For Official Use Only

Transcription

1 Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Document of The World Bank For Official Use Only PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT ON A PROPOSED CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 2.3 MILLION (US$3.5 MILLION EQUIVALENT) AND A PROPOSED GRANT FROM THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY TRUST FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF US$6 MILLION TO THE REPUBLIC OF SENEGAL FOR A Report No: SN SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF FISH RESOURCES PROJECT Sustainable Development Department Environment and Natural Resources Management Unit Country Department AFCF1 Africa Region November 20,2008 This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

2 CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective September 30,2008) CurrencyUnit 410FCFA US$ = FCFA = US$1 = SDRl FISCAL YEAR January 1 - December 31 AFD CAS CBD CDD COMO COREMAP CPUE CCLME CLP CLPA CNCPM DDI DPM EA EOP ESW FRAP GDP GEF GIRMaC IDA JICA LSP M&E MCS MEM MFI MSC MSP MTR NGO PNI SWAP UNCLOS WAEMU WBI WSSD ZPP ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS Agence Francaise de Ddveloppement - French Agency for Development Country Assistance Strategy Convention on Biological Diversity Community-Driven Development Cellule Opdrationnelle de Mise en Oeuvre - Project Implementation Unit Coral Reef Rehabilitation and Management Project Catch-per-unit effort Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem Project Comitd Local de Pgcheurs - Local Fishers Committee Conseil Local de PCche Artisanale - Local Council of Artisanal Fishers Conseil National Consultatifde Pgches Maritimes - National Consultative Council for Marine Fisheries Direction de la Dette et de l lnvestissement - Directorate for Debt and Investment Direction des Piches Maritimes - Directorate for Marine Fisheries Environmental Assessment End of Project Economic and Sector Work Fonds de Reconversion des Artisans Pkheurs - Alternative Livelihoods to Fishing and Poverty Reduction Fund Gross Domestic Product Global Environment Facility Projet de Gestion Intdgrde des Ressources Marines et C6tikes - Integrated Marine and Coastal Resource Management Project International Development Association Japan International Cooperation Agency Letter of Sector Policy Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring, Control and Surveillance Ministry of Maritime Economy, Maritime Transport, Fisheries and Community Protected Areas Micro Finance Institution Marine Stewardship Council Medium Size Project Mid-Term Review Non-Governmental Organization Programme National d Immatriculation - National Registration Program Sector-wide approach United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea West African Economic and Monetary Union World Bank Institute World Summit on Sustainable Development Zone de PCche Protdgde - Protected Fishing Zone Vice President: Acting Country Director: Sector Manager: Task Team Leader: Obiageli K. Ezekwesili McDonald Benjamin Marjory-Anne Bromhead John Virdin

3 SENEGAL Sustainable Management of Fish Resources CONTENTS Page I. STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE... 1 A. B. C. I1. A. B. C. D. E. I11. A. B. C. D. E. F. IV. A. B. C. D. E. F. G. Country and sector issues... 1 Rationale for Bank involvement... 4 Higher Level Objectives to which the Project Contributes... 5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION... 7 Lending instrument: Specific investment loan (as co-financing to the GEF Grant)... 7 Project Development Objective and Key Indicators... 7 Project Components... 8 Lessons learned and reflected in the project design... 9 Alternatives considered and reasons for rejection IMPLEMENTATION AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS. 10 Partnership arrangements., Institutional and implementation arrangements Monitoring and evaluation of outcomes/results., Sustainability and Replicability Critical risks and possible controversial aspects Credit and grant conditions and covenants APPRAISAL SUMMARY Economic and financial analyses Technical Fiduciary Social Environment Safeguards., Policy Exceptions and Readiness... 18

4 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

5 This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not be otherwise disclosed without World Bank authorization.

6 Annex 1: Country and Sector Program Background Annex 2: Major Related Projects Financed by the Bank and/or other Agencies Annex 3: Results Framework and Monitoring Annex 4: Detailed Project Description Annex 5: Project Costs Annex 6: Implementation Arrangements Annex 7: Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements Annex 8: Procurement Arrangements Annex 9: Economic and Financial Analysis Annex 10: Safeguard Policy Issues Annex 11: Project Preparation and Supervision Annex 12: Documents in the Project File Annex 13: Statement of Loans and Credits Annex 14: Country at a Glance Annex 15: Incremental Cost Analysis Annex 16: Matrix of Stakeholder Participation Plan Annex 17: Senegal Fisheries and Aquaculture Sector Policy Letter Annex 18: Map (IBRD 36459)... 95

7 SENEGAL SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF FISH RESOURCES Date: November 20,2008 Country Director: McDonald Benjamin Sector Manager: Marjory-Anne Bromhead Project ID: P Environmental Assessment: Partial Assessment Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Global Supplemental ID: PO92062 Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan PROJECT DOCUMENT AFRICA AFTEN Team Leader: John Virdin Sectors: General agriculture, fishing and Focal Area: I-International waters forestry sector (100%) Environmental Assessment: Partial Themes: Other environment and natural Assessment resources management (P) Supplement Fully Blended?: Yes [ ] Loan [XI Credit [XI Grant [ 3 Guarantee [ ] Other: Team Leader: John Virdin Sectors: General agriculture, fishing and forestry sector (1 00%) Themes: Other environment and natural resources management (P) For Loans/Credits/Others: Total Bank financing (US$ million): 3.50 ProDosed terms: Standard (final maturitv of 40 vears including a =ace Deriod of 10 vears). International Development Association (IDA) Global Environment Facility (GEF) Total: Borrower: Republic of Senegal Dakar Senegal Responsible Agency: Ministry of Marine Economy, Maritime Transports and Fisheries Dakar, Senegal

8 ~~ FY 9 I 10 I 11 I 12 I Annual Cumulative -_ oo Project implementation period: Start March 24,2009 End: April 30,2013 Expected effectiveness date: March 24,2009 Expected closing date: March 3 1, 2012 Does the project depart from the CAS in content or other significant respects? Re$ PAD I.C. Does the project require any exceptions from Bank policies? Re$ PAD IKG. Have these been approved by Bank management? Is approval for any policy exception sought from the Board? Does the project include any critical risks rated substantial or high? Re$ PAD III.E. Does the project meet the Regional criteria for readiness for implementation? Re$ PAD IK G. [ ]Yes [XINO [ ]Yes [XINO [ ]Yes [ IN0 [ ]Yes [ ]No [XIYes [ ]No [XIYes [ ]No Project development objective Re$ PAD II. C., Technical Annex 3 The combined development objective/global objective of the project is to empower communities to reduce fishing pressure on the fish stocks supporting the central coastal fisheries of Senegal (from the Cap-Vert Peninsula to the Saloum River Delta), by (i) promoting co-management of the coastal fisheries, (ii) contributing to the rehabilitation of the essential ecosystems for the coastal fisheries, and (iii) supporting alternative livelihoods and accompanying poverty reduction measures in targeted poor fishing communities. Global Environment objective Re$ PAD II. C., Technical Annex 3 See above: combined Project/Global Objective. Project description [one-sentence summary of each component] Re$ PAD II.D., Technical Annex 4 The project would include the following four components: Component 1 : Co-management of Coastal Fisheries Component 2: Rehabilitation of Ecosystems Essential for Coastal Fisheries Component 3: Poverty Alleviation Measures for Fishing Communities and Alternative Livelihoods for Fishers and Fish Processors Component 4: Institutional Strengthening for Fisheries Management, and Monitoring and Evaluation Which safeguard policies are triggered, if any? Re$ PAD IK F., Technical Annex 10 The following Safeguards are triggered: OP 4.01, 4.04 and The Government publicly disclosed documents that were discussed during appraisal. Significant, non-standard conditions, if any, for: Re$ PAD III. F. Board presentation: No conditions

9 Loadcredit effectiveness: Preparation of the Operational Manuals, including the Project Implementation Manual and the Administrative and Financial Procedures Manual; Non-objection for the contract of the national co-management specialist for component 1; Non-objection for the short-list of institutions or firms to support implementation of ZPPs, artificial reefs and ecolabelling activities in component 2; Recruitment of the technical support institution for component 3 and the micro-finance institution for the FRAP of component 3; and Signature of a Ministerial Decree defining the mandate of the CLPAs. Covenants applicable to project implementation: The national co-management specialist will be recruited within the first two months of project implementation. 0 The institution or firm to support the implementation of ZPPs, artificial reefs and ecolabelling activities in component 2 will be recruited within the first 6 months of project implementation. Baseline data for key performance indicators collected within the first two months of project implementation. 0 A CLP is legally established in each of the eight new sites targeted by the project, within the first 18 months of project implementation. 0 The CLPAs are established in the central coastal region (from the Cap-Vert peninsula and the Saloum River Delta) is signed within the first 6 months of project implementation. 0 External auditor recruited in terms and conditions acceptable to the Association within the first 6 months of project implementation. 0 A co-management agreement is signed between the Minister of Maritime Economy and the CLP in each of the 8 new sites targeted by the project, no later than 24 months after the Effective Date 0 A consolidated local fisheries management plan is prepared and submitted by at least four different CLPAs in the central coastal region (from the Cap-Vert peninsula and the Saloum River Delta), within the first 24 months of project implementation. 0 A management plan for a ZPPs covering Mballing, Nianing, Pointe-Sarbne and Mbodibne, is approved by the Minister of MEM within the first 24 months project implementation, and a second management plan for a ZPP covering Ouakam and Carribre is signed within the first 30 months of project implementation. 0 All small-scale fishing and transport vessels operating within the central coastal region (from the Cap Vert peninsula and the Saloum River Delta) are registered by the National Registration Program (PNI) within the first six months of project implementation.

10

11 SENEGAL SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF FISH RESOURCES I. STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE A. Country and sector issues 1. Country Context. Senegal is located on the West Coast of Africa and is part of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU). With a population estimated at about 12 million, its economy is dominated by a few strategic sectors, including groundnuts, fisheries, and services. The role of the agricultural sector has declined over time, from almost 15 percent of GDP in 1960 to 7 percent in The informal sector accounts for about 60 percent of GDP. Its rural economy frequently suffers from drought, and lacks access to basic services and infrastructure, leading to low productivity, high emigration and higher poverty rates in rural areas. As a result, it is estimated that almost half of the population lives in cities. This ratio is projected to increase up to 60 percent by Sector Importance. Due to exceptional natural conditions, Senegal and its neighbours are endowed with some of the richest fishing grounds in the world. As a result, the marine fish resources off the coast of Senegal play a role in the culture, lives and economy of the population as large as any of the other natural resources in the country. Senegalese fishers have been involved in marine fisheries for centuries and coastal communities throughout the country have developed a culture of fishing. Fishing and associated activities such as processing, marketing, services and other part-time activities together are estimated to provide more than 600,000 jobs in Senegal (accounting for 17 percent of the labour force, and 10 percent of the rural population). In addition to livelihoods, the fisheries in Senegal make an extremely significant contribution to food security, constituting some 70 percent of animal protein consumption in the country, as estimated annual per capita fish consumption i s 26 kilograms (well above the world average of 16 lulograms). At the level of the country s economy, between 1997 and 2002 the fisheries sector accounted for about 2.3 percent of the country s GDP and 12.5 percent of the primary sector s GDP (i.e. approximately FCFA 300 billion or US$714 million in gross production value generating an added value of about FCFA 200 billion or US$476 million). Fish products also account for some 32 percent of the country s exports by volume, and roughly 37 percent of the total export value. In summary, marine fisheries play a critical role in the economy in Senegal, in terms of contribution to Gross Domestic Product (GDP), foreign exchange, food security and livelihoods. 3. Key Sector Issues and Institutional Constraints. Despite the economic importance of Senegal s fishery resources and the marine ecosystems that support them, the sector has been facing major difficulties in recent years due to overfishing of the most valuable commercial resources and uncontrolled expansion of the number of fishers, boats and gear, as well as land-based fish processing and preservation facilities. The sector has essentially faced the boom and bust cycle common to many uncontrolled fisheries around the world, where rapid development and investment led to strong growth in catches and returns, as well as the number of fishers and fishing capacity. Then as the fisheries continued to grow in an uncontrolled environment beyond what the fish stocks and resource base could sustain, they started to contract, bringing down catch and growth rates. 4. In Senegal, fisheries production rose steadily until 1985, when catches began to level off and landings began to decline. Since then, small-scale fishing effort has continued to increase, although the number of industrial vessels has remained stable. Essentially, these small-scale vessels have continued to proliferate even as fish stocks and catches have declined, due in part to rising world prices and demand for food fish which helped offset declining catch rates, and by vessels going farther and farther up and down the coast of West Africa in search of fish, or constantly replacing overfished higher value species for lower value ones (i.e. fishing down the food chain ). 1

