PROJECT DEVELOPMENT FACILITY
REQUEST FOR PDF Block B CEO APPROVAL
AGENCY’S PROJECT ID: TBD
GEFSEC PROJECT ID: 2631
FINANCING PLAN (US$)
GEF ALLOCATION
COUNTRY: Jordan
PROJECT TITLE:
Mainstreaming Sustainable Land Management Practices
Project (estimated)
Project Co-financing
(estimated)
GEF AGENCY: IFAD
OTHER EXECUTING AGENCY(IES):
Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation (MOPIC), Ministry
of Environment (MOE), Ministry of Agriculture (MOA), and Ministry
of Water and Irrigation (MWI)
DURATION: 12-15 months
GEF FOCAL AREA: Land Degradation
GEF OPERATIONAL PROGRAM: OP15
GEF STRATEGIC PRIORITY: SLM 1, SLM 2
6 450 000
32 840 000
PDF A*
none
PDF B**
350 000
Sub-Total GEF PDF
350 000
PDF CO-FINANCING (details provided in Part II, Section E – Budget)
GEF Agency (IFAD)
240 000
Government of Jordan
30 000
GM
50 000
Others
35 000
Sub-Total PDF Co-financing:
355 000
Total PDF Project Financing:
705 000
ESTIMATED STARTING DATE: September 2005
ESTIMATED WP ENTRY DATE: December 2006
PIPELINE ENTRY DATE: 11 January 2005
RECORD OF ENDORSEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT:
H.E Bassem I. Awadallah
Date: 26 September 2004
Minister of Planning and International Cooperation
Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation, Jordan
Dr. Kamal M. Khdier
Date: 26 September 2004
Advisor, (GEF OFP)
Director, Water and Environment Department,
Ministry of Planning and International cooperation, Jordan.
This proposal has been prepared in accordance with GEF policies and procedures and meets the
standards of the GEF Project Review Criteria for approval.
Jim Carruthers
Khalida Bouzar
Assistant President
GEF Coordinator
Programme Management Department
GEF Unit, Programme Management Department
IFAD
IFAD
Tel: +39-06/5459-2419
Tel. : +39-06/ 5459-2151
Email: j.carruthers@ifad.org
Email: k.bouzar@ifad.org
Please do not forget to copy the gefregistry@ifad.org on all official communications.
1
PART II - PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PREPARATION
A - DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PDF ACTIVITIES
Approach
1. Before implementation of the full GEF project can take place a number of key
intermediary steps are necessary. These include further analysis of the causes and
effects of those aspects of land degradation which the GEF project will address,
the establishment of coordination mechanisms between relevant actors,
stakeholder consultations and undertaking need assessment surveys to specify
institutional strengthening and capacity building programs. This is a very
extensive itinerary, but it must be stressed that without these preliminary and
detailed planning stages, the full project benefits cannot be realised.
Jordanian organizations and individuals, as stakeholders, will undertake many of
these PDF activities, but for some aspects additional skills (national and
international) will need to be employed on a short-term basis. The PDF activities
will be organized by and through the Project Coordination Unit. As with the full
project, a principle in implementing the PDF-B activities will be to ensure a
participatory approach. This means that the concepts presented in Part A are
expected to gradually evolve under the influence of the stakeholders; at the same
the incremental costs of the proposed full-scale project will be more fully
described and refined.
B - PDF BLOCK B OUTPUTS
2. The outcomes sought from this stage are the development of the building
blocks for the full project. These comprise a series of coordination committees
which will start to ensure an integrated approach to mainstreaming sustainable
land management practices in government planning, plus the outline of a national
environmental monitoring system and a program of enhance public awareness.
The process will also produce the level of detailed planning to describe the design
and implementation of the full project; these documents will be submitted to the
GEF Council for Work Programme Inclusion in December 2006.
3. Each of the activity headings previously described for the full GEF funded
project will require preparatory steps; these are outlined below.
