Cover Note
Work Program Inclusion - UNEP/GEF Biodiversity
Project Title: In situ Conservation of Crop Wild Relatives Through Enhanced Information Management and Field
Application
Date: March 11, 2002
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
1. Country Ownership


Country Eligibility
Country Drivenness
Clear description of Project’s fit within:
 National reports/communications to Conventions
 National or sector development plans.
 Recommendations of appropriate regional
intergovernmental meetings or agreements.
The project is fully in alignment with national policies and plans
(including NBSAPs) for conservation and sustainable use of genetic
resources in the partner countries. See Annex I and K.
Armenia possesses many species of wild relatives of domestic crops,
including three of the four known wild species of wheat (Triticum
boeticum, T. urartu and T. araraticum), many species belonging to the
genus Aegilops (i.e. Ae. tauschii, Ae. cylindrica, Ae. triuncialis, etc.) and
wild relatives of rye and barley. Wild apple and pear species grow in
most of the forests of the country, together with wild forms of several
other fruit and nuts (e.g. quince, apricot, sweet and sour cherry, walnut,
pistachio and fig). The Caucasus Mountains form a significant feature of
the country determining much of the character of the biodiversity.
A few natural parks and reserves have been established to protect the
habitats of these and Armenia's natural endemic species. Thus, in the
Koshrov Reserve it is possible to find wild pear species. Wild relatives of
cereals occur in the Erebuni National reserve. Hundreds of species of
crop wild relatives are under protection in the Yekhegnadzor Protected
Zone including ancestors of wheat and other cereals and of important
fruit tree species.
1
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
Armenia lacks adequate and updated information on biodiversity and
natural resources, particularly on the status of habitats on endemic,
endangered species and on distribution of crop relatives. Besides that,
essential conservation activities are constrained by the lack of financial
resources and by the need of developing adequate planning and capacity
building at all levels.
In its National Biodiversity and Strategy Action Plan (1999) Armenia
recognizes the following major needs and objectives in its genetic
resources conservation strategy: improving legal and institutional
frameworks for the conservation and management of natural resources;
increasing the environmental awareness and educational programs at all
levels of society, especially within NGOs and the National Ministry of
Environment; upgrading the national capacity for biodiversity and
ecological monitoring and for the planning, management and
administration of protected areas; guaranteeing the long-term financial
support of PGR conservation and maximizing actions likely to lead to
economically, ecologically, and socially sustainable solutions for
agrobiodiversity conservation; and ensuring that biodiversity concerns
are incorporated into agricultural and pastureland practices.
Due to its location in the Andean region, with several ecological habitats
in a restricted area of which mountain ecosystems form one of the most
important components, Bolivia is rich in natural biodiversity. It is one of
the centres of domestication and centre of diversity of important crops
such as potato, sweet potato, maize, peanut, cassava, cotton, tobacco,
cocoa, beans, pepper, etc., as well as several local crops such as Andean
tubers (i.e. Ullucus tuberosus, Oxalis spp.), quinoa (Chenopodium
quinoa) tarwi (Lupinus mutabilis), and many others. Most of the wild
relatives of the above mentioned species which occur in the country are
characterized by interesting adaptive traits related to environmental and
soil stresses tolerance, disease resistance, etc. that could be useful for
crop improvement programs and are of particular concern to Bolivia.
In its First National Report on Implementing the Convention on
2
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
Biological Diversity (1999), Bolivia identified a number of steps that the
country wished to take at a national level: improve the institutional
capacity for biodiversity conservation management and use and
consolidate the developing National System of Protected Areas; create
and develop a National Network of gene banks and research institutes
that work on crop and forest genetic resources; design an adequate legal
framework through the promotion of a national law on biodiversity
conservation; involve the civil society in environmental issues by
developing educational public awareness programs on sustainable
development and biodiversity conservation; recuperate and enhance some
traditional agricultural practices and indigenous knowledge regarding
sustainable conservation and exploitation of natural resources; and
encourage the development of sustainable tourism within the Protected
Area system as an educational and awareness raising tool.
Thanks to the richness of environments and climates, Madagascar
possesses great natural biodiversity and is recognized as a world centre of
plant diversity. Much of this diversity is associated with the island's
mountain ecosystems. The numerous wild species that are present
include two wild relatives of rice (Oryza staminata and O. punctata),