12 5. The result of this uncontrolled growth in the small-scale fisheries is that many of the highest value coastal demersal stocks have been severely depleted and are now in rapid decline throughout the country, according to a World Bank sectoral study (ESW) in Senegal s marine fish resources can essentially (albeit somewhat artificially) be divided into (i) the coastal fisheries (often targeting sedentary coastal demersal species) utilized directly by the coastal fishing communities, as well as migrating small-scale fishers and industrial vessels, and (ii) the more offshore (and often migratory) fisheries that extend from the coastal areas out to the 200-mile limit of Senegal s waters. Because the coastal demersal species usually account for more than 25 percent (in volume terms) of the country s total catch, and more than 50 percent of the total value of fishery exports, that fact that these fisheries are struggling is of significant concern. 6. As Senegal s coastal demersal fish stocks become increasingly overfished and as the degradation of the marine ecosystems on which they depend becomes more severe, the small-scale fishery that relies on them will probably continue to migrate to neighbouring waters, with the West African countries incurring higher costs and making less profit. For all these reasons, the 2004 World Bank study concluded that Senegal s coastal demersal fish stocks and the small-scale fisheries that depend on them are facing a crisis. Already, some estimates show that more than 30 percent o f the coastal demersal species landed in Senegal by small-scale fishers are caught outside of the country s waters. Furthermore, as many as 2,000 Senegalese pirogues are now estimated to be fishing in the waters o f neighbouring Guinea-Bissau at any given moment. Senegal s small-scale fishers are among the most dynamic in West Africa and this fishery has now become an important cross-border activity, with environmental and economic implications for neighbouring countries such as The Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Mauritania and Guinea, as well as social concerns and increasing conflicts between local and Senegalese fishers as well as fisheries authorities. 7. The impacts of the overexploitation of Senegal s coastal fisheries on rural poverty, as well as food security and macro-economic growth are significant. The resource base for the fisheries which account for roughly a quarter of the volume of fish caught in the country by the some 52,000 people directly employed by the small-scale fisheries (and likely benefits a large portion of the some 600,000 people indirectly employed in the sector) and 50 percent of the value o f fish exports, is heavily overfished and facing a collapse. As this resource declines, the costs for the thousands of small-scale and often rural fishers to continue to participate in the sector will only increase, and the costs of relocating or shifting into new careers will certainly have profound social impacts along the coast, as will the reduction in one of the country s largest exports. These social impacts can already be seen in the numbers of Senegalese fishers participating in the growing immigration of West African citizens to Spain and Europe by sea. 8. To help address these threats to Senegal s coastal fish stocks and fisheries, this project has been designed to complement the ongoing Integrated Marine and Coastal Resource Management Project (GIRMaC) and the initiatives of other donors such as the European Union. The rationale behind developing this project (entitled Sustainable Management of Fish Resources in Senegal ) in complementarity with the GIRMaC is the opportunity to: (i) enable the Government of Senegal to implement the significant policy shifts in the management of the coastal fisheries that have been initiated with the support of the GIRMaC, by working with other donors to assist the Government to implement the recently completed Fisheries Sector Policy Letter, and (ii) to expand the scope of the pilot projects in the co-management of coastal fisheries initiated under the GIRMaC. Furthermore, this project would allow the World Bank to support the Government to help promote alternative livelihoods to fishing in targeted communities in order to reduce pressures on the resources and address some of the key social issues involved in the sector, in the form of a fishers reconversion fund. 9. Government Response to Key Sector Issues and Constraints. The Government of Senegal has recognized the social and economic importance of the marine fisheries sector in the country by giving it a central place in the country s macroeconomic policies and strategies. The first Poverty Reduction 2

13 Strategy Paper ( ) named the sector as one of the key drivers of the creation of wealth pillar of the strategy, assigning it a central role in the fight against poverty. This role was further elaborated in the second Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper ( ). More specifically, the country s Accelerated Growth Strategy promoted by the second Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper named fisheries as one of the five sectors of the national economy with high economic potential, which was to function as one of the drivers of accelerated economic growth. 10. In terms of the key sector issues and constraints, the Government of Senegal has elaborated them as the analytical basis for the Letter of Sector Policy signed in This Letter of policy places an emphasis on sustainable management of the fish resources, and achieving an optimal contribution of the sector to economic growth and poverty reduction. To respond to the challenges facing the fisheries sector as well as to help it achieve the economic potential noted in the Accelerated Growth Strategy and second Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, the Government has articulated essentially a two-pronged approach in the Letter of Policy: (i) implementing systems of collaborative or co-management for the coastal fisheries, to devolve more of the responsibility for managing these overfished resources to the users, to support them to implement needed reforms, and (ii) more broadly at the national level and including the offshore fisheries, to introduce a system of fishing access rights to fishers, as a tool to offset the reduction of fishing capacity and the recovery of the stocks Addressing the challenges of the coastal fisheries through the implementation of co-management systems represents a new way of doing business for the Government in the sector, and requires institutional transformation for the Ministry of Maritime Economy, Maritime Transport, Fisheries and Community Protected Areas (MEM) to become a more demand-based agency that can support the fishers and fishing communities. The Government began testing this approach in 2005 with the implementation of several pilot initiatives in the fisheries component of the World Bank and GEF-financed Integrated Marine and Coastal Resource Management Project (GIRMaC). The positive experiences of the comanagement pilot initiatives in this component of the GIRMaC, where each of the communities in pilot sites organized to form Local Fishers Committees and reached consensus on local fisheries management initiatives subsequently signed into legal agreement with the Minister of MEM, have encouraged the Ministry and the Government to move to formally adopt a co-management strategy for the coastal fisheries as outlined in the Letter of Sector Policy. Overall, it is important to note that beyond these fisheries co-management initiatives, the GlRMaC project suffered from an implementation strategy that tried unsuccessfully to achieve relatively distinct environment and fisheries objectives and activities at the same time through the same institutions (e.g. parks and ecosystem management together with fisheries management). This strategy resulted in heavy project implementation structures (e.g. a project coordination unit) that served as an obstacle to the ability of MEM to respond effectively to communities demands in the pilot sites in the fisheries component. For this reason, the Mid-Term Review of the GlRMaC in January 2008 recommended a restructuring of the project to adjust this strategy and concentrate the fisheries component largely on implementation of the co-management pilots, placing all of the responsibility for this component in the hands of MEM rather than a project coordination unit. Thus, the problems to date with implementation of the GlRMaC have been related more to the institutional structure created to implement the project, rather than the development hypothesis or technical design of the fisheries component of the project, which have been shown to be sound. 12. This project therefore allows the Government, and more specifically MEM, to consolidate the gains and lessons learned to date from fisheries co-management initiatives of the GlRMaC, and expand these interventions to cover a much larger share of the coastal fisheries. Thus, the project would allow the Government to implement one of the key elements of the Letter of Sector Policy and address the coastal fisheries that currently constitute the greatest concern to the sustainability of the fisheries resources and the thousands of livelihoods in the country that are dependent upon them. 3

14 13. In terms of the open water fisheries at the more national scale and the introduction of fishing access rights, the Government is working together with 8 other neighboring countries to prepare a regional initiative that would be co-financed by the World Bank and GEF, the West Africa Regional Project for Fisheries, that would support the introduction of rights at a large scale, in complement to the comanagement initiatives supported in the coastal fisheries through the GIRMaC and this project. Furthermore, the Government is participating in the GEF-funded Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem Project (CCLME), which aims to address priority transboundary concerns on declining fisheries, associated biodiversity and water quality through governance, investment and management programs. The Government agency responsible for coordinating the country s participation in the CCLME is MEM, and this project would be managed from the same office as the CCLME, in order to ensure synergies are captured. The Government considers this project as a pilot for the CCLME, with lessons that could be replicated throughout the wider region. 14. In summary, while there are numerous challenges facing both Senegal s coastal and offshore fisheries, this project will only focus on rehabilitating the coastal resources, where there are already proven models from the GIRMaC that are priorities in the Government s policy, and where the likely biggest impacts on coastal and rural poverty can be made. 15. Country Eligibility for GEF Co-Financing. The Republic of Senegal ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in October 1984 and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in June Furthermore, the country is eligible to receive financing from the International Development Association (IDA). The GEF co-financing will assist the Government of Senegal to address some of the key issues targeted by the International Waters focal area of the GEF, such as unsustainable exploitation of fisheries and protection of fisheries habitats. Furthermore, the GEF cofinancing will support the Government to respond to the direction set by the first, second and third Conferences of the Parties (COP) to the Biodiversity Convention, which stresses the importance of in situ conservation of marine and coastal ecosystems. It responds specifically to the Jakarta Mandate approved by COP2, in that it supports the sustainable use and conservation of vulnerable habitats and species. Senegal ratified the Biodiversity Convention in June In addition, the proposed GEF co-financing will assist the Government of Senegal to meet the targets set by the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg in 2002, both for (i) sustainable fisheries to be achieved by 2015, and (ii) a network of representative marine protected areas to be implemented by B. Rationale for Bank involvement 16. Rationale for Bank Involvement in the Sector. As described in Section A above, Senegal s coastal fisheries clearly represent the nexus between poverty and environment, as the fish stocks and the ecosystems that support them are overexploited and degraded, and the large number of rural coastal fishing communities and livelihoods dependent upon them are increasingly squeezed. This nexus is one pillar of the World Bank s agriculture and rural development strategy, Reaching the Rural Poor (2002). This strategy, together with the World Bank s Fisheries Approach Paper, Saving Fish and Fishers (2004), provided a clear rationale for the Bank s initial support to reforms in the management of the coastal fisheries in Senegal piloted through the GIRMaC, and now for the consolidation and extension of these reforms through the project. Encouraged by the experiences to date with the GIRMaC (despite slower than expected implementation rates), the Government has made co-management o f the coastal fisheries one of the major objectives o f the new Letter of Sector Policy (LPS) signed in Together with the GIRMaC, this project will allow the Government to implement the LPS objectives for co-management of coastal fisheries throughout the entire central coastal region, from the Cap Vert Peninsula to the Saloum River Delta. Thus, the project will support the Government of Senegal to implement and expand the comanagement reforms piloted in the GIRMaC to help rehabilitate the coastal fish resources in this central 4

15 coastal region, thereby providing a consolidated model for the implementation of the Government s Letter of Sector Policy that could be replicated to the northern coastal region and the Casamance in the south. As such, the project will also serve as a pilot that can be replicated more widely through the region by the Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem Project. 17. Development Hypothesis for Bank Involvement in the Sector. The project s development hypothesis, also reflected in the Government o f Senegal s LPS (see section A. 1 : Country and Sector Issues), is that in order to address the poverty-environment nexus in the coastal fisheries, communities should be empowered and where necessary organized (e.g. as legally recognized Local Fishers Committees) to collaborate with government institutions to sustainably utilize and manage the coastal fisheries resources. The idea is that households in coastal communities will have greater incentives to sustainably use the resources and to invest in their rehabilitation, if they have the responsibility and authority to control their use. This development hypothesis is being tested in the GIRMaC project, and although institutional problems have resulted in slower than expected disbursements and implementation (i.e. tensions between the Government agencies and a project coordination unit of consultants), targeted communities have clearly validated and embraced the co-management model, by putting forward concrete proposals for management o f the resources and entering into legal agreements with the Government to do so. Similarly, the Government of Japan (JICA) has supported co-management of coastal fisheries in the community of Nianing in the central coastal region, with strong buy-in from local fishers and positive experiences to date. 18. The project would thus seek to consolidate and expand these examples, not only by expanding the coverage of the Government s co-management initiative, but also by testing additional tools for rehabilitation of the coastal fisheries, such as co-managed protected fishing zones (zones de p2che protkgdes - ZPPs), market-based approaches to encourage sustainable resource management through ecocertification of fish products, and the establishment of artificial reefs, among others. Both the GIRMaC and this project will utilize an Alternative Livelihoods to Fishing and Poverty Reduction Fund (Fond de Reconversion des P2cheurs - FRAP) being established by the Government, to provide block grants and micro-credit to targeted communities to support interested fishers to undertake alternative livelihoods to fishing, and thereby further reduce some of the pressure on the resources. In summary, this project will learn from the lessons of the GIRMaC, to further refine the development hypothesis o f co-management o f the coastal fisheries, in order to help achieve the Government s objective of increased contribution from the fisheries to economic growth, and to help reverse the significant environmental degradation and overfishing occurring in these areas. 19. Comparative Advantage of the Bank in the Sector. The Bank s comparative advantage in supporting coastal fishing communities and fisheries in Senegal lies in: (i) quality economic and sector work (2004 Senegal Fisheries ESW), (ii) ongoing policy dialogue with our donor partners to facilitate the implementation of the needed reforms in the management of coastal fisheries; (iii) coordination to enable collaboration between multiple donors to parallel and co-finance complementary activities, as co-chair of the fisheries sector donor s group in Senegal; (iv) the convening power to bring together stakeholders from local and national levels to reach consensus for resolving competing demands on the coastal fish resources; and (v) a track record of investment and lessons learned through the GIRMaC, which though certainly not perfect, provides a sound body of experience upon which to support further implementation of reforms. C. Higher Level Objectives to which the Project Contributes 20. Contribution to the Government of Senegal s Sector and Poverty Objective. This project directly contributes to the Government of Senegal s Accelerated Growth Strategy, which calls for the fisheries 5

