3
5. Protected area design
Inadequacies in design mean achieving the protected areas major management
objectives of the protected area is impossible
Inadequacies in design mean that achievement of major objectives are
constrained to some extent
Design is not significantly constraining achievement of major objectives, but
could be improved
Reserve design features are particularly aiding achievement of major
objectives of the protected area
0
The boundary of the protected area is not known by the management authority
or local residents/neighbouring land users
The boundary of the protected area is known by the management authority but
is not known by local residents/neighbouring land users
The boundary of the protected area is known by both the management
authority and local residents but is not appropriately demarcated
The boundary of the protected area is known by the management authority
and local residents and is appropriately demarcated
There is no management plan for the protected area
0
A management plan is being prepared or has been prepared but is not being
implemented
An approved management plan exists but it is only being partially
implemented because of funding constraints or other problems
1
Does the protected area
need enlarging,
corridors etc to meet its
objectives?
Planning
6. Protected area
boundary demarcation
Is the boundary known
and demarcated?
Context
7. Management plan
Is there a management
plan and is it being
implemented?
Next steps
The 1986 (draft but neither
adopted nor implemented)
management plan identified the
objectives for the area.
2
Further planning processes are
necessary.
1
2
3
1
2
The boundary is neither known
nor marked. The local
community need to be involved
in planning the boundaries
relative to the key biodiversity
areas within the landscape.
3
0
2
A management plan was written
and agreed in 1986. A further
interim management was being
developed by WWF (not
completed). The management
plan needs significant updating
171
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Issue
Planning
Additional points
Planning
Criteria
Score
An approved management plan exists and is being implemented
3
The planning process allows adequate opportunity for key
stakeholders to influence the management plan
+1
There is an established schedule and process for periodic review
and updating of the management plan
+1
The results of monitoring, research and evaluation are routinely
incorporated into planning
+1
8. Regular work plan
No regular work plan exists
0
Is there an annual work
plan?
A regular work plan exists but activities are not monitored against the plan’s
targets
A regular work plan exists and actions are monitored against the plan’s
targets, but many activities are not completed
A regular work plan exists, actions are monitored against the
plan’s targets and most or all prescribed activities are completed
There is little or no information available on the critical habitats, species and
cultural values of the protected area
Information on the critical habitats, species and cultural values of the
protected area is not sufficient to support planning and decision making
Information on the critical habitats, species and cultural values of the
protected area is sufficient for key areas of planning/decision making but the
necessary survey work is not being maintained
Information concerning on the critical habitats, species and cultural values of
the protected area is sufficient to support planning and decision making and is
being maintained
There is no survey or research work taking place in the protected area
1
There is some ad hoc survey and research work
1
There is considerable survey and research work but it is not directed towards
the needs of protected area management
2
Planning/Outputs
9. Resource inventory
Do you have enough
information to manage
the area?
Context
10. Research
Is there a programme of
management-orientated
survey and research
work?
Next steps
with an implementation plan.
The planning processes at
present are now beginning to
consider the role of stakeholders
in planning processes. The plan
should be designed to be
adaptive and updateable. A
monitoring and evaluation plan
needs to be developed.
The M&E framework needs to
be developed for the annually
produced workplan.
2
3
0
1
2
The M&E framework should
include planned surveying.
Further information should be
gathered in the Herenna forest
that remains relatively unknown.
3
0
Research on the Ethiopian wolf
is good, but there are gaps in
knowledge among other species
and ecological aspects of the
area. These need to be
prioritized and filled.
172
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Issue
Criteria
Score
There is a comprehensive, integrated programme of survey and
research work, which is relevant to management needs
Requirements for active management of critical ecosystems, species and
cultural values have not been assessed
Requirements for active management of critical ecosystems, species and
cultural values are known but are not being addressed
Requirements for active management of critical ecosystems, species and
cultural values are only being partially addressed
Requirements for active management of critical ecosystems, species and
cultural values are being substantially or fully addressed
3
12. Staff numbers
There are no staff
0
Are there enough
people employed to
manage the protected
area?
Staff numbers are inadequate for critical management activities
1
Staff numbers are below optimum level for critical management activities
Staff numbers are adequate for the management needs of the site
2
3
Problems with personnel management constrain the achievement of major
management objectives
Problems with personnel management partially constrain the achievement of
major management objectives
Personnel management is adequate to the achievement of major management
objectives but could be improved
Personnel management is excellent and aids the achievement major
management objectives
Staff are untrained
0
Staff training and skills are low relative to the needs of the protected area
Staff training and skills are adequate, but could be further improved to fully
achieve the objectives of management
Staff training and skills are in tune with the management needs of the
protected area, and with anticipated future needs
1
2
Inputs
11. Resource
management
Is the protected area
adequately managed
(e.g. for fire, invasive
species, poaching)?
Process
Inputs
13. Personnel
management
Are the staff managed
well enough?
Process
14. Staff training
Is there enough training
for staff?
Inputs/Process
0
1
2
Next steps
Further information regarding
active management is necessary.
Most importantly, the effect of
livestock grazing on the
Afroalpine grasslands is not
known.
3
1
2
Staff numbers need to be
increased
There need to be incentives to
ensure that the staff carry out
their duties optimally. Thus,
even the staff that do exist are
poorly managed.
3
0
Refreshment of training would
be worthwhile but staff
management is a more important
issue. Training could, however,
be provided as an incentive for
the staff.
3
173
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Issue
15. Current budget
Is the current budget
sufficient?
Inputs
16. Security of budget
Is the budget secure?
Inputs
17. Management of
budget
Is the budget managed
to meet critical
management needs?
Criteria
There is no budget for the protected area
Score
Next steps
0
Budget needs to be increased
(current funding levels are at
US$ 13.9/km²/yr). However,
what budget there is, is poorly
managed.
The available budget is inadequate for basic management needs and presents a
serious constraint to the capacity to manage
The available budget is acceptable, but could be further improved to fully
achieve effective management
The available budget is sufficient and meets the full management needs of the
protected area
1
There is no secure budget for the protected area and management is wholly
reliant on outside or year by year funding
There is very little secure budget and the protected area could not function
adequately without outside funding
There is a reasonably secure core budget for the protected area but many
innovations and initiatives are reliant on outside funding
There is a secure budget for the protected area and its management needs on a
multi-year cycle
Budget management is poor and significantly undermines effectiveness
Budget management is poor and constrains effectiveness
0
Budget management is adequate but could be improved
2
Budget management is excellent and aids effectiveness
3
There is little or no equipment and facilities
0
There is some equipment and facilities but these are wholly inadequate
1
There is equipment and facilities, but still some major gaps that constrain
management
There is adequate equipment and facilities
2
2
3
1
2
The budget from the regional
government is relatively secure
(although it has declined in the
past year) but external funding is
necessary to build the capacity of
the protected area.
3
0
1
Budget management is a barrier
to the effectiveness of the
management of the area.
Process
18.
Equipment
Is equipment
adequately
maintained?
Equipment and facilities are
present, but not always well
planned. However,
administration means they are
rarely used properly. This
requires improvement.
3
Process
174
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Issue
Criteria
19.
Maintenance
of equipment
Is equipment
adequately
maintained?
Score
There is little or no maintenance of equipment and facilities
0
There is some ad hoc maintenance of equipment and facilities
1
There is maintenance of equipment and facilities, but there are some important
gaps in maintenance
Equipment and facilities are well maintained
2
There is no education and awareness programme
0
There is a limited and ad hoc education and awareness programme, but no
overall planning for this
There is a planned education and awareness programme but there are still
serious gaps
There is a planned and effective education and awareness programme fully
linked to the objectives and needs of the protected area
1
There is no contact between managers and neighbouring official or corporate
land users
There is limited contact between managers and neighbouring official or
corporate land users
There is regular contact between managers and neighbouring official or
corporate land users, but only limited co-operation
There is regular contact between managers and neighbouring official or
corporate land users, and substantial co-operation on management
0
Indigenous and traditional peoples have no input into decisions relating to the
management of the protected area
Indigenous and traditional peoples have some input into discussions relating
to management but no direct involvement in the resulting decisions
Indigenous and traditional peoples directly contribute to some decisions
relating to management
0
Next steps
Recurrent budget for
maintenance and replacement is
inadequate and needs to be
improved. Much equipment is
not used and thus does not
require maintenance.
3
Process
20. Education and
awareness programme
Is there a planned
education programme?
Process
21. State and
commercial
neighbours
Is there cooperation
with adjacent
land users?
Process
22. Indigenous people
Do indigenous and
traditional peoples
resident or regularly
using the PA have input
2
The EWCP, FZS and MELCA
have education projects that are
carried out with the park
authorities; these are being
improved.
3
1
2
No cooperation and linkages.
The kebeles allocate land to
agricultural households with no
cooperation with park
authorities. Linkages (through
joint management committee)
need to be institutionalized.
3
1
2
Collaboration with indigenous
peoples needs to be improved
(through joint management
committee on which
representative(s) will sit).
175
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Issue
to management
decisions?
Process
23. Local communities
Do local communities
resident or near the
protected area have
input to management
decisions?
Process
Additional points
Additional points
Outputs
24. Visitor facilities
Are visitor facilities
(for tourists, pilgrims
etc) good enough?
Outputs
25. Commercial
tourism
Do commercial tour
operators contribute to
protected area
management?
Process
26. Fees
If fees (tourism, fines)
are applied, do they
Criteria
Score
Indigenous and traditional peoples directly participate in making decisions
relating to management
3
Local communities have no input into decisions relating to the management of
the protected area
Local communities have some input into discussions relating to management
but no direct involvement in the resulting decisions
Local communities directly contribute to some decisions relating to
management
Local communities directly participate in making decisions relating to
management
There is open communication and trust between local stakeholders and
protected area managers
Programmes to enhance local community welfare, while conserving protected
area resources, are being implemented
0
1
Next steps
Collaboration with local people
needs to be improved (through
joint management committee on
which representative(s) will sit).
2
3
+1
+1
There are no visitor facilities and services
0
Visitor facilities and services are inappropriate for current levels of visitation
or are under construction
Visitor facilities and services are adequate for current levels of visitation but
could be improved
Visitor facilities and services are excellent for current levels of visitation
1
There is little or no contact between managers and tourism operators using the
protected area
There is contact between managers and tourism operators but this is largely
confined to administrative or regulatory matters
There is limited co-operation between managers and tourism operators to
enhance visitor experiences and maintain protected area values
There is excellent co-operation between managers and tourism operators to
enhance visitor experiences, protect values and resolve conflicts
0
Although fees are theoretically applied, they are not collected
The fee is collected, but it goes straight to central government and is not
returned to the protected area or its environs
0
1
2
Trust needs to be improved
(through joint management
committee).
The quality of service at the
Lodge needs improvement
(through privatization of the
management); further facilities
are necessary.
3
1
2
Cooperation needs to be
improved (through the joint
management committee). A
marketing plan is necessary
which should be done with tour
operators.
3
The revenue generated by Bale
would not cover recurrent costs
even if they remained. With
176
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Issue
help protected area
management?
Outputs
27. Condition
assessment
Is the protected area
being managed
consistent to its
objectives?
Outcomes
Additional points
Criteria
The fee is collected, but is disbursed to the local authority rather than the
protected area
There is a fee for visiting the protected area that helps to support this and/or
other protected areas
Important biodiversity, ecological and cultural values are being severely
degraded
Some biodiversity, ecological and cultural values are being severely degraded
Some biodiversity, ecological and cultural values are being partially degraded
but the most important values have not been significantly impacted
Biodiversity, ecological and cultural values are predominantly intact
Are the
available
management
mechanisms
working to
control
access or
use?
Outcomes
29. Economic benefit
assessment
Is the protected area
providing economic
benefits to local
communities?
2
3
0
1
Next steps
growth, Bale will be able to
cross-subsidize other areas and
use the excess for its own
development.
The key biodiversity and
ecological processes require
further urgent protection.