which possess some virus and pest resistance, one wild relative of
sorghum (Sorghum verticiflorum), two wild relatives of Vigna (V.
vexillata and V. angivensis) and a wild relative of banana (Musa
perrieri). Most significantly, the country possesses almost 50 species of
wild coffee (Mascarocoffea) with interesting and unique traits.
Madagascar’s National Report on Implementing the CBD identifies
several key needs for improving plant natural resource conservation:
creation of a national policy and program for the enhancement of PGRs
including crop wild relatives; development of educational programs and
information and training projects on the importance of PGRs and their
conservation and use; creation of several decentralized, short-term gene
banks within the country with the objective of establishing a long-term,
national gene bank; and strengthening research institutes that evaluate
and use PGRs, including crop relatives, and study sustainable rural
3
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
development issues.
In terms of species, genes and ecosystems, Sri Lanka has a very high
rate of both forest- and agro-biodiversity. The highland areas support
montane subtropical broadleaf hill forest and wet temperate forest.
Important wild relatives of crops found on the island include cereal
relatives belonging to the genera Ores, Digerati, Echinochloa, and
Panicum. There are also important legumes (e.g. Vigna, Dolichos),
vegetables (e.g. Cucumis, Asparagus, Solanum, Ipomea), oil seeds (e.g.
Sesamum, Dioscorea), fruits (e.g. Citrus, Diospyros, Mangifera, Musa)
and others (e.g. Cinnamomum, Curcuma, Tamarindus).
The country possesses one of the oldest and extensive networks of
protected areas, extending to over 14% of the land area. It comprises 3
Strict Natural Reserves, 3 Natural Reserves, 12 National Parks, the
Sinharaja National Heritage Wilderness Area and many others. A recent
initiative, called the National Conservation Review, is taking place
among all natural forests and grasslands, to assess the biological diversity
existing in protected area networks and to define a minimum set of sites
necessary to conserve the available diversity which would include
diversity of crop relatives. Sri Lanka is also implementing a national
programme on ex situ conservation with the creation of a Plant Genetic
Resources Centre, responsible to collect, conserve and document the
genetic diversity of food crops, their wild relatives and other economic
species.
In its recent National Report on CBD Implementation, Sri Lanka
identifies the following current major needs and objectives: the
development of a national computerized database system on biodiversity
information, the undertaking of studies to identify threatened species, and
the adoption of adequate safeguards for preventing unregulated exports
of valuable and useful endemic plant species. A review of the current
protected areas for establishing a national system that could ensure more
effective conservation, and the development of a public awareness
strategy on biodiversity conservation, are also underway.
The
4
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
Agriculture Sector Plan accords highest priority to conservation and
enrichment of useful natural resources for improving agricultural
production.
Vavilov identified Uzbekistan as one of the centres of origin of many
modern crop plants. It is possible to find some of the nearest wild
relatives of cultivated onion (Allium oshaninii, A. vavilovii, A. praemixtum, A. pskemense), as well as many wild fruit and nut species (Vitis
vinifera, Pistacia vera, Malus sieversii, Pyrus turkomanica, and Rubus
caesius). It forms part of the global centre of plant diversity of the
mountains of middle Asia and is in a centre of crop plant diversity.
The main objectives that Uzbekistan highlighted in its National
Biodiversity Action Plan (1997) include establishment of a system of
protected areas with strong legal protection which would cover at least
10% of the country; development of public awareness, education, and
participatory programs involving the agricultural, forestry, and
environmental sectors, as well as mass media, schools and national
institutions; promotion of the sustainable use of biodiversity while
achieving the maximum economic, scientific, recreational and cultural
benefits for all the people of Uzbekistan, ensuring at the same time the
long-term conservation of biodiversity and viability of ecosystems; and
creating regional or local action plans that more specifically address
regional or local issues and needs.
This project responds to the objectives highlighted in each respective
country’s NBSAP through: creation of effective national information
system that brings together dispersed information on CWR; creation of
appropriate framework for making and implementing conservation
decisions through development of inter-agency collaborative agreements
in each country; training programs for building enhanced capacity to use
information and implement priority conservation actions for CWR; and
country level public awareness programs for in-situ conservation of
CWR. The project will contribute to the strengthening of the PGR
conservation in partner countries through development of national-level
5
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria

Endorsement

Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
CWR Conservation and Sustainable use Action Plans and Management
Plans for CWR populations in selected PAs. In addition training will be
provided on participatory approaches and on benefit sharing issues and
the project will analyze how benefit-sharing issues might appropriately
be incorporated into each partner country.
Vartan Ayvazyan
Minister of Nature Protection
Yerevan, Republic of Armenia
27 February 2002
Endorsement by national operational focal
points
Lic. Hernán Cabrera Francidakiz
Viceministro de Medio Ambiente,
Recursos Naturales y Desarrollo Forestal
Ministero de Desarrollo Sostenible y Planificacion
La Paz, Bolivia
18 February 2002
Roger Edmond
General Secretary
Ministry of Environment
Antananarivo, Madagascar
12 February 2002
A.H.N. Jayasekara
Acting Secretary
Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources,
Sri Lanka
13 February 2002
Sergey V. Myagkov
Deputy Director,
Hydro-meteorological Institute (SANIGMI)
Tashkent, Uzbekistan
21 February 2002
6
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
See Annex D for letters.
2. Program & Policy Conformity

Program
Designation &
Conformity
Describe how project objectives are consistent with
Operational Program objectives or operational criteria
The wise conservation and use of crop wild relatives has been recognized
as a key element in the implementation of the Convention on Biological
Diversity. It is identified as a relevant activity in GEF Operational
Programme #13 on Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biological
Diversity important to Agriculture (para. 19.iii). Improved conservation
and use of crop relatives provide global environmental benefits and
supports sustainable production systems by maintaining biodiversity and
the resource base required to increase agricultural production while
reducing the need for agricultural procedures with negative
environmental effects. The promotion of in situ conservation of crop
wild relatives and other wild plants for food production constitutes one of
the 20 agreed activities of the FAO Global Plan of Action for the
Conservation and Sustainable Utilisation of Plant Genetic Resources for
Food and Agriculture.
The project is fully consistent with the objectives of Operational
Programme #4 (mountain ecosystems) as well. The five countries all
possess mountain ecosystems of major importance as identified by GEF
(Andes, Caucasus, foothills of Hindu-Kush and Pamirs, mountain chains
on tropical islands), and they possess economically important and
endangered wild relatives in their mountain ecosystems. As noted in their
National Biodiversity Strategic Action Plans, they are all concerned to
link in situ conservation of important crop wild species with sustainable
use of their mountain ecosystems.
7

Project Design
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
Describe:
 Sector issues, root causes, threats, barriers etc
affecting global environment
 Project logical framework, including a consistent
strategy, goals, objectives, outputs
inputs/activities, measurable performance
indicators, risks and assumptions
 Detailed description of goals, objectives, outputs
and related assumptions, risks and performance
indicators
 Brief description of project activities, including
an explanation how the activities would result in
project outputs (in no more than 2 pages)
 Global environmental benefits of the project.
 Incremental cost estimation based on the project
logical framework
 Describe project outputs (and related
activities & costs) that result in global
environmental benefits
 Describe project outputs (and related
activities & costs) that result in national
environmental benefits
 Describe the process used to jointly estimate
incremental cost with in-country project
partner
 Present the incremental cost estimate. If
presented as a range, then a brief
explanation of the challenges and
constraints and how these would be
addressed by the time of CEO endorsement.