16 sector to be one o f the key drivers of economic growth, through the sustainable use and additional value added from the resources, rather than increased production quantities (which are no longer possible at current levels of fishing effort). To help realize the objectives of the Accelerated Growth Strategy, the Government prepared a Letter of Sector Policy (LPS) in 2008, together with an Action Plan for its implementation in The Government has requested support from the donor community for the implementation of the Action Plan to the LPS, and together with the GIRMaC, this project responds to that request by supporting one of the key objectives and axes of the Action Plan, to help rehabilitate the coastal fisheries through the introduction of co-management systems, including tools such as artificial reefs and market-based incentives such as eco-certification o f fish products Contribution to the Objectives of the CAS. The project directly responds to challenges specified in the FY07-FY10 Country Assistance Strategy (CAS). More specifically, one o f the three main pillars of the CAS, the pillar for Accelerated GrowtWealth Creatiodstrengthening the Drivers of Growth, includes an outcome of promoting sustainable development and management of natural resources, beginning with the fisheries resources. This outcome in the CAS highlights the fact that the fisheries sector employs 10 percent o f the rural population and generates 30 percent o f the country s exports (page 24). As such, the CAS notes that the Bank will provide continued support to the sector through the GIRMaC, and that with financing under the GEF sustainable fisheries management project, the Bank will strengthen the regulation of access to fish resources. 22. Contribution to Relevant GEF Operational Program Goals. The sustainable fisheries management activities that will be supported by the project will contribute directly to the implementation of Strategic Objective I o f the International Waters Focal Area: to foster international, multi-state cooperation on priority water concerns, and more specifically to Strategic Program I: Restoring and Sustaining Coastal and Marine Fish Stocks and Associated Biological Diversity. More specifically, the project will enable the country to work together with artisanal fishers to implement fisheries and habitat management reforms such as co-management plans and protected fishing zones (i.e. marine reserves), which will allow the country to address the overexploitation of both transboundary fisheries and fish stocks. The project would result directly in one of the four expected outcomes from this Strategic Program: institutions and reforms introduced to catalyze implementation of policies reducing overfishing and benefiting communities. The project s results framework is therefore directly in line with the implementation of this Strategic Program and the expected outcomes and indicators. Additionally, GEF co-financing will be used by the Government of Senegal to help rehabilitate some of the most overexploited fish stocks in the Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem (CCLME), serving as a pilot for the other countries participating in the CCLME Program. Furthermore, project-funded activities will reduce the need for targeted fishing communities to migrate throughout the CCLME for fishing opportunities, thereby reducing pressures on the wider fish resources in the LME water body. For example, the GEF support would contribute significantly to the strengthening of Senegal s network of protected fishing zones (ZPPs). The participation in the co-management of these ZPPs by the local communities living within them or on their outskirts would help to make the network more stable, and would contribute directly to the objective and key results indicator of the Strategic Partnership for a Sustainable Fisheries Investment Fund in Africa for the sustainable use of fisheries resources to be achieved in at least 10 countries in the LMEs of Sub- Saharan Africa by 2015, as well as the results indicator for the average increase in catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of small-scale fishers in targeted fisheries. A draft of the concept for this project was included as an annex in the original Partnership Brief for the Strategic Partnership that was approved by the GEF Council, to serve as a model for the type of investments that would be made under the Partnership, 23. Compliance with the Eligibility Criteria of the Strategic Partnership for Fisheries in Africa. The project is in line with the Strategic Partnership s eligibility criteria: (i) The Sectoral Strategy and Stakeholder Participation Template will include a long-term approach to ensure the sustainability of the fishery sector, poverty alleviation measures and activities 6

17 designed to achieve those aims, such as those described in the World Bank s Sectoral Economic Study and the Government s Letter of Sector Policy. (ii) The proposed project does not overlap with on-going activities. (iii) The proposed project will cover the additional cost of activities providing environmental benefits extending beyond Senegal s borders. Without these additional resources, the proposed project activities would probably not obtain the necessary funding given the numerous competing demands in a country whose budget resources are extremely limited. (iv) The funding of the proposed project meets the co-financing ratio of three donor dollars to one GEF dollar. The proposed sum of US$6.0 million from the Strategic Partnership Investment Fund would complement the new US$3.5 million in IDA funding and the IDA funding of US$5.0 million for GIRh4aC s component Sustainable Fisheries Management, the EU funding of US$9.2 million, the US$1.35 million of funding from the Government of Senegal and Swiss funding of US$0.5 million (for a total financing of US$25.54 million - see Annex 5). (v) The proposed project is consistent with the Strategic Partnership s 10 operating principles. 11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Lending instrument: Specific investment loan (as co-financing to the GEF Grant). B. Project Development Objective and Key Indicators 24. The combined development objective/global objective of the project is to empower communities to reduce fishing pressure on the fish stocks supporting the central coastal fisheries of Senegal (from the Cap Vert Peninsula to the Saloum River Delta). The project would achieve this objective by (i) promoting comanagement of the coastal fisheries, (ii) contributing to the rehabilitation of the essential ecosystems for the coastal fisheries, and (iii) supporting alternative livelihoods and accompanying poverty reduction measures in targeted poor fishing communities. Successful experiences would be used to draw lessons for potential replication at a later date to the coastal fisheries in the other regions of the country. 25. The rationale behind this objective is that the coastal fish stocks that provide so many livelihoods, exports and foreign exchange for the country, can be restored if the Government empowers small-scale fishers to sustainably co-manage these resources, while at the same time conserving the key habitats that support them. The central region of the coast, from the Cap Vert Peninsula to the Saloum River delta, is being selected as a pilot area that could serve as a model for replication to the other two coastal regions of the country (St. Louis and the Casamance) after the end of the project. These fisheries are globally significant and vital for the livelihoods of numerous coastal communities. Resources and cross-border fishers will be included in the project, as declining stocks in these waters have led Senegalese fishers to fish the entire length of the West African coast. 26. In order to meet the development and global environment objective, the project activities focus on achieving several key outcomes, including: (a) local co-management of the fisheries is strengthened and understood; (b) critical habitats supporting key fish species are protected in a participatory manner; and (c) alternative livelihoods and accompanying poverty reduction measures are supported in the areas targeted by the project. 27. The key indicators for measuring the success of project activities toward achieving the development objective and these outcomes are (see Technical Annex 3: Results Monitoring Framework): 0 Increase in the average size of fish caught for targeted species in co-management sites 7

18 0 0 Reduction in the level of fishing effort for targeted species in co-management sites Eight new co-management sub-project proposals are approved as legal agreements with the Government and successfully implemented by end-of-project (EOP) 70 percent of community members surveyed in participating communities are satisfied with project activities to rehabilitate coastal fish stocks (ZPPs, artificial reefs, ecolabelling) Each community targeted by the project has access to a system of micro-credit, and projectsupported poverty reduction measures are implemented in at least the four initial pilot sites, by EOP. C. Project Components 28. The project consists of a program of interventions and support by different donors (see Section III.A), including the IDA credit currently under implementation through the GIRMaC project, funding from the European Union (through the STABEX project) and co-financing from the Government, in addition to the GEF Grant and IDA Credit. The project, including this total program of interventions, will support the following components and sub-components (with total costs in millions of U.S. Dollars in parenthesis). GEF is lending support to components 1, 2 and 4. The IDA Credit is lending support to component 3. Additionally, the GIRMaC project (IDA credit currently under implementation) is also supporting activities described in components 1,2 and 4. Objectives and detailed descriptions of each sub-component identified below are found in Technical Annex 4: Detailed Description. 29. Component 1: Co-management of Coastal Fisheries (US$2.0 M IDA-GIRMaC project, US$2.66 M GEF, US$2.6 M EU, US$0.34 M Government). The objective of this component is to implement co-management systems to improve the governance of the coastal fisheries for a more sustainable use of the resources. This component will support the following sub-components: (1) Promotion of Local Co-Management Initiatives in 4 Pilot Sites ($2.0 m IDA-GIRMaC project); (2) Consolidation and Strengthening of Coastal Fisheries Co-management ($2.36 m GEF, $0.3 m Government); and (3) Institutional Support for a System of Local Fisheries Governance ($0.3 m GEF, $2.6 m EU, $0.04 m Government). 30. Component 2: Rehabilitation of Ecosystems Essential for Coastal Fisheries (US$2.4 M GEF, US$0.5 M IDA-GIRMaC project, US$1.5 M EU, US$0.5 M Switzerland, US$0.4 M Government). The objective of this component is to contribute to the rehabilitation of ecosystems essential to the coastal fisheries, by establishing Protected Fishing Zones (ZPPs) in association with artificial reefs, in order to help regenerate the natural resources, and by creating market mechanisms to encourage sustainable management of the ecosystems. This component will support the following sub-components: (1) Protected Fishing Zones ($0.9 m GEF, $0.15 m Government); (2) Artificial Reefs ($0.8 m GEF, $0.13 m Government); (3) Introduction of Access Rights and Associated Management Instruments ($0.1 m GEF, US$0.5 m IDA-GIRMaC project, US$1.5 m EU, US$0.5 m Switzerland); and (4) Market Incentives for Sustainable Management for Targeted Fisheries ($0.6 m GEF, $0.12 m Government), 3 1. Component 3: Poverty Alleviation Measures for Fishing Communities and Alternative Livelihoods for Fishers, Fish Processors, and Fish transporters (mareyeurs) (US$3.5 M IDA, UW0.46 M Government). The objective of this component is to offset any negative socio-economic impacts for targeted fishing communities resulting from co-management initiatives or management plans (including the introduction of instruments such as ZPPs, artificial reefs, eco-labels, etc.). This component will support the following sub-components: (1) Poverty Alleviation Initiatives in Project-Targeted Communities ($2.0 m IDA, $0.25 m Government); (2) Support for Alternative Livelihoods to Fishing ($1.0 m IDA, $0.1 m Government); and (3) Capacity Building, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Communications ($0.5 m IDA, $0.11 m Government). 8

19 32. Component 4: Institutional Strengthening for Fisheries Management, Project Management and Monitoring and Evaluation (US$2.5 M IDA-GIRMaC project, US$0.94 M GEF, US$5.1 M EU, US$0.15 M Government). The objective of this component is to support the Ministry of Maritime Economy to manage and implement the project in the context of the Letter of Sector Policy, and to monitor and evaluate results. This component will support the following sub-components: (1) Development of a Fisheries Code and Support for the Implementation of Fisheries Management Plans ($0.9 m IDA-GIRMaC project, $4.4 m EU, $0.28 m GEF, $0.04 m Government); (2) Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation ($1.6 m IDA-GIRMaC project, $0.7 m EU, $0.6 m GEF, $0.11 m Government); and (3) Replication of Project Activities at the Sub-Regional and Regional Level ($0.06 m GEF). D. Lessons learned and reflected in the project design 33. This project directly reflects the lessons learned from global good practices as well as Bank-financed operations in Senegal such as the GIRMaC project, and the Bank s ongoing analytic work on the sector and in the country. The design also reflects innovations from a multitude of non-bank financed projects and programs, such as the fisheries co-management initiatives financed by the Government of Japan (JICA) in Nianing, and feasibility studies on ecolabelling of fish products financed by the Government of Germany (GTZ). 34. First, global experiences with collaborative or co-management of coastal fisheries resources have confirmed that this project should include several aspects in the design: (a) communities should be placed at the center of fisheries and coastal ecosystem management; (b) coastal fisheries management is most likely to be sustainable when the Government forms a partnership with coastal communities (i.e., collaborative management); (c) collaborative coastal fisheries management is a process, and must be implemented as such, rather than in a compartmentalized or fragmented approach focused on individual outputs; and (d) the establishment of no-take or no-fishing zones, i.e. protected fishing zones, is one of the most effective tools communities and local governments can employ to both rehabilitate depleted fisheries and protect the coastal ecosystems upon which they depend. 35. Second, the model of co-management piloted by the GIRMaC works, as community demand for increased responsibility in the management of the coastal fish resources in Senegal is high. In almost all pilot sites of the GIRMaC, as well as the similar co-management sites financed by JICA, fishing communities and fishers have clearly understood and appreciated the threats to the resource base, and have welcomed the opportunity to take management measures to address them. In some cases they have even begun to implement management measures without waiting for Government support. This comanagement model includes Government-financed facilitators living and working with the communities, to help them form legally-recognized Local Fishers Committees (CLPs) that prepare management initiatives for the fisheries with work programs and budgets, which are legally recognized by the Minister. At the supra-community level, Government-established Local Councils of Artisanal Fishers (CLPAs) help coordinate management between different communities and CLPs, develop consolidated local fisheries management plans to be legally recognized by the Ministry, as well as serve as a forum and communication channel between the Ministry and the communities. Lessons to date have shown that neighboring communities have the will and ability to work together and collaborate, and that the CLPAs have a crucial role to play in this process, and therefore must be established and operational in areas of intervention. Furthermore, lessons to date have shown that co-management initiatives have a multiplier effect, whereby neighboring communities see the results of a pilot and wish to participate as well. For this reason, the project is being designed so that project sites will be selected based on a principle of geographic concentration, i.e. by expanding outwards from the existing pilot sites in the central coastal region of the country between Cap Vert and the Saloum River delta. 9

