NIGERIA
NATIONAL FADAMA DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM II
Proposal for Project Development Funds (PDF) Block B Grant
Country:
Eligibility
GEF Focal Area
GEF Programming
Framework:
Project Title:
Requesting Agency:
Executing Agencies:
Total Project Cost:
Financing Plan (tentative):
Project Duration:
PDF Block B Funds:
PDF Co- Financing:
Project Preparation Funds:
Block A Grant Awarded:
Nigeria
Ratified the Biodiversity Convention, 8/29/94
Ratified Framework Convention on Climate Change 8/29/94
Multi-Focal
OP#12 – Integrated Ecosystems and Resource Management
National Fadama Development Program II (NFDP II)
World Bank
Federal Ministry of Environment in collaboration with Federal Ministry of
Agriculture and Rural Development and Federal Ministry of Water
Resources
US$120 million
IDA: US$ 100 Million,
GEF: US$ 10 million
FGN: US$ 10 million
Five (5) years, (Phase one of a 15 year program)
US$290 000
US$ 50,000 (FGN)
US$ 15,000 (DFID)
US$600, 000 (IDA)
No
BACKGROUND:
1. Nigeria occupies 923, 773 square kilometers of land near the equator that is marked by
ecological diversity and climatic variation. The natural vegetation reflects the topographic and
climatic diversity. Principle vegetation types range from the dense mangrove forests of the Niger
Delta, coastal plains and rain forests of the south, to the arid and semi-arid grassland of the north,
different types of savannah and also the montane grasslands on the Jos and Mambila Plateaux.
PAGE
1
The vegetation types corresponds to different ecological zones: the semi-arid zone, where rainfall
is erratic and less than 250 mm per year; the dry sub-humid and sub-humid zones which lie south
of the semi-arid zone with an average annual rainfall from 250 to 500 mm; the humid zone, where
average rainfall is between 500 to 1500 mm; the very humid and plateau zones, where the wet
season lasts about 6 months and average annual rainfall is about 1000 mm; and the mountain
zones, which have a wet season which lasts 10 or 11 months with two peak rainfall climatic
regime. Each zone is further sub-divided into sub-zones based on differences in floral species
composition. For example, the mountain zone (also sometimes referred to as the tropical
rainforest zone) is divided into three sub-zones: mangrove forest (salt water swamp) occurring in
the Niger delta and along the Atlantic coast of Nigeria, Fresh Water Swamp forests in river
valleys and Lowland rainforest occurring further inland. ( Map 1 indicating Nigeria’s Agroecological zones is attached).
2. Soil types in the different ecological zones range from rocky slopes of hills and mountains,
boulder accumulations with little or no soil and crystalline areas to shallow soils, sandy and
sandy-clay, loamy and sandy-loams and riverine alluvium. Over 5,103 species of higher plants
have been identified throughout these regions, as well as a wide array of animal species that
includes over 247 species of mammals alone. These include some of the world’s more unique
species, such as the West African Manatee, Pygmy Hippopotamus, Western Hartebeest, West
African Bush Elephant, Wild Dog, Giant Eland, and 24 species of primate. In addition to these
rare and distinct mammals, Nigeria has recorded over 885 species of birds, 900 species of fish,
more than 109 species of amphibians, and over 135 species of reptiles.
3. The Government of Nigeria has accorded some protection to areas with fragile ecosystems or
significant biodiversity throughout the country by designating various categories of protected
areas. It has 8 national parks, 1,129 forest reserves, 30 game reserves, 5 game sanctuaries and
thousands of gazetted forest reserves and grazing areas. Despite the official status of the protected
areas in Nigeria, the conservation and management of ecosystems and ecosystem processes in
areas of high global biodiversity is weak or non-existent. This is due largely to a lack of
operational funds and institutional capacity, and the pressures on government to deliver more
immediate basic services to the population. Collaboration between the agencies responsible for
natural resources protection is minimal or non-existent. Moreover, there is minimal coordination
between agencies largely responsible for conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems and those
that are purely responsible for extraction and utilization of these resources.
Environmental Issues and Poverty:
4. According to the World Bank Interim Country Strategy for Nigeria, 70 percent of the total
population of Nigeria (75 million people) is rural and 60 percent of the rural population is poor,
with 32 percent living below the poverty line. The majority of the most impoverished people in
Nigeria depend directly on the utilization of natural resources for their livelihood. The pressure
on natural resource base has exasperated with the population growth in rural areas, and resulting
increased demand for food, fuelwood and other natural resources. Approximately 80% of the
rural population relies on wood as its main source of energy. This in turn is translated into
increasing demand for arable land, deforestation, unsustainable agricultural practices including
haphazard land clearing, increased use of fertilizer, pesticides and herbicides. Ecological
processes support Nigerian rural life and the local economy through maintaining soil
productivity, the recycling of nutrients, the cleansing of air and water, and maintenance of
climatic cycles. At the genetic level, diversity found in natural life forms support the breeding
programs necessary for the improvement of cultivated plants and domesticated animals to
enhance food supply and security. In addition, the national economy also depend on services
PAGE
1
provided by natural resources including agriculture, water supply, forests, fisheries and nonrenewable energy, which are the foundation of its economy. Wild flora forms the basis of a very
significant pharmacological industry and the traditional use of medicine, as well as other nontimber forest products critical to local communities
5. The key environmental issues in Nigeria include land degradation, flooding and erosion,
deforestation, forest degradation, biodiversity loss, fisheries depletion, water contamination and
pollution from toxic and hazardous wastes1. Land degradation is noted as being the most serious
environmental issue affecting more than 50 million people. Formerly highly productive areas of
the lowland rainforests, freshwater swamp forests and savannah woodland have been hit by soil
fertility declines. It is estimated that at current population growth rates, agricultural production
will have to double in the next two decades to meet the subsistence requirements in the different
ecological regions. Pervasive poverty, non-availability of agricultural inputs, inadequate access to
water resources, markets and other productive assets are some key reasons causing farmers in the
Niger delta as well as in the Sudano Sahelian and Guinea Savannah regions to cultivate
increasingly marginal land and reduce fallow periods on existing plots. The influx of farmers into
resource rich regions from degraded upland areas also increases the pressure to seek new land
areas and to cultivate marginal land, resulting in further deforestation and land degradation. In
riverine areas, farmers are clearing prime forests and even forest shrines for plantain cash crops.
Land degradation, deforestation and the loss of biodiversity associated with unsustainable
harvesting levels in the high forest and in the savannah, are compounded by inappropriate
farming practices. Despite an estimated annual costs of US$3 billion to the national economy2,
existing interventions to mitigate land degradation and deforestation or to reduce biodiversity loss
are inadequate.
6. Flooding and Erosion. Over the last 30 years the construction of upstream dams and
subsequent sedimentation in reservoirs has decreased the supply of water for household and
agricultural services. This has also affected livelihoods of downstream populations engaged in
fishery. In some ecological zones, the effect of the dams was to decrease downstream floods.
This resulted in the settlement of large numbers of people in areas that were considered
unsuitable before the dams were constructed, because of the frequent and extensive flooding. In
addition, these dams gradually silted up, and they no longer functioned as flow buffers, causing
seasonal floods which have increased to pre-dam levels, threatening large number of the rural
poor. The return of floods also resulted in severe riverbank erosion and consequent loss of
valuable land. The serious gully erosion problems in the tropical rainforest zone as well as in the
Sudano Sahelian regions impact lives and livelihood of millions of urban as well as rural
populations.
7. Deforestation and Loss of Biodiversity. Government records indicate that 90 percent of the
original forest cover has been cleared and 2 percent of the remaining 5,950,000 hectares is
undisturbed. Demand for timber and fuelwood continues to rise, resulting in situations where
over 35,775 logs of 65 different tree species are removed annually from one reserve alone (Oyo
forest Reserve). In other sectors such as agriculture, large expanse of land is cleared for intensive
and extensive flood agriculture resulting in serious erosion of riverbanks, silting of rivers and
streams, and in some instances, loss of villages and farmlands to flooding. Most of the forests in
the lowland rainforest zone are already highly degraded, and savannah forest and woodlands are
similarly threatened. Deforestation, forest degradation and loss of biodiversity are serious
problems in all of the different ecological zones.
1
2
World Bank, Towards an Environmental Action Plan for Nigeria, Washington, DC: World Bank, 1990.
World Bank, 1990.
PAGE
1
ROOT CAUSES OF ECOSYSTEM DEGRADATION:
8. The government of Nigeria has recognized the importance of conservation and sustainable
use of ecosystems. There is a demonstrated intent and strategy in government for conservation
and sustainable management and use of the ecosystems. Different categories of protected areas
have been established ranging from strict nature reserves to game and forest reserves to protect
fragile ecosystems and biodiversity. However, inadequate and uncoordinated mechanisms, lack
of capacity and operational funds hamper the implementation of the strategic directions of
governments for conservation and sustainable use of ecosystems.
9. Increasing populations, pervasive poverty in rural areas, unsustainable agricultural practices
and overexploitation of natural resources are key root causes of natural resource degradation.
Declining productivity and increasing pressure on natural resources have marginalized the poor
and exacerbated community conflicts. Other causes include: (a) poorly developed markets that
fail to value or undervalue natural resources; (b) policy and institutional regimes that promote
open access to natural resources; (c) inefficient public regulating agencies with lack of clear roles
and responsibilities; (d) inadequate or negligible involvement of key stakeholders in decisions
involving the management of natural resources; (e) inadequate conservation measures and
unsustainable use of biodiversity; (f) weak inter-agency coordination, planning and monitoring of
natural resource use especially at the local government and community levels; and (g) inadequate
regulatory framework governing land tenure, rights of access to and use of resources, and conflict
resolution. These issues manifest themselves in different ways in the different ecological zones,
varying in severity depending on externalities including economic, social and political incentives.
LESSONS LEARNED FROM PAST AND ON GOING ACTIVITIES:
10. The GEF, World Bank, UNDP and bilateral donors have provided support to the
Government of Nigeria to address key issues of global and national importance including
biodiversity conservation, climate change, international waters and desertification which Nigeria
has identified as priorities for the country. Lessons learned from these activities and from projects
in other countries in Africa will compliment the design and preparation of NFDP II. Some of
these include:

The proposed IDA and GEF supported Nigeria: Microwatershed and Environmental
Management Program which aims to: (a) strengthen the policy and regulatory framework for
environmental management at the Federal level; (b) strengthen the institutional framework
for environmental management and in particular, the capacity for environmental impact
assessment at the state, local and community level in 6 targeted states; (c) strengthen
protected area and biodiversity management in these 6 states and in and around specific
protected areas (Yankari and Kainji Lake National Parks and Lame Burra Game Reserve);
and (d) support community investments to promote sound natural resources management in
the six target states.

Towards a National Environmental Action Plan for Nigeria which was financed by the World
Bank. This report published in 1990 formed the basis for the country National Environmental
Policy, Nigerian Agenda 21 and the design of the World Bank funded Nigeria Environmental
Management Project (EMP).

The World Bank funded Nigeria Environmental Management Project (EMP) which
essentially supported building of capacity at the Federal level for environmental management.
PAGE
1

The World Bank also supported the government in carrying out an environmental assessment
of the Niger Delta, which resulted in the report entitled: Towards an Environmental
Development Strategy for the Niger Delta. The positive results of these initiatives were
largely lost due to the difficult political situation in the country during the late 1990s.

The World Bank and Nigerian government co-sponsored a workshop in May 2000 to discuss
issues and opportunities in natural resources management. This workshop was attended by
national and local governments, NGOs and donors. The report on which the workshop was
based notes that a poverty alleviation program should address three strategic objectives: (a)
emphasize the sustainable use of its renewable resources such that their regenerative capacity
is not jeopardized, and the negative impact on the poor is minimized; (b) minimize the
depletion of nonrenewable resources so that sufficient savings in man-made, human, or social
capital, are ensured for the benefit of all, specifically for the poor; and (c) minimize pollution
and its attendant negative impact on the environment, human health and ecosystems
functions. Soil conservation and agroforestry programs coupled with intensification are
identified in the report as potential interventions.

The Government of Nigeria has made the conservation of biodiversity a national priority,
having prepared and adopted a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan in 1997. The
Strategy aims to: (a) improve conservation through the national system of protected areas; (b)
promote sustainable use of biological diversity through improved management; and (c)
mainstream both conservation and sustainable use into decentralized development by means
of an integrated approach to land use planning at the local level. The following actions are
prioritized in the strategy: (i) the protection of ecosystems, especially watersheds, fresh water
systems and tropical high forests; (ii) improving yields of both indigenous and exotic species
facing high economic demand to sustain their supply as well as protect their substitutes; (iii)
managing the fragile soils to provide conditions conducive to the perpetuation of species of
economic, medicinal and genetic conservation value; (iv) regulating and purifying water flow
and protecting valley forests and wetlands; (v) maintaining conditions vital to the sustenance
of protected areas and fragile habitats that threaten species used for breeding and feeding; (vi)
enhancing the efficiency of biodiversity resource use to reduce their exploitation rate.

National Health Strategy and Traditional Medicinal Plants. Nigeria’s National Health
Strategy highlights the importance of medicinal plants and traditional health systems. One of
the key objectives is to integrate safe and regulated traditional medical practices into the
national health system. The strategy aims to promote research into the propagation of
traditional medicinal plants, in-situ and ex-situ conservation and promotion of medicinal
plants, promote safe practices and greater collaboration between public and private health
providers.

NFDP I: In order to address the rural poverty in Nigeria that is a direct cause of increasing
deforestation and unsustainable agricultural practices, the World Bank assisted the
Government of Nigeria to implement the IDA funded National Fadama Development Project
(NFDP I) from 1993 – 1999, focusing on the development of low-lying alluvial flood plains
or “fadama” in Hausa language, for irrigation. The NFDP I aimed to: (a) privatize drilling;
(b) construct fadama and access roads and marketing infrastructure; (c) simplify drilling
technology for shallow tubewells, conduct aquifer studies and upgrade irrigation
technologies; (d) organize fadama farmers for irrigation management, cost recovery and
PAGE
1
better access to credit, marketing and other services; and (e) complete a full environmental
assessment of future fadama development.

Lake Chad Basin Management Initiative. This proposed GEF/UNDP/World Bank initiative
will complement the NFDP II GEF activities. For example program initiatives in the HadejiaNguru wetlands to promote restoration of degraded or threatened areas; agro-forestry, in-situ
and ex-situ conservation of biodiversity, wild species, and medicinal plants; and ecologically
sustainable livelihoods, will complement the hydrology and integrated water management
programs to be implemented under the Lake Chad Basin initiative.

The proposed project aimed at Enhancing conservation of the critical network of wetlands
required by migratory waterbirds on the African/Eurasian Flyways. This initiative seeks to
improve the conservation status of African/Eurasian migratory birds by enhancing and
coordinating measures taken by GEF eligible countries to conserve the critical network of
wetland areas that these birds require to complete their annual cycle.

The program will also draw lessons from the GEF supported Ghana Northern Savannah
Biodiversity Conservation Project which aims to improve the livelihood and health of
communities in the northern savanna zone of Ghana through promoting sustainable use and
conservation of natural resources using ecosystem based approaches. The program will also
build on the knowledge, lessons learned and implementation experience of biodiversity
management programs in Cote d’Ivoire and Burkina Faso (PCGAP and GEPRENAF) as well
as innovative programs such as the Cape Peninsula Biodiversity Conservation Project, Maluti
Drakensburg Transfrontier Conservation Management Program of South Africa and the
Mulanji Mountain Conservation Program of Malawi.