For detailed description of project rationale and objectives see paras
21-49 and project logframe and list of activities in Annex B. The
project has been designed into two levels: international and national.
The five country partners will be closely involved in the activities
undertaken as part of Output 1. They will ensure that the procedures
developed can be used by national institutes and organizations and
provide appropriate information and results. The national partners
will also work with international partners to develop approaches that
enhance the accessibility and usability of the international
information system both to their own institutions and to other nonpartner country institutions. In sum, the GEF supported project will
increase country level and global knowledge of the conservation
status of CWR and assist in the development of national planning
capabilities for these species in the five countries. It will provide
tested procedures for identifying, prioritizing, implementing, and
monitoring conservation actions for crop wild relatives that can be
adopted by other countries. These will be designed to ensure
adequate coverage of key ecosystems within mountain areas and
other special centres of crop diversity, and to strengthen links
between the diverse conservation and agricultural development
sectors of the countries involved. The project will generate a
knowledge base, the appropriate elements of which will be
transmitted to decision makers and to the public. Other parts of this
knowledge base will permit the five countries and others to begin
addressing the issues of benefit sharing of those crop wild relatives
that possess genotypes with substantial potential value for improving
agricultural production at national and international levels.

Global environment benefits are described in Annex A including
description of domestic benefits.
Baseline

8
See paragraphs 1-20 for description of baseline situation.
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:


See Annex A for a complete description of how the baseline was
arrived at. In sum, at international level the databases maintained by
the international partners and other relevant international
organizations are considered as part of the baseline in respect of that
portion of the databases that can be used for decisions on conserving
crop wild relatives. Current annual costs for maintenance of
information relevant to crop wild relatives in these by the different
partners was estimated.
The baseline at national level has been estimated through the
analysis of the operational costs for conservation of CWR in five
countries and calculation of current annual costs for maintenance of
information relevant to CWR in partner countries and international
institutions.
International information management
The databases maintained by the international partners and other relevant
international organizations are considered as part of the baseline in
respect of that portion of the databases that can be used for decisions on
conserving crop wild relatives. These databases include System-wide
Information Network on Genetic Resources (SINGER), maintained by
IPGRI, the World Database on Protected Areas and Species Conservation
Database maintained by UNEP-WCMC, the Species Information System
maintained by IUCN, the information system on botanic gardens
maintained by BGCI and the various information resources managed by
FAO (e.g. Ecoport, WAICENT and WIEWS). Cumulative annual costs
for the life of the project of maintenance of information relevant to crop
wild relatives in these are estimated by the different partners at
$2,885,785.
National information management
All countries maintain information relevant to conservation of CWR but
Information held by different institutions and agencies (Ministries,
botanic gardens, genebanks, herbaria etc.) is poorly accessible, cannot be
brought together and used to determine CWR status, distribution and to
plan conservation actions. Information available in international and
9
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
other leading non-country institutions can not be easily accessed and
incorporated into CWR conservation needs analysis. Country work to
digitize this information is proceeding slowly owing to limited resources.
The total baseline figure for all countries (excluding international
elements noted below, $464,251) reflect current resources dedicated to
relevant information collection and management. International partners
are working with several of the different national institutes on data
management issues. The total cost of these baseline activities is estimated
at $70,644.
Capacity building
Although the resources are limited in all countries the total baseline
expectations of funding allocation by the partner countries is $1,028,498.
This includes relevant allocations for key protected areas likely to
possess populations of crop wild relatives and resources allocated to gene
banks, botanic gardens and other collections. It also includes resources
available to support the infrastructure and operation of the different
agencies that are expected to have crop wild relatives on land that is their
responsibility (Ministry of Environments and Forestry, National Wildlife
Service etc).
The international partners have a number of ongoing baseline activities
that have potential to provide support for country actions. IPGRI
investigates factors that determine the extent and distribution of genetic
diversity, the ways in which it can be measured and analysed. This has
resulted in the DIVA software which is available for the project. WCMC
has substantial work on the development of improved geographic
information analysis systems and tools. BGCI works with country
botanic gardens on the optimal maintenance procedures for endangered
materials and IUCN is supporting a programme to improve red listing
activities and complete the identification of threat status. The resources
allocated to these activities are approx. $152,022.
Public awareness
Outside of a few groups of conservation professionals and plant breeders,
awareness of the need to conserve (or even the existence of) crop wild
10
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
relatives is more or less absent in all partner countries. There is a
growing awareness within all partners of the key role of public awareness
activities and a growing concern to engage decision makers and the wider
public in the conservation agenda. All countries have made general
provision for this, particularly through support to botanic garden and
protected area public awareness activities and through educational
activities in schools (total in country provision $92,718).
International agencies are active in public awareness work and in
publicizing the importance of conservation work involving useful wild
plants. Much of the work involves a wider agenda than CWR although
these are frequently cited in publications, interviews and videos. The
total baseline projection for the international agencies in this area is
$64,522.
The calculated total baseline for the project is $ 4,758,440.
Incremental cost estimation based on the project logical framework are
described in Annex A including Incremental Cost Matrix.