20 36. Lastly, because in the current situation of overcapacity and overexploitation in the coastal fisheries, in order to reach the project s objective of restoring the coastal fish resources, many communities will need to restrict or reduce fishing activities in the near-term as part of co-management activities and the implementation of no-take protected fishing zones. For such co-management initiatives to be successful, and to address the drop in livelihoods amongst the affected poor fishers, the project must support fishers efforts to acquire new skills and the micro-credit necessary for them to pursue alternative livelihoods to fishing outside the sector, to both help reduce pressure on the resources and compensate fishers for lost revenues as a result of management measures. E. Alternatives considered and reasons for rejection 37. Several alternatives were considered in the project design, towards meeting the objective o f restoring the fish stocks that support the coastal fisheries in Senegal. A project focused on large-scale, multisectoral marine parks or protected areas was considered, in order to support a national network of such areas. However, there is not yet a legal framework in the country for the establishment and management of such areas, which would permit the project to finance their implementation directly. Rather, given the success of the GIRMaC in catalyzing communities to take a greater level of responsibility in the management and rehabilitation of the coastal fisheries, the project will support the implementation of community-scale protected fishing zones in the context o f co-management, under the legal framework of the 1998 Fisheries Code. 38. Additionally, in terms of replicating the experiences of co-management under the GIRMaC, the project considered enlarging the area of intervention to try to demonstrate models along the northern coast near St. Louis, as well as along the southern coast near the Casamance. However, given the limited amount of hnds available and the benefits of scale from concentrating in one area, the project will focus geographically on the fisheries along the central coast of Senegal between the Cup Vert Peninsula and (including) the Saloum River Delta. This will allow neighboring communities to collaborate and reinforce their efforts, as well as human and financial resources to be economized IMPLEMENTATION AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS A. Partnership arrangements 39. This project will be implemented in partnership with several other donors, in order to help the Government of Senegal finance the action plan in the Letter of Sector Policy. More specifically, the project includes direct co-financing from the World Bank (through both the new US$3.5 million IDA funds and the existing US$5 million IDA resources of the GIRMaC), from the Government of Switzerland (through a trust fund supporting vessel registration), and from the Government of Senegal, and parallel financing from the European Union (through the STABEX project). While the parallel financing from the EU and the co-financing from the IDA resources of the GIRMaC and the trust fund resources from the Government o f Switzerland are integral to the project, the objectives and results can be achieved just through the implementation of the new IDA funds (US$3.5 million) and GEF grant (US$6.0 million), along with the Government co-financing (US$1.35 million). The different donors will all be working together to support the Directorate of Marine Fisheries (DPM) within MEM to implement the Letter of Sector Policy for the fisheries, as a first step towards an eventual sector-wide approach (SWAP). Additionally, the project will be implemented in collaboration with the Wula Naafa I1 project funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which will be implemented from 2008 to 2013 and provides US3.0 million to support rehabilitation of the coastal fisheries in southern Senegal. 10

21 Lastly, the project will provide lessons and experiences for the larger Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem (CCLME) Project. B. Institutional and implementation arrangements 40. The Ministry of Maritime Economy and Transport (MEM) is the project's executing agency, and more specifically the Directorate for Marine Fisheries (DPM) within the Ministry. The DPM already has a project implementation unit (COMO) for the fisheries component o f the GIRMaC, as well as another for the implementation of the EU-funded fisheries STABEX project. Additionally, the Sustainable and Equitable Management of Maritime Fisheries Sector Capacity Building Project, funded by the Agence Franqaise de Ddveloppement (AFD) is also managed by a coordination unit with technical assistance within DPM. The Directorate is strengthening the existing project implementation unit for the GIRMaC to manage the implementation of this project together with the GIRMaC, as well as to implement a standard monitoring and evaluation system for all of the various donor support received by DPM for the implementation of the action plan for the Letter of Sector Policy, as the first step towards a future sectorwide approach (SWAP). 41. This COMO will include fiduciary monitoring capacity, for both financial management and procurement. The Financial Management Specialist of the COMO will oversee the Financial Management aspects of the Project including the consolidation of financial statements for project activities, providing quarterly Interim Financial Reports, monitoring financial transactions on the project's account through the DDI (Direction de la Dette et de 1 'Investissement) and making the necessary arrangements for the annual financial audit. The IDA and GEF funds will flow from the World Bank to the Designated Accounts opened under the DDI at the Ministry of Economy and Finance. C. Monitoring and evaluation of outcomes/results 42. The Results Framework and monitoring indicators (see Section I1 B above for project outcome indicators and Annex 3 for the Results Framework) underwent extensive consultations with national and local stakeholders, the ministry of Fisheries, the Ministry of Planning, corporate reviews and outside experts. Currently, the sector monitoring system within the executing agency (DPM within MEM) charged to ensure sustainable monitoring lacks the resources and coordination to adequately report on progress. For this reason, component four of the project will support capacity building in monitoring and evaluation in the DPM, through the recruitment of additional resources and a full time M&E expert reporting to the Project Coordinator in the Project Implementation Unit (COMO). 43. In terms of the key performance indicators, or outcome indicators, baselines will be available by project effectiveness. In terms o f the first two outcome indicators listed in Section B.3, while the average size of targeted fish catches is expected to increase as a result of project interventions, there is no biological basis to establish a target. The indicator will therefore be based on individual species identified at each co-managed site. Other qualitative indicators are being refined to avoid a 0-1 approach. For the eight sub-projects where co-management is being established, the pre-selected sites will be confirmed within two months after project effectiveness, and various milestones will be identified to reflect for example, legally recognized CLPs, signed co-management agreements with the government, and implementation of various surveillance, enforcement, monitoring and other mechanisms to demonstrate effective co-management among the targeted sites along the central coast. Such milestones are imperfect measures of co-management, but reflect the process-oriented nature o f the interventions. 44. In addition to the outcome indicators, the intermediate indicators in the Results Framework were designed to create a logical link with each of the components of the project and the outcome indicators. Again, baselines and targets are being established for each, and the Government has provided technical 11

22 notes on each of the intermediate indicators, including persons responsible for their implementation, for collection, timeliness, and how each indicator will be collected. The data for the project s outcomes and the accompanying three groups of intermediate indicators will come from different sources, depending on the specific outcome of interest. 45. For the co-management of coastal jsheries indicators, the project will finance baseline surveys in each community before the development of co-management plans and initiatives, as well as periodic information collection as part of the work of the Project Implementation Unit (COMO). 46. The same approach is being taken with the data for outcomes of the rehabilitation of coastal ecosystems component through the establishment of protected fishing zones. The key performance indicator linked to this component is closely linked to the establishment of CLPs and co-management sites. The project is therefore aiming to support these CLPs with the tools to legally and financially enforce these zones and the measures will indicate various milestones during this process. Ultimately, the placement of artificial reefs, coupled with managed fishing and support for alternative livelihoods to fishing is expected to lead to fishing effort and species size to be increased, thereby linking with the project s development objective. As with other indicators, the targeted communities as well as fishers and producers, will play a key role in collecting the baseline and periodic data to manage for results. 47. The CLPs will also be heavily involved in creating alternative livelihoods component, with a particular focus on increased value added to fish products. Consultations with the communities involved indicated that value added processing of fish, among others, was the most feasible option to increase incomes for existing fisherman, especially women in the community. The project will finance organizations and micro-finance institutions to provide technical assistance on micro-finance/microcredit, and will finance technically-qualified consultants to undertake monitoring of key indicators and impacts. 48. The final repository for data on all results indicators will be the Directorate for Marine Fisheries in MEM, which will report regularly to the World Bank. However, all relevant information for each targeted site will be posted at the nearest Maison de Pgcheurs in the four initial pilot sites, and the new fishers meeting places to be constructed by the project in the eight additional sites. D. Sustainability and Replicability 49. The issue o f sustainability is examined from the perspective of institutions, policies and individual sites. In terms o f institutional sustainability, the project will work with partners to support the Directorate for Marine Fisheries in the implementation of the fisheries management aspects of the Letter of Sector Policy, to ensure that the progress made towards achieving the objectives of the Letter is continued by MEM after the project. Furthermore, the project is promoting the implementation of existing policies for co-management already established by the Government based in part on pilots financed to date by the GIRMaC. Thus, the policies supported by the project are fixed, and the institutions involved all subscribe to them. Lastly, in terms of individual sites, the project is designed to minimize the operating costs per site after the end of the project, and to ensure clear benefits are seen by the communities, who will themselves continue the coastal fisheries management activities long after the project. 50. In terms of replicability, the project will implement a model for co-management of coastal fisheries that can grow horizontally and be replicated to communities throughout the country, particularly as more and more are established. The reasoning for clustering project activities in the coastal region between Cap Vert and the Saloum is that in addition to the synergies captured between neighboring sites, the concentration of results and achievements in one region can act as an example that catalyzes similar actions in the northern and southern regions. The project will support MEM to promote these examples to 12

23 other regions, including exchanges between individual fishing communities to share lessons learned. Thus, the potential for replication is high, as the project supports activities that are part of a nationwide policy, and should serve as models for regions of the country outside of the areas of intervention. See Annex 4 for further details on sustainability and replicability plans. E. Critical risks and possible controversial aspects Risks To moiect develodment obiective Implementation Capacity: Risk that the institutional difficulties in the management o f the GIRMaC will impact the project s implementation Social: Risk that the resource management measures necessary will create negative social impacts in targeted communities, as a result of reduced incomes and/or livelihoods To component results Component 1 : Risk of conflict between neighboring communities that share the same coastal fisheries, where onehome are willing to participate in project activities and are others are not Component 2: Risk that the excess number of fishers and fishing boats active nation-wide will impinge upon and i eopardize proj ect-supported activities in targeted sites, and that sommunities and government will not be able to enforce community management measures Component 3: Risk that there will be a low uptake 3f micro-finance or a high default -ate by borrowers because of.nexperience and/or high interest rate ;barges Risk Mitigation Measures The project has avoided the same institutional structure as the GIRMaC, and will ensure that the restructuring recommended during the Mid-Term Review is implemented, which returned management authority for the comanagement initiatives to MEM. The project has designed component 3 to mitigate this risk, with an alternative livelihoods fund available to help compensate fishers and families for any losses, and to encourage alternative livelihoods to fishing The project will ensure that Government creates and operationalizes the Local Artisanal Fishers Councils in targeted areas o f intervention, as a forum to resolve disputes, etc. between neighboring communities and sites. The project will ensure that MEM legally recognizes the site-based activities to restore the coastal fisheries being supported by the project, and provides enforcement support as needed to communities to ensure their management measures are respected by outside fishers. The selection o f an experienced microfinance institution will help lower the risk of high defaults because o f the institution s prior experience in this area. Low uptake will be addressed by the provision of rebates to MFI borrowers who successful meet the conditions o f their loans on termination Risk Rating with Mitigation S S M S M 13

24 Component 4: Risk that the implementing agency will not have sufficient capacity to effectively monitor outcomes and results Overall Risk Rating of their loan. Additionally, the project will, through a contracted FRAP Support Institution, provided individualized training and support for fishers taking on MFI loans on financial planning, management, and organizational skills. The Results Framework has been designed on the basis of indicators that are proven to be readily available, and the project will recruit a full-time M&E SDecialist L Modest Risk F. Credit and grant conditions and covenants 5 1. Credit and grant effectiveness: 0 Completion of the Operational Manuals, including the Project Implementation Manual and the Administrative and Financial Procedures Manual; e Non-objection for the contract of the national co-management specialist for component 1; e Non-objection for the short-list of institutions or firms to support implementation of ZPPs, artificial reefs and ecolabelling activities in component 2; e Recruitment of the technical support institution for component 3 and the micro-finance institution for the FRAP of component 3; and 0 Signature of a Ministerial Decree defining the mandate of the CLPAs. 52. Covenants applicable to program implementation: The national co-management specialist will be recruited within the first two months of project implementation. The institution or firm to support the implementation of ZPPs, artificial reefs and ecolabelling activities in component 2 will be recruited within the first 6 months of project implementation. Baseline data for key performance indicators collected within the first two months of project implementation. A CLP is legally established in each of the 8 new sites targeted by the project, within the first 18 months of project implementation. Each of the CLPAs are established in the central coastal region (from the Cap Vert peninsula and the Saloum River Delta) is signed within the first 6 months of project implementation. External auditor recruited in terms and conditions acceptable to the Association within the first 6 months of project implementation. A co-management agreement is signed between the Minister of Maritime Economy and the CLP in each of the 8 new sites targeted by the project, within 24 months of project implementation. A consolidated local fisheries management plan is prepared and submitted by at least 4 different CLPAs in the central coastal region (from the Cap Vert peninsula and the Saloum River Delta), within the first 24 months of project implementation. A management plan for a ZPPs covering Mballing, Nianing, Pointe-Sarbne and Mbodihne, is approved by the Minister of MEM within the first 24 months project implementation, and a second management plan for a ZPP covering Ouakam and Carrihre i s signed within the first 30 months of project implementation. 14