While the goals of sustainable management and use of natural resources are articulated in
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, the Microwatershed and Environmental
Management Program and NFDB II are the only two projects to address the Biodiversity
strategy. These two projects are being designed with close coordination to enhance
complimentary.
NATIONAL FADAMA DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (NFDP) II
Baseline – NFDP IDA Component:
11. NFDP I brought about the widespread adoption of simple, low-cost irrigation technologies,
which in turn helped farmers to achieve substantial incremental production of high-value
horticultural crops. Since completion of NFDP I, the Government of Nigeria has expressed a
strong interest in continuing the accomplishments of the initiative under a follow-up project, the
National Fadama Development Project II (NFDP II) and has requested support through both the
GEF and IDA. The design of NFDP II draws heavily on the lessons of the NFDP I project.
However, weaknesses in NFDP I led to a change in emphasis for the NFDP II in terms of: (a)
broader stakeholder and private sector involvement; (b) increased gender equity; (c) emphasis on
post-harvest infrastructure; (d) an increased emphasis on sustainable development in terms of
monitoring and mitigating negative environmental and social impacts; and (e) a more integrated
landscape approach to project design. In addition, NFDP II activities reveal a greater awareness
of the importance of protecting fragile ecosystems within the target areas.
PAGE
1
12. The NFDP II is a national program to be implemented over a 15 year period. During the first
phase it aims to focus on states which are determined as being priority by national stakeholders
based on an agreed upon criteria. The Federal Ministry of Environment (FME) has prepared a
preliminary list of ecologically fragile areas urgently needing intervention in consultation with the
NGO community (Annex 1). A subset of this list will be determined through a multi-stakeholder
consultative process and based on agreed upon criteria for initiating activities during the first
phase of NFDP II. For example, two workshops are being planned - one in the Northern areas of
Nigeria and another in the South - to bring together, a broad range of stakeholders from these
areas to determine ecological priorities in a participatory manner. The preliminary list prepared
by FME (see Annex 1) will provide the main discussion document. Additionally, such
deliberations will lead to the identification of biological corridors that cut across several states
and localities. A map indicating these areas is being prepared by FME and should be available by
November, 2001.
13. The overall program development objective of the NFDP II is to improve food security and
reduce rural poverty through intensified agricultural production. In particular, the program aims
to assist smallholder private farmers and other entrepreneurs to overcome production,
organizational and marketing constraints which prevent them from fully utilizing their resources
and capabilities for fadama development on a sustainable basis. The related development
objectives are to: (a) increase local capacity for intensifying agricultural production; (b) increase
capacity at all levels of government to assess and mitigate social and environmental impact of
investments in fadama development; and (c) promote public participation and foster increasing
gender equity in agriculture, as indicated by: the preparation of national and state-level strategies
which reflect concerns of broader stakeholders and incorporate available statistical information
on the role of gender in agricultural enterprise. Environmental and social safeguards will be put in
place based on community-based environmental impact assessment and mitigation plans.
14. The program seeks to accomplish its objectives through: (a) adoption of improved, low-cost
production and post-harvest infrastructure and technologies; (b) improved access to markets and
development of post-harvest, market-oriented infrastructure; (c) diversification into
commercially-oriented, yet complimentary and sustainable activities; (d) increased value added of
production, and incremental employment; (e) promotion of integrated agricultural production (as
opposed to current monoculture techniques), including crops/livestock, semi-intensive/intensive
smallholder animal husbandry, fisheries and agro-forestry activities/enterprises; (f) increased
gender equity in terms of meaningful involvement of and support to women for food processing
and improving household-level nutrition standards and well-being; (g) durable and effective
economic interest groups and participating local government councils; (h) sustainable
mechanisms to deliver financial and technical services to private irrigators; (i) sound policy and
institutional framework for private irrigation; and (j) promotion of frameworks and processes to
ensure that program activities are carried out with due regard to environmental and social
concerns, in particular the maintenance of ecosystem services in ecologically fragile areas.
Towards this end, the NFDP II will develop and employ appropriate environmental and social
safeguards to ensure that specific project activities do not negatively impact fragile ecosystems.
15. The NFDP II comprises eight main components: (i) Fadama Investments Facility; (ii) Fadama
Infrastructure Development; (iii) Enterprise and Trade Facilitation Support; (iv) Technology
Support; (v) Strengthening Farmers' Organizations (vi) Environmental and Social Protection and
Conservation; (vii) Policy Formulation; and (viii) Implementation Coordination Component.
(i) In order to improve food security and livelihoods of small-holder farmers, the Fadama
Investments Facility (FIF) component would support the establishment and operation of a small
PAGE
1
grant and a private-financed credit fund to channel financial, technical and training services.
These services will help rural communities carry-out small-to-medium-scale income-generating
activities to intensify fadama and other agricultural developmental activities; and improve the
associated collective economic infrastructure. While the Fadama Development Credit Fund
would on-lend to targeted beneficiaries on market-determined criteria, the Investment
Enhancement Fund would finance investments in economic infrastructure, on grants basis,
designed to minimize the production and market risks, inadequate or asymmetric information,
logistical bottlenecks and high transaction costs associated with the production and marketing of
horticultural products. These investments would be carefully targeted and may include public
goods such as the rehabilitation and maintenance of irrigation infrastructure, construction of
access roads, collective storage and preservation infrastructure. The Support Services subcomponent would provide grants for the financing of trade facilitation programs, market
information and crop-livestock integration, fisheries and agro-forestry development services.
(ii) Fadama Infrastructure Development Component would finance investments in economic
infrastructure, on grant basis, to facilitate efficient market development. The grant which would
be channeled through the Agricultural Development Programs (ADPs) will be applied for closing
part of the infrastructure deficit identified by the infrastructure assessment done by the states and
reflected in the state’s action plan for Fadama II. The investments in physical infrastructure will
be directed to demarcation of stock routes and grazing reserves as well as construction of wells
and similar infrastructure as watering points for livestock; construction and/or rehabilitation of
fadama access and other rural roads, small bridges, communications facilities, such as telephone
lines, rural electrification, construction and/or rehabilitation of terminal markets and collection
centers and cold stores. These community infrastructure subprojects would provide technical
assistance, civil works, and goods for activities such as rehabilitation of irrigation systems,
construction works, agro-forestry, etc. The component would promote public-private sector
partnership in the construction and maintenance of the infrastructure.
(iii) The Enterprise and Trade Facilitation Support component would support, on grant basis, the
facilitation of the FIF activities by NGOs and the private and public sectors—a veritable
investment enhancement support fund. It would finance trade facilitation programs in
collaboration with the Nigerian Export Promotion Council (including organizing export
promotion trade fairs, study and promotional tours), and the establishment of a market
information system for on-line information on prices and product demand characteristics in local,
state, national and international markets. The information would be used by the beneficiaries of
the FIF, project personnel, participating banks and consultants for sub-project preparation,
technical and financial evaluation of sub-project proposals, product marketing, and the design of
demand-driven training courses.
(iv) Technology Support Component would strengthen the capacity of the ADPs to provide
technical support to the project beneficiaries and to ensure management of project
implementation at the state level. The ADPs would: (a) directly provide diversified production
and post-harvest research and extension support services; perform the function of collection and
treatment of socio-economic data on fadama and poverty reduction activities in general and
provide demand-driven assistance on organizational and institutional matters in their zone of
operation; (b) subcontract to third parties, such as research centers, other public agencies, NGOs
and consulting firms all other activities which other providers can deliver better than the former
can including the delivery of appropriate research and extension services (c) assist with
awareness-raising campaigns to help farmers adopt the new project philosophy; (d) facilitate the
linkage of the participating economic interest groups with markets, input suppliers and other
partners; and (e) strengthen the Women In Agriculture (WIA) unit of the ADPs to enhance its
PAGE
1
support for targeted gender interventions and training support to the women groups. Targeted
training would be provided to ADPs to re-orient extension services delivery to adopt integrated
ecosystem management approaches to rural development.
(v) Strengthening Farmers' Organizations Component is designed to empower the participating
economic interest groups, especially farmers’ associations, pastoralists and marketing/distribution
associations, to be financially autonomous and efficient organizations. In addition, the project
would strengthen the capacity of the participating local government councils in mobilizing the
communities for development actions. The support to the economic interest group would include
financing technical assistance, training in group dynamics, entrepreneurial skills and leadership
development and studies. In order to improve the availability and quality of production and
marketing support services to beneficiaries, the project would support capacity-building
interventions for participating NGOs and other private operators, including those involved in seed
multiplication, para-veterinary service providers, local artisans and groups/individuals involved in
equipment repairs and maintenance services. A baseline study on institutions and the social
assessment will be carried out during preparation which would provide further information for
proper design of this component.
(vi) Environmental and Social Protection and Conservation component (ESPC) aims to promote
the sustainable management of fragile ecosystems and ecosystem services within the target areas
and at the same time build capacity to monitor and mitigate potential adverse environmental and
social impacts of fadama development activities. The interventions supported by IDA financing
will largely address capacity building for monitoring and mitigating possible negative
environmental and social impacts. (See GEF Alternative below, for initiatives that promote an
integrated landscape approach and sustainable management of fragile ecosystems).
(vii) Policy Formulation Component is designed to enhance the cost-effectiveness; efficiency and
sustainability of the public agencies which deliver technical, development, administration and
management services to key stakeholders, notably the Departments of Agriculture (FDA) and
Rural Development (FDRD) of Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Federal
Ministry of Water Resources and Federal Ministry of Environment. The funds dedicated to
improving rural and poverty alleviation policy at the national and state levels is necessary to help
the Government achieve its objectives of: (i) ensuring that the concerns of the poor, rural
communities are integrated into policy formulation and analysis; and (ii) increasing
decentralization of implementation responsibility (operational and financial) to state governments
as fiscal status and accountability improves. The institutional audit will provide an action plan
for strengthening the participating public agencies to deliver services efficiently. The project
would provide technical assistance, training and studies to improve the capacity of these agencies
and a few selected government agencies at the Federal and State levels to undertake policy
formulation and program/project design and implementation for rural poverty reduction.
(viii) Implementation Coordination Component would finance the support for key implementing
agencies to coordinate the project activities. The ADPs and other federal agencies implementing
the project will be involved in coordinating the environmental and social protection and
conservation component. Finances from IDA will go towards the establishment and maintenance
of the Fadama Development Coordinating Unit (FDCU), which will be answerable to the Projects
Coordinating Unit of the FMARD. The unit will provide administrative support and oversight for
national-level coordination of project implementation, including procurement and disbursements,
project accounting and reporting (consolidation of periodic and progress reports, annual operating
plans, etc), establishment of management information systems (MIS), project supervision,
PAGE
1
monitoring and evaluation, and audits. Evaluation activities would include the establishment of
baseline project impact indicators during the first year of the project.
16. While the implementation of the baseline intervention will result in improved agricultural
practices to enhance food security and increased beneficiary incomes at the individual farm level,
the focus of the baseline is limited to addressing mitigation of possible negative environmental
aspects. Moreover, it is not designed to integrate global values such as compatibility with
biodiversity nor restoration of fragile ecosystems. Implementation of the baseline scenario could
therefore, result in fragmentation of important habitats with concomitant biodiversity loss, and
natural resources degradation in marginal fragile but globally important ecosystems.
NFDP II - GEF Alternative
17. The global environmental objective of the NFDP II is to demarcate, strengthen the
monitoring, conservation and sound management of fragile ecosystems and key components of
ecosystem services. The proposed activities are consistent with the GEF Operational Program for
Integrated Ecosystem Management, since it adopts an ecosystem approach to address land
degradation in vulnerable ecosystems. The program aims to optimize ecosystem services—
ecological, social, and economic in the targeted ecosystems in an integrated manner within the
context of sustainable development. The specific project activities encompass biodiversity
conservation, carbon sequestration, land and water conservation, food production, sustainable
livelihoods, and the production of marketable goods and services.
18. GEF activities under the NFDP II intervention will provide support to the identification,
protection and sustainable conservation and utilization of fragile ecosystems within the NFDP II
target areas. GEF finances will also provide support for implementing the opportunities and
initiatives made thus far for poverty alleviation through more sustainable natural resource
management. For instance, activities of the NFDP II will further the implementation of objectives
proposed by the 1997 National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. The GEF role will be to
assist the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) in undertaking a more ambitious program that
would generate both national and global benefits. The GEF alternative will comprise the baseline
scenario described earlier, augmented with an expanded rehabilitation, conservation and
sustainable development program explicitly designed to address integrated ecosystem
management in priority fragile areas, both within and outside protected areas.
19. Integrated ecosystem management activities being supported under this project will be guided
by the findings of the: (i) National Biodiversity Strategy Action Plan; (ii) Water Resources
Management Strategy (iii) analyses being initiated on Policy Framework for Protected Areas
(Microwatershed and Environmental Management program); (iv) analyses on natural resource
dependence, crop production and poverty (study entitled: Environmental Degradation, Impacts on
Poverty and Options for harmonization of Sectoral Initiatives); and Lake Chad Initiative and
programs supported by DFID. Under this component, conservation plans and management
strategies will be developed using a consultative approach for select fragile ecosystems within the
targeted States. The management plan would specify appropriate land use, zonation and
conservation of rare or threatened medicinal plants, wildlife and biodiversity, water regimes,
fragile soils and crop varieties. The plans would also aim to harmonize, to the greatest degree
possible, approaches and activities of different public agencies with a mandate and responsibility
for managing the resources and area within the particular ecosystem.
PAGE
1
20. The GEF alternative will also assist in mainstreaming biodiversity considerations through
integrated ecosystem management into regular government programs and projects. More
specifically, GEF funding will complement IDA funding, in particular, under component (vi):