Community Awareness and Mobilization
4. A review of existing public awareness campaigns will be undertaken in order
to assess the impacts so far. While this would also cover educational programs,
more emphasis would be placed on agricultural based and rural communities, i.e.
to reach those directly affected by degradation issues. This would enable a gapanalysis to be undertaken indicating where awareness needs to be further raised,
2
and would serve to describe the needs for and actions to be taken to raise
awareness at the national level. From these initial investigations a larger program
of public awareness for inclusion in the full GEF project would be devised. The
responsibility for these investigations would lie with the MOE (through the
Environmental Education and Information Committee), but other stakeholders
already active in this area (e.g. RSCN) would be fully integrated in the decisionmaking process.
5. At the same time surveys of community interests and indigenous/traditional
conservation practices at the local level would take place in areas identified for
inclusion in ARMP II (these would be organised by the Community Development
Unit within of ARMP II). The intention would be to arrive at a participatory
approach through which community interest could be raised and actions could be
implemented for addressing wider conservation issues. These would then be
included for funding through ARMP II. The Community Development Unit is
due to be greatly enlarged in ARMP II - while GOJ will meet direct staff costs,
GEF funds would be directed towards incremental operational and other costs for
this unit.
6. These processes would, in total, seek both to raise awareness and to ensure the
possibility of wider participation in the planning stages of the GEF activities. In
summary the activities to be funded would cover:
o Sensitization workshops
o Commissioning of surveys to assess local level concerns & effects of
awareness campaigns
o Surveying of community interest and potential activities and
indigenous/traditional practice
o Development of concepts to be used in participatory planning and
participatory monitoring
SLM Approaches
7. The planning process for this activity would involve the identification of the
small-scale physical activities which would eventually be funded as
demonstrations through ARMP II. While some of these might initially be
identified through the surveys described above, the intention would be to specify
the activities in sufficient detail that costs and benefits could be described. The
planning stage would ascertain the first series of activities and sites for the full
project. This would essentially be a pilot stage for the staff of ARMP-II, to allow
them to develop the preferred participatory approaches which would later be
extended. The plans would need to describe agreed community commitment and
responsibilities for the ongoing management of the schemes, once completed, and
would include community training requirements. In addition the schemes would
include the mechanisms for participatory monitoring. This planning stage would
also address the need to establish demonstration sites and would determine the
3
possible methods – linked to the public awareness campaigns – for dissemination
of the results
8. In addition, routine land use planning activities by ARMP-II staff would
identify the initial batch of state and other land areas which require SWC
activities to complete the watershed approach to conservation. In these areas
detailed planning would allow the extent of funding to be calculated, so that more
precise costing could be prepared for the full project.
9. Under this heading the MWI would also be asked to investigate and describe
the activities necessary to ensure an integrated approach to water resource
management. This would serve to link local water monitoring with ARMP-II
activities, both to raise awareness of and to promote the integrated approach to
communities, and also to provide data for MOA and MOE. Specific activities to
be funded under this heading would include:
o Identifying physical activities to be included in initial phase of SLM, plus
undertaking cost/benefit analyses.
o Identifying initial SLM sites
o Upgrading cost estimates for SWC activities on State lands
o Devising dissemination/replication mechanisms
o Designing the water monitoring regime most appropriate to the ARMP-II
area.
Environmental Monitoring
10. For the PDF stage the intention is to scope the overall framework of a
national environmental monitoring system. This task not only involves
identifying the monitoring agencies and indicators but also specifying the
techniques and technology involved. This requires agreeing with the numerous
agencies concerned what needs to be regularly monitored, and how. In addition
there is a need to assess which of the internationally agreed indicators should be
adopted. The MOE, and specifically the PCU, would have the primary
responsibility for these tasks, but its role would be as a coordinator of many
stakeholders, both within and outside government.