2
3
There are active programmes for restoration of degraded areas within the
protected area and/or the protected area buffer zone
Outputs
28. Access
assessment
Score
+1
Protection systems (patrols, permits etc) are ineffective in controlling access
or use of the reserve in accordance with designated objectives
Protection systems are only partially effective in controlling access or use of
the reserve in accordance with designated objectives
Protection systems are moderately effective in controlling access or use of the
reserve in accordance with designated objectives
Protection systems are largely or wholly effective in controlling access or use
of the reserve in accordance with designated objectives
0
The existence of the protected area has reduced the options for economic
development of the local communities
The existence of the protected area has neither damaged nor
benefited the local economy
There is some flow of economic benefits to local communities
from the existence of the protected area but this is of minor
significance to the regional economy
0
1
2
There is no habitat restoration
underway; this should take place
in severely degraded and
prioritized areas.
The coverage of the protected
systems is limited to 1% of the
area; this needs to be extended to
priority areas (through mapping
the highly threatened or used
areas).
3
1
2
The flow of benefits to local
communities is significant but
the linkage needs to be made
with the protected area and the
wildlife. The benefits could be
increased with planning. Given
that the area is a de facto open
177
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Issue
Criteria
3
Outcomes
There is a significant or major flow of economic benefits to local
communities from activities in and around the protected area
(e.g. employment of locals, locally operated commercial tours
etc)
There is no monitoring and evaluation in the protected area
There is some ad hoc monitoring and evaluation, but no overall strategy
and/or no regular collection of results
There is an agreed and implemented monitoring and evaluation system but
results are not systematically used for management
A good monitoring and evaluation system exists, is well
implemented and used in adaptive management
1
30. Monitoring and
evaluation
Planning/Process
TOTAL SCORE
Score
0
Next steps
access area, the flow of benefits
is unsustainable.
M&E framework needs to be
planned and implemented.
2
3
33
178
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Annex I0-I: GEF FSP Ethiopia “SDPASE” Total Budget and Work Plan “TBWP”: Outcome Level
STAGE ONE FOUR YEARS FROM January 2008
Award ID:
Award Title:
Business Unit:
Project ID:
Project Title:
Implementing Partner
(Executing Agency)
GEF
Outcome/Atlas
Activity
Imp
Agent
00048561
PIMS 449 ETHIOPIA Sustainable Development of Protected Area System of Ethiopia
ETH 10
00058768
Sustainable Development of Protected Area System of Ethiopia
NEX – Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, (and GTZ-IS for Implementation)
Fund
ID
Donor
Name
Atlas
Budget
Code
71200
ATLAS Budget
Description
2008
(USD)
2009
(USD)
2010
(USD)
2011
(USD)
Total
USD
International
Consultants
32,000
32,000
20,000
32,000
32,000
128,000
20,000
Local Consultants
12,000
38,000
12,000
16,000
12,000
20,000
12,000
11,000
48,000
85,000
40,000
5,000
52,000
13,000
23,000
13,000
40,000
28,000
78,000
1.0.2 (NPC);
1.1.2 a/b; 12.1; 1.2.2; 1.3.2;
1.4.1/2
1.2.4 PAs, People and Poverty
1.2.5 M and E Services
1.2.,6 PAs and Tourism
10,000
10,000
5,000
10,000
5,000
10,000
5,000
40,000
15,000
1.4
1.7
15,000
10,000
10,000
5,000
40,000
1.8
40,000
9,900
156,900
32,000
8,200
210,200
32,000
5,800
107,800
32,000
5,704
116,704
32,000
40,000
29,604
591,604
128,000
1.6
1.5
71300
OUTCOME 1
Wildlife Protected
Areas are
Mainstreamed
into National
Development
Frameworks
NEX
62000
GEF
72100
71600
74200
74500
72200
73100
OUTCOME 2
Policy, regulatory
NEX
62000
GEF
71200
Contract services companies 1
2
3
Travel
Printing &
Publications
Miscellaneous (Short
training)
Equipment
Utilities
Sub-total GEF
International
Consultants
See Budget Note:
1.0.1 CTA
1.3.1
2.0.1 CTA
179
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Governance
Frameworks are
in Place and
Functioning
71300
Local Consultants
12,000
72100
Contract servicescompanies
10,000
25,000
Travel
Publications
Miscellaneous (Short
training)
Utilities
Sub-total GEF
8,000
International
Consultants
Local Consultants
71600
72500
74500
73100
71200
71300
62000
GEF
71600
72500
74500
74500
72200
74200
73100
OUTCOME 4
New Protected
NEX
62000
GEF
71200
Travel
Publications
Miscellaneous
(Training)
Miscellaneous
(Short-term Training)
Equipment
Audio visual and
print production costs
Utilities
Sub-total GEF
International
Consultants
12,000
48,000
33,000
30,000
60,000
15,000
32,000
9,000
18,000
2.0.2; NPC
2.2.1; 2.3.2 a & b
2.1.2 Wildlife Policy Linkage
2.2.2 Wildlife Sector Review
2.3.1 WCPA & PA Categories
2.5
2.4
2.6
10,000
8,000
3,000
6,000
9,600
106,600
5,700
144,700
4,200
86,200
1,656
56,656
21,156
394,156
2.7
48,000
20,000
12,000
48,000
80,000
12,000
21,000
40,000
40,000
40,000
48,000
40,000
12,000
6,000
48,000
16,000
12,000
192,000
156,000
48,000
27,000
40,000
40,000
40,000
40,000
170,000
170,000
70,000
40,000
9,000
150,000
3.01, CTA
3.11,3.2.1,3.3.1,3.5.1/2, 3.61/2
302, NPC
3.5.3, 3.5.4, 3.6.3
312 PA Economics Training
313 PA Community Training
314 PA Tourism Training
315 PA Management Training
323 Warden Training Program
333 Guard Training Program
366 GIS Database Input
3.7
3.8
322,332,341,365
17,000
3.10
72100
NEX
12,000
10,000
15,000
8,000
3,000
2,000
Contract servicescompanies
OUTCOME 3
Protected Area
Agency has
Capacity for
Planning and
Managing the
Protected Area
System Plan of
Ethiopia
12,000
33,000
20,000
25,000
8,000
3,000
60,000
50,000
50,000
30,000
10,000
3,000
45,000
40,000
60,000
60,000
30,000
10,000
4,000
45,000
6,000
6,000
5,000
10,000
0
35,000
0
0
0
0
0
45,000
0
3.9
19,000
195,000
32,000
26,200
536,200
32,000
24,400
384,400
32,000
3,672
211,672
32,000
73,272
1,327,272
128,000
3.11
10,000
10,000
60,000
60,000
10,000
2,000
0
4.0.1 CTA
180
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Area
Management
Partnerships are
Piloted and
Replicated
71300
72100
71600
74200
74500
72200
73100
71200
71300
72100
OUTCOME 5
Financial
Sustainability
Plan Developed
and Demonstrated
NEX
62000
GEF
71600
74200
74100
74500
72200
74200
73100
Local Consultants
12,000
Contract servicescompanies
30,000
Travel
Publications
Miscellaneous
(Short-term training)
Equipment
Utilities
Sub-total GEF
International
Consultants
Local Consultants
Contract servicescompanies
Travel
Publications
Professional services
Miscellaneous
(Short-term training)
Equipment
Audio visual and
print production costs
Utilities
Sub-total GEF
12,000
6,000
30,000
30,000
20,000
8,000
1,000
6,000
12,000
6,000
30,000
0
5,620
110,620
16,000
0
450,000
26,300
621,300
16,000
20,000
6,000
12,000
20,000
8,000
8,000
9,000
3,000
8,000
1,000
4,000
10,000
8,000
1,000
6,000
12,000
5,000
8,000
0
4,000
48,000
12,000
95,000
30,000
30,000
32,000
3,000
20,000
4.0.2 NPC
4.11, 4.3.1
4.2.1 University Field Studies
4.2.2 Community Awareness
4.2.3 Review Hunting Areas
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.2.7, 4.3.4, 4.3.5 (PAs)
4.7
20,000
20,000
8,000
3,000
0
3,158
64,158
16,000
8,000
6,000
2,000
10,000
10,000
8,000
3,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
450,000
42,078
890,078
64,000
48,000
24,000
14,000
50,000
30,000
32,000
6,000
9,000
15,500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,000
66,000
6,800
93,800
3,800
81,800
3,810
69,310
18,410
310,910
7,000
94,000
16,000
20,000
6,000
6,000
5.0.1 CTA
5.1.1, 5.2.1
5.02 – NPC
5.1.2, 5.2.2
5.1.3 PA Economic Analysis
5.2.3 Trust Fund Processes
5.3
5.4
5.2.7
5.5
5.6
181
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
GEF
Outcome/Atlas
Activity
Impl
Agent
Fund
ID
Donor
Name
Atlas
Account
Code
71300
71600
74200
74100
74500
72200
74200
73100
74500
74100
ATLAS Description
Local Consultant Mgt
Travel
Publications
Audit Fees
Miscellaneous (Short
Train For a)
Equipment
Audio visual and
print production costs
Utilities
Communications
Professional services
Sub-total GEF
PROJECT TOTAL
Amount
Year 1
Amount
Year 2
Amount
Year 3
6,000
30,000
4,000
6,000
36,000
4,000
6,000
36,000
4,000
3,000
1,000
3,000
1,000
80,000
5,000
Amount
Year 4
Total
USD
Notes
3,000
1,000
6,000
36,000
4,000
1,000
3,000
1,000
24,000
138,000
16,000
1,000
12,000
4,000
NPC
Admin Staff PMU 1
PMU 2
M and E 4
PMU 3
Inception M and E 5
2,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
82,000
20,000
PMU 4
PMU 5
2,400
4,000
40,000
175,400
3,500
4,000
40,000
104,500
2,400
4,000
40,000
101,400
4,680
4,000
40,000
104,680
12,980
16,000
160,000
485,980
PMU 6
PMU 7
PMU 8
793,900
1,710,700
872,220
623,180
4,000,000
BUSINESS PLAN AND OVERALL BUDGET NOTES: STAGE ONE
Ethiopia is an LDC, with considerable rural poverty, and has one of Africa’s least well developed Protected Area Systems. Against that,
Ethiopia harbours some of the most diverse ecosystems, with high endemism, of all tropical Africa. This project is to upgrade that
system and build capacity and sustainable financing across the several autonomous Regions and varied landscapes. The project has two
administrative parts or “Stages” – each of four years. Part One focuses on capacity, Part Two on further scaling up of implementation.
Capacity Building requires a diverse set of skills / knowledge transfer – from basic wildlife management in Protected Areas and at larger
landscape levels, through tourism planning, watershed and land degradation linkages, sustainable financing and PES issues, and the
range of topics around community involvement including benefit sharing, CNNRM and community conflict resolution. Training is
emphasised - especially the nationalization of training programmes IN Ethiopia, instead of constant reliance on Tanzanian and Kenyan
institutions. Project planning uses specialist Consultancies to develop the detail of major institutional contracts (such as the training
programmes). All of this means a heavy reliance on International (often “Regional – from Africa”) Consultancy – especially in Stage
One. Stage Two (see below) has a much smaller input of consultants and a greater use of Contracts to implement on the ground.
182
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
The Business Plan for the FIRST 4 year stage of this 8 year project is to focus on institutional reform, capacity building, and the clarity
of roles and mandates of wildlife sector institutions, whilst emphasising skill development at professional warden and field levels.
Training capacities are developed in country, by partnering with neighboring institutions. Overall implementation of this first stage is
entrusted to GTZ-IS, through a Letter of Agreement from Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, the Executing Agency of
Government. GTZ-IS assists the establishment of a Project Management Unit in the Wildlife Conservation Department in the Ministry.
After 4 years, Stage Two takes over, with implementation by the newly capacitated Wildlife sector under standard NEX processes. In
both stages of the project, the complexity of technical inputs that is required to drive several diverse outputs is coordinated by a full time
National Project Manager, advised by an experienced internationally recruited CTA consultant. Specialised technical inputs are led by a
series of short-term consultants (both internationally and locally sourced). In many cases International and local consultants work
together in a skill transfer process. Where relevant, activities are led by contracted specialized institutions through service contracts (ie
in longer term training activity and economic studies).
NOTE: COMMON COSTINGS USED IN THESE BUDGETS:
The project will confirm and flesh out details of this outline Procurement Plan in the initial Inception Process. Such a detailed Plan will be
based on the principles described here and updated to reflect real price changes in Ethiopia as needed. The Procurement Plan will be
based on NEX processes covering contracts such as that agreed with GTZ-IS. GTZ-IS will take responsibility for major tax-free
procurement (vehicles) using accepted best practice in this first stage.