Environmental and Social Protection and Conservation component (ESPC) aims to promote
the sustainable management of fragile ecosystems and ecosystem services within the target
areas and at the same time build capacity to monitor and mitigate potential adverse
environmental and social impacts of fadama development activities. GEF funds will
compliment IDA funding in the management of fragile ecosystems and ecosystem services,
while IDA funds will primarily support the monitoring and mitigation activities. The
Environmental and Social Protection and Conservation Component will comprise the
following sub-components: a) institutional strengthening (IDA/GEF); (b) pilot programs at
the local level to promote collaborative management and restoration of fragile ecosystems
(GEF); (c) analysis of viable options for, and establishment of an Financial Mechanism to
Deliver on Integrated Approaches to Ecosystem Management (this will operate on a national
level) to promote sustainable natural resource management (GEF); (d) support to
community-based conflict resolution mechanisms (IDA); and (e) targeted interventions to
support HIV/AIDS awareness and prevention in rural areas (IDA).

The environmental monitoring and mitigation activities (IDA) will focus on all areas in the
nation where fadama activities will be supported. They will include (not comprehensive at
this stage): (a) creating a comprehensive database to monitor changes in the ecosystem - in
particular the groundwater rechargeability; (b) establishing a central monitoring and
evaluation system; and (c) building capacity for (i) ensuring safety, quality and efficiency of
aquifer recharge, surface water, flow and discharge and pollution levels; (ii) monitoring
agro-industry related activities to ensure that contamination of water sources is minimized;
(iii) training to project beneficiaries for monitoring and minimizing adverse impacts,
including the use of fertilizer, maintaining groundwater tables and soil fertility, and (iv)
addressing riparian rights issues and managing common water resources.