25 All small-scale fishing and transport vessels operating within the central coastal region (from the Cap Vert peninsula and the Saloum River Delta) are registered by the National Registration Program (PNI) within the first six months of project implementation. IV. APPRAISAL SUMMARY A. Economic and financial analyses 53. This project is essentially a framework -type project, where the majority of the investments will be determined by targeted communities, e.g. the co-management activities in component one, the establishment of protected fishing zones in component two and support for alternative livelihoods in fishing communities in component three. For this reason, indicative cost-benefit analyses of representative examples of these investments have been used, as proxies to illustrate the basis for deciding on the merits of the project. 54. In terms of co-management activities, an indicative cost benefit analysis has been carried out, based on data collected from similar activities in communities supported by the GIRMaC project. In the pilot site at Foundiougne, investments in co-management supported the communities to implement management measures for the shrimp fishery such as seasonal and monthly closures to allow the catchable individuals to grow to larger sizes. The relationship between prices in the local, national and international markets for shrimp and the size of individual products (Le. size o f shrimp caught) is not linear. Prices for larger specimens may be two or three times greater than prices for smaller specimens, such as juveniles. Thus, as a result of the measures taken by the communities, total production from the shrimp fishery increased (from 170 tons annually to 340 tons annually), average size o f the shrimp caught increased (from 200 individuals per kilogram to between 60 and SO) and significant benefits were realized (global gross income doubled). Similarly, the environmental sustainability o f the catch increased as well, as the species were given more time to reproduce and grow. B. Technical 55. The project s approach builds upon global experiences with the promotion of collaborative (or comanagement) partnerships between communities and governments, in order to allow them to more sustainably manage the natural resource base upon which they depend. The pilot sites financed to date by the GIRMaC have confirmed that this model is technically sound, and has been effective and well received in the targeted communities. In addition to the activities piloted in the GIRMaC, the project introduces additional instruments shown to be good practice, such as the establishment of no-take protected fishing zones. The impact of such collaboratively-managed protected fishing zones in replenishing fish populations and protecting critical coastal ecosystems is well documented. It is also a key element of the Government of Senegal s strategy for the fisheries sector. For this reason, empowering coastal communities to establish and monitor protected fishing zones is one of the main approaches utilized by the project. The wisdom of this approach has been confirmed by other World Bank investments, such as in the first phase of the Coral Reef Rehabilitation and Management Project (COREMAP Phase I) and the Marginal Fishing Communities Development Pilot in Indonesia, as well as by numerous experiences and good practices from around the world, including examples from India, the Philippines and Samoa as summarized in the World Bank Fisheries Approach Paper Saving Fish and Fishers (2004). 56. In addition, the project s design builds on lessons learned in the GIRMaC and other similar investments, suggesting that efforts to restore overexploited fish stocks and improve management o f the resource base should be accompanied by support to embark upon alternative livelihood strategies for 15

26 those interested. The project reflects the good practices in both community development and microfinance operations supported by the Bank, in order to provide small grants to fishing communities for basic infrastructure to help improve post-harvest quality and value added, as well as to tie commerciallycompetitive micro-finance to sustained technical assistance for business planning and occupational training. The project design complies with OP8.30, in that a micro-finance institution has been identified, its capacity assessed, and the necessity for remedial grant assistance for the institution assessed by effectiveness. In the case of this project, remedial grant assistance is needed only with respect to the extension o f lending activities to some new localities which will be co-management sites. C. Fiduciary 57. A financial management assessment of this project was carried out in May 2008, more specifically an assessment of the financial management capacity o f the Directorate of Marine Fisheries (DPM), including accounting systems for project expenditures and underlying internal controls (see project files for the Financial Management Capacity Assessment and Procurement Capacity Assessment). The conclusion of the assessment was that the financial management system in place with DPM, subject to the capacity building measures included in the project, satisfies the Bank s minimum requirements under OP/BP 10.02, and therefore is adequate to provide, with reasonable assurance, accurate and timely financial management information on the status o f the project required by World Bank. 58. Based on the assessment, financial management risks inherent in the project entity and risks specific to project design have been rated as substantial. Several measures have been designed to mitigate these risks, including implementation of the action plan in Technical Annex 7. These measures include supporting financial management and capacity building for the COMO, as well as the recruitment of an NGO or institution to support the management of the block grants in component 3 and assist in payment validation procedures, including community disclosure and oversight mechanisms where applicable. A series of these measures and other operating procedures for each project activity is expected to be clearly documented in the project Operational Manuals. Financial Monitoring reports have been prescribed for reporting purposes. Full details of these measures are given in Annex 7. Funds for the project are expected to be channeled through a Designated Account opened for the purpose. D. Social 59. There are many opportunities for the project to accomplish its objectives arising from the current socio-cultural and political context. First and foremost, this is a community-focused project, and therefore communities are at its center. The fishing communities in the central coastal region are the key stakeholders. These key stakeholders will be integral partners in collaboratively managing the coastal fisheries and establishing marine reserves. To ensure that their concerns have been taken into account in project design, community focus groups have been held in each of the pilot sites to provide a representative sample o f views and key issues that should be addressed. 60. These focus groups concluded that the co-management approach piloted by the GIRMaC was appropriate to the communities targeted and well received, as the communities strongly wanted to play a more informed and active role in managing the fisheries. One o f the common messages emerging from the focus groups was that fishers clearly recognized the need to reduce fishing effort to help rebuild the resource base. In many cases, there were already traditions of resource management measures, such as closed seasons for fishing of certain species, which disappeared with growing populations and increased migration of fishers. However, this knowledge remains in the four communities and has been utilized as the basis of the co-management plans developed through the GIRMaC. This project will continue to 16

27 capitalize on such knowledge, to expand co-management in the central coastal fisheries and increase the roles and responsibilities of communities and fishers in the management of these resources. 61. The focus groups also reinforced both the need and challenges for assisting fishers to find alternative livelihoods. Many of the fishers (almost exclusively men) in these communities are deeply attached to the activity of fishing, and also pointed out that they have few, if any, transferable skills to launch alternative livelihoods. The women in these communities participating in the sector were almost solely involved in fish processing and handling, however not the younger generations. Many of the households in these communities are increasingly dependent upon the women s financial contributions, due to declining incomes from the male-dominated fishing activities. However, as fish catches decline so do as well the incomes of the women, deepening poverty in these communities and reinforcing the need for alternative livelihood solutions. For this reason, the project includes both technical assistance and retraining targeted to men and women, as well as targeted grants and financing to new activities. E. Environment 62. Because this project aims to implement a process that empowers communities to sustainably comanage coastal ecosystems to help restore the fish stocks, most of the activities are expected to have positive, impacts on the environment. The project is designed to help implement policies and institutional frameworks for fisheries resource management, and to enhance the livelihoods of poor fishing communities as a result. F. Safeguards 63. The following Safeguard Policies are applicable to the project: Safeguard Policy Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01) Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04) Forestry (OP 4.36, GP 4.36) Pest Management (OP 4.09) Cultural Property (OPN ) Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20) Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) Safety of Dams (OP 4.37, BP 4.37) Projects in International Waters (OP 7.50, BP 7.50, GP 7.50) Projects in Disputed Areas (OP 7.60, BP 7.60, GP 7.60)* Applicability Yes Yes No No No No Yes No No No Safeguard Screening Category: S2 Environmental Screening Category: B 64. Key Safeguard Policy Issues. The project builds upon the Environmental Management Framework prepared for the GIRMaC, and has conducted an Environmental Assessment (EA) to identify any safeguards that could be triggered by the activities additional to the GIRMaC introduced by this project. This assessment showed that the key safeguard issue (and the reason for which the involuntary resettlement safeguard applies) is the potential restriction of traditional access to coastal and fish resources that may be introduced by the project in targeted communities, in order to reduce fishing effort to allow the stocks to rebuild. Currently, the resources are utilized through a system of open access that has allowed essentially more fishers and fishing pressure than the resources can sustain. The project addresses this in the central coastal region by supporting co-management of the coastal fisheries, as a 17

28 precursor to a community level rights-based system. It is from this transition away from open access to more regulated fisheries, that the key risks are created. These risks are largely social, because the implementation of co-management and rights-based systems imply that access to specific areas or types of fisheries will be restricted. The project-wide instrument to address this risk is the FRAP in component 3 of the project, which will help fishers move out of the fishing sector to pursue alternative, potentially more profitable and sustainable livelihoods. This instrument will address these risks wherever they may emerge in local project sites. From a safeguards standpoint, the FRAP will utilize a process framework prepared by the project, to ensure that decisions concerning restriction of access to fish resources are decided on the basis of consensus of stakeholders. The fund will also utilize the Environmental Management Plan (including an Environmental and Social Management Framework) prepared through the EA, as a framework to ensure individual sub-projects are screened for any potential impacts under the natural habitats safeguard (OPBP 4.04). This safeguard was triggered because the project is oriented towards the conservation of natural habitats. However, the project is expected to have beneficial impacts on targeted natural habitats, and any activities with potential negative impacts would not be financed by component The first draft of the Environmental Assessment and the Process Framework was made available to the World Bank by the Ministry of Maritime Economy on June 9, 2008, and to the InfoShop on July 8, G. Policy Exceptions and Readiness 66. There is no policy exception sought under this project. 18

29 Annex 1: Country and Sector Program Background SENEGAL: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources 1. Country Context. Senegal is located on the West Coast of Africa and is part of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU). With a population estimated at about 12 million, its economy is dominated by a few strategic sectors, including groundnuts, fisheries, and services. The role of the agricultural sector has declined over time, from almost 15 percent of GDP in 1960 to 7 percent in The informal sector accounts for about 60 percent of GDP. Its rural economy frequently suffers from drought, and lacks access to basic services and infrastructure, leading to low productivity, high emigration and higher poverty rates in rural areas. As a result, it is estimated that almost half of the population lives in cities. This ratio is projected to increase up to 60 percent by Over the past decades, Senegal has enjoyed a stable political climate, and has remained largely unaffected by regional instability. This stability is viewed as the result of a relatively free and diverse media (with numerous newspapers and radios) and an active civil society (with hundreds of NGO), as well as the ability to preserve the historical social equilibrium between modem institutions and religious communities. Several indicators used by the international community such as World Bank Institute (WBI) governance indicators and the Freedom House ranking of civil liberties and political rights reflect the relatively good health of Senegalese institutions, and show that Senegal compares favorably to most African countries. However, the quality of its institutions still lags with respect to that prevailing in emerging and OECD countries. 3. Sector Importance. Due to exceptional natural conditions, Senegal and its neighbours are endowed with some of the richest fishing grounds in the world. As a result the marine fish resources off the coast of Senegal play a role in the culture, lives and economy of the population as large as any of the other natural resources in the country. Senegalese fishers have been involved in marine fisheries for centuries and coastal communities throughout the country have developed a culture of fishing. Fishing and associated activities such as processing, marketing, services and other part-time activities together are estimated to provide more than 600,000 jobs in Senegal (accounting for 17 percent of the labour force, i.e. one in every six people in Senegal works in fisheries, and 10 percent of the rural population). In addition to livelihoods, the fisheries in Senegal make an extremely significant contribution to food security, constituting some 70 percent of animal protein consumption in the country, as estimated annual per capita fish consumption is 26 kilograms (well above the world average of 16 kilograms). At the level of the country s economy, between 1997 and 2002 the fisheries sector accounted for about 2.3 percent of the country s GDP and 12.5 percent of the primary sector s GDP (Le. approximately FCFA 300 billion in gross production value generating an added value of about FCFA 200 billion). Between 1999 and 2002 fish products also accounted for some 32 percent of the country s exports by volume, and roughly 37 percent of the total export value. In summary, marine fisheries play a critical role in the economy in Senegal, in terms of contribution to Gross Domestic Product (GDP), foreign exchange, food security and livelihoods. 4. Government Sector Strategy. The Government of Senegal has recognized the social and economic importance of the marine fisheries sector in the country by giving it a central place in the country s macroeconomic policies and strategies. The first Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper ( ) named the sector as one of the key drivers of the creation of wealth pillar of the strategy, assigning it a central role in the fight against poverty. This role was further elaborated in the second Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper ( ). More specifically, the country s Accelerated Growth Strategy promoted by the second Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper named fisheries as one of the five sectors of the national 19

30 economy with high economic potential, which was to function as one of the drivers of accelerated economic growth. 5. Key Sector Issues and Institutional Constraints. Despite the economic importance of Senegal s fishery resources and the marine ecosystems that support them, the sector has been facing major difficulties in recent years due to overfishing of the most valuable commercial resources and uncontrolled expansion o f the number of fishers, boats and gear, as well as land-based fish processing and preservation facilities. The sector has essentially faced the boom and bust cycle common to many uncontrolled fisheries around the world, where rapid development and investment led to strong growth in catches and returns, as well as the number of fishers and fishing capacity. Then as the fisheries continued to grow in an uncontrolled environment beyond what the fish stocks and resource base could sustain, they started to contract, bringing down catch and growth rates. 6. In Senegal fisheries production rose steadily until 1985, when catches began to level off and landings began to decline. Since then, small-scale fishing effort has continued to increase, although the number of industrial vessels has remained stable. Essentially, these small-scale vessels have continued to proliferate even as fish stocks and catches have declined, due in part to rising world prices and demand for food fish which helped offset declining catch rates, and by vessels going farther and farther up and down the coast of West Africa in search of fish, or constantly replacing overfished higher value species for lower value ones (i.e. fishing down the food chain ). 7. The result of this uncontrolled growth in the small-scale fisheries is that many of the highest value coastal demersal stocks have been almost wiped out. Senegal s marine fish resources can essentially (albiet somewhat artificially) be divided into (i) the coastal fisheries (often targeting sedentary coastal demersal species) utilized directly by the coastal fishing communities, as well as migrating small-scale fishers and industrial vessels, and (ii) the more open-water (and often migratory) fisheries that extend from the coastal areas out to the 200-mile limit of Senegal s waters. According to a World Bank sectoral study (ESW) in 2004, the coastal demersal stocks were the most heavily exploited and are now in rapid decline throughout the country, and as a result the coastal fisheries which rely on them (mainly the smallscale sector) are struggling. This is of significant concern because these coastal demersal species usually account for more than 25 percent (in volume terms) of the country s total catch, and more than 50 percent of the total value of fishery exports. 8. To give a more accurate picture of the scale of the overexploitation of these valuable resources, one model of Senegal s marine ecosystem showed that in 15 years ( ), the total biomass of five of the most valuable coastal demersal species on the continental shelf (i.e. red pandora (Pagellus bellottii), white grouper (Epinephelus ceneus), red sea bream (Pagrus cceruleostictus), red mullet (Pseudupeneus prayensis) and lesser African threadfin (Galeoides decadactylus)) declined by 75 percent, and actual fishing effort expended on these species more than doubled over the same period. In particular, annual catches of white grouper fell from 60,000 tons in 1971 to 7,000 tons in 1999 (a 2007 assessment reports the species is in danger o f extinction). In total, catches of coastal demersals fell from more than 140,000 tons in 1997 to about 84,000 tons in In terms o f species caught, the decline is even more dramatic given the increase in the relative share of low value species in the total catch. As mentioned previously, catches of species of very high commercial value were often replaced by catches of less valuable species - somewhat masking the true scale of overfishing. 9. As Senegal s coastal demersal fish stocks become increasingly overfished and as the degradation of the marine ecosystems on which they depend becomes more severe, the small-scale fishery that relies on them will probably continue to migrate to neighbouring waters, with the West African countries incurring higher costs and making less profit. For all these reasons, the World Bank study concluded that Senegal s coastal demersal fish stocks and the small-scale fisheries that depend on them are facing a crisis. Already, 20