1) Consultants: International Consultancy Rates used here are net costs and include contracted fee, per diems and terminal and travel costs.
Ethiopia is not yet an expensive country (although costs are rising). A DSA of 70$ is used across this whole 4 year period (averaging cheap field
and more expensive town costs). Planning uses the 2007 indicative inclusive figure of 3,000$ per week (13,000$ per month, or 20,000$ for 1.5
months, taking 1.5 months as 6.7 weeks.) Note that Government planning has been in person months, but indicate week equivalents. Given the
weakened dollar and global inflation, we expect this figure to rise in future. Changes will be reflected in revised procurement plans. Note the
figure is an average - biologists tend to cost less, whilst economists / lawyers / IT cost more.
The longer term “CTA” is costed at UN P4/5 scales in Ethiopia at 160,000$ per year, including recruitment and allowances etc. CTA costs are
split across Outcomes (eg 30% time in Outcome 1). Outside recruitment – the average pay-scale is under 3000$ per week.
183
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
National Consultants are averaged as 3,000$ pm (750$ pw), inclusive of allowances and recruitment. The NPC is costed at a higher rate, seeking
a senior appointment, with more allowances – averaged at 5,000$ pm or 60,000$ pa. The TOR require someone with exceptional skills. The NPC
costs are also spread across all outcomes (eg 10% time on Outcome 1).
In most cases we pair an International Consultant with a National Consultant, seeing this as capacity – skill transfer. But this also provides context
and country specific information to international expertise. International expertise provides the incremental thinking to Ethiopian wildlife
conservation.
Project Management Staff: There are two a Project Administrator and Project Accountant; both nationals. They are costed at 1500$ per month.
2) Institutional Contracts: These are written as complete block costs, inclusive of travel, publications and reports, internal training and
dissemination processes. They spread over more than one year, and completion of satisfactory year one progress reports and budgetary requests for
following year allocations, will trigger the release of funds for year two. Contracts will be awarded using GTZ-Agreement with Government.
3) Equipment: Vehicles (expecting Toyota Hard-tops and Twin-Cabs) will be purchased for management team (details below). Note that vehicles
are not just for routine place to place travel; vehicles are a major wildlife management tool in Protected Areas – facilitating boundary inspection,
anti-poaching, survey and monitoring training etc. Such vehicles cannot be hired. There is little vehicle hire facility in Ethiopia beyond tourist
chauffer driven rates. Operational costs include insurance. GTZ –IS buy vehicles using tax fee best practice.
Computers will be purchased locally, taking advantage of service and guarantees. Cost-effective procurement procedures will be followed. Main
offices and basic furniture will come from Government counterpart funding.
4) Project Travel Plan. As per first stage, the project will prepare a comprehensive travel plan, based on real needs and prevailing costs in
Ethiopia. The Plan will be based on a set of principles (following both donor and Government norms). These include:
 The principle of a field based Protected Areas project seeking conservation impact on the ground in the PAs. Fieldwork is the norm.
 Principle of ensuring continuous capacity transfer and buy-in of the Regions and PA administrations (especially stage 1)
 Need to exercise continuous oversight of the contractual and consulting inputs to achieve maximum value (especially stage 2)
 Least cost travel (including travel time and financial cost) commensurate with needs and purpose,
 Project staff are paid at rates agreed by GTZ-IS, and government counterparts are paid at government rates.
 Short Term Training has costs for participant travel built into that budget line..
 Travel has three core purposes within regular project activity (monitoring project implementation, field data collection, field training and
demonstrating conservation processes). These three core technical / programming purposes and one administrative travel purpose are:
1) At least two core staff from two Regional HQ visit the Project HQ monthly,
2) At least two core staff from Project HQ visit at least two Regional Wildlife Offices monthly
184
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
3) A team of at least two project HQ staff plus federal counterparts visit at least two PAs each month for field work; PLUS
4) An administrator from Project HQ travels to at least 2 Regional HQ /PAs each month on accounting equipment purposes.
Travel options in Ethiopia include use of the still relatively cheap Ethiopian Airways internal flights (22 destinations including all Regional
Capitals). A 100$ dollar ticket for a two hour flight can replace a 600 km 24 hour drive by vehicle.
1
2
3
4
The travel budgets are summarized as follows:
Regional staff to Federal Project HQ
Federal staff from Project HQ to Regions
Project staff field work in 2 PAs
Administrative staff to regions
2 staff from 3 Regions for 2 days
2 staff to 3 regions for 3 days
2 staff 4 days in each of 2 PAs
1 staff 2 days in each of 3 Regions
TOTAL
1,000$ pm
1,400$ pm
800$ pm
800$ pm
4,000$ pm or 48,000$ pa
DETAILED BUDGETARY JUSTIFICATION FOLLOWS
Outcome
No.
ATLAS
Budget
1
Internation
al
Consultant
Budget notes
No.
Details
1.01
To minimize the transaction cost and maximize the cost effectiveness of the interventions provided by international
consultants / contracts in order to attain the project objective, one international consultant will be hired to provide full time
technical support throughout the project lifetime (the CTA). The international consultant will be selected on competitive basis
and will make contribution towards achieving all the five technical outcomes plus M&E. Details of the expected inputs
provided by the international consultant are shown in the TORs for International Consultant, included in the Annexes of the
FSP ProDoc. They are summarized here:
Answerable to the Wildlife Authority and GTZ-IS through the NPC, the CTA will:
Be responsible for the overall delivery of wildlife conservation content of the GEF intervention;
Provide technical coordination between the many components of the project, within and between outcomes
(Coordination here includes timing, sharing of results and resources, as well as technical / professional quality of output)
Be responsible for Output / Outcome reporting, with contractees, as quality publications
The CTA will invest time in capacity building and skills transfer. Stage One is a capacity building period.
The CTA spends 20% time on Outcome1, 20% on 2, 30% on 3 (capacity transfer), 20% on 4, and 10% on Outcome 5.
The CTA will work closely with a full time national consultant to implement these technical project activities (the National
Project Coordinator - NPC) – see below.
185
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome
No.
ATLAS
Budget
Internat
Consultant
1.3.1
Local
Consultant
1.0.2
Local Cons
1.1.2
Local Cons
1.2.1
Budget notes
An international consultant is provided through open tender to analyze the scope for PES (Payment for Ecological Services)
issues around PAs - looking at potential for watershed services to the PA system. This is planned for 1.5 mm (6.7 weeks =
20,000$). This follows from discussion in PDF B process with many partners and stakeholders, including the World Bank and
IFAD support to Lake Tana Watershed. PES is a new concept in Ethiopia. There is thus a need for agreement and buy-in from
within PA agencies as well as finance and potential user agencies. Note that this input has importance to Outcome 5 – and
Stage 2.
Outputs include: A PES strategy agreed within Ministry, and within Ministry Finance,
Tana River Catchments provide first MoU showing mutual interest and modalities for resource support.
Agreement on PES structures within Federal and Regional Authorities.
To maximize the cost effectiveness of the interventions provided by national consultants in order to attain the project objective,
one national consultant will be hired as National Project Coordinator (NPC) to provide overall technical support and
coordination throughout the project lifetime. The NPC will contribute towards achieving all these technical project outcomes,
and will spend 20% time overseeing administration issues (see Outcome 6). Details of the expected inputs provided by the NPC
are shown in the TORs included in the Annexes of the Prodoc / Proposal. They are summarized here:
The NPC is responsible to Government and GTZ-IS for:
The overall implementation of the project, including timely and cost effective delivery of outputs;
Ensuring effective liaison and cooperation between government agencies at federal and regional level;
Facilitating the smooth preparation and implementation of the many contracts;
Devoting 20% of time to oversight of the project administrative processes, supervising Administrative Staff, & reporting.
Ensuring the timely delivery and adequacy of national counterpart co-finance obligations.
The NPC will work closely with the CTA (1.1 above). The NPC spends 10% time on each of Technical Outcomes 1, 4, 5; 20%
time on Outcome 2 and 3; and 20% time on administrative issues (outcome 6).
Local (national) Consultants are recruited through best practice methods set out in the NEX / GTZ-IS modalities.
a) Two national consultants are provided for, (1 from wildlife and 1 from tourism sectors), who are giving support to the
International Consultant in data collection, and in determining strategy at regional levels for Wildlife - Tourism interaction.
Inputs in year 2 and follow-up in year 3 - 4. (1.7mm each at 3,000$ pm = 10,000$ in year 2 and 6,000 each in years 3 and 4)
b) One consultancy (3mm) to work with Inter Consultant, to assess and produce best practice on eco-tourism: “Developments
and Opportunities in Ethiopia”, as a major case involvement to the study area – from original habitats. Year 1 – 9,000$
A national consultant will be sourced through tendering to assist government and partners in the integration of EIA process
into PASDEP, with specific reference on reducing conflict between conservation and “unplanned” development. The consultant
will produce Guidelines for future EIA process and use past case history to illustrate issues. 2mm = 6,000$
186
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome
No.
ATLAS
BudgetCons
Local
1.2.2
Local
Consult
1.3.2
Local
Consult
1.4.1
Local
Consult
1.4.2
1.2.4
Service
Contract
(Internation
al)
Service
Contract
1.2.5
Budget notes
Local consultants will be sourced through tendering to assist government and partners in Integrating (and institutionalizing) M
& E process about Protected Areas into PASDEP. This includes the indicators and targets agreed on as PASDEP start-up in
2006. 90 days. Consultants will develop protocols for such data collection and modalities to integrate. (2 people one social
skills, one harder M and E process, both in year 2). (2 x 3mm x 3,000$ = 18,000$). This covers both federal and regional
process. Follow-up in year 3 (1mm each).
A local consultant will be commissioned to provide review of Protected Areas in the Lake Tana Watershed, looking at landuse practices, impact on hydrology (in terms of dry-season water flow and sediment flow). Compare protected and nonprotected areas. NOTE – this could be a contract with IWMI local partner. This feeds into and complements International
Consultant 1.3.1 (1.5mm year 1 and same in years 3, 4; all at 5,000$).
A local consultancy (60 days) will be commissioned to undertake a study on Protected Area impact on SLM / Land
Degradation, working around e.g. Simien in Amhara Region (dry mountains) and new Ogaden in Somali Region (flat very arid)
PAs. The aim is to contrast in and out situations, comparing resource status and livelihood implications. Year 2; 2mm at
3,000$ = 6,000$.
A local consultant (same person as in 1.4.1 above) will compile learning, and best practices and documentation and feed into a
larger workshop on PA – SLM interactions in general at a later stage in project. 30 days input. Year 3 x 1 mm at 3,000$.
An Institutional Contract to be awarded, through best practice as agreed between Government and GTZ-IS. (Call for bids –
e.g. WRI, ACTs, UN Poverty Initiative, etc) for a field study on Protected Area and Poverty issues, with reference to Ethiopian
protected areas (and transfer skills in such studies). Study will look at positive and negative impacts and opportunities for
improvement. This has publication and workshop inputs (see below). Note that this feeds into later studies on community
support, training curricula, tourism linkages etc. Outputs include:
1) Detailed documents (with statistics) on impacts of Protected Areas on Local Livelihoods (including lost opportunity costs).
2) An understanding of these impacts within wildlife sector at all levels.
3) Recommendations to reduce negative consequences and improve positive feedback.
An Institutional Contract to be awarded, through best practice as agreed between Government, UNDP – GEF and GTZ-IS; to
provide M & E Services. This follows GEF rules on External Evaluations. Inputs here include short input midway through
Stage One (is project on track) and a full External Evaluation at end of Stage One. This latter consists of two International
Consultants (one with Sustainable Finance expertise and one with PA Capacity Building expertise), assisted by a Local
Consultant, and logistical support.
187
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome
No.
ATLAS
Budget
Service
Contract
1.2.6
Travel
Utilities
1.4
1.5
Equip
1.6
Publication
1.7
Short Term
Training
and Fora
1.8
Budget notes
An International Service Contract is provided through open tender process. The Contractor will seek to integrate PAs and
Tourism sectors, in respect of institutional collaboration, business models, tourism support, publicity and tourism financial
support to PA structures – at federal, regional and PA level, as well as Govt. to Govt. linkages. Linkages to the Private Sector
and to International Organizations are essential activities. At present there is little institutional collaboration and the project
process suggests that tourism financing will be key to long-term sustainability. The Contractors will liaise closely with the
developing WB led tourism master plan. The Contract is seen as 4 months input in year 2 (52,000$) with specific follow-up
(e.g. supporting MOU processes) of 1mm each in years 3 and 4 (a further 26,000$). Outputs include:
A draft Protected Areas Tourism Strategy, with buy in from Federal and Regional Authorities
Private sector agreement with the PA – Tourism Strategy and clarity of roles and mandates.