The GEF resources will compliment IDA funding, and will work to put in place, under a
barrier removal approach, an enabling policy and institutional framework - at the Federal,
State and local levels - for sustainable integrated land and water management, and promote
mechanisms for collaborative management and restoration of fragile ecosystems to deliver
multiple environmental benefits. Activities will include promoting optimal land use patterns
to revive the health of ecosystems and the livelihoods of communities that depend on them.
Where biological corridors are being demarcated or where a specific protected area or
fragile ecosystem spans state borders, program activities will adopt an ecosystem approach
to implementation. Sub-components which will be co-funded by GEF are:
(a)
Institutional Strengthening: Technical assistance, training and equipment will
be provided for relevant public and private agencies involved in the implementation of the
ESPC component. All stakeholder groups including community organizations, women's
groups, and NGOs will benefit from the training. This sub-component will also fund the
development of a comprehensive baseline on the selected ecosystems and set up a GIS
database to monitor changes in the ecosystem. Each agency responsible for monitoring and
implementing programs for specific targeted ecosystems will collect pertinent data, which
will be processed in a central monitoring and evaluation system that will be set up under the
project. During further preparation, it will be determined who will manage the database and
where it will be located. In addition, the institutional arrangements regarding coordinating
functions and supporting functions will be decided during project preparation.
PAGE
1
(b)
Pilot Programs to Promote Collaborative Management and Restoration of
Fragile Ecosystems: This sub-component will support the development of pilot programs
including incentives for sustainable resource management within, and restoration of fragile
ecosystems in the target areas. Since activities in one area of the ecosystem will have
positive or negative impacts on other areas, the restoration work will be carried out taking
into consideration optimal land use patterns to revive the health of the ecosystem and the
livelihoods of the communities that depend on them. Examples of possible pilot initiatives
are: (a) to promote research, monitoring and conservation strategies for ensuring the natural
integrity of desert oases within the Lake Chad National Park; (b) sustainable livelihoods for
communities living adjacent to the Lake Chad National Park to ease the stress on the park
and on the Hadejia-Nguru wetlands; (c) establishment/strengthening of forest and grazing
reserves outside the Lake Chad National Park and the Kamuku National Park and the
Kwaimbana game reserve; (d) promoting agro-forestry and social forestry to promote carbon
sequestration; (e) develop a methodology for assessing/monitoring the carbon dynamics
within the selected areas mentioned in (d) above; (f) sustainable community managed
fishery projects to allow the recovery of fish catches in and around the Hadejia-Nguru
wetlands; (g) restoration of degraded ecosystems with community involvement; (h)
conservation farming including: agro-biodiversity and wildlife farming to increase the gene
pool (in the hope of re-stocking the wild with indigenous species at a later stage); (i)
demarcation and establishment of wildlife corridors; and (j) promotion of in-situ and ex-situ
farming of medicinal plants. Restoration programs will be designed and implemented in
collaboration with communities in accordance with the management plans developed under
the first sub-component, and taking into consideration traditional land use patterns, pastoral
movements and the provision of ecosystem services. During program preparation,
comprehensive social assessments will be carried out to get an understanding of complex
socio-economic context, traditional resource use and extraction practices and existing and
potential conflicts between user groups. Existing initiatives promoting integrated ecosystem
management would be strengthened under this component, such as the collaborative
management of three forest reserves (Wudataye, Borno State; Kpashaimi, Niger State; and
Omo, Ogun State) supported by the World Bank through the EMP.
(c)
Financial Mechanism to deliver on Integrated Approaches to Ecosystem
Management (FMIEM): The goals of this sub-component are to identify viable financing
mechanisms to promote sustainable use and management of fragile ecosystems. Processes
for setting up and implementing such financing mechanisms will be explored during
program preparation. It is expected that such processes/mechanisms will attract investments
for carrying out priority conservation and management activities within the entire country.
At present individual agencies responsible for particular protected areas or wetlands, receive
funding from large corporations including firms engaged in oil exploration and production
on an ad hoc basis. Options for the mandate, responsibilities and administration
arrangements of the FMIEM as well as criteria upon which funds will be disbursed, will be
defined during program preparation. Design and implementation arrangements of the
FMIEM will draw upon the experience with such financing mechanisms in Africa and other
regions as well as on environmental/conservation/disaster management trust fund
management experience in Nigeria.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
21. A number of proposals was submitted to the Bank to address the environmental and natural
resources issues in Nigeria. The original proposal submitted by the Hadejia-Nguru Wetland
PAGE
1
Project management targeted biodiversity conservation and promotion of sustainable livelihoods
within the Hadejia-Nguru wetlands of the larger Komadugu-Yobe Basin. Subsequently proposals
were submitted for supporting the management of the Lake Chad National Park and the desert
oases within them. Separate proposals were under preparation by the Conservator General of the
National Parks Service for the Pandam State Park, the Pai River Game Reserve and other reserves
in the Semi-arid and Dry sub-humid ecological zones. Proposals were also submitted from
different interest groups for support in the Niger Delta and the Cross River National Park. It was
clear from an institutional perspective that addressing the different issues in all of these
ecosystems and ecological zones would be too much of a challenge. On the other hand, the
NFDP II program is being proposed as a national program covering all of the ecological zone.
22. Focusing on several different sites which are important from a national as well as from a
global perspective within the States that are targeted under the NFDP II during its first phase of
operations made more sense from a training and capacity-building perspective. This approach
would provide the opportunity to adopt an ecosystem approach to managing the natural resources
of priority areas within the target states. The selection of sites will be determined based on: (i)
studies conducted by different stakeholders on priorities from a global as well as from a national
perspective; (ii) the availability and commitment of stakeholders; (iii) the severity of the threats;
and (iv) administrative capacity at the state and local level. The spatial scope of program
activities; the range of issues and threats to be targeted; implementation arrangements; and
specific beneficiary groups need to be further defined during program preparation.
RATIONALE FOR PROGRAM AND GEF SUPPORT
23. The World Bank’s strategic focus for assistance to Nigeria identifies three priority areas
where the Bank can contribute to good governance, poverty reduction, and community
empowerment and social inclusion. Poverty in Nigeria is widespread and pervasive. While the
contribution of the oil and gas sector to the national economy is quite significant, the benefits are
not perceived as being equitably shared with the majority of the population, and in particular, the
rural poor. Agriculture remains a key vehicle with which to achieve the government’s goals of
reducing poverty in rural areas.
24. The links between the dependence on natural resources and poverty are very obvious in many
parts of Nigeria where communities are marginalized and livelihoods lost due to natural resource
degradation. The program is in keeping with the national priorities of reducing poverty in rural
areas through sound management of the natural resources, as articulated in different government
proclamations as well as the National Environmental Action Plan. It is also in accordance with
the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan and the priorities of the aforementioned
international conventions.
25. In the absence of GEF assistance, the government would nonetheless likely pursue a program
to promote sustainable development in the targeted areas through limited existing initiatives that
are implemented by the National Park Service or by State institutions. The government has
demonstrated a commitment to protected areas management and is likely to continue some
minimal level of financial and related support to protect some of the local benefits that are
recognized. However, the many pressures on government to alleviate poverty through provision
of immediate basic needs in the target areas as well as in the country as a whole, restricts support