31 some estimates show that more than 30 percent of the coastal demersal species landed in Senegal by small-scale fishers are caught outside of the country s waters. Furthermore, as many as 2,000 Senegalese pirogues are now estimated to be fishing in the waters of neighbouring Guinea-Bissau at any given moment. Senegal s small-scale fishers are among the most dynamic in West Africa and this fishery has now become an important cross-border activity, with environmental and economic implications for neighbouring countries such as The Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Mauritania and Guinea. 10. The impacts of the overexploitation of Senegal s coastal fisheries on rural poverty, as well as food security and macro-economic growth are significant. The resource base for the fisheries which account for roughly a quarter of the volume of fish caught in the country by the some 52,000 people directly employed by the small-scale fisheries (and likely benefits a large portion of the some 600,000 people indirectly employed in the sector) and 50 percent of the value of fish exports, is heavily overfished and facing a collapse. As this resource declines, the costs for the thousands of small-scale and often rural fishers to continue to participate in the sector will only increase, and the costs of relocating or shifting into new careers will certainly have profound social impacts along the coast, as will the reduction in one of the country s largest exports. These social impacts can already be seen in the numbers of fishers participating in the growing immigration of Senegalese citizens to Spain and Europe by sea. 11. To help address these threats to Senegal s coastal fish stocks and fisheries, this project has been designed to supplement the ongoing Integrated Marine and Coastal Resource Management Project (GIRMaC), together with other donors. The rationale behind developing this project (entitled Sustainable Management of Fish Resources in Senegal ) in conjunction with the GIRMaC is the opportunity to: (i) enable the Government of Senegal to implement the significant policy shifts in the management of the coastal fisheries that have been initiated with the support of the GIRMaC, by working with other donors to assist the Government to implement the recently completed Fisheries Sector Policy Letter, as well as the Presidential Decree in 2005 for the establishment of a national network of marine protected areas (MPAs), and (ii) to expand the scope of the pilot projects initiated under the GIRMaC. 12. Government Response to Key Sector Issues and Constraints. The Government of Senegal has clearly recognized these challenges and constraints facing the sector, elaborating them as the analytical basis for the Letter of Sector Policy completed in This Letter of policy places an emphasis on sustainable management of the fish resources, and achieving an optimal contribution of the sector to economic growth and poverty reduction. To respond to the challenges facing the fisheries sector, the Government has articulated essentially a two-pronged approach in the Letter of Policy: (i) implementing systems of collaborative or co-management for the coastal fisheries, to devolve more of the responsibility for managing these overfished resources to the users, to support them to implement needed reforms, and (ii) more broadly at the national level and including the open-water fisheries, to introduce a system of fishing access rights to fishers, as a tool to subsidize the reduction of fishing capacity and the recovery of the stocks. Both of these key elements are aimed at allowing the fisheries sector to recover and achieve the objectives set for it in the Accelerated Growth Strategy and the second Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. 13. Addressing the challenges of the coastal fisheries through the implementation of co-management systems represents a new way of doing business for the Government in the sector, and requires institutional transformation for MEM to become a more demand-based agency that can support the fishers and fishing communities. The Government began testing this approach with the implementation of the Integrated Marine and Coastal Resource Management Project (GIRMaC) in 2005, with USSlO million in IDA financing and US$5 million in GEF grants from the World Bank. The project consists essentially of two components, one on the environment and the other on fisheries, the latter to test co-management approaches in coastal fisheries in pilot sites. The GIRMaC has encouraged the Ministry and the Government to move to formally adopt a co-management strategy for the coastal fisheries as outlined in the Letter of Sector Policy, which has shown to be a highly popular and well-received model with the 21

32 targeted fishing communities. However, the division of objectives of the project between both environment and fisheries led to a shared institutional structure for project management (a separate coordination unit of consultants) that has hindered implementation to this point and the ability of the Ministry to respond to communities demands in the pilot sites. For this reason, the Mid-Term Review of the GIRMaC in January 2008 recommended a restructuring of the project to remove this institutional obstacle and place all responsibility for implementation of the fisheries component in the hands of MEM. The project therefore allows the Government and more specifically the Ministry, to consolidate the gains and lessons learned to date from the GIRMaC, and expand these interventions to cover a much larger share of the coastal fisheries, and thus allow the Government to implement one of the key elements of the Letter of Sector Policy and address the coastal fisheries that currently constitute the greatest concern to the sustainability of the fisheries resources and the thousands of livelihoods in the country that are dependent upon them. 14. In terms of the open water fisheries at the more national scale and the introduction of fishing access rights, the Government is working together with 8 other neighboring countries to prepare a regional initiative that would be co-financed by the World Bank and GEF, the West Africa Regional Project for Fisheries, that would support the introduction of rights at a large scale, in complement to the comanagement initiatives supported in the coastal fisheries through the GIRMaC and this project. 22

33 P 0 0 N a fi e, a 8 a N P 0 0 N I 2 0 N W 0 0 N I 2 0 ly Do 0 0 N I 2 0 N to 0 0 N I W 0 0 N W 0 0 N I W 0 0 N W 0 0 N I.I 8 x 2 3 w fi.e t' H FA.I ? 3 FA IC FA.I d m w U.e w m 3 Y a4 M e - a, m * L 0 Y u a, n 6 a, m Y L 0 Y u 6 c% e cd u.e Y 3 L s; c m 3 8J 8 m - 4 8

34 Annex 3: Results Framework and Monitoring SENEGAL: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources Results Framework PDO Project Development Objective/Global Objective: The combined development objective/global objective of the project is to empower communities to reduce fishing pressure on the fish stocks supporting the central coastal fisheries of Senegal (from the Cap Vert Peninsula to the Saloum River Delta). Short-Term Outcomes Component 1: Co-Management of Coastal Fisheries A system of local coastal fisheries governance based on comanagement that is coherent, well understood and institutionally strengthened, is established. Component 2: Rehabilitation of Coastal Ecosystems Critical habitats for key coastal fish species are protected in a participatory manner, through the establishment of ZPPs, the immersion of artificial reefs, the introduction of access rights to Project Outcome Indicators Development Objective Indicators: Increase in the average size of fish caught for targeted species in co-management sites Reduction in the level of fishing effort for targeted species in co-management sites Co-management of coastal fisheries indicator: 8 new co-management subproject proposals are approved as legal agreements with the Government and successfully implemented by EOP Rehabilitation of coastal ecosystems indicator: 70 percent of community members surveyed in participating communities are satisfied with project activities to rehabilitate coastal fish stocks (ZPPs, artificial reefs, ecolabelling) Alternative livelihoods to fishing indicator: Each community targeted by the project has access to a system of microcredit, and project-supported poverty reduction measures are implemented in at least the four initial pilot sites, by EOP. Short-Term Outcome Indicators 8 new CLPs legally established in the central coastal region, within the fnst 18 months of implementation 4 consolidated local fisheries management plans are approved by the relevant Local Artisanal Fishers Councils (CLPAs) within 24 months of project implementation, and implemented by EOP 2 protected fisheries zones (ZPPs) are created and legally established and their management plans prepared. At least 2 artificial reefs are expandedsubmerged and co-managed with 24 Use of Project Outcome Information Gov. gauge of impact of comgt. measures (including ZPPs, artificial reefs, ecolabelling) on coastal fisheries resources and on fishing community livelihoods. Gauge of efficiency of comanagement model implementation, benchmark for progress. MTR and EOP measure by Gov. of perceived impact of project on coastal fish stocks and ecosystems. MTR and EOP measure by Gov. of socio-economic impact of project on beneficiaries (Le. targeted fishing communities). Use of Short-Term Outcome Monitoring Measure of legal recognition of co-management partners Measure of operationally capabilities of the Local Councils Measure of the output of the investment in protected fisheries zones Measure of the output of the artificial reefs investment

35 targeted fisheries, and efforts towards eco-labeling of small-scale fish products. Component 3: Alleviation Measures for Fishing Communities and Alternative Livelihoods for Fishers, Fish Processors, and Fish transporters (mareyeurs) Alternative revenue generating activities are developed for fishers and their families areas targeted by the project, within the fisheries sector though better access to higher value markets, or outside of the sector with training and cash support (micro-finance) from the project for communities to compensate for the loss of fishing effort and income, and to invest in alternative livelihoods. Component 4: Institutional Strengthening for Fisheries Management, Project Management and Monitoring and Evaluation Efficient management, monitoring and evaluation of project and dissemination of implementation results the local communities by EOP Access rights are defined, legally recognized and introduced in 2 of fisheries under comanagement All small-scale fishing and transport vessels originating from within the central coastal region are registered by the National Registration Program (PNI) within the first six months of project implementation At least 1 fishery is eligible for ecocertification according to the criteria of the Marine Stewardship Council by EOP Feasibility study and consensus on a sustainable financing mechanism for the recurrent costs of ZPPs Percentage of women in participating communities that are benefiting from microcredit to develop activities outside the fisheries sector Percentage of targeted fishing communities receiving micro finance, and number of families in targeted communities that are entering new commercial markets Percentage of alternative livelihoods undertaken by fishers receiving micro finance access and small-enterprise training from the project, sustained profitably at EOP Annual M&E reports with all data on results indicators and M&E plan completed Participating communities receive information on key indicators in a timely manner Annual audit opinion has been unqualified Measure of output from investment in the introduction of access rights Measure of output from investment in small-scale vessel registration Measure of success of project to introduce eco-certification pilots Measure of sustainability of project interventions Indicator of participation of women in project activities Indicator of sustainability and success of alternative livelihoods to fishing in targeted communities Indicator of potential for, and sustainability of, alternative economic livelihoods for fishers in targeted communities To ensure that technical and fiduciary management is adequate and that mitigation measures are in place for timely action. 25

36

37 I I % Y &E Ege O v) VI e, 0 0 Q e 8, p 8 -d x e 3 3 g % 3 Q 'G ; Q a Q e, W N 8 9

38 0 cu 00 N 0 v) m [.I Q PP 0 0

39 Appendix 1 : Detailed Arrangements for Data Collection (including Baselines) for Project Outcome Indicators (Le. Key Performance Indicators) 1. Development Objective Indicators: The baselines for these two indicators will be collected immediately after project effectiveness, at the level of each of the eight new co-management sites. The data will be collected by a group comprised o f the head of the local fisheries administration office for each site, the facilitator andor CLP representatives from the closest o f the four initial pilot sites, and the project Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist based in the COMO in DPM. The group will rely on existing information present in each of the local fisheries administration offices on fishing catch, effort and catch sizes for fish landed in the respective areas. Once the targeted fisheries and landing sites are identified that are relevant for each o f the eight sites, the initial baselines will be collected and then the local fisheries administration office will continue to monitor the data and transmit the information to the COMO at DPM on a monthly basis. The Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist at the COMO will compile and consolidate the data into trimester monitoring reports for the project. Aggregate percentage values for the two indicators across the sites will be aggregated on an annual basis. Furthermore, each trimester relevant summaries of the data collected for the two indicators will be sent by the COMO to the facilitators, to present to the CLPs and larger communities. 2. Co-Management Component Indicator: The different steps to arrive at a Decree and comanagement agreement for each site will be clearly described in a matrix (similar to Appendix 1 in Annex 4), including selection of facilitator, establishment of CLP, preparation o f sub-project proposals, and submission through CLPA to Minister for signature as a Decree and co-management agreement. The Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist in the COMO will work with the facilitators and CLPs to track the progress o f each of the eight new sites in this process, towards achieving the indicator. 3. Rehabilitation Coastal Ecosystems Component Indicator: This indicator will be measured on the basis of a periodic survey o f the villages involved in ZPPs and artificial reefs supported by component 2 of the project, notably Mbodibne, Point Sarbne, Nianing, Mballing, Yenne and Bargny. A baseline survey will be conducted immediately after effectiveness, to measure satisfaction with public-supported efforts to help rehabilitate coastal ecosystems to date. The survey will be conducted every six months after the baseline, and the results collected by the Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist at the COMO. 4. Alternative Livelihoods and Poverty Reduction Component Indicator: The baseline values for this indicator is zero, as currently the fishing communities targeted by the project do not have access to microfinance, and the four initial pilot sites have not yet received project grants to support poverty reduction activities. The micro-finance institution will provide regular reports o f coverage in targeted communities, that will be collected by the COMO as part of monitoring and evaluation reports. 29