11. At the same time, at the local level, the expansion/redevelopment of the
M&E system for ARMP II (in accordance with program 5 of the National
Strategy for Agricultural Development) would be reviewed to incorporate
relevant and useful environmental indicators. For this, the PDF-B would fund
workshops, staff-awareness and external assistance to develop an appropriate
approach and system. Overall, eligible activities under this heading might
include:
o Stakeholder analysis for identification of key participants
o Establishment of co-ordination mechanisms/committees
o Commissioning of agencies/consultants to scope outline
4
o Workshops to propose specific environmental monitoring roles
o Workshops to determine and agree on indicators and monitoring
responsibilities
o Training for augmenting ARMP-II’s M&E system
12. The formation and work of the coordinating committees would provide the
initial mechanism for developing the integrated approach to addressing
degradation issues at the national level, and for identifying policy issues. There is
already the embryo of a suitable network which can be built upon, based on the
approaches used for preparation of the NAP. The PCU would be guided in these
activities by a Steering Committee, and would be supported by the recruitment of
international expertise, as needed.
Capacity Building/Institutional Strengthening
13. The PDF stage would basically seek to understand the requirements for
capacity building/institutional strengthening within the full project. This would
involve identifying those areas of the wider capacity building programs that
would be funded by GEF. An initial requirement would be coordination with the
other agencies supporting capacity building – this would be organized by the
PCU. This task would also include assessment of the institutional strengthening
required to implement the full project, and would seek to place a cost on this
support. A full training program would be devised during the PDF-B. Specific
activities eligible for funding would be:
o Establishment of coordination and information mechanisms with other
actors involved in this activity
o Needs assessment surveys
o Identification of gaps for possible funding
Project Coordination Unit
14. The intention is that the PCU for the full project would grow out of the unit
established to implement the PDF stage. The PCU would have responsibility for
commissioning activities under the PDF, hence would need to be led by a senior
officer able to envisage the scope and ambitions of the GEF project, but also able
to realize the interactions necessary to integrate the overall GEF project with the
considerations of other stakeholders (in particular this refers to the interaction
with ARMP II). The PCU would be guided by a Steering Committee comprising
the main stakeholders – the exact composition would be determined at the start of
the PDF stage.
15. The PCU would be specifically responsible for finalizing the project
documents describing the activities and implementation arrangements for the full
GEF project (the initial drafting would be charged to the committees responsible
for specific tasks). This would include designing an M&E system for the overall
GEF funded activities, preparing detailed costs estimates by activities, and
undertaking the internal reporting necessary to conform to GOJ requirements.
5
Before submission of the final project documents, they would be appraised by
IFAD. The PDF stage would fund incremental staff costs and operating budgets
for the PCU, including Technical Assistance, support staff, equipment and
vehicles.
16. The above preparation steps are summarised in table 1.
6
Table 1.
Full Project Activity
1. Community
Awareness &
Mobilization
PDF - PROJECT PREPARATION ACTIVITIES
PDF-B Preparation Activities
Cost Headings
Identification of and consultations with Stakeholders
Gap analysis - results from local awareness campaign



Sensitization workshops
Commission evaluation of local level concerns & effects of awareness campaigns
Survey of community interest and potential activities and indigenous/traditional practice
Establishment of feedback mechanisms





Participatory planning
Participatory monitoring
Specify physical activities to be included, plus costing
Identify initial SLM sites
Devise dissemination/replication mechanism























Stakeholder analysis
Establish co-ordination mechanisms/committees
Appoint committee for review
Commission Agency/Consultants to undertake review
Workshops to ratify review
Prepare Review Report
Identification of key participants
Commission agencies/consultants to scope outline
Prepare Review Report
Workshops, agree on indicators
Augment project M&E system
Review & update as necessary
Establish coordination and information mechanisms
Needs assessment surveys
Identify gaps for possible funding
Specify training requirements
Specify institutional strengthening needs
Confirm project steering committee arrangements
Initial staff appointments
Initial Procurements
Describe M&E system for Project
Prepare detailed proposal for full project
Updating of incremental Costs table
2. SLM Approaches
Identification of additional SLM activities and practices plus
cost/benefit analyses.