of activities that have clear global as well as national benefits. Programs supported by
government grants focus largely on the realization of short term benefits without internalizing
losses that may be incurred in natural capital. This is true too of the NFDP II program which, in
the absence of GEF support, would focus primarily on intensification of agricultural production to
PAGE
1
provide local benefits. In order to ensure that a complete range of potential impacts and benefits
are captured, the Baseline scenario will need support for effective management of the protected
areas within the targeted states and to promote sustainable development in the buffer zones of
these protected areas as well as in vulnerable ecosystems.
26. Program activities supported by the GEF will prioritize necessary policy reforms, investments
and other interventions. Integrated ecosystem management will be promoted through the: (i)
creation of an appropriate enabling environment, (ii) strengthening institutional capacity, and (iii)
the promotion of investments that address local, national and global environmental issues. GEF
assistance will enable Nigeria to protect and to utilize sustainably the country’s biodiversity
beyond a nationally justified and affordable level. Global benefits will include capacity for
enhanced monitoring, information exchange, and improved skills to identify and manage
ecologically threatened areas in a sustainable manner. National and local benefits will include
sustainable use of natural resources and habitats (direct uses), distributional benefits, and
incremental protection of ecological functions.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PDF ACTIVITIES
27. The bulk of the preparation costs for the overall program will be financed from IDA, DFID,
and the FGN. The PDF-B grant will finance the participatory processes that will lead to the
delineation of program activities that will yield clear global benefits, and which will be financed
with GEF resources. These activities include technical assistance, stakeholder consultations,
institutional strengthening initiatives, and support for pilot demonstration activities. Specific
preparation activities to be financed through the PDF Block B grant funds are described below:
(i) Review existing enabling environment for integrated ecosystems management. This
review will examine sectoral policy issues that have arisen since the first Fadama program (NFDP
I) and examine current options for the strengthening/development of an appropriate enabling
framework for integrated ecosystem management. The review will examine ecosystem and land
use related policy and institutional issues that may arise during the implementation of the NFDP
II program. This work will be closely coordinated with other programs and interventions under
preparation or implementation in Nigeria, such as the Community Driven Development Program,
the Micro Watershed and Environmental Management Program (MEMP), the Lake Chad
Initiative, the Water Resources Management Strategy, and Rural Water Projects. The review will
examine existing and proposed policies, regulations, incentive structures, and institutional
arrangements to support integrated ecosystem management. Options will be identified for
promoting close cooperation among relevant sectoral agencies and stakeholders, and decentralize
integrated ecosystem management to the local level.
(ii) Prioritization and Delineation of Ecosystem Foci. Important ecosystems in Nigeria
are increasingly degraded and destroyed through pressure from intensified land use and drought,
resulting in the loss of unique plant and animal species and essential ecosystem services. While
several studies have been conducted by FME, IUCN, DFID, and other partners, on a broad
national level, there is still inadequate detailed baseline information for identification and
monitoring of biodiversity richness and the rate of ecosystem degradation. For example, elephant
populations are thought to migrate along biological corridors between certain forest reserves
within the Guinea Savanna eco-zone. However, relevant up to date information is lacking on
specific migratory routes, herd distribution, composition and population, as well as on the threats
impacting negatively on these populations such as the rate of habitat loss, the extent of human
settlement and activities along the migratory route. The proposed studies, together with
information gathered from other initiatives such as the MEMP, will enable the demarcation of the
PAGE
1
spatial unit and scale for program intervention in target areas covered during the first phase of the
NFDP II. PDF finances will support identification of priority locations within the NFDP II target
states and propose viable measures for protection, rehabilitation, and/or sustainable development
of these ecologically sensitive areas. Detailed baseline data will be prepared on species diversity,
distribution and status for long-term monitoring and evaluation of ecosystem recovery and
stability.
(iii) Identification of Options for Establishment and Management of the Ecosystem
Management Fund. PDF-B funds will be used to identify the most viable and effective options
for the establishment of the fund including public, private and NGO involvement and
disbursement and management criteria for the establishment of an ecosystem fund to manage
threatened ecosystems. Operational guidelines will be defined in collaboration with stakeholders
for setting up the fund, including selection criteria, funding parameters, disbursement, monitoring
and evaluation.
(iv) Stakeholder Consultations and Awareness Raising. Extensive consultations are
being carried out with regional and local stakeholders in selected States to be targeted under the
NFDP II. Further studies are being conducted by DFID on the subject of conflict resolution
between pastoralists and farmers. These latter studies are focused on specific areas around the
Hadejia-Nguru wetlands. The PDF-B funds will be used to build on the findings of these
consultations and studies to: (i) assess local perspectives and commitment for continuing or
initiating sustainable livelihoods that are economically and socially viable and promote
biodiversity conservation within a framework of integrated ecosystem management; and (ii)
identify options for initiating some demonstration projects for promoting integrated ecosystem
management at the local level. The demonstration projects will yield valuable lessons for the
design of the larger program and also provide an opportunity for immediate intervention in areas
under severe threat. The consultations will be carried out to identify the potential beneficiaries,
their current livelihood patterns, issues and challenges to sustainable use and management of
biodiversity and acceptable interventions to promote integrated ecosystem management.
(v) Capacity Building. Building on the above component, a structured approach will be
adopted towards training and capacity building support for all key implementing agencies
including national, state and local level stakeholders is a key component of the program. PDF-B
funds will be used for building capacity in key implementing agencies on the options for
integrated ecosystem management and identifying the synergy between land degradation and the
loss of livelihoods. Selected training to be provided will include: (i) study tours to observe lessons
from ongoing integrated ecosystem management projects in the region; (ii) workshops to raise
awareness on concepts and approaches for integrated ecosystem management; (iii) training needs
assessment for building capacity in ecosystem management, financial and administrative
management in key implementing agencies.
PAGE
1
Project Preparation Activities
PREPARATION ACTIVITY
GEF/PDF B (US$)
Policy and regulation framework review
30,000
Prioritization of Ecosystem Foci
Stakeholder Consultations
Options for FMIEM
Capacity Development
Awareness Raising Workshops
TOTAL
40,000
60,000
35,000
70,000
55,000
290,000
JUSTIFICATION FOR PDF GRANT
28. The proposed PDF B proposal is a part of the outcomes of stakeholder consultation including
the federal and local governments, NGOs and community groups, and represents a preliminary
consensus on project priorities among the stakeholders involved (see section on Stakeholder
Involvement below). It is now necessary to refine the program concept, components,
implementation strategy, support public consultation and additional technical studies. The NFDP
II is being prepared using resources from a variety of sources including IDA (PPF), trust funds,
bilateral funds. The GEF PDF-B grant is therefore requested to fund the costs of identification
and preparation of the incremental activities that will generate global benefits. The PDF-B grant
will be managed by the FME, with technical inputs from different government ministries
including the Ministry of Water Resources, Ministry of Agriculture as well as NGOs (mainly the
Nigerian Conservation Foundation (NCF) and Savannah Conservation). The National Park
Service, headed by the Conservator General (a parastatal within FME) will lead the Prioritization
of Ecosystem Foci study in collaboration with NCF.
PDF BLOCK B OUTPUTS
29. The expected output for this PDF-B grant will be a comprehensive program concept
document (PCD) to be supported by GEF, including detailed sub-component design,
implementation plan, financing plan and agreed arrangements for management, monitoring and
evaluation. In particular:

Identification of a set of options for promoting close cooperation among relevant sectoral
agencies and stakeholders and decentralize integrated ecosystem management at the local
level;

Detailed baseline data on species diversity, distribution and status for long-term monitoring
and evaluation of ecosystem recovery and stability will be generated;

Identify options for establishment and management of a Funding mechanism for Ecosystem
Management ;

Consensus on the operational guidelines for selection criteria, funding parameters,
disbursements, monitoring and evaluations for the Ecosystem Management Fund will be
reached;
PAGE
1

Options will be identified for initiating some demonstration projects for promoting integrated
ecosystem management at the local level; and

Workshops will be organized for raising awareness in integrated ecosystem management and
identifying the synergy between land degradation and the loss of livelihoods.
ELIGIBILITY AND OPERATIONAL PROGRAM
30. Nigeria ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity on the 24th August 1994, the
Convention to Combat Desertification on the 7th August 1997 and the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change, on the 29th August 1994. The proposed program is consistent
with the GEF Operational Strategy, supporting long-term protection of globally important
ecosystems. In terms of GEF operational programs, the emphasis on an integrated approach to
alleviate demographic and economic pressures by promoting sustainable land and water use, is
most consistent with the eligibility criteria of OP 12 (integrated ecosystem management), in that
it supports the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, carbon sequestration, land and
water conservation, food production and sustainable livelihoods. The NFDP II adopts a
programmatic approach to addressing socioeconomic and ecological issues within an integrated
sustainable development framework, and covers multiple GEF focal areas.
31. The objectives of the GEF funded activities complement those of Nigeria’s Biodiversity
Strategy and Action Plan ratified in December 1997 and are fully integrated with NFDP II.
REPLICABILITY
32. It is envisaged that the integrated ecosystem management approach promoted by the GEF
activities of the NFDP II would be replicated in other states targeted by the NDFP in subsequent
phases. Lessons from the experience will be incorporated into natural resource management and
poverty-focused programs within Nigeria and in other countries with similar agro-ecological
systems. Best practices and lessons learned from the program pertaining to conservation and
sustainable utilization of natural resources, will be disseminated to a broader local, national and,
international audience. Program support dissemination of information on experiences gained will
be consistent with the GEF Outreach Strategy. Specific resources will be allocated to monitor
program activities and to identify and disseminate lessons learned to a broad-based audience.
This will occur specifically through: (i) awareness raising and consultations with local rural
communities and farmer's associations, NGOs, as well as the ADPs; (ii) support programs to
increase awareness of the value of integrated ecosystem management and the link between the
value of biodiversity and ecosystem services to poverty, and (iii) study tours and outreach
programs.
STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT
33. The Government and the Bank agreed that stakeholder participation was essential throughout
the preparation of this project because of: (i) the demand-driven nature of the project; (ii) the
reliance on existing, experienced intermediaries for provision of support services to beneficiaries;
(iii) the importance of ownership to ensure sustained maintenance of project-financed
investments; and (iv) the explicit project development objective of increasing beneficiary
organizational and management capacity. Participation during project preparation started with an
initial consultation with key stakeholders throughout the country. A stakeholder workshop
attended by over 300 potential beneficiaries from every state in the federation was held to
synthesize the findings of the beneficiary consultations which took place during the initial project
preparation stage. Finally, further consultations will be held during project pre-appraisal and
PAGE
1
appraisal, leading to the design of a participation action plan for project implementation. The
participation action plan would facilitate stakeholder participation at all levels of project
implementation. Ongoing participation by beneficiaries will also take place through the
monitoring and evaluation system of the project to ensure disclosure of and adherence to
safeguard policies.
34. Interviews have been held with key stakeholders at the federal, state and local level, and
written inputs provided by stakeholders in both public as well as private NGO groups.
Assessments carried out by the NGOs such as NCF and consultations still being carried out by
DFID in some of the target areas provided valuable insight into stakeholder perceptions.
Opportunities for ongoing participation will be provided during the project preparation phase.
Consultation will be expanded through workshops and specific beneficiary groups will be
identified. A series of consultative workshops at the national, state and local levels is planned
under the PDF-B activities. These will involve key representatives from the public and private
sectors, community-based organizations, local and international NGOs, and other stakeholders.
35. National and local governments, NGOs, and CBOs stakeholders groups already involved and
to be brought into the process include: (i) Federal Level:- Federal Ministry of Environment (Dept.
of Forestry, Dept. of Environmental Conservation and Dept. of Soil Erosion and Flood Control);
Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (Dept. of Rural Development Dept. of
Land Resources and Dept. of National Parks); Federal Ministry of Water Resources (Dept. of
Water Supply and Dept. of Dams and Reservoirs); Federal Ministry of Planning; and Federal
Ministry of Finances; NGOs including Nigerian Conservation Foundation and Savannah
Conservation; (ii) State level:- State Environmental Agencies; State Productive, Social, Planning
and Financial Departments, and (iii) Local level:- Local Government Associations (LGAs), and
CBOs in the participating states.
MONITORING AND EVALUATION
36. During preparation a terms of reference will be developed to put in place a monitoring and
evaluation program. Program performance in terms of social development outcomes will be
monitored and measured through a process monitoring system which is to be developed prior to
program implementation. Capacity will be built at the state and local level to monitor and
measure the environmental impacts of investments funded under the NFDP II.
37. The expected time-frame for the preparation assignments will be approximately 18 months.
The terms of reference for the consultants will identify clear deliverables and link payments to
progress indicators.
TIME FRAME
38. The experience with the NFDP I and studies and reviews conducted under that project
provided a solid foundation for the preparation of this project. It is presently anticipated
that final appraisal will take place by May 2002 and the project will be presented to the
Board for approval in August 2002. According to this timetable, program effectiveness is
expected by October/November 2002.
INDICATIONS OF BORROWER COMMITMENT AND OWNERSHIP.
39. As mentioned earlier, the goals and objectives of the program are quite in keeping with the
national priorities outlined in the environmental, natural resource management, biodiversity
PAGE
1
management and poverty reduction strategies. Additionally, the management of the HadejiaNguru Wetlands Project (HNWP), currently managed by the Nigerian Conservation Foundation,
submitted a proposal to the World Bank staff requesting support for continuing the biodiversity
management and sustainable livelihood programs currently being implemented by the HNWP.
Lastly, the ideas outlined in this concept were discussed at length with key stakeholders at the
Federal and State level and with representatives of NGO communities. These NGOs work
closely with community groups in the targeted States to promote environmentally sustainable
development. The priority sites were identified and endorsed during these consultations. The
program concept has been endorsed, by key officials of the Federal Ministry of Environment, the
GEF Focal Point for Nigeria, the Conservator General of Nigeria, management of the HNWP,
NCF and by representatives of Savannah Conservation. In addition, the federal and local
governments have shown strong commitment to provide 10 percent cofinancing to support this
program.
SUSTAINABILITY.
40. The project is driven by local and national needs and there can be little doubt about the
continued commitment among local stakeholders. The project components have been endorsed by
key stakeholders at the Federal level as well as at the state level and by the NGO community and
community leaders within specific ecosystems such as the Hadejia-Nguru wetlands. The
community level investments will be demand driven and designed and implemented by local
communities with necessary technical assistance. The success and replication of these
investments will depend on the economic viability and the extent to which communities derive a
benefit from them. Restoration, rehabilitation and conservation of fragile ecosystems and the
return from ecosystem services will ensure a viable natural resource base, which will in turn
support livelihoods for the people dependent on those resources. The strong capacity building
support for policy and institutional reform will ensure that the programs are implemented in an
effective and sustainable manner. The Financial Mechanisms to support Integrated Approaches
for Ecosystem Management will ensure a long-term stable flow of resources to finance and
support areas with little potential for full financial cost recovery. Interventions will include
activities which promote the documentation and dissemination of lessons learned and good
practices to encourage replication.
41. With the conclusion of phase one, lessons learned will be incorporated into the design of
subsequent phases of the program. These subsequent phases are expected to target other priority
ecosystems not focused upon during this first phase. Best practices in promoting integrated
ecosystem management approaches and lessons learned will be disseminated to a broader local,
national and, international audience.
PAGE
1
APPENDIX ONE
Name
Kpashimi Forest
Reserve (Niger State)
Established in 1961.
Gulu-Anguwan district
in Lapai Local
Government Area
Wuda Taye Forest
Reserve (Borno State)
Established in 1957.
Mafa Local
Government Area.
40km east of
Maidugiri.
Description
Largest forest reserve in
Niger State. Extent: 117
sq.km. Located 300 meters
above sea level, within the
southern Guinea Savanna
ecological zone.
Geographical boundary
demarcated by Alu and
Madu streams. The reserve
forms part of the watershed
of Niger river. Vegetation
types are savanna
woodland, forest outlier and
transition forest. Wildlife
species include Red-patas
monkey, Mona monkey,
Monitor lizard, Grey
Duiker, Pangolin,
porcupine, leopard and red
river hog.
Located in the Sahel/Sudan
Savannah ecological zone.
Extent: 99.59 sq.km.
Riparian vegetation
includes numerous varieties
of grasses, Acacia Senegal,
Acacia seyal, Adansonia
digitate, Karite Parkia
bigilobosa, Ziziphus.
Species diversity and rich
aquatic habitat in Lake
Wuda Taye.
Wild life includes: Mona
monkey, Monitor lizard,
Issues/ Pressures
1. Encroachment by migrant
farmers
2. Unsustainable harvesting
of non-timber forest products
by migrants
3. Increasing demands by
some communities to allow
farming within the reserve,
especially during the dryseason
4. Unsustainable level of
hunting of wild species
within the reserve
5. Lack of capacity within the
department of forestry at the
local government level
Possible Interventions
1. Promote capacity and
awareness in biodiversity
conservation and sustainable
natural resource management.
2. Increased awareness of the
value of the resources and
possibilities for sustainable
utilization
3. Planting of economically
valuable tree crops within the
reserve as well as in the
support zones
4. Promotion of agro-forestry
in the support zone
5. Promotion of conservation
farming in the support zone
6. Promotion of traditional
medicinal plants
Opportunities
1. Continue relevant support
provided by other donor funded
projects (i.e. Forestry III), for
sustainable livelihoods and
community-managed resources.
1. Overgrazing by nomadic
groups.
2. Degradation of grazing
reserves outside the forest
reserves
3. Encroachment by migrant
farmers
4. Damming of River Ngadda
in 1988 adversely affects
water flow to Lake Wuda
Taye and livelihoods during
the dry season.
5. Unsustainable harvesting
of non-timber forest products
1. Promote the establishment