Greater publicity for PA destinations in country and targeted marketing.
National Tourism processes include wildlife interests, staff in tourism and wildlife sectors with greater awareness
Travel costs across 4 years to meet Travel plan as laid out in Business Plan above.
Overall – this is averaged across all the component outputs in this outcome. The sum provides back-up maintenance, minor
equipment, sundries to this Outcome; the total in year 5 is rounded
The budget provides for equipment to allow the Ministry HQ staff who lead much of this Outcome to ahead and implement
efficiently – this is mainstreaming the Protected Areas process within four sectors / themes in the Federal and key Regional
Capitals (This unit works with Tourism, Finance, Watersheds, Environment and Land Management sectors at HQ and field
levels). Needs are:
1 Vehicle (Toyota Hardtop) 28,000$ (Note vehicle hire is not an option in cost effectiveness)
Projector, Video Unit: 4,000$
Computer – Printer – Scanner (DTPU) Unit, 3,000$
Total Equipment here is 35,000$
Major documents should be published in Amharic and English. The project assists in dissemination (print, media and video)
key documentation – in this case the new policies and strategies that affect wildlife.
Project works with private sector and Tourism Dept to jointly produce brochures and videos showcasing Ethiopian wildlife
Major Tourism Training in Year 2, planning Wildlife Tourism Strategy preceded by Regional Wildlife Tourism Meetings.
Follow-up interaction years 3 and 4
Wildlife sector will host training fora showing how PAs integrate into PRSP (PASDEP) process.
Wildlife sector will host training sessions on PES implications in key watersheds
Wildlife sector will host forum-debating role of PAs in overcoming land degradation.
NOTE: Training Fora will be local, and cost-efficient; targeting key partners in Federal and Regional Pas
188
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome
No.
2
ATLAS
Budget
Internation
al
Consultant
Local
Consult
Local
Consult
Local
Consult
Budget notes
2.0.1
The CTA (see Note 1.0.1 above under Outcome 1) puts 20% of time adding technical content to this Outcome Number 2 on
Institutions and Policy
2.0.2
The NPC (see Note above under Outcome 1) puts 20% of time to this Technical Outcome on institutions and policy, (there will
be much internal debate on policy processes).
A local consultant is recruited to review the existing ToR and financing / business plans models and enabling legislation for
ALL the regional wildlife units in Ethiopia. 1 mm 3000$. This is a precursor to the main plan of study.
Two local consultancies to be commissioned (through Tendering process). These are
1) A field review of Natural Forest potential “Parks” is to be undertaken, focus on Southern and Western Ethiopia (Joint survey
with Wildlife Forestry staff from HQ and region) 4 people over 2 months (4 x 2 x 3,000$ = 24,000$)
2) A local consultancy is commissioned to examine the history of PA gazettement in Ethiopia (2 x 1mm), outline barriers which
delayed past gazettement (federal, regional) and outline best practice for future gazettement. Advice on legal matters and
practical questions of advocacy, PA design etc. Commission a two-person team (PA planner and lawyer).
A local consultant is recruited (1mm) to review all regional wildlife laws and proclamations, and institutional organizational
set-ups (e.g. new Amhara Regional Wildlife Authority). The study provides lessons on best practice at regional level
A contract will be developed through a tendering mechanism, to review the main elements of existing wildlife policy and their
linkages with other sectors etc in other regions. The contract will seek to up-date present federal law and policy as required, and
work with Government colleagues to get the processes approved, with mechanisms for update / review. Outputs will be
1) An analysis of pros cons and opportunities and challenges of current policy process (and how it affects emerging topics such
as empowerment, PES, management processes, buffer zones etc.
2) Recommendations as to best practice in seeking policy review and harmonization.
An institutional contract is put out for tender, seeking support for institutional reform within the evolving wildlife sector and
surrounding decentralization and ministerial reorganization. Contract services and outputs include:
- Agreement on scope and mandate of “wildlife” sector, with reference to natural resources (e.g. forestry) and federal vs.
regional mandates (e.g. the role of “NATIONAL” National Parks, cross-border Parks).
- Agreement on internal organisation, staffing levels and ToR for sections /staff, & funding requirements incorporated.
- Basic HR functions around staffing posts are agreed
- Staffing plan built into an overall Sector Business Plan, linked to financial flows
(Contracts could go to e.g.- Bonn Law Unit Of IUCN, Price Waterhouse etc)
2.2.1
2.3.2
Local
Consult
2.1.1
Service
Contract
2.1.2
Service
Contract
2.2.2
189
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome
No.
ATLAS
Service
Budget
2.3.1
Contract
3
Budget notes
Support commissioned from IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas – to advise on PA categories and functions and that
are harmonized with IUCN Categories. Ensure all PAs are on IUCN WCMC list. This consultancy will work with authorities to
improve PA gazettement reporting process. Key outputs include:
1) Clarity on PA categories, linking international typology to national categories.
2) Agreement on the functions of the UN List of PAs, Updating Ethiopia’s database
3) Advice on PA categories of value in Ethiopian context
The final “Policy” and final “Organizational Structure, Mandate and ToR” for the Wildlife sector books printed/disseminated,
English and Amharic
Travel costs across 4 years to meet Travel plan as laid out in Business Plan above
Several short training inputs are provided for in this outcome:
Three consensus fora are planned to agree and document the policy process (federal and regional inputs).
Three working groups meet to finalize institutional reform, again seeking clarification of regional – federal interaction. and
training dissemination.
Further 3 fora bring PA managers together to agree PA categories, agree boundaries, agree legal gazettement processes.
Across all outputs, contribution to maintenance of vehicles, copiers, computers, communications etc. Rounded in year 5
Publications
2.4
Travel
Short Term
Training /
For a
2.5
2.6
Utilities
2.7
Internationa
l
Consultant
Internationa
l Consultant
3.0.1
The CTA spends 30% of time on this technical Outcome, providing inter-action between components, synergy and technical
linkages. Details under Output 1
3.1.1
Internationa
l Consult
3.2.1
Internationa
l Consultant
3.3.1
An international training consultant will hold an updated Training Needs Assessment for “In-Service Training”, and Develop a
Training Programme (working with new Training Officer). 1.5mm in year 1, = 6.7 weeks = (20,000$) followed by final
assessment in year 4 of 10 days (5,000$). The consultancy will flesh out details of all in service training inputs that follow
(3.1.2 to 3.2.5)
An international consultancy is commissioned to develop a training framework for Wildlife Guards - (Training Needs
Assessment, Curriculum and Methodology) working with new Dept Training Officer and co-finance partners for Guard (Scout)
cadres. Providing links to Kenya Ranger Training School. 1.5mm in year two (20,000$). This leads to contract 3.2.4.
An international consultancy is commissioned to develop a training framework for new Wildlife wardens (Training Needs
Assessment, Curriculum and Methodology) working with new Dept Training Officer and Wondar Genet Forest College.
Providing links to both CAWM Mweka Tanzania and KWS School Kenya) 1.5mm in year two & 15 days follow-up in year 4.
This leads to detailed Contract 3.2.3, and an agreed contract with detailed budgets and indicators is main output.
190
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome
No.
ATLAS
Budget
Internationa
l Consultant
3.5.1
International 3.5.2
Consultant
Internationa
l Consultant
3.6.1
Internationa
l Consultant
3.6.2
Local Cons
3.0.2
Local
Consultant
3.5.3
Budget notes
An international consultancy is commissioned to develop the overall “Business Plan” for the Wildlife Sector, looking at longterm needs and contributions from Federal/Regional levels. Factor in the growing linkages from tourism and PES process.
Advise on planning at system and PA level. 1.5mm (= 6.7 weeks = 20,000$) in year 2. This leads to Stage 2 of Project. Key
Outputs are:
1) The optimum and essential costs scenarios for the Wildlife Sector, factoring in major new PAs / staffing are outlined
2) Funding strategies are outlined showing present and anticipated government allocations, compared with regional norms.
3) Strategies to meet gaps between requirements and probable funding are outlined (looking at PES, Tourism etc)
An international consultancy is commissioned to develop the overall Knowledge Management system for the sector, including
databases, computerized and hard copy records. Advise on learning, and planning KM at federal regional and at PA level.
1.5mm. This leads to Stage 2 of Project. Key outputs are:
1) A “SWOT” assessment of existing formal and informal knowledge management systems in Ethiopia’s “wildlife sector”.
2) Recommendations for strengthening such knowledge and information management, from government, NGOs and Academia
3) Demonstrations of KM mechanisms including web sites, databases, library storage etc.
An international consultancy is commissioned to develop plans for an overall cost-effective GIS system for the wildlife sector
(learn from Forests). Select local technical partners to undertake training and set up systems. Advise on needs at federal /
regional level. 1.5mm (= 6.7 weeks = 20,000$), with 10 days follow-up at end (5,000$). This takes off from 3.5.2 above – to
spatial databases.
Key outputs from this “planning consultancy” include:
1) Assessment of current GIS situation in Ethiopia (training, practitioners, skills) with special reference to past forest expertise
2) An agreed outline of GIS Options for wildlife sector (including costs and benefits)
3) An approved contract setting out the development of a GIS system.
An international consultancy is commissioned to advise on PA system ecological coverage, looking at total gaps and
inadequacies in terms of size and design. Set out a bio-geographic planning framework, which fits into GIS planning structures.
(Work with national counterpart – see below) 1.5mm = 6.7 weeks @20,000$ in year 3. This leads to Stage 2. Key Outputs are:
1) Building on the PA System analysis from PDF B, assess the current biogeographic analysis of Ethiopia
2) Assess the coverage of current PA network against the best of biogeographic and ecological systems (real & potential PAs)
3 Make recommendations for further improvements to PA system (new PAS, upgrading, dispersal, corridors, fragmentation)
The Nat Project Coordinator has 30% technical time on this Outcome, ensuring outreach and coordination between
components.
A local consultancy is commissioned (two people of 3mm each, total 18,000$) to outline the Protected Area System Plan for
Ethiopia, examining federal, regional, community and private sector responsibilities, at ecosystem level and Protected Area
level. Outline role of “species recovery plans”, demonstrate coordination with broader Africa scale plans for eg Elephant
conservation, TBNRM etc. Commission a two person team : Biologist and PA planner.
191
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome
No.
ATLAS
Budget
Local
Consultant
Local
Consultant
Service
Contract
3.5.4
3.6.3
3.1.2
Service
Contract
3.1.3
Service
Contract
3.1.4
Service
Contract
3.1.5
Service
Contract
3.2.3
Service
Contract
3.3.3
Service
Contract
3.6.6
Budget notes
A local consultancy is commissioned to advise on natural forests and the Ethiopian PA system plan. How are forests included,
which forests. 1 mm (3,000$) input, after catchment studies and institutional mandates are clear.
A local consultancy is commissioned to work with International consultant above (3.6.2) on gap analysis and sites to
incorporate into system. Provide linkages to regions and to national NGO interests (2mm @3,000$ pm = 6,000$; year 3).
A Service Contract will be awarded by tender to an institution to run a Protected Area Economics, Business Model, Valuation,
Livelihood and Option Analysis Training Course, for 20 staff in a field setting. 2 specialist trainers (plus CTA) for ten days.