40 Annex 4: Detailed Project Description SENEGAL: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources A. Project Summary 1. The combined development objective/global objective of the project is to empower communities to reduce fishing pressure on the fish stocks supporting the central coastal fisheries of Senegal (fkom the Cap Vert Peninsula to the Saloum River Delta). The project would achieve this objective by: (i) promoting co-management of the coastal fisheries; (ii) contributing to the rehabilitation of the essential ecosystems for the coastal fisheries; and (iii) supporting alternative livelihoods and accompanying poverty reduction measures in targeted poor fishing communities. Successful experiences would be used to draw lessons for potential replication at a later date to the coastal fisheries in the other regions of the country. 2. The rationale behind this objective is that the coastal fish stocks that provide so many livelihoods, exports and foreign exchange for the country, can be restored if the Government empowers smallscale fishers to sustainably co-manage these resources, while at the same time conserving the key habitats that support them. B. Program Description by Component 3. The program of interventions from different donors will support the following components and sub-components (with total costs in millions of US. Dollars in parenthesis). GEF is lending support to components 1, 2 and 4. IDA is lending support to component 3. Additionally, the GIRMaC project (IDA credit currently under implementation) is also supporting activities under component 1,2 and Component 1. Co-Management of Coastal Fisheries (USrS2.0 m IDA-GIRMaC project, US$2.66 m GEF, US$2.6 m EU). The objective of this component is to implement co-management systems to improve the governance of the coastal fisheries for a more sustainable use of the resources. More specifically, the component aims to consolidate and extend along the central coast of Senegal the results achieved to date in the four co-management pilot sites financed by the GIRMaC (in the communities of Ouakam, Ngaparou, Foundiougne, Bktenty), as well as by JICA (Nianing). As such, the project will build upon the progress achieved to date in these co-management sites in order to both sustain these ongoing efforts and replicate them in neighboring communities and fisheries. The project will operate under the principle of replication to the extent possible given the funds and projected operating costs, with a view to maintaining coherence and creating synergies among the initiatives, as well as targeting local fisheries that might be included in future national fisheries management plans (in particular those plans concentrating on coastal shrimp, cymbium and octopus) or in eco-certification efforts (such as lobsters, etc.). 5. In general, the component will support the model of co-management based upon the establishment of Local Fishers Committees (CLPs) within communities as legally-recognized private associations, and Local Artisanal Fisheries Councils (CLPAs) as organs of the Government operating at the supracommunity level. More specifically, CLPs are defined as legally-recognized private entities, composed of fishers and established per community. CLPAs are defined as local councils composed of representatives of local Government, senior traditional leaders, artisanal fishers, CLPs, fish processors and marketing professionals, and other stakeholders, established by the Government in order to advise the Ministry of Maritime Economy on management and conservation measures for coastal fisheries resources. The CLPs will work in collaboration with project-funded facilitators and with the technical assistance of a fisheries co-management specialist, in order to develop comanagement initiatives (with each initiative corresponding to a specific management or conservation measure). The various co-management initiatives proposed by CLPs would be consolidated into one sub-proj ect for that community, describing the necessary implementation budget and support activities for each of the management or conservation measures proposed, such as: (i) participatory research; (ii) monitoring and evaluation; (iii) surveillance and enforcement of management and 30

41 conservation measures; (iv) training; (v) education and awareness-raising; and (vi) any other necessary activities. A draft co-management agreement, with the sub-project (various co-management initiatives) as an annex, would then be submitted to the Minister of Maritime Economy, after having been reviewed by the CLPA representing that particular CLP (provided the CLPA has been legally established and is functioning effectively). The agreement would also be sent to the National Consultative Council for Marine Fishers (CNCPM) for any objections. The agreements would then be signed by the Minister of Maritime Economy and the President of each CLP, and implemented by the respective CLPs with the support of the Government. In the context of signing the agreements (and on the basis of the guidance received by the respective CLPA), the Minister will sign any Ministerial decrees (i.e. arritis ) necessary to support the implementation of the comanagement initiatives, such as for example restrictions on (i) the use of certain types of fishing gear and motors; (ii) fishing catch; (iii) fishing areas or periods open to fishing; (iv) processing of fish products, etc. 6. The initial limit on project funds available to finance each CLP sub-project is set at 100,000,000 CFA (approx. US$250,000), although this could subsequently be increased by as much as an additional 50,000,000 CFA (approx. US$125,000) on the basis of satisfactory implementation of the first sub-project. 7. As part of their support to the implementation of the co-management initiatives, the CLPs would also help identify sources of alternative livelihoods to fishing and general poverty reduction measures to be supported by the Alternative Livelihoods to Fishing and Poverty Reduction Fund (FRAF ) in component three. As such, the CLPs will play a central role in working with their communities to identify participants and beneficiaries of micro-credit and alternative livelihood activities supported by the FRAP. The CLPs will also help monitor and evaluate the progress of these initiatives supported by the FRAP during their implementation, and play and important role in ensuring that the beneficiaries of these programs respect the terms of their agreements and the co-management agreements signed with the Minister. 8. The process of identifying beneficiaries from the FRAF in component three would be undertaken in parallel with the development of co-management initiatives. When necessary, the project will support the establishment and operations of the CLPA representing the geographic area of targeted CLPs. The CLPAs, working together with the facilitators, members of the CLPs and local government officials, would be supported to develop consolidated local fisheries management plans covering their respective geographic zones, which would reflect the co-management agreements signed by the CLPs. The project would include a budget for support to the CLPAs to implement these management plans, together with Government and other sources of financing. These plans, together with their implementation budgets, would be submitted to the Minister of Maritime Economy, after having been reviewed by the CNCPM for coherence with the plans put forward by other CLPAs, national strategy documents (such as the Letter of Sector Policy and the Accelerated Growth Strategy) and other donor-financed initiatives in the sector. The plans would be approved by the Minister of Maritime Economy, through the passage of a Ministerial Decree legally recognizing the various management and conservation measures included in the plans. 9. The four initial co-management pilot sites financed by the GIRMaC in sub-component 1.1 below will continue to be implemented according to the model already put in place, but these efforts will be monitored and adapted based on new lessons learned in additional sites, to ensure a common approach to co-management of coastal fisheries in the central zone of the country. 10. The co-management initiatives developed by the CLPs, and the consolidated local fisheries management plans prepared by the CLPAs, would include measures targeted to the species or areas co-managed in the four initial pilot sites supported by the GIRMaC, but could also cover other fisheries, or the implementation of protected fisheries zones and immersion of artificial reefs (financed through component two). 11. The co-management agreements between the Ministry and the CLPs, and the consolidated local fisheries management plans prepared by the CLPAs, will be the framework within which various management measures (such as fisheries conservation areas, artificial reefs, eco-labeling, etc.) are 31

42 implemented. More specifically, in replicating this model to additional sites, the project will ensure that the consultations and levels of local decision-making will be enlarged beyond an individual CLP or community to include the larger group of communities involved in a targeted fishery. The unit of management would expand from the area specific to a community (CLP), to the management of a fishery targeted by several communities (at the level of a CLPA, or several CLPAs). The role of the CLPAs in brokering such collaboration between CLPs and communities will be refined and further implemented with the support of the project, as well as the principles for the discussions between the CLPs, CLPAs and the CNCPM. The Ministry of Maritime Economy will continue to strengthen its capacity to support and monitor the implementation of local co-management initiatives by the CLPs and to ensure their integration into local fisheries management plans developed by the CLPAs, and also incorporating them into national plans with the approval of the CNCPM. 12. Lastly, in the context of component two, the project will help build the capacity of the participating stakeholders to support the Government to eventually use the co-management institutions (CLPs, CLPAs, etc.) to define and test a system of access rights to the targeted coastal fisheries, in particular their allocation and management. The project will also support pilot operations to ensure that the registration of small-scale fishing vessels is a mechanism used to support the efforts of co-management of coastal fisheries, as well as more widely to support the management of artisanal fishing capacity (e.g. together with the use of fishing permits, development of consolidated local fisheries management plans by the CLPAs, monitoring of fisheries statistics, monitoring and evaluation of co-management activities, support for fisheries research, etc.) and surveillance and enforcement of artisanal fisheries. The component will include the following four sub-components: 13. Sub-component (1) Promotion of Local Co-Management Initiatives in Four Pilot Sites (USrS2.0 m IDA-only financed by GIRMaC project). The objective of this sub-component is to continue to support the Ministry of Maritime Economy to test and implement co-management of coastal fisheries in the four initial pilot sites of Ouakam, Ngaparou, Foundiougne and BCtanti, and their neighboring areas. To meet this objective, the project will finance technical assistance, community-level works, goods and equipment for fisheries management, training workshops and operational support. Specific activities will include: 14. Activity 1.1 Identijication and Implementation of Local Co-management Initiatives, in the context of Local Co-Management Agreements. This activity will support the targeted communities to identify and formulate sub-projects for the co-management of local fisheries, that include specific management measures and a budget, such as (i) restrictions on fish sizes, fishing seasons or on fishing gear that go beyond existing regulations; (ii) limits on daily catch, the number of daily fishing trips, and daily landings; (iii) setting allowable catch within a specific marine area; and (iv) seasonal closures; (v) setting limits or regulating access to certain fishing zones (in conformity with Article 21 of the 1998 Fisheries Code); and (vi) immersion of artificial reefs and the management of access to these areas. The sub-projects will include, for each management measure, a description of the specific activities, their justification, implementation measures and detailed costs. The costs for each of the management measures will be consolidated into an overall budget for the sub-project. A facilitator will be based in each targeted community (or groups of communities) to work with the fishers to establish a legally-recognized CLP, and to help that CLP prepare local co-management initiatives, together with a co-management specialist. Each CLP s co-management sub-project proposal will be submitted to the CLPA for review and approval, and subsequently to the CNCPM (together with the CLPA s consolidated local fisheries management plan if possible), before being transmitted to the Minister of Maritime Economy for approval and signature as an agreement with the CLP. This agreement will represent a contract between the Government and the CLP for the comanagement of the specified fish resources, and together with an accompanying Ministerial Decree, will legally recognize the measures included in the sub-projects. The project will then provide financing directly to the CLPs to implement the local co-management initiatives. 15. Activity 1.2 Local Level Monitoring, Control and Surveillance (MCS). The project will support local level MCS measures required to ensure compliance with the measures included in the comanagement agreements as well as national regulations. These measures will include support for local monitoring of fish catch and effort, organization of surveillance patrols by law enforcement 32

43 officers as well as by local fishers to detect potential infractions, and procedures to call on formal surveillance and enforcement capacity when needed and implement sanctions (e.g. when external fishers violate the management measures). 16. Activity 1.3 Participatory Fish Stock Evaluation Program. The project will support the Ministry of Maritime Economy to provide assistance (or contract expert consultants) to work with CLPs and communities to conduct participatory evaluations of the impacts of management measures on the fish stocks, and/or monitoring and evaluation of catch and effort data, in response to fishers needs identified by the facilitators. This will include baseline evaluations for each site for the key results indicators. 17. Sub-component (2) Consolidation and Strengthening of Coastal Fisheries Co-management (US2.36 m GEF, USO.3 m Government). The sites pre-selected for financing by this subcomponent include: Bargny and Yenne (in particular to support activities related to ongoing management of artificial reefs), Nianing, Mballing, Point Sarbne, Mbodibne, Fambine and Carribre (between Ouakam and Soumbkdioune). These sites would be supported through the project on the condition of the creation or presence of a CLP and corresponding CLPA, and the implementation of co-management agreements integrating activities related to the establishment of protected fishing zones (ZPPs) or artificial reefs. 18. The objective of this sub-component is to support the interested neighboring communities around the four pilot sites of the GIRMaC to develop and implement co-management measures, towards the consolidation of co-management efforts for shared fisheries, as well as the implementation of common ZPPs and artificial reefs. 19. The key operating principle will be to ensure that all communities concerned by one of the fisheries targeted in the existing pilot sites supported through sub-component 1.1, or by the implementation of ZPPs and artificial reefs supported by component two, participate in the comanagement of that fishery (and/or ZPP and artificial reef), with a priority given to those fisheries with the most potential for eco-certification (for example the lobster fishery in Ouakam as well as the one in Ngaparou, and the shrimp fishery in Foundiougne and Bktenty, etc.). A priority will also be given to those resources managed according to a national fisheries management plan (e.g. shrimp, octopus and cymbium). To meet this objective, the project will finance technical assistance, community-level works, goods and equipment for fisheries management, training workshops and operational support. In particular, the project will support local monitoring of the fish stocks, using tools such as the Guidance for Assessment of Small-scale and Data Deficient Fisheries manual developed by the Marine Stewardship Council. Outputs from this sub-component will include implementation of co-management of coastal fisheries in at least eight new communities near or around the four existing pilot sites, including the introduction of access rights in specific cases, and support for community-based monitoring of the resources. 20. In the event that the Ministry of Maritime Economy judges, in the early execution of the project, that any of the pre-selected sites do not conform to the selection criteria outlined above, and in particular the interest of the community to participate, then another site and community would be selected as a replacement. Similarly, if other sites are determined to be a higher priority to ensure integration of various project activities and achievement of the objective, then such sites could be substituted as well, up to a total of eight new sites for support under this sub-component. The registration of all small-scale fishing vessels originating from the zone covered by the respective CLPAs for these sites should be completed by the Government, with support from component 2 if necessary. Specific activities will include: 21. Activity 2.1 Confirmation of pre-selection of Neighboring Communities to the Initial Pilot Sites, to Confirm their Participation in Co-Management. The project will support the replication, or extension of the co-management model and activities described in sub-component one (as well as implementation of ZPPs and artificial reefs), to at least eight interested neighboring communities near or around the four pilot sites (along the central coast between the Cap Vert Peninsula and the Saloum River Delta). While the eight new sites have been pre-selected as mentioned above, criteria for their 33