of grazing reserves and
livestock routes.
2. Promote capacity and
awareness in biodiversity
conservation and sustainable
natural resource management.
3. Increased awareness of the
value of the resources and
possibilities for sustainable
utilization
4. Planting of economically
valuable tree crops within the
reserve as well as in the
1. Continue relevant support
provided by other donor funded
projects (i.e. Forestry III), for
sustainable livelihoods and
community-managed resources.
20
2. Strengthen multiple use
management strategies of the
reserve by local communities
and improve collaboration
between communities and
authorities responsible for
managing the natural resources.
Strengthen multiple use
management strategies of the
reserve by local communities
and improve collaboration
between communities and
authorities responsible for
managing the natural resources
Duiker, Pangolin,
porcupine, and Hyena.
Kamuku National
Park (Kaduna State)
Established game
reserve since 1969.
Became National Park
in 1999.
Located in Northern Guinea
Savanna ecological zone.
Wildlife: More than
90 mammal species
171 bird species.
Vegetation:
Isoberlina spp Deterium,
combretum, terminalia.
The National Park forms
part of an elephant
migratory route. Shares the
same elephant herd of about
100 individuals with the
Kwiambana and Kogo
Game Reserves.
Savanna Conservation
working closely with
Kamuku communities.
by migrants and others who
view the reserve as common
property.
6. Increasing demands by
some communities to allow
farming within the reserve,
especially during the dryseason
7. Unsustainable level of
hunting of wild species
within the reserve
8. Lack of capacity within the
department of forestry at the
local government level
1. Overgrazing: The park is
situated on well established
cattle routes and due to lack
of suitable grazing areas use
park as grazing.
2. Conflicts between rangers
& nomadic Fulani.
3. Farming on borders
conflicts with migrant
wildlife like elephants
destroying crops.
21
support zones
5. Promotion of agro-forestry
in the support zone (cereals,
gum, nuts)
6. Promotion of conservation
farming in the support zone
7. Promotion of traditional
medicinal plants
8. Ecological survey to
prepare a baseline of species,
ecosystem characteristics.
1. Promote sustainable
management of grazing
reserves
2. Promotion of awareness
and conservation education at
all levels
3. Promotion of agroforestry
and replanting of vegetation
to conserve the habitat of the
corridors
4. Promote protection of
corridors by local
communities and authorities
(elephant control squad).
1. Merge with Kwiambana
Game Reserve;
2. Establish wildlife corridor
between the two protected areas
and the Kogo game Reserve
3. Support sustainable
livelihood projects in support
zone and along biological
corridor
Kwiambana Game
Reserve (Zamfara
State)
Established in 1971.
Managed by Zamfara
State wildlife Unit
Located in Northern Guinea
Savanna
Extent: 2614 sq km.
Mariga river forms
boundary with Kamuku
National Park.
Vegetation: Isoberlinia
woodlands and Terminalia
woodlands constitute 95%
of the vegetation.
Wild life: Lions, leopard,
Roan, western hartebeest,
waterbuck, Grimms duiker,
warthog, spotted Hyena
Kogo Game Reserve
(Katsina State)
Bordering Kamuku in
SW and Kwiambana in
North
Situated in the Northern
Guinea Savanna ecological
zone.
Extent: 361 sq km
Forms part of an elephant
migratory route together
with the Kamuku National
Park and Kwiambana Game
Reserve. Authorities have
requested that the NPS take
over management
1. Overgrazing by nomadic
communities.
2. Lack of grazing reserves
outside the protected area.
3. Lack of effective
management measures has
adverse impacts on
neighboring protected areas
such as Kamuku National
Park.
4. Increasing encroachment of
migrant and other farmers
5. Increased poaching.
Harvesting of fuelwood
6. Unsustainable utilization of
non-wood forest products.
7. Unsustainable fishing in
Mariga river.
8. Siltation of the Mariga
river impacting watershed
ecosystem.
9. Lack of appropriate
demarcation of protected
area.
1. Only 4 unarmed rangers in
selected villages no resources.
2. Grazing, hunting poaching
3. Enclave (Kogo village
about 1000 people) inside
reserve no strict control
4. Encroachment by planting
of belt of forest plantation/
maligna.
22
1. Survey demarcation and
beaconing
2. Promotion of awareness
and conservation education at
all levels
3. Promotion of agroforestry
and replanting of vegetation
to conserve the habitat of the
corridors
4. Promote protection of
corridors by local
communities and authorities
(elephant control squad).
Local NGO, Savanna
Conservation wants to assist
communities in Kwiambana
to manage the Game reserve
as in Kamuku
1. Support the proposed
recommendation for merger
with Kamuku National Park
and upgrade to National Park
status
2. Establish wildlife corridor
between the two protected areas
and the Kogo game Reserve.
1. Survey demarcation and
beaconing
2. Promotion of awareness
and conservation education at
all levels
3. Promotion of agroforestry
and replanting of vegetation
to conserve the habitat of the
corridors
4. Promote protection of
corridors by local
communities and authorities
(elephant control squad).
1. Re-establish wildlife corridor
between the three protected
areas
2. Support sustainable
livelihood projects in support
zones and along biological
corridor
3. Support community policing
and management of natural
resources
Pandam Wildlife Park Located within the Guinnea
Savannah Woodland belt.
(Plateau State)
Extent: 244km2.
Established 1972
Vegetation: Grassland and
patches of riparian forest
surrounding lake Pandam.
Linked to Dep River
tributary of Benue River.
Lake supports a population
of endangered West
African Manatees
Trichechus senegalensis.
Other wildlife includes a
wide variety of birds,
1. Increasing urbanization and
human encroachment.
2. Inadequate financial
support and institutional
capacity to effectively
manage the Sanctuary.
3. Overfishing
4. Overharvesting of
resources within the park
hippos, fish and roan
antelope, buffalo, kob
and red river hog
The Pandam park is
considered a major tourism
attraction.
23
3. Support the request
by authorities of the
park have for the
NPS to upgrade the
Pandam Wildlife
Park to a National
Park to afford it a
greater protected area
status
2. Promote sustainable
livelihood activities of local
inhabitants
3. Promote research into
species diversity and
population densities to
support sustainable resource
utilization
3. Assistance to upgrade
the Wildlife Park into a
National Park
2. Assistance for developing
community micro-projects for
sustainable livelihoods
3. Assistance for research and
monitoring of the protected area
Southern Borno
Elephant Corridor
A biological
corridor/migration
route for elephants that
includes four Forest
Reserves including:
1. Damboa Forest
Reserve (Borno State)
2. Gujuba Forest
Reserve (Yobe State)
3. Gwoza Forest
Reserve (Borno)
4. Sambisa Game
Reserve
(Borno)
Over 1000km2
The corridor between the
four forest reserves falls
largely within the Sudan
Savanna ecological zone,
with patches of riparian
vegetation particularly near
the Gujuba forest reserve.
The Yazdaram River is the
main drainage for Gwoza
reserve
In addition to the migrating
elephant populations, the
corridor hosts a rich
diversity of plant and
animal species including
Roan, red-fronted gazelle,
western hartebeest,
Ostriches, and Topis.
1. Elephants migrate through
the following four protected
areas and through to
Cameroon to the Waza
National Park.
2. Increased development and
human settlement is causing
fragmentation of the wildlife
corridor.
3. Lack of institutional
management;
4. Encroachment of farmers
into the reserves;
5. Unregulated exploitation of
natural resources
6. Elephant migratory route,
grazing no boundary
demarcation so encroachment
by farmers and grazers.
Sambisa Reserve is being
managed by NPS (Chad
Basin rangers) with little
funding. It has high
potential as a National
Park.
24
1. Mitigate loss of habitat
through agroforestry
2. Promote awareness of the
values of sustainable natural
resource management
3. Support greater control of
Ivory trade
4. Conservation farming and
reintroduction of red-fronted
gazelles.
1. Re-establish wildlife corridor
between the three protected
areas
2. Support sustainable
livelihood projects in support
zones and along biological
corridor
3. Support community policing
and management of natural
resources
Hadejia Nguru
Wetlands(HNW)
(Jigawa, Yobe and
Bauchi States)
Established 1987
Located in the KomaduguYobe Basin. Covers an area
of 3 500km2 .
Extensive area of
floodplain formed at the
confluence of the Hadejia
and Jama’are rivers which
form River Yobe and flow
into Lake Chad.
HNW Forms a natural
barrier to the Sahel desert.
Lies within the semi-arid
Sudano-Sahelian ecological
zone with riparian forest on
the fringes of the
floodplains. Seasonal
flooding is important to
maintaining the ecological
system of the wetlands and
support the livelihoods of
about 1.5 million people.
HNW Conservation project
supported by IUCN since
1987, now managed by
NCF.
Rich biodiversity including
rodent, primates (red patas
monkey), jackal, Grimm’s
Duiker, and 38 species of
fish. Wide diversity of
internationally important
bird species, a count in
1997 recorded 324, 510
water birds in the dry
season. Rangelands occupy
13% of the wetland area
1. Depletion and modification
of biodiversity through
increasing development and
desertification
2. Increased agriculture,
overgrazing, firewood
exploitation, mining of
potash, over fishing, and
poaching of wildlife.
3. Construction of the Tiga
and Challawa dams upstream
of the wetlands has resulted
in channel siltation and
irregular releases of water
adversely affecting
communities downstream
4. Water scarcity during
drought periods with water
demand exceeding supply
4. Limited financial support
for continuation of activities
of the Hadejia Nguru
Wetlands Conservation
project
25
1. Development of
1. Continued financial support
community woodlots,
for the Hadejia Nguru Wetlands
Improving awareness of
Conservation project
communities in sustainable
natural resource management.
2. Improved collaboration
with authorities of the
upstream Challawa and Tiga
dams through the Water
Consultative Forum to ensure
appropriately timed water
releases and resolve conflicts.
3. Support for community
projects such as agro-forestry,
beekeeping, promotion of
woodstoves, construction of
flood control dykes for
improved rice production, and
community eco-tourism at
places like Dabar Magini.
4. Support ongoing research
scientific documentation,
public awareness and
education, preparation of
management plans and
guidelines, monitoring and
evaluation.
Chad Basin National
Park Bulatura Sector,
(Yobe State)
Yusufari Local
Government Area
Dagona Waterfowl
Sanctuary (Yobe State)
Located in the Bade-Nguru
Sector of the Chad Basin
National Park and lies
within the Bade and
Jakusko Local Government
Areas
The Bulatura Sector lies in
the Sudano-Sahelian
ecological zone and covers
92km2 Consists of a series
of fertile interdunal
depressions or desert Oases
that are rich in salt deposit
and are fed by groundwater
from the Hadejia-Nguru
Wetland System
Bird species previously
occurring at the oases
include crowned cranes and
flamingos. The oases
provide an essential life
support system for a high
population of subsistence
farmers.
The Dagona Waterfowl
Sanctuary supports a wide
variety of west palearctic
migrant bird species
including Spur-winged
Geese, Pelicans, Garganey,
Pintails, Black Tail
Godwits, and a variety of
Wader species
1. Natural integrity of the
Bulatura Oases is severely
degraded due to drought,
human population pressures,
and over-utilization of natural
resource base, which has
resulted in the loss of
biodiversity and the collapse
of key ecosystem processes
2. Destruction of vegetation
species in the Oases for
charcoal production and
building material
3. proliferation of livestock
farming
4. Mining of potash
5.Over-exploitation of
wildlife species
6. Human encroachment, for
agricultural activities and
livestock grazing
7. Subsistence fishers in the
support zone of the Sanctuary
have in recent years been
forced to resort to agricultural
production due to the
upstream damming and
diversion of their major water
source
26
1. Much of the agriculture in
the area is rain-fed, and while
the opportunity for irrigation
exists, it has not yet been
efficiently and sustainably
exploited
2. Rehabilitation of the oases
and sustainable utilization of
resources by residents
3. Promote increased
awareness amongst
inhabitants of the essential
service offered by the
ecological system of the oases
4. Development of a
management strategy is
needed for minimizing
conflicts between the Chad
Basin National Park
management and
communities both within and
adjacent to the protected area.
1. Support for sustainable
microprojects such as
agroforestry
2. Support research into the reestablishment of locally
endangered or extinct wildlife
species such as the Dama
Gazelle
NIGERIA: MAP OF AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES
27
MAP OF LOCATION OF PROPOSED GEF AREAS TARGETED UNDER NFDP II
28