Includes Manual preparation, based on courses delivered. Total cost 40,000$
A Service Contract will be awarded by tender to an institution to run a Protected Area Community Conservation and
Participation training course: (Community options, buffer zones, policy and empowerment, sustainable use, benefits and
incentives, AIG, ICDP, M & E, etc) for 20 staff in a field setting. 2 specialist trainers (plus CTA) for ten days. Includes Manual
preparation based on courses delivered. Total cost 40,000$
A Service Contract will be awarded by tender to an institution to run a Protected Area and Tourism Course (Planning,
managing, monitoring tourism inputs and impacts, guiding, community tourism and eco-tourism, interpretation and promotion)
for 20 staff in a field setting. 2 specialist trainers (plus CTA) for ten days. Includes Manual preparation. Total cost 40,000$
A Service Contract will be awarded by tender to an institution to run a FOUR PART Protected Area Training Course for 20
staff in a field setting. 2 specialist trainers (plus CTA) for ten days. Includes Manual preparation. 40,000$ year 3. Details are:
a) PA Management: staffing, patrolling, recording, anti-poaching and law, staff management, target species, threat analysis etc)
b) Management Plan – Preparation/Implementation. Objectives & strategy, problems & option setting, work plans & budgets
c) M & E processes: M & E programme and activities. Vegetation water & fire. Animal populations. People issues
d) Sustainable Use Issues: Hunting, Quotas, Benefits, Problem Animal control, capture. Trade (birds reptiles) CITES issues
A Service Contract is developed with Wondar Genet College to provide two: one year “warden training” in Ethiopia in both
(field and classroom) with 12 students each intake, with support from CAWM Mweka College in Tanzania, and senior
Departmental staff from Ethiopia. Overall cost both trainings 170,000$.
Outputs include preparation and delivery of the Training Courses, with curricula and outline training manual, plus input from
Wildlife Sector senior staff.
A Service Contract is developed with KWS Kenya Ranger Training School, to provide a basic “Wildlife Guard Training”
course in Kenya in both field and classroom, with 24 students, with part two field training in Ethiopia with KWS trainers in
country. Overall cost both trainings 170,000$
Part two is that KWS mount a similar course, but all in Ethiopia (at a Protected Area with Co-Finance support)
KWS Kenya and Ethiopian colleagues finalize curriculum (and translate to Amharic)
A service contract is put out to tender to provide GIS support to Wildlife Department (on job training, demonstration, backup
and technical outputs) in setting up a GIS unit. Over three years, start Federal, add one Regional input. ToR evolve from
Consultant 3.6.1 above Total 80,000$ over 3 years.
192
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome
No.
4
ATLAS
Budget
Professional
Services
(Training)
Profesional
Services (/
Training)
3.2.2
3.4.1
Budget notes
Staff from Wondar Genet College and the Wildlife Cons Dept Training Officer both participate in training at a short term
training course in CAWM (Mweka Kenya), build best practice and identify training counterparts.
Three Msc Scholarships awarded to members of the Wildlife Agency (selection by Government and Partnership). One year
professional (NOT research) training, so probably at UK Universities that run one year courses
a) Wildlife Economics, Business Models, Private sector inputs
b) Wildlife and Tourism (Global best practice)
c) Wildlife Community Management
Usual safeguards about post training work – employment bonds.
Travel costs across 4 years to meet Travel plan as laid out in Business Plan above
Department staff trained in GIS process (overview of uses and methods for many staff), two technicians on data manipulation
and two officers on use of GIS methodology, use in PA management planning, in gap analysis etc. Training in Addis.
Major manuals and experiences will be published (translate into Amharic summaries)
Travel costs across 4 years to meet Travel plan as laid out in Business Plan above
To follow-up use of the training, feedback and lessons learned.
Two sessions on Training Needs Assessments from all Regions, together with co-finance to agree package (and learn from first
course to improve second course).
Training leads to consensus on system planning and business plan models, with agreement from Regions.
Fora seek consensus on GIS process and the PA system.
One forum is to coordinate with University / Civil Society to Commission a larger Conference on Ethiopia PA System.
3,2.4 and 3.3.4 Field Equipment (camping, short-term camping vehicle hire (mini-bus), binoculars, maps etc) provided, with
class equipment, videos, projector, specimens, maps and books (for Warden training – 25,000$ and Guard Training 10,000$).
3.6.8. Provide a GIS unit with two computer units, software (key), scanner, digitizer and map printer.
Across all outputs in this Outcome (and other Outcomes), a pro-rata contribution to maintenance of vehicles, copiers,
computers etc. Total in year 5 is rounded.
Training
Training
3.2.2
3.6.5
Publications
Travel
Training
Fora
3.8
3.7
3.10
Equipment
3.9
Utilities
3.11
Internation
al
Consultant
Local Cons
Local
Consultant
4.0.1
The CTA devotes 20% of his/her time to this Outcome through the project Stage one period
4.0.2
4.1.1
The NPC devotes 10% of his time to this Outcome, through the project Stage one period
A local consultant is hired to examine best practice, opportunities and constraints within existing working partnerships (Region
to Development Partner, PA to Development Partner, PA and Region to varied donor groups and larger NGOs; and PAs with
the Private Sector) with a view to determining best practices for future partnership. 2mm input @3,000$ = 6,000$.
193
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome
No.
ATLAS
Budget
Local
Consultant
Contract a)
4.3.1
4.2.1
Contract b)
4.2.2
Contract c)
4.2.3
Travel
Publications
Equipment
4.4
4.5
4.2.7
Equipment
a) To core
PA Regions
Equipment
b) To new
PA Regions
Short TermTraining
For a
Utilities
4.3.4
4.3.5
4.6
4.7
Budget notes
A local consultant works with regions to agree conditionalities of supply of field infrastructure, with MOU setting out purpose.
2mm input following awareness workshop.
Service Contract to University of Addis Ababa to commission student small scale field studies in priority PAs, to build greater
partnership between biodiversity researchers and wildlife sectors. Contract covers 3 years, to be governed by joint committee to
decide criteria, priorities and timing. Amounts increase as University builds capacity. Key Outputs include:
1) A network of wildlife researchers established, with greater awareness in academia of wildlife problems.
2) A set of research outputs that address priority issues in PAs
3) Protected Area field staff participate in field research and resource surveys, with linkages to academia.
Service contracts to two field based civil society groups to undertake awareness raising, leading to increased cooperation
amongst communities around conflict PAs. Details of PAs to be decided after Inception process, but key outputs include:
1) Greater factual knowledge of background to community – conservation conflicts which can inform management
2) Knowledge can feed into management Plan and Community planning frameworks
3) A greater capacity in country to address socio-economic issues within the wildlife sector
Service Contracts to (two) hunting associations to commission review of hunting lessons and best practices on quota setting,
hunting management and reserve conservation, as a technical study to the wildlife organisation. Key Outputs include:
1) A review of present hunting concessions (historical trends in quota use, revenues and beneficiaries)
2) Strengthening of the private sector association with linkages top PA management and resident communities.
3) Recommendations for improving conservation management n key hunting areas of Ethiopia.
Travel costs across 4 years to meet Travel plan as laid out in Business Plan above
Best Practice document is disseminated. Key findings from University and hunting studies are published
Provision for field study support to university researchers (camping, binoculars, maps/imagery, photos/cameras, cycles,
laptop/printer unit). No vehicle support. Total cost 60,000$
Support to the main regions with Wildlife PAs, in order to practice new PA management modalities: To Afar, Amhara,
Oromiya and SPN Regions (4). A package of field vehicle (Twin-cab is cost effective), with camp equipment, computer unit
and field radios; plus running costs for 2 years (package of 60,000$ times 4) 240,000$. MOU governs use and purpose.
Support to new Regions developing PAs for the first time: To Somali and Gambella Regions (2), A package of field vehicle
(Twin-cab) with camp equipment, computer unit and field radios; Plus simple survey equipment and running costs for two
years. (Package of 75,000$ times 2 – 150,000$). MoU governs use.
Training sessions / Discussion Fora assess best practices and how partnerships can be extended and enlarged.
Results of findings are discussed and accepted in science fora. One training workshop to be a larger joint conservation science
conference with University. Fora raise awareness of the conditionality MOUs and infrastructure, and at end to assess success.
Across all outputs in this Outcome (and other Outcomes), a pro-rata contribution to maintenance of vehicles, copiers,
computers etc. The total in year 5 is rounded.
194
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome
No.
5
ATLAS
Budget
Internationa
l Consult
Internationa
l Consult
5.0.1
5.1.1
Internationa
l Consult
5.2.1
Local Cons
Local
Consultant
Local
Consultant
Service
Contract
5.0.2
5.2.2
Service
Contract
Training
Travel
Publications
5.2.3
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.2.7
5.3
5.4
Budget notes
CTA spends 10% time on this Technical Outcome, providing linkage and support to components.
An international consultant is recruited to plan a contract to undertake the “Economic Analysis of Ethiopian PA system”.
Develop the methodology and framework for larger analysis. TOR for study outlined. Assess the possibility of GEF support to
Trust Fund, and outline other non-GEF options. 1.5mm at start (year 2) and 0.5mm follow-up at end (year 4). This links to
Stage 2. Key Outputs are”
1) Building on earlier consultancies on Business Plans and Tourism / PES processes, plan for a broader economic analysis of
PA costs and benefits is prepared, which includes direct and indirect economic benefits.
2) Suggest how this economic analysis is mainstreamed into larger government planning processes at federal / regional levels.
3) Outlines areas where further documentation / policy reform implementation may be needed to maximize benefit
An international consultant is recruited to develop a Trust Fund mechanism for Protected Areas Ethiopia. This will follow GEF
best practice and start with awareness of Trust Fund operations using examples from e.g. Uganda and Tanzania.” Develop the
methodology and framework for trust fund, get agreement on membership, purpose and constitution, seek registration. 1.5mm.
Work with national colleague. This links to Stage 2. Key Outputs include:
1) Building on broader financial assessments and linkages to watersheds and tourism services, the consultancy will detail the
needs for a Trust Fund in Ethiopia, looking at options including revolving funds for community buy-in and a depository trust
fund for tourism PES revenues.
NPC spends 10% time on this Technical Outcome, much linked to the coordination of outcomes.
Work with International consultant above (5.1.1), identify other trust funds in Ethiopia (e.g. Community, health, develop best
practice and lessons learned). Look at national legal status for trust funds; look at trust fund expertise (2mm).
Work with International consultant above (5.2.1), identify centres of expertise, and access to data sets (federally, regionally an
around PAs) Select target PAs.(2mm)
A service contract is put out to tender to commission a team to prepare the detailed economic assessment of Ethiopia’s PA
system. This will incorporate tourism and watershed planning (PES) information outlined in Outcome 1.
Part two of the study uses this information to show growing importance of PA system to macro-economic and local microeconomic systems in country, and show how to use this information to advocate for funding flows.
Part three of this study links the economic arguments to the PA Business Plan models developed in Outcome 3.5.
A service contract supports the Trust Fund Secretariat – under independent Management Board, following GEF best practice,
with stakeholder registration and constitution.
Build linkages to other GEF Trust Funds (eg Uganda and Tanzania), learn lessons on use, operations and design.
Travel costs across 4 years to meet Travel plan as laid out in Business Plan above
Key findings from analyses are published (policy briefs, brochures economic papers, media) and used to advocate for
sustainable funding.
195
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Outcome
No.
PMU
ATLAS
Budget
Short
Term
Training
Utilities
5.5
5.6
Local Con
PMU
1
Travel
PMU
2
PMU
3
PMU
– ME
3
PMU
4
AUDIT
Short Term
Fora
Equipment
OP Costs
Utilities
Communic
ations
Professiona
l Services
(Admin
overhead)
PMU
5
PMU
6
PMU
7
PMU
8
Budget notes
Training sessions build agreement on economic analysis, to obtain information from other sectors, to agree on way forwards,
one workshop discusses donor interests as a donor round table.
Across all outputs in this Outcome (and other Outcomes), a pro-rata contribution to maintenance of vehicles, copiers,
computers etc. The total in year 5 is rounded.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT COSTS INCLUDING SPECIFIC M and E Processes.
a) The NPC provides 10% time to supporting and linking technical outcomes to Project Administrative Services (See ToR).
Specifically Administrative Reporting to Govt. and GTZ-IS; and work planning.
b) Local Consultant Project Admin Staff – Full time Project Administrator and Project Accountant 100% input (see ToR)
Note that junior staff are provided by Government of Ethiopia (drivers, secretaries, cleaners, and guards)
Travel costs across 4 years to meet Travel plan as laid out in Business Plan above
Compulsory input. Done by GTZ-IS auditors. Annual costs 3,000$
Meetings at Regional Federal levels to discuss best practice and learning feed back from mid-stage and end of stage one
evaluations. Planning the move to Stage 2
Basic office & furnishings are provided from government, we add security proofing from the project, Two desk top computer
sets, plus modern laptops for senior staff. Photocopier, Scanner.