Sustainability
(including financial
sustainability)
Replicability
Describe proposed approach to address factors
influencing sustainability, within and/or outside the
project to deal with these factors
Describe the proposed approach to replication (for e.g.
dissemination of lessons, training workshops,
information exchange, national and regional forum
etc.) (could be within project description)
11
See Annex B for Project Logframe.
The proposed approach to ensure sustainability and to minimize the longterm cost of conserving CWR is detailed in paras 50-58.
The activities supported under Output 4 (public awareness) will
seek to ensure a sound public appreciation of the importance of
conserving crop wild relatives in each country. Botanic gardens
will develop appropriate displays. The support and interest of TV,
the press and radio will be obtained for key events and activities.
Through workshops and other public awareness events the
support of key decision makers will also be sought. The countries
and international partners will work together to develop
international public awareness activities that ensure that project
outputs are made available to conservation workers in non-target
countries. Activities will include presentations and demonstrations
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
at international conferences and meetings and demonstration
activities and appropriate events such as SBSTTA, COP, FAO
commission and IUCN congress meetings. Development of
regional awareness will be supported through inputs made to
existing regional networks of the different partners. Internet
linkages will also be developed by the partners to publicize the
development of the systems.
Major disseminated outputs will include the international
information system (Output 1), data sharing protocols for crop
wild relatives (Outputs 1 and 2), a decision making guide (Output
3), country information system (Output 2), course manuals
(Output 3), press information, TV and video products (Output 4).
A Project Web Site will be established linked to the global
information portal, which can be used as a way of rapidly making
new developments available to the whole community of partners
and to other interested parties. Links will be established by all
partners to this web site from their own web sites.