3. Environmental
Monitoring
Identification of and consultations with Stakeholders
Review of Baseline
Establishing the procedure for scoping the outline of a
national Environmental Monitoring System
Establish project level Environmental monitoring
4. Capacity
Building/Institutional
Strengthening
Link with assessments of capacity building/training within
ministries and others
Specify Training Program for Full Project
5. Project Coordination
Unit
Establish a Project Coordination Unit
Preparation of project brief and draft project documents
7
C – JUSTIFICATION
17. The goal and objectives of the full GEF project focus on mitigating the causes
and effects of land degradation on the structure and functional integrity of
ecosystems through institutional strengthening and sustainable land management
interventions, whilst also contributing to poverty alleviation by improving local
livelihoods and economic well-being. The approach to be adopted is based upon
integrating existing initiatives with proposed project activities described in
Jordan’s NAP. Jordan has demonstrated a commitment to the International
Conventions and is at a stage where significant efforts are being put into raising
the agenda both nationally and within government for addressing environmental
degradation issues. The timing is appropriate to support these efforts.
18. The full project will build on an already successful baseline, and will use this
to greatly extend the potential benefits achievable both nationally and globally.
This requires a multi-dimensional and integrated approach, which must be
prepared with great care. The PDF stage is therefore crucial and comprises key
activities which, in their totality, will ensure that the national effort required to
implement the full project is fully mobilised.
8
D - TIMETABLE
Area
1
Activity
Identification of and consultations with
Stakeholders
1
2
3
Gap analysis - results from local
awareness campaign
Establishment of feedback mechanisms
2
Identification of additional SLM
activities and practices plus cost/benefit
analyses.
Extension of SWC on state lands
3
Identification of and consultations with
Stakeholders
Review of Baseline
Establishing the procedure for scoping
the outline of a national Environmental
Monitoring System
Establish project level Environmental
monitoring
4
Link with assessments of capacity
building/training within ministries and
others
Specify Training Program for Full
Project
5
Establish a Project Coordination Unit
Preparation of project brief and draft
project documents
Activity
Intermittent Activity
9
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
E – BUDGET
19. The overall estimate for the project preparation budget is $705,000. In
addition to the GEF funding, a total of approximately $355,000 of co-financing
will have been raised. IFAD would have contributed a total of $240,000; and,
GM would have contributed a total of $50,000 where $25,000 would specifically
be used in developing the coordination mechanisms and assisting in the
mobilization of financing for the full GEF project (and beyond). The GOJ
contribution (staffing costs and office overheads) is estimated to be approximately
$30,000. It is also estimated that an additional $35,000 in co-financing will be
confirmed in the early stages of the PDFB from agencies like JICA, GTZ and
DFID and would specifically contribute to planning capacity building endeavours
in the full project. The preparation the full project is estimated at 12-15 months.
Table 2. Estimated PDF-B Funding by Activities
PDF-B Activities
1. Workshops
2. Studies &
Surveys
3. Management
& Coordination
4. Other
GEF
Consultations with stakeholders for environmental monitoring
Determination of national level indicators to be used
Raising community awareness
Determination of project level indicators
Review workshops for project proposals and reports
Review of baseline activities including policy analysis
Study to identify potential national level indicators
Scoping of national environmental monitoring system
Assessment of effectiveness of awareness campaigns
Design of awareness activities
Survey of traditional practices & analysis of cost benefit options
Needs assessment surveys for capacity building/training
Preparation of TORs for commissioning studies etc.
Initial staff appointments, procurements etc.
Design/development of M&E systems
Preparation of project reports & accounts
Development of coordination mechanisms & establishment of
committees
Operational costs for the PCU
Cost of appraisal of full project proposals
Totals:
70,000
140,000
75,000
65,000
350,000
Table 3. Co-financing Sources
Co-financing Sources
Classification
Type
Cash and In-kind
Overhead Costs,
Cash
Management and
Coordination
In-kind
Staffing Costs/
Overhead Costs
To be determined
Planning &
Capacity Buildling
Sub-Total Co-financing
Co-financier
IFAD
Global
Mechanism
Government Of
Jordan
Unidentified
10
Amount (US$)
240 000
50 000
Status
Confirmed
Confirmed
30 000
Confirmed
35 000
To be
Confirmed
355 000
11