VEHICLES Two Toyota Hardtops (CTA NPM, Consultants), with safety equipment, insured. 56,000$
Town based administrative Suzuki.(insured) 14,000$
Operating Costs here includes HQ office and vehicle maintenance costs.
Across all outputs in this Outcome (as in other Outcomes), a pro-rata contribution to running of office (computers, stationery,
reporting etc). The total in year 5 is rounded..
Communications – main cost is internet broadband access. Skype and internal communications
Costed as 4% Administrative overhead, each year, over project stage one only, to GTZ-IS
196
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Annex I0-II: GEF FSP Ethiopia “SDPASE” Total Budget and Work Plan “TBWP”: Outcome Level
STAGE TWO: FOUR YEARS FROM JANUARY 2012
Award ID:
Award Title:
Business Unit:
Project ID:
Project Title:
Implementing Partner
(Executing Agency)
GEF
Outcome/Atlas
Activity
Imp
Agent
00048561
PIMS 449 ETHIOPIA Sustainable Development of Protected Area System of Ethiopia (Stage 2)
ETH 10
00058768
Sustainable Development of Protected Area System of Ethiopia
NEX – Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. National Implementation Modality
Fund
ID
Donor
Name
OUTCOME 1
Systemic Capacity
is consolidated for
Protected Area
Management
across all Ethiopia
NEX
62000
Atlas
Budget
Code
71200
International
Consultants
71300
Local Consultants
72100
Contract
servicescompanies
71600
72500
72200
74200
NEX
62000
(USD)
2014
(USD)
2015
Total
USD
48,000
48,000
48,000
18,000
18,000
140,000
40,000
50,000
6,000
180,000
66,000
50,000
3,000
6,000
5,000
10,000
18,000
3,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
29,000
6,000
11,000
5,000
192,000
60,000
72,000
17,000
500,000
196,000
200,000
32,000
24,000
11,000
(USD)
2012
48,000
60,000
18,000
14,000
160,000
60,000
60,000
GEF
74500
OUTCOME 2
ATLAS Budget
Description
GEF
71200
Travel
Publications
Miscellaneous (Short
Trainings)
Equipment
Audio visual and
print prod costs
Sub-total GEF
International
Consultants
(USD)
2013
6,000
3,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
444,000
16,000
50,000
391,000
16,000
312,000
16,000
10,000
220,000
16,000
See Budget Note
(At end of tables):
1.1. CTA 30% time
1.2 Prepare Contracts
1.3 NPC 30% time
1.4
1.5 Support Reg. PAs
1.6 Training Courses
1.7 PA Survey Database
1.13 Support to M & E
1.8
1.12
20,000
1.9
3,000
1.10
40,000
1.11
1,367,000
64,000
50,000
2.1a CTA 10% time
2.1b Prepare Contracts
197
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Sustainable
Finance / Business
Plan, including
Trust-Fund, in
place and
functioning
71300
Local Consultants
72100
Contract
servicescompanies
71600
74500
72200
74200
71200
OUTCOME 3
Best Practice
Protected Area
Management is
Replicated in
other Priority
Protected Areas.
NEX
62000
71300
Local Consultants
72100
Contract
servicescompanies
GEF
71600
74500
72200
74200
71200
OUTCOME 4
Protected Area
Principles are
mainstreamed
across all sectors
and levels in
Ethiopia
71300
NEX
62000
Travel
Miscellaneous (Short
Trainings)
Equipment
Audio visual and
print production costs
Sub-total GEF
International
Consultants
Travel
Miscellaneous (Short
Trainings)
Equipment
Audio visual and
print production costs
Sub-total GEF
International
Consultants
Local Consultants
GEF
72100
Contract
servicescompanies
6,000
14,000
30,000
70,000
6,000
6,000
30,000
70,000
250,000
6,000
6,000
10,000
70,000
250,000
6,000
5,000
6,000
3,000
10,000
10,000
6,000
3,000
3,000
10,000
210,000
48,000
60,000
18,000
14,000
60,000
60,000
40,000
30,000
6,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
388,000
48,000
368,000
48,000
64,000
18,000
18,000
3,000
30,000
18,000
60,000
60,000
80,000
30,000
6,000
30,000
40,000
80,000
30,000
6,000
6,000
48,000
40,000
20,000
6,000
6,000
3,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
355,000
32,000
60,000
12,000
14,000
312,000
32,000
262,000
32,000
181,000
32,000
12,000
12,000
12,000
3,000
80,000
40,000
80,000
50,000
50,000
40,000
80,000
80,000
80,000
80,000
50,000
50,000
24,000
17,000
80,000
220,000
500,000
24,000
2.2a NPC 10% time
2.2b
2.3 Business Plans
2.4 Develop TF
2.5 Inputs to Fund
2.6
8,000
2.7
3,000
2.8
40,000
2.9
1,030,000
192,000
60,000
72,000
17,000
180,000
160,000
240,000
110,000
24,000
3.1 CTA 30% time
3.2 Prepare Contracts
3.3 NPC 30% time
3.4
3.5 Species Action Plans
3.6 Hunting block inputs
3.7 NGO Community
3.8 Leveraging donors
3.9
12,000
3.10
3,000
3.11
40,000
3.12
1,110,000
128,000
60,000
48,000
17,000
80,000
80,000
240,000
180,000
180,000
4.1 CTA 20% time
4.2 Prepare Contracts
4.3 NPC 20% time
4.4
4.5 Trans-boundary input
4.6 Climate proof PA plan
4.7 Wildlife corridors
4.8 PA Tourism Plans
4.9 Animal control
198
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
71600
Travel
Miscellaneous (Short
trainings)
Equipment
Audio visual & print
production costs
Sub-total GEF
74500
72200
74200
GEF
Outcome/Atlas
Activity
Implem
enting
Agent
Fund
ID
Donor
Name
Atlas
Account
Code
62000
GEF
6,000
6,000
5,000
5,000
3,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
142,000
360,000
340,000
10,000
248,000
24,000
4.10
10,000
4.11
3,000
4.12
40,000
4.13
1,090,000
Notes
Amount
Year 1
Amount
Year 2
Amount
Year 3
71200
International
consultants
16,000
16,000
16,000
71300
Local Consultants
6,000
28,000
6,000
28,000
6,000
28,000
6,000
28,000
24,000
112,000
PM 3 NPC 10% time
PM4 Admin staff
12,000
12,000
12,000
12,000
3,000
48,000
3,000
7,000
7,000
PMU 6
PMU 7
PMU 11
100,000
10,000
71600
72500
NEX
6,000
ATLAS Description
72100
INTERNAL
PROJECT
MANAGEMENT
6,000
74500
72200
74200
74500
Contract servicescompanies
Travel
Publications
Miscellaneous (Short
term Training)
Equipment
Audio visual and
print production costs
Communications
Sub-total GEF
PROJECT TOTAL
Amount
Year 4
16,000
Total USD
64,000
14,000
110,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
20,000
2,000
2,000
2,000
2,000
8,000
176,000
86,000
69,000
72,000
403,000
1,327,000
1,537,000
1,351,000
785,000
5,000,000
PM 1 CTA 10%
PMU 8
PMU 9
PMU 10
< 10% of total
199
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
BUSINESS PLAN AND OVERALL BUDGET NOTES: STAGE TWO
The Business Plan for the FIRST 4-year stage of this 8-year project focused on institutional reform, capacity building, and the clarity of roles and
mandates of wildlife sector institutions, whilst emphasising skill development at professional warden and field levels. Overall implementation of the
first stage was entrusted to GTZ-IS, through a Letter of Agreement from Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, the Executing Agency of
Government. GTZ-IS creates Project Management capacity in the Wildlife Conservation Department in the Ministry.
After 4 years, Stage Two takes over, with implementation by the newly capacitated Wildlife sector, under standard NEX processes. In this stage of
the project, the complexity of technical inputs that is required to drive several diverse outputs is led by a full time National Project Coordinator,
advised by an experienced internationally recruited CTA consultant (see below). Specialised technical inputs are planned by a series of short-term
consultants (both internationally and locally sourced); in most cases international and local consultants work together in a skill transfer process.
Activities to implement these plans, within on-ground practical demonstrations, will be led by contracted specialized institutions from Ethiopia or
the eastern Africa region through service contracts. This includes longer term training activity, economic, technical studies (eg climate change and
species recovery plans). Federal Wildlife HQ will contract Regions to undertake activities in their PAs. Contracts will follow best practice NEX norms
(agreement between GoE and UNDP, as prescribed by NEX rules) and will include due diligence testing and competitive bidding.
Note that these budgetary allocations and the prioritisation of interventions will be updated and approved in the Mid-term Evaluation at end of Stage
One. A formal Revision Process at the end of the first stage will examine the suitability of proposed interventions.. Whilst there is general agreement
now as to these allocations; all parties agreed that changing conditions in the wildlife sector, the overall pattern of costs, and the possibility of other
donor co-finance, etc; could all influence these proposed budgets to some extent.
NOTE: COMMON COSTINGS USED IN THESE BUDGETS:
The project will develop a detailed procurement plan for Stage 2 in the last year of Stage 1. This Plan will be based on the principles
described here (and used in Stage 1), and updated to reflect real prices in Ethiopia and new GEF cost norms in 2012-2015. The Procurement
Plan will be based on NEX processes as agreed between UNDP and Government in Ethiopia. UNDP will take responsibility for major taxfree procurement (vehicles) using accepted best practice,
1) Consultants: International Consultancy Rates used here are net costs and include contracted fee, per diems and terminal and travel costs.
Ethiopia is not yet an expensive country (although costs are rising). A DSA of 70$ is used across this whole 4 year period (averaging cheap field and
more expensive town costs). At present we still use the 2007 indicative inclusive figure of 3,000$ per week (13,000$ per month) or 20,000$ per 1,5
months; taking 1.5 months as 6.7 weeks.) Note that Government planning has been in person months, we keep to that but indicate week
equivalents.. Given the weakened dollar and global inflation, we expect this figure to rise. Changes will be reflected in the new procurement plan.
Note the figure is an average - biologists tend to cost less, whilst economists / lawyers / IT cost more.
The longer term “CTA” is costed at UN P4/5 scales in Ethiopia at 160,000$ per year, including recruitment and allowances etc. CTA costs are split
across Outcomes (eg 30% time in Outcome 1)
200
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
National Consultants are averaged as 3,000$ pm, inclusive of allowances and recruitment. The NPC is costed at a higher rate, seeking a senior
appointment, with more allowances – averaged at 5,000$ pm or 60,000$ pa. The TOR require someone with exceptional skills. The NPC costs are
also spread across all outcomes (eg 10% time on Outcome 1).
In most cases we pair an International Consultant with a National Consultant, seeing this as capacity – skill transfer. But this also provides context
and country specific information to international expertise. International expertise provides the incremental thinking to Ethiopian wildlife
conservation.
2) Institutional Contracts: These are written as complete block costs, inclusive of travel, publications and reports, internal training and
dissemination processes. They spread over more than one year, and completion of satisfactory year one progress reports and budgetary requests for
following year allocations, will trigger the release of funds for year two. Contracts will be awarded using NEX procedures.
3) Equipment: After 4 years of intensive field use, vehicles from Stage 1 will have reached the end of cost effective lives, and need replacement.
New 4x4 field vehicles (expecting Toyota Hard-tops and Twin-Cabs) will be purchased for management team (details below). Note that vehicles are
not just for routine place to place travel; vehicles are a major wildlife management tool in Protected Areas – facilitating boundary inspection, antipoaching, survey and monitoring training etc. Such vehicles cannot be hired. Operational costs include insurance.
4) Project Travel Plan. As per first stage, the project will prepare a comprehensive travel plan, based on real needs and prevailing costs in Ethiopia.
The Plan will be based on a set of principles (following both UN and Government norms). These include:
 The principle of a field based Protected Areas project seeking conservation impact on the ground in the PAs. Fieldwork is the norm.
 Least cost travel (including travel time and financial cost) commensurate with needs and purpose,
 Project staff are paid at UN rates and government counterparts are paid at government rates.
 Short Term Training has costs for participant travel built into that budget line..
