Socio-Environmental Impacts of Ecosystem Projects in Africa

1
Socio-Environmental Impacts of Ecosystem Projects
in Africa
Case Studies
2
The ARES Region World Bank

• ARES region comprises nearly all of Sub-Saharan
  Africa
• 682.1 million people
• Economic growth and livelihoods are contingent on
  the provision of natural resources such as land,
  water and forests.
• African ecosystems are a key source of water
  supply for agro-development
• ARES ecosystem absorbs large amounts of carbon
  emissions
• Mismanaged environment has negative impacts on
  health, economic growth, and the global
  environment.

3
World Bank Key ARES Goals

• Ensure Sustainable Livelihoods
• Improve Environmental Health
• Reduce Vulnerability to Natural Disasters and
  Extreme Climate Events
• Maintain Global Ecosystems and Values

4
Key ARES Challenges

• High population growth
• Widespread poverty
• HIV-AIDS
• Political fragmentation and instability
• Low levels of investment in human resources and
  development
• Immigration
• Rapid and unplanned urbanization
• Extreme climate variations
• Deteriorating natural eco-systems

5
Environmental Resource Management

• Objectives
• Methodologies
• Strategy
• Implementation
• Performance Indicators Assessment

6
Zimbabwe Community Action Project

• Objective
• Poverty Reduction
• Complete the macroeconomic agenda for reform and
  private sector development in order to foster
  sustained growth
• Strengthening rural development and natural
  resources management including empowerment of
  local communities to manage economic and social
  development
• Promote poverty reduction through human resources
  investments, effective social safety nets,
  improved targeting and regular monitoring of
  welfare indicators.
• Methodology
• Community sub-projects (including social
  mobilization, infrastructure, improved natural
  resources management, training and capacity
  building for local communities)
• Poverty monitoring and analysis (technical
  assistance, study fund, survey enhancement,
  training and capacity-building, workshops,
  dissemination) and
• Community Action Project (CAP) institutional
  support (administration and operating costs,
  beneficiary assessments, Environmental Impact
  Assessment, training and capacity building for
  CAP staff).

7
Zimbabwe Community Action Project

• Strategy
• Channel of financial resources directly to the
  beneficiary communities.
• Targeted 26 of the poorest districts of Zimbabwe
  and is support of Government of Zimbabwe's
  Poverty Alleviation Action Plan (PAAP)
• Empowerment of poor communities and monitoring of
  poverty
• Objective and design were consistent with
  Zimbabwe's Country Assistance Strategy (CAS 1997)
  on poverty reduction.
• Implementation
• CAP became effective in 1998 but 18 months later,
  disbursements to the project were suspended
  because the Government of Zimbabwe defaulted on
  its loans to the Bank and other international
  financial institutions.
• In 2000, the Ministry of Public Service, Labour
  and Social Welfare (MPSLSW) gave CAP an
  additional loan, but the project had to be
  significantly scaled down and project employees
  released. the local level also released the
  officers responsible for CAP.
• In October 2000, the Bank cancelled the project
  because of Zimbabwes default on international
  loans

8
Zimbabwe Community Action Project

• Outcome
• The design of the project was appropriate for
  achieving the objective and outputs.
• Project was unable to achieve its objectives in
  its shortened timeframe.
• All structures were dismantled and work suspended
• Financial default was the primary reason for
  failure.
• Final assessment is unsatisfactory

9
Mauritania Rainfed Natural Resource Management
Project (NRMP)

• Objectives
• To break the poverty cycle by improving basic
  ecological functions (water and mineral cycles,
  ecological succession) and managing resources
• Sustainable yield increases in crops and
  livestock
• Increased incomes for participating communities
• Methodology
• Financial investments in 250 villages chosen from
  representative agro-ecological zones in the
  countrys rainfed area
• Strengthen government services to support
  community organization, improve the legal
  framework for local empowerment, and finance
  government's technical support to beneficiaries
• Enhance skills, including developing and
  disseminating required technologies (research,
  short- and medium-term technical assistance)

10
Mauritania Rainfed Natural Resource Management
Project (NRMP)

• Strategy
• Empower local communities and decentralize
  services of the Ministry of Rural Development and
  Environment (MDRE)
• Implement recommendations of the country
  environmental strategy paper (CESP) concerning
  more efficient management of natural resources
• Coordinate with existing extension services,
  devising a domestic energy strategy, and
  cooperating with the Mauritanian Integrated
  Development Program of Irrigated Agriculture
  (PDIAIM)
• Implementation
• Sought to address rural development in an
  integrated approach
• Combat the underlying causes of environmental
  degradation (i.e., mainly the overuse of
  resources)
• Used a bottom-up, participatory approach that
  empowered communities to determine their own
  development needs. (d) carried out in close
  coordination with ongoing programs and projects
  to avoid duplication of efforts and
• Supported Mauritanias existing communal
  development policy

11
Mauritania Rainfed Natural Resource Management
Project (NRMP)

• Outcome
• In the 295 villages, 120,000 people affected by
  NRMP. Investments in soil and water conservation
  (e.g., aerial tree seeding, rehabilitation and
  protection of retention dams) visibly improved
  the re-growth of natural vegetation and soil
  fertility, resulting decreased rate of
  degradatio.
• Increased the available natural resource base.
  Fencing of crop area against animal intrusion cut
  production losses by 30.
• Yield from livestock increased, new crops were
  planted.
• Empowerment of village communities through
  participatory approach has had a positive impact
  on social organization and change in attitudes
  among rural communities.
• Project received overal rating of satisfactory in
  achieving its development objective of
  sustainable yield increases and increased incomes
  for participating communities.
• Social objective of empowerment was rated Highly
  Satisfactory

12
Conclusions Recommendations

• Close monitoring of multiple participants and
  agencies is necessary to avoid duplication of
  work
• Local participation and decentralization critical
  success factors
• Government and agency financial stability is
  necessary
• Flexible, community level programs that can be
  adapted to local situations increase probability
  of success
• Long-term commitment instead of short-term
  projects.