Stakeholder
Involvement



Monitoring &
Evaluation


Describe how stakeholders have been involved in
project development
Describe the approach for stakeholder
involvement in further project development and
implementation
Other products from the project will include scientific peer reviewed
publications (starting with a published version of Annex H) and a variety
of reports, papers, model procedures, management plans which will be
made as widely available as possible to for the global community. Project
products (such as crop wild relative fields in other databases such as
IUCN’s SIS) will also be widely disseminated through IPGRI’s
established networks.
Project implementation arrangements and stakeholders’ participation are
described in paras 59-64. Reflecting the different character of each
country, the national implementation arrangements differ between
countries (see stakeholder participation plans described in detail in
Annex E).
M&E is fully described in paras 66-73.
Describe how project design has incorporated
lessons from similar projects in the past
Describe approach for project M&E system,
Project Logframe details approach to measurement of project impact
12
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
based on the project logical framework, including
the following elements:
 Specifications of indicators for objectives and
outputs, including alternate benchmarks, and
means of measurement.
 Outline organisational arrangement for
implementing M&E
 Indicative total cost of M&E (may be
reflected in total project cost).
taking into account recommendations from the Biodiversity Program
Study. In that regard, baseline data will be established initially and
impact measured at project close and periodically after project
termination.
Estimate total project cost.
Estimate contribution by financing partners.
Propose type of financing instrument
Total Project Cost is provided in Project Brief and Annex A. In sum, the
total project cost, including the PDF B grant, is US$ 12,578,994. The
GEF Request, including the PDF B, is US$ 6,162,025. Co-financing
total, excluding PDF B, is US$ 6,380,969 and it is being provided by:
IPGRI (1,305,000), IUCN (384,000), FAO (280,000), BGCI (205,300),
WCMC (250,000), Donor (1,000,000); Armenia (206,200), Bolivia
(1,038,860), Madagascar (720,114), Sri Lanka (351,984) and Uzbekistan
(321,861).
Standard Fee of US$ 382,000 plus premium of US$ 116,500 to cover
added costs of supervision missions and monitoring and evaluation of a
project that spans five countries and four continents.
M and E by UNEP will involve one mid-term and one final evaluation
conducted by external consultants. UNEP task manager for project will
conduct supervision missions once a year to monitor project progress and
implementation.
3. Financing

Financing Plan



Implementing Agency
Fees
Propose IA fee



Cost-effectiveness
Estimate cost effectiveness, if feasible
Describe alternate project approaches considered
and discarded
The chosen approach seeks to maximize cost effectiveness by collating
all available existing information before investing resources in seeking
additional information that may not ultimately be needed. The approach
also focuses conservation interventions on locations where the best return
can be expected from any intervention (e.g. existing protected areas and
other sites where populations are most likely to remain).
Other approaches that have been tested in other projects have involved
substantial investments for species survey, genetic diversity analysis and
the identification of gene management zones. This approach, while
13
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
desirable in some respects, has proved to be costly, beyond the available
resources of most developing countries, and difficult to sustain in terms
of the protection actions required for the identified populations. The
approach proposed in this project will maximize conservation results and
allow population and genetic work to develop on the basis of available
country needs and resources.
4. Institutional Coordination & Support
IA Coordination and
Support
 Core commitments
& Linkages
Describe how the proposed project is located within
the IA’s
 Country regional/global/sector programs
 GEF activities with potential influence on the
proposed project (design & implementation)
UNEP’s role in the GEF is detailed in the Action Plan on
Complementarity Between the Activities Undertaken by UNEP under the
GEF and its Programme of Work (1999). This project addresses three
Action Plan strategic objectives:
1) promoting multi-country cooperation directed to achieving global
environmental benefits by establishing international cooperation
mechanisms and building capacity for the conservation of crop wild
relatives;
2) contributing to the ability of the GEF and countries to make
informed strategic and operational decisions on scientific and
technical issues in the GEF focal areas (agrobiodiversity) by
enhancing international and national information management and
building capacity for countries to make cost-effective interventions
to conserve and sustianably use crop wild relatives; and
3) relating national and regional priorities to global environmental
objectives by directing national and regional resources towards
project activities that will conserve of globally significant wild
relatives of crop plants.
UNEP WCMC is contributing US$ 250,000 of in-kind resources to the
implementation of the GEF alternative and 2,612,500 to the baseline.