 Travel has three core purposes within regular project activity (monitoring project implementation, field data collection, field training and
demonstrating conservation processes). These three core technical / programming purposes and one administrative travel purpose are:
1) At least two core staff from two Regional HQ visit the Project HQ monthly,
2) At least two core staff from Project HQ visit at least two Regional Wildlife Offices monthly
3) A team of at least two project HQ staff plus federal counterparts visit at least two PAs each month for field work; PLUS
4) An administrator from Project HQ travels to at least 2 Regional HQ /PAs each month on accounting equipment purposes.
Travel options in Ethiopia include use of the still relatively cheap Ethiopian Airways internal flights (22 destinations including all Regional
Capitals). A 100$ dollar ticket for a two hour flight can replace a 600 km 24 hour drive by vehicle.
The travel budgets are summarised as follows:
1
Regional staff to Federal Project HQ
2 staff from 2 Regions for 2 days
800$ pm
201
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
2
3
4
Federal staff from Project HQ to Regions
Project staff field work in 2 PAs
Administrative staff to regions
2 staff to 2 regions for 2 days
2 staff, 4 days in each of 2 PAs
1 staff 2 days in each of 2 Regions
TOTAL
900$ pm
800$ pm
500$ pm
3,000$ pm or 36,000$ pa
TOTAL BUDGET NOTES
OutCome No
1
ATLAS
Budget
Inter
Consult
No.
1.1
1.2
‘’
National
Consult
“
1.3
1.4
Budget notes
Details
This provides for 30% of CTA time in technical oversight, reporting and monitoring of contracts during stage 2. The CTA
together with NPC (see 1.3 below) build linkages between Regional and Federal Offices.
Overall CTA time is 30% Outcomes 1 and 3, 20% time Outcome 2 and 10% time on Outcome 1 and POOM.
The overall TOR for the CTA include: “Answerable to the Wildlife Authority and UNDP through the NPC, the CTA will:
Be responsible for the overall delivery of wildlife conservation content of the GEF intervention;
Provide technical coordination between the many components of the project, within and between outcomes
(Coordination here includes timing , sharing of results and resources, as well as technical / professional quality of output)
Be responsible for Output / Outcome reporting, with contractees, as quality publications
The CTA will invest time in capacity building and skills transfer. Detailed TOR are in separate Annexes.
This provides for 3 x 1.5mm consultancies (1.5 ms at = 6.7 weeks = 20,000$ per consultant input) Year 1. Each consultant will
draw up detailed TOR for the major contracts, including cost effective budgeting, targets, outputs, training, and M and E
processes. The contracts are : a) Regional Protected Area Development (including PA selection) (see 1.5 below)
b) Training Courses via Ethiopian Institutions (Wondar Genet College from Stage 1) (see 1.6 below)
c) Protected Area Survey and Monitoring, linking censuses to databases (see 1.7 below)
Consultants will be sourced using UNDP-GoE NEX guidelines and established best practice.
Outputs include approved Contracts with detailed mandates, partners, budgets, TOR, reporting times, & selection criteria.
This provides for 30% of NPC (National Project Coordinator) time in technical oversight, reporting and monitoring of
contracts during stage 2. The NPC together with CTA (see 1.1 above) build linkages between Regional and Federal
Offices, and between sectors and agencies of government. TOR for NPC include: “Answerable to the Wildlife Authority
and UNDP, and in cooperation with the CTA, the NPC is responsible for:
The overall implementation of the project, including timely and cost effective delivery of outputs;
Ensure effective liaison and cooperation between government agencies at federal and regional level;
Facilitate the smooth preparation and implementation of the many contracts;
Devote 10% of time to oversight of the project administrative processes, supervising Administrative Staff
Ensure the timely delivery and adequacy of national counterpart co-finance obligations. Detailed TOR in Annexes.
Three national consultants support inter-national expertise (see 1.2 above) in drawing up contracts. This is 3 x 1.5mm at 3,000$
(14,000S$). This provides national context and detailed site knowledge, plus a learning capacity interchange for national staff.
One national consultant is mandated to prepare terminal lessons learned on accomplishments at end of the project (1mm input).
202
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
OutCome No
ATLAS
Budget
Institut’n
Contracts
1.5
“
1.6
“
1.7
“
1.13
Travel
Short
Training
1.8
1.9
Equipment
1.10
Budget notes
Contracts drawn up between Federal Wildlife Authority and Regional Wildlife Authorities to
a) Develop Protected Areas at regional level, building on capacities developed within the first capacity stage, and includes new
PAs that have been upgraded and created. This capacity development includes PA planning, essential infrastructure and
equipment, boundary marking, field training, and maintenance costs in demonstration PAs. PAS selected by 1.2a above.
b) To develop skills and processes in regional authorities to oversee wildlife protected area management at regional level.
Key outputs will be: 1) MOUs with all Regional Wildlife Bodies setting out patterns of support. 2) At least 5 new PAs
benefiting from this second round of funding support for demonstrating conservation effectiveness. 3) Inputs in place and
functional and PAs showing improved METT scores. 4) Effective management oversight based on political will and mutual
agreements, by the Regional Administrations. Government will take lead on this process.
Wondar Genet Training Centre In the University was supported in stage one to run specialised wildlife training courses (paired
with CAWM Mweka Tanzania and Kenya Wildlife College). In this stage Wondar is contracted directly to run a series of
training programmes (both diploma and in service) for federal and regional PA agencies. Details come from 1.2b above.
Key outputs will be:
1) At least 4 different In service Training Courses on priority topics are held with 20 participants per course.
2) At least two full Training Courses for wardens assistant wardens held in country, with 15 + graduates per course
3) Wondar Genet works with Wildlife Authorities to monitor utility of training as ongoing needs Assessment
A technical contract to be awarded to build competency (through actual field on-job training) in wildlife sector for PA survey
work (linking ground and air survey and censuses) and building this into a GIS database that can be accessed by both Regional
and Federal Wildlife Units. This input will link with past GIS expertise and capacity at federal level, details by 1.2c above.
Contract awarded through competitive process as agreed under NEX rules. Key Outputs will be:
1) Wildlife Sector has professionally designed resource assessment and survey capacity, which is linked to dedicated
computerised spatial database system, accessible to federal and regional authorities.
2) A programme of combined aerial and ground large mammal and habitat surveys is implemented, using best practice, with
staff trained to participate and analyze results. At least three air surveys of priority PAs conducted, and ground truthing in
place.
3) Results from all surveys are analyzed with information made accessible through interactive databases.
4) Coordination between this survey capacity and PA Management Plans, Species Action Plans and critical corridors etc.
An institutional contract is developed following best practice in UNDPO and O of E in GEF to provide for international and
national external evaluation of the project. ToR to follow GEF guidelines. Two Terminal evaluators plus local consultant backup. A shorter mid-stage M and E input ensures project has adequate monitoring processes.
An annual sum to facilitate travel of technical staff between HQ, Regions and the PAs. See Travel plan above
Provides for stakeholder involvement and training on the pattern of support to regional PA agencies, training of the
implementers and feedback on accomplishments and lessons learned.
In year 2, a larger format training brings database developers to support the PA survey processes.
This provides for supply of start up software and communications to new agency stakeholders PAs abd Regional Offices.
203
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
OutCome No
2
ATLAS
Budget
Operate
Costs
Publish
1.11
Budget notes
This provides for communications, vehicle running, office support – pro-rated to this Outcome across all Outcomes.
1.12
In last year of project, a series of PA publications building survey data into PAs with increased capacities for management.
Inter
Consult
“
2.1a
Nat
Consult
Contracts
2.2a
2.2b
2.3
“
2.4
This provides for 10% of CTA time in technical oversight, reporting and monitoring of contracts during stage 2.
Details of CTA inputs are in 1.1 above.
This provides for 2 x 1.5 mm consultancies (6.7 weeks = at 20,000$ each) to draw up detailed TOR for the major contracts in
this outcome , including cost effective budgets, outputs, targets and M and E processes. Consultancies seek expertise in
business planning and trust fund process in the African Region. Consultants in Year 1 with
a) 1.5 mm for overall business planning for the new Wildlife Authorities, and
b) 1.5 mm for the conceptual development of the Trust Fund, based on agreements at end of Stage 1.
Consultants will be sourced using UNDP-GoE NEX guidelines and established best practice.
Outputs include approved Contracts with detailed mandates, partners, budgets, TOR, reporting times, & selection criteria.
This provides for 10% of time of NPC working with the CTA on technical support of contracts; networking to Government.
This provides for counterpart national consultancy input (3 x 1.5mm) ro work with international expertise on contracts
A suitable institution will be contracted to develop (and train and monitor use of) business plans for the wildlife PA sector,
including nested federal, regional, and individual PA business plans. Such business plans will help guide future investment,
promote efficiencies and increase tourism flows. Details of contract will come from 2.1b above. Key Outputs will be:
1) The Business Plans from Stage 1 are updated, reflecting new institutional structures. Business Plans in place from Federal to
Regional Authorities.
2) Each major PA with a Business Plan compatible with Regional Oversight, and reflects management plan costs and revenues.
3) Business Plans set out where further revenue could be sourced, looking at PES and Tourism flows plus Private Sector and
Donor Partnership.
(And see notes in 2.5 below). Following stage one agreements on trust funds, and with concurrence of the MTE process, the
Trust Fund Secretariat that was planned in stage one will be operationalized. The Secretariat will be separate from the civil
service – parastatal processes; this contract provides the funds for maintaining the Secretariat.
Note that the Trust Fund envisaged here is not the full GEF financed Investment Fund (as per Bwindi in Uganda or Eastern Arc
in Tanzania). The Trust Fund envisaged here has two parts:
The first component of the TF is a repository and disbursement mechanism for capital derived from catchment management
and other PES processes and from Tourism payments – The Conservation Fund
The second component is a Revolving Fund, largely for CBOs around Protected Areas, providing capital to invest in
conservation activity and reduce exploitative pressure. Fund management will use best practice from UNCDF experiences in
Ethiopia and elsewhere. GEF provides limited seed money around four PAs (see 2.5 below).
2.1b
204
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
OutCome No
3
ATLAS
“Budget
2.5
Travel
Short
Training
Equip
Operate
Costs
2.6
2.7
Inter
Consult
“
3.1
National
Consult
3.3
“
3.4
Contracts
3.5
“
3.6
2.8
2.9
3.2
Budget notes
This provides for the seed capital of the Revolving Fund component that supports community engagement, and the
conservation fund. (This follows approval of the preliminary processes in stage one and concurrence of Mid-Term
Evaluation and partners as to role of the Trust Fund.). The two parts of the TF are outlined above. GEF provides limited
seed capital to both (2 x 250,000$), Additional co-finance is expected to provide support during stage2.
An annual sum to facilitate travel of technical staff between HQ, Regions and the PAs.
Provides for stakeholder involvement and training on the operations of the developing Trust Fund, training of the
implementers and feedback on accomplishments and lessons learned.
This provides for start up software and communications to new agency stakeholders (prorated to this Outcome).
This provides for communications, vehicle running, office support – prorated to this Outcome.
This provides for 30% of CTA time in technical oversight, reporting and monitoring of contracts during stage 2. The CTA
together with NPC (see 1.3 below) build linkages between Regional and Federal Offices. CTA TOR in 1.1 above.
This provides for 3 x 1.5 mm consultancies (6.7 weeks = 20,000$ each) to draw up detailed TOR for the major contracts,
including cost effective budgeting, outputs, targets and M and E processes. Details are:
a) Priority Species Action Plans, including confirmation of taxa, linkage to eg IUCN Species Specialist Groups (3.5 below)
b) Management Plans for buffer zone hunting blocks, including buy-in with Private Sector and Outfitters (3.6 below).
c) Community Conservation Planning and Involvement, including selection of areas (3.7 below)
Consultants will be sourced using UNDP-GoE NEX guidelines and established best practice.
Outputs include approved Contracts with detailed mandates, partners, budgets, TOR, reporting times, & selection criteria.
This provides for 20% of NPC time in technical oversight, reporting and monitoring of contracts during stage 2. The NPC
together with CTA (see 1.1 above) build linkages between Regional and Federal Offices
Three national consultants (3 x 1.5mm input at 3,000 $ each) support inter-national expertise (see 3.2 above) in drawing up
contracting documents. National consultants provide national context and background.
One national consultant is mandated to prepare terminal lessons learned on accomplishments at end of the project. 1mm
Five “Priority Species Action Plans” (for elephant, mountain nyala, wild ass, Ethiopian wolf, Grevy’s zebra) are contracted out
for development & initial implementation, to suitable institutions of demonstrated regional conservation expertise. Outputs are:
1) Technical assessments of the conservation status of these five key species, based on surveys (see 1.7 above)
2) Conservation plans for these species drawn up and approved with input from government and non-government expertise
3) These conservation Species Action Plans under implementation in priority sites
4) Initial success of plans used to advocate for further funds.
Wildlife hunting blocks (which are legally gazetted buffer zones around major PAs) are managed according to detailed plans
drawn-up by collaborative mechanisms (wildlife, safari-outfitters from private sector and local communities). Outputs are:
1) An overview of status of the Wildlife Hunting Blocks is completed, showing conservation, social & economic cost/benefits
2) Private sector and communities work with Governments to draw up management plans showing roles and mandates
3) Stakeholders implement the plans (using evolving adaptive management) d0pcumenting successes and challenges
205
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
OutCome No
4
ATLAS
“Budget
3.7
“
3.8
Travel
Short
Training
Equip’nt
Operate
Inter
Consult
3.9
3.10
3,11
3.12
4.1
4.2
“
National
Consult
“
4.3
4.4
4.5
Contracts
Budget notes
Contracts awarded to community support NGOs to develop community activities that foster conservation, around five separate
PA clusters (not immediate co-finance areas). Outputs are:
1) A greater analysis of community conservation relationships setting out costs and benefits to both sides. Learn from Bale Mts
2) Community Conservation Plans for peripheral buffer zones are developed which link into adjacent PA Plans
3) CC Plans show linkages to tourism Developments, reduction of conflict, use of alternative resources
4) CC Plans link to Community Funding Processes under 2.4/5 above
Contracts awarded to two institutions of comparative advantage to link donor PA interest (private sector multi-laterals bilaterals) in two separate regional PA clusters. Key outputs will be targeted (leveraged) co-finance agreements for aspects of PA
management. This contract drawn up by CTA/NPC building on donor linkages of UNDP/Govt. Outputs are:
1) At least two new Donor - PA partnerships are approved, setting out long term capacity and support.
An annual sum to facilitate travel of technical staff between HQ, Regions and the PAs.
Provides for stakeholder involvement and training on the wildlife technical interventions, training of the implementers
and feedback on accomplishments and lessons learned.
This provides for start up software and communications to new agency stakeholders.
This provides for communications, vehicle running, office support – prorated to this Outcome.
This provides for 30% of CTA time in technical oversight, reporting and monitoring of contracts during stage 2. The CTA
together with NPC (see 1.3 below) build linkages between Regional and Federal Offices. CTA details in 1.1 above.
This provides for 3 x 1.5 mm (6.7 weeks = 20,000$ each) consultancies to draw up detailed TOR for the major contracts,
including cost effective budgeting, outputs, targets and M and E processes. Details are
a) Develop 2 contracts, one on Trans-boundary processes (see 4.5 below), and one on wildlife dispersal zones, corridors (4.7)
b) Develop a contract setting up climate change advisory support in PA design & management and species plans (see 4.6)
c) Develop a contract for developing PA / site based Tourism Plans (building on stage1) see 4.8 below.
Consultants will be sourced using UNDP-GoE NEX guidelines and established best practice.
Outputs include approved Contracts with detailed mandates, partners, budgets, TOR, reporting times, & selection criteria.
This provides for 30% of NPC time in technical oversight, reporting and monitoring of contracts during stage 2. The NPC
together with CTA (see 1.1 above) build linkages between Regional and Federal Offices
Three national consultants support inter-national expertise (4.2 above) in drawing up contracts. 3 x 1.5mm)
One national consultant is mandated to prepare terminal lessons learned on accomplishments at end of the project (1mm).
Contracts awarded to suitable institutions (federal, region, private sector, NGO; OR combinations) to develop transboundary MOU processes in and around 3 priority sites (eg Alatish, Gambella and Turkana). Outputs are:
1) Analyses of Cross-Border Threats and Opportunities for developing “TBNRM” at each site.
2) Formal discussions with cross border authorities (eg Dinder NP in Sudan, and in Kenya for Turkana). These
discussions include possibilities of joint surveys and implementation of species action plans (eg Grevy’s Zebra).
3) Outline Cooperation MOU drawn up and technical diplomatic agreement sought
4) Cooperation processes are monitored and documented, feeding into PA Management Plans
206
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
OutCome No
ATLAS
Budget
“
4.6
“
4.7
“
4.8
“
4.9
Travel
Short
Training
Equipm.
Operating
5.10
5.11
5.12
5.13
Budget notes
Specialist institution contracted to develop climate adaptation proofing strategies for species action plan processes, for PA
management plans and for regional authorities mandated to conserve landscape systems of PAs. Outputs are:
1) Technical analyses of Climate Change Scenarios for Ethiopia and how these may impact wildlife habitat/populations
2) These analyses feed into Species Action Plans and PA management plans.
3) This information set feeds into a) Contract 4.7 below on dispersal areas and movement corridors seeking longer term
conservation benefits; and b) Possible needs for PA boundary modification, use of Forest Reserves and new PAs.
A contract (or a series of interlocking contracts in different Regions) awarded to technical and conservation institutions to
plan and implement a set of priority wildlife dispersal zones and corridors, around major wildlife PAs. Outputs include:
1) Conservation Expertise uses “Minimum Viable Population” concepts and other tools to highlight areas of conservation
concern, drawing on experiences from Bale Mts in Stage 1.
2) Conservation Surveys and Census data are used to highlight dispersal areas, which are afforded buffer-zone status.
3) Buffer zone plans drawn-up in relation to Community Plans and (where relevant) Hunting Block Plans, as well as PA
and Species Action Plan processes.
4) Priority areas for conservation fed into larger national / Regional PA policies and Systematic Network Planning.
A contract (or contracts) awarded to organisations of comparative advantage to develop Tourism Plans, and facilitate plan
implementation for all major PAs, in cooperation with PA management, regional agencies and emerging private sector.
Outputs include:
1) Systemic guidelines as to how Tourism Plans at PA and Regional level function, building on new wildlife tourism
policies developed in stage 1.
2) Guidelines used to develop PA based Tourism Planning, including marketing, involvement of local people (including
conservation - wildlife - cultural - historical tourism packages), and involvement of private sector.
3) Tourism Plans feed into Management Plans and Business Plans.
A contract (or contracts) awarded to suitable institutions to plan and implement problem animal control (prevention and
mitigation) measures around main PA clusters. This contract developed by CTA, NPC and Federal staff. Outputs include:
1) An assessment of Human – Wildlife Conflict interactions in Ethiopia – around PAs (less attention to “on-farm” pests
such as baboons, porcupines, jackals, mole-rats etc). Assessment looks at conservation & socio-economic consequences.
2) Existing conflict resolution mechanisms are catalogued and assessed as to effectiveness and acceptability.
3) A portfolio of promising options are tested around at least 3 PA clusters, including best practice from elsewhere. These
should include livestock predator conflicts as well as eg elephant and large herbivore conflicts.
4) Results are used to advocate for policy recognition, mainstreaming into Management Plans and use of best practice
An annual sum to facilitate travel of technical staff between HQ, Regions and the PAs.
Provides for stakeholder involvement and training on the pattern of support to regional PA agencies, training of the
implementers and feedback on accomplishments and lessons learned.
This provides for start up software and communications to new agency stakeholders.
This provides for communications, vehicle running, office support – prorated to this Outcome.
207
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
OutCome No
PMU
ATLAS
Budget
Int
Cons
PM 1
Project
Own
Operatio
n Mgmt,
Int Cons
PM 2
Local
Consult
PM 3
PM 4
Local
Consult
Publish
PM 5
Equip
PM 7
Travel
Commun
PM 8
PM 9
Operating
Costs
Short
Training
PM
10
PM
11
PM 6
Budget notes
International Consultant: This provides for 10% of CTA time to provide inputs to the Project Management Unit over project 4
year period. Note this differs from Stage 1 where GTZ-IS provided backstopping support and oversight to administrative input
International Consultant – A Two person Final Evaluation Team (one on Wildlife and one on Trust Fund processes) undertakes
detailed final evaluation to GEF standards and TOR. There will be much emphasis on sustainability, and future funding flows
from non-GEF resources. (Two persons each 1 mm {= 4.3 weeks}at 13,000$). This is year 4.
IC. A single evaluator provides a “mid-term” oversight process at end of two year period (1 mm, 13.000$)
Consultants will be sourced using UNDP-GoE NEX guidelines and established best practice.
Outputs include accepted Terminal (Mid-term Overview) Evaluation Report to GEF O of E standards.
a) LC: This provides for 20% of National Project Manager time, again an increase from the first stage, across 48 months
b) Local Consultancy Support Staff (Administrator /Accountant and an Accounts Assistant), for the 48 months of project
lifetime. Other support staff from Government,
Local Consultant. 2 Ethiopian Evaluators work with IC team on Final Evaluation (2x1mm) – providing local context, extra
field documentation and interpretation to the evaluation processes. There is also a skills transfer component here.
Funds are provided for detailed midterm reporting (establishment of Trust Fund and Business Plan in place), and a full
Terminal Report on the full 8 year GEF Project – with history and lessons learned.
The vehicles purchased 4 years earlier need replacing (as they become non-economical in terms of maintenance after 4 years in
field conditions) – see Procurement Plan at top of budget notes. Computers need upgrading to allow new technologies and
communications. (Total is 2 Toyota Hardtops, 1 Suzuki town admin vehicle, field vehicles with safety inputs & tools / spares,
plus 3 computers and 2 laptops plus printers, radio upgrade as needed))
Funds support internal travel costs (HQ to the 9 Regional capitals and PAs) on administrative / management support.
Costs of radio, (field security) and telephone communications (9 regional capitals)
Operating the Vehicles (including insurance) and Computer facilities, this also includes annual audit costs, office supplies.
Two inputs provided here: First in year one on NEX processes, training in accountability, results based planning and
accounting. This for staff from all regions and major PAs, administrator managers. Use of Atlas codes etc.
Second in year two on M and E processes, data collection after baselines etc. All Regions and main PA Managers.
208
Resubmission Ethiopia PAS PIMS 494 Prodoc
Country: Ethiopia
SIGNATURE PAGE
UNDAF Outcome(s)/Indicator(s):
By 2011, significantly strengthened capacities of the government, communities and
other relevant stakeholders to respond to situations that threaten the lives and wellbeing of population, which require rapid and appropriate action to ensure their
survival, care, protection and recovery while enhancing their resilience to shocks and
leading to food insecurity and sustainable livelihoods.
Expected Outcome(s)/Indicator (s):
Strategies and programmes for sustainable environmental management integrated in
national policies, national capacity raised to implement those strategies, and actual
services delivered to the poor.
MYFF Service Line 3.5: Conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity
Expected Output(s)/Indicator(s): Funding for Protected Area management
increased through new business plans.
 Increased level of income in communities through revenue sharing, collaborative
plans and other income-generating activities.
Government Partner: MoFED
Executing Agency: MoARD/WCD
Total budget: $31,429,500
Allocated Resources:
GEF $9,000,000
UNDP $ 1,200,000
Govt. $4,764,000 (In kind)
_________________
Other Donors:
Parks Africa: $ 7,750,000
Bale Consortium: $ 7,320,000
FZS
:
$ 2,590,000
CI
:
$
5,000
Total: US$ 22,429,500
Programme Period: 2006 -2011
Project Title: Ethiopia Protected Areas
Project ID: 00058768
PIMS ID: 494
Proposal ID: 00048561
Project Duration: 8 years
Management Arrangement: NEX, with
UNDP support
Brief Description: This GEF Biodiversity Project (Strategic Priority One (BD1) and OP1-4) addresses capacity
building across the whole protected areas sector of Ethiopia, in order to achieve a sustainable national protected area
system. The project recognizes the relatively weak sectoral situation at the moment - whereby the protected area
system is under resourced and marginalized from the national development agenda. The Project is in TWO Stages,
stage one building capacity and Stage two scaling up interventions at field level.
Agreed by (Government: MoFED):
Agreed by (Government Executing Agency): MoARD:
Agreed by (UNDP):
210