Consultation,
Coordination and
Collaboration
between IAs, and
IAs and EAs, if


National project coordinators and IPGRI project coordinator maintained
regular contacts with UNDP country offices in five partner countries.
Describe how the proposed project relates to
activities of other IAs and 4 RDBs in the
country/region.
Describe planned/agreed coordination,
collaboration between IAs in project
UNDP Armenia fully assisted during the project development phase. In
order to avoid duplication of work the UNDP staff provided all available
14
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
appropriate.
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
implementation.
information relevant to crop wild relatives (generated during
development of the PDF-B UNDP/GEF project ”Sustainable use of
Agrobiodiversity in Armenia”, 1999).
The representative of UNDP country office in Bolivia attended the
National GEF Projects Review Committee meetings and fully supported
the project.
Several meetings were held in Madagascar with UNDP staff to discuss
links with relevant UNDP projects in the country.
The UNDP office in Sri Lanka participated in the full-project planning
process and assisted in the PDF-B funds management. The representative
of UNDP office was invited to attend the National Steering Committee of
the full project as an observer.
This country level collaboration will continue during project execution.
The proposal results from extensive preparatory activities to define the
scope of the project. This has involved both the partner countries and the
international agencies.
The international partners identified the project area as a high priority at
both their first Inter-Agency Meeting (Paris, 1998 - reported to COP as
UNEP/CBD/COP/4/Inf. 17) and their second meeting (Rome, 1999). In
reaching this conclusion, the meetings drew on the experience of a
number of the agencies involved in a Council of Europe initiative on
conserving crop wild relatives (see: Proceedings of Workshops on the
Conservation of Wild Relatives of European Cultivated Plants, Bocconea,
7, Italy, 1997; A Catalogue of the Wild Relatives of Cultivated Plants
Native to Europe, Flora Mediterranea 5, 1995).
To date, only one GEF project (WB) has had the conservation of crop
wild relatives as its major focus and this project took place in Turkey
entitled “In-situ conservation of genetic diversity”. This project builds
15
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
on some of the achievements of the Turkish work. IPGRI maintained
close links with national partners during project execution (and was on
the Technical Advisory Committee) and continues to collaborate with
Turkey in work on conserving traditional crop varieties on farm.
Specifically, in designing this project the partners focussed on costeffective interventions after having analyzed the World Bank GEF
funded project in Turkey.
Another relevant GEF project (UNDP) is currently in progress in selected
Middle East countries (Jordan, Lebanon, Syria) aimed at managing and
maintaining diversity in the agroecosystems of the fertile crescent as part
of integrated land management strategies. This project (in which IPGRI
is a partner) will provide important complementary experiences on
agroecosystem management that can strengthen the implementation
phase of the proposed project in respect of some species that occur as
part of e.g. forage systems.
Another UNDP GEF project currently in progress takes place in Ethiopia
"A dynamic farmer based approach to the conservation of Ethiopian plant
genetic resources". This project is concerned with on farm and ex situ
conservation of traditional cultivated varieties of some key Ethiopian
crops and not with wild crop relatives. As stated in the project
description, "Through a novel method of establishing Community Gene
Banks this project will link farm communities and their landraces with
existing genetic resource conservation efforts of the Plant genetic
Resource Centre/Ethiopia (PGRC/E)" - now called Insitute of
Biodiversity Conservation and Research. IGPRI participates in the
Ethiopian project and IPGRI participates in the Project Advisory and
Overseeing Committee (PAOC). As with a number of other recent
agrobiodiversity projects, the UNDP Ethiopian initiative has provided
insights into multidisciplinary approaches and how one can bring
together the formal and informal sectors. However, the project activities
are not directly relevant to the work outlined in this proposal since they
deal with cultivated rather than wild materials.
16
Work Program Inclusion per criteria
established in Draft # 8 of the project
review criteria
Reference Paragraphs and Explanatory Notes:
Both countries and international agencies have also drawn on their own
past activities in respect of conserving crop wild relatives to identify the
scope of the project. These include collecting activities and ex situ
conservation together with research on population localization,
population management and the measurement of the extent and
distribution of genetic diversity in populations of crop wild relatives.
5. Response to Reviews
Council
Convention Secretariat
GEF Secretariat
Other IAs and 4 RDBs
STAP
Review by expert from
STAP Roster
Respond to Council comments at pipeline entry
Respond to comments from Convention Secretariat.
Respond to comments from GEFSEC on draft project
brief.
Respond to comments from other IAs, 4RDBss on
draft project brief.
Respond to comments by STAP at work program
inclusion.
Respond to review by expert from STAP roster
17
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
See Annex C1.