44 confirmation will include: (i) interest of the respective community; (ii) shared fishery with existing pilot sites, or common interest in a ZPP and artificial reef; and (iii) the existence or creation of a CLPA to represent the community and future CLP. With the support of local Government authorities, the CLPs in the four existing pilot sites, the co-management specialist and the COMO, the current facilitators will conduct visits with neighboring communities to discuss their participation and agreement with the comanagement approach up front. As such, the eight sites for replication will be confirmed with the Directorate of Maritime Fisheries immediately after effectiveness. The project will also support study tours for neighboring communities seeking to learn from practices and experiences from the four initial pilot sites or from other co-management sites. The objective of the Government will be eventually to support the participation of all the communities represented by each CLPA in the area of intervention along the central coast to form a CLP as needed and to participate in co-management of the targeted coastal fisheries. 22. Activity 2.2 Replication of Co-Management to Neighboring Communities. Once the eight communities have been confirmed and agree to participate, the project will support the replication of the co-management model utilized in the existing four pilot sites (see sub-component 1) to these neighboring communities. The project will therefore support: (i) the recruitment and initial and ongoing training of eight community facilitators (selected from within each community to the extent possible) to play the same role as the current facilitators in the four initial pilot sites; (ii) the initial and ongoing training in co-management for other participating stakeholders, such as local fisheries administration officials and community leaders; (iii) the establishment and operation of the CLPs; as well as (iv) the development and implementation of co-management agreements. The project will operate on the principle of trying to estimate the recurrent costs of co-management activities in each community up front, and reducing these costs as much as possible while introducing self-funding mechanisms to ensure the models are sustainable. 23. More specifically, this activity will support: (i) the selection and recruitment of community facilitators, and their training, together with other stakeholders at each site (e.g. local fisheries administration agents, community leaders, etc.), in advance of beginning any co-management activities in a site; (ii) the establishment of CLPs in each of the eight new sites; (iii) the construction of fishers' meeting place' in each community (or groups of communities, depending on availability of fimds) which would be the property and headquarters of the CLP; (iv) implementation of awareness campaigns among the communities to ensure ownership of the co-management process; (iv) provision of information and training for CLPs to help identify management measures; (vi) a participatory biological and socio-economic baseline evaluation of the sites and fisheries, according to the results indicators, which should be available for each site before the sub-projects are financed; (vii) the identification by the CLPs of sub-projects for submission to the Minister of Maritime Economy for signature as a co-management agreement, (viii) the identification of poverty reduction measures and alternative livelihoods support for fishers, fish processors, and fish transporters from the FRAP in component three of the project; (ix) the development and implementation of participatory research programs and monitoring and evaluation as part of sub-project proposals; (x) the identification of any surveillance and enforcement needs to apply the measures necessary to implement the sub-project proposals that would form the basis of the co-management agreements, including participatory local surveillance at the scale of the CLPAs and the preparation of corresponding surveillance and enforcement measures as part of the sub-project proposals; (xi) preparation of the sub-project proposals (including the accompanying surveillance and enforcement measures) by the CLP and their submission to the CLPA and subsequently CNCPM; (xii) on the basis of the sub-project proposals, presentation of the draft co-management agreements and Ministerial Decrees to the Minister of Maritime Economy for signature; (xiii) implementation of sub-projects and co-management agreements by the respective CLP; (xiv) monitoring and evaluation of implementation by the CLPs and CLPAs; and (xv) implementation and monitoring of poverty reduction and alternative livelihoods measures identified and supported by the FRAP in component three. The activities supported by ' The meeting place would allow for meetings and training sessions, and would be constructed or rehabilitated for the sites where there are already local fishers associations. Construction would be based on the availability of land concessioned to the CLP by the local collective. 34

45 component three and sub-component 1.2 of the project should be implemented in parallel in order to ensure the success of fisheries co-management measures. 24. In order to implement these activities, the facilitators in the existing four pilot sites and the comanagement specialist will provide support to the community facilitators and supervise their activities. More specifically, the co-management specialist will supervise the facilitators in the existing four pilot sites, who will in turn support and supervise the new community facilitators. 25. The results of the co-management agreements (including detailed financial management: e.g. the budget, commitments, payments made, disbursements by activity, etc.) should be presented each semester by the CLP to the community (with the support of the community facilitator, the comanagement specialist and local fisheries administration officials), and transmitted to the CLPA and the CNCPM. These presentations will be indispensable to guide future requests for co-management agreements and sub-projects, and should also include any corrective measures needed to improve the performance of sub-projects. 26. After the first year of project implementation, a study will be conducted to detail the preparation cycle for co-management agreements and their approval, including the roles and responsibilities of different actors, the procedures. An updated sustainability plan for co-management activities supported by the project in the various sites should be completed by the COMO by mid-term review. 27. Activity 2.3 Local level Monitoring, Control and Surveillance (MSC) offlsheries. The project will support necessary MCS measures in the areas under the jurisdiction of CLPAs, in order to ensure that fishing activities respect rules and regulations stated in the co-management agreements implemented by the CLPAs, as well as national regulations. These measures include the support to local monitoring of fishing effort, patrols by local authorities and by local community members and procedures to call on formal surveillance and enforcement capacity when needed (e.g. when external fishers violate the management measures). 28. At the beginning of project implementation a study will be conducted through this activity in order to define the procedures for MCS in the context of a consolidated MCS plan prepared by the CLPs and CLPAs. This plan should include the objectives and targeted results, activities, implementation procedures and detailed budget (distinguishing between investment and recurrent costs), as well as sources of finance. Completion of this study, along with the individual consolidated fisheries management plans of the CLPAs, will be a preliminary step to project financing of MCS activities. 29. Sub-Component (3) Institutional Support for a System of Local Fisheries Governance (US$0.3 m GEF, US$2.6 m EU, US$0.04 m Government). The objective of this sub-component is to strengthen the capacity for the consultation and decision-making mechanisms between the different participating communities, i.e. the CLPAs. In particular, this sub-component will support CLPAs and CLPs to move away from individual comanagement plans and agreements between each CLP in a community and the Ministry of Maritime Economy, to larger multi-clp agreements around a shared fishery (within the boundaries of member communities to a CLPA). As a basis for these activities, by project effectiveness the Ministry of Maritime Economy will pass a Ministerial Decree clearly defining the mandate of the CLPAs (as specified by Article 10 of the Decree for the Application of the 1998 Fisheries Code), including the geographic zones of their jurisdiction, although not the specific CLPAs themselves. Within the first six months of project implementation, a separate Ministerial Decree will be passed establishing the respective CLPAs representing the communities targeted by the project. GEF-funded outputs will include local fisheries co-management plans approved by the targeted CLPAs and submitted to the CNCPM. To meet this objective, the project will finance technical assistance, training workshops and operational support. Specific activities will include: 30. Activity 3.1 Support to CLPAs. This activity will support the CLPAs to function and play their roles in each of the areas of intervention of the project, to coordinate and review local co-management initiatives proposed by CLPs as sub-projects (and eventually to consolidate them where possible), to 35

46 broker agreements between different communities and CLPs, and to contribute to larger national-level management plans. The project will also support the CLPAs to develop and consolidated local fisheries management plans that aggregate the different co-management sub-projects of CLPs to cover all of the fisheries within the scale of the CLPA. At least 4 consolidated local fisheries management plans will be approved by targeted CLPAs, by mid-term review of the project. The project will provide technical assistance to assist the CLPAs to develop the plans. The project will also support capacity-building activities in targeted communities, including inter-community visits and exchanges to share experiences and lessons learned. 31. Activity 3.2 Support to the CNCPM. This activity will support the CNCPM to discuss strategic issues in the sustainable management of fisheries that arise at the level of CLPAs but which have national implications. This will include support for consultations and training of CNCPM members, including sessions for assessing sub-proj ect proposals from CLPs and consolidated local fisheries management plans by the CLPAs. 32. Additionally, the DPM could submit specific measures for review by the CNCPM, such as (i) the extension of a closed season to cover artisanal fisheries, (ii) the institutional study on co-management, etc. The project will provide support to the CNCPM as needed for these reviews. 33. An institutional study on co-management will be conducted at the beginning of the project in order to summarize (i) the legal framework for the CLPs, CLPAs and CNCPM, including their regulatory jurisdiction and the legal powers they will have to enforce decisions, (ii) the placement of the three institutions within the country s larger institutional framework for fisheries management, including their relationshp to each other as well as outside institutions (e.g. producers organizations, etc.), and (iii) the internal organization of each of the three institutions, in particular the need to establish sub-commissions concentrated on particular themes, or supply chains, etc. The study will propose any adjustments to existing regulations necessary to support the three institutions and comanagement of coastal fisheries. 34. ComDonent 2. Rehabilitation of Ecosvstems Essential for Coastal Fisheries (US$2.4 m GEF, US$0.5 m IDA-GIRMaC project, US$1.5 m EU, US$0.5 m Switzerland, US$0.4 m Government). The objective of this component is to contribute to the rehabilitation of ecosystems essential to the coastal fisheries, by implementing protected fishing zones (ZPPs) and artificial reefs in order to help regenerate the natural resources, by registering small-scale vessels and in pilot cases introducing access rights, by creating market mechanisms to encourage sustainable management of the ecosystems. Depending on their size, the ZPPs and the artificial reefs will be integrated into the comanagement agreements signed by the CLPs with the Ministry of Maritime Economy, as well as the consolidated local fisheries management plans prepared by the CLPAs, and in any relevant national fisheries management plans. The instruments necessary to manage access to certain fishng zones or resources, or more generally to support fisheries sector management, will be supported by this component, including registration of small-scale fishing vessels and the establishment and allocation of access rights in certain cases. This will include four sub-components: 35. Sub-Component (1) Protected Fishing Zones (ZPPs) (USrSO.9 m GEF, US$0.15 m Government). The objective of this sub-component is to support the Government to establish several protected fishing zones (ZPPs) as instruments of the co-management system of coastal fisheries, which could be associated with creation and expansion of artificial reefs, in order to protect critical habitats, nursery areas and spawning grounds for coastal demersal species. The ZPPs will include a peripheral zone where fishing is regulated to permit only specific types of activities or limited access, and a core zone where fishing activities are prohibited altogether, on the basis of the 1998 Fisheries Code. 36. The procedures and mechanisms for the establishment, implementation and management of ZPPs will be complimentary to those implemented in the context of component one, and will be recorded in a guide for ZPPs to be produced before the end of the project. Towards the establishment of ZPPs, the sub-component will finance technical assistance, goods and equipment for establishment and management of ZPPs, training workshops and consultations (notably between CLPs and/or CLPAs) to 36

47 define the ZPP, and operational costs for the ZPPs. This sub-component could also support communities to conduct direct habitat restoration or cleaning of marine environments critical for coastal demersal species, as needed in targeted areas. Outputs from this sub-component will include the establishment (creation, demarcation, management planning and monitoring, etc.) of protected fishing zones in targeted sites. Specific activities will include: 37. Activity 1.1 Creation of Protected Fishing Zones (ZPPs). This activity will support the creation of protected fishing zones and the appropriate participatory management framework for them, in potential sites that can support the rehabilitation of the fish resources. In particular the project would support the establishment of a ZPP that would include the four communities of Mballing, Nianing, Point Sarbne et Mbodibne, and another that would include Ouakam and Carribre. More specifically, the project will support targeted fishing communities to identify and demarcate potential protected fishing zones (ZPPs), and to develop, implement and monitor management plans for these ZPPs. Community consensus on the identification and establishment of a ZPP will be an essential precondition for project activities. These activities will include: (i) organizing information and awareness campaigns in targeted communities on the concept, establishment process, management and benefits of ZPPs; (ii) consulting with stakeholders that will be involved, directly or indirectly affected by ZPPs, in order to define the different actors in the area and their perceptions, means of collective and individual action, objectives and concerns regarding the creation of the ZPPs; (iii) building the capacity of stakeholders for the co-management of the ZPPs; (iv) conducting baseline evaluations of sites and assessments of fish resources and fishing practices; (v) supporting a participatory process for designating ZPPs; and (vi) measuring the socioeconomic baseline and potential benefits from the creation of the ZPPs, for discussion with stakeholders. 38. Activity 1.2 Support the Preparation and Implementation of Management Plans for ZPPs. This activity will support the creation, approval and monitoring and evaluation of management plans for the ZPPs, and subsequently their integration into the sub-project proposals of respective CLPs and the consolidated local fisheries management plans prepared by the relevant CLPAs (depending on the size of the ZPP). The project will assist communities and the Government to clearly define the objectives, management and/or conservation measures and intended results of each ZPP, in the context of a participatory management plan and necessary regulatory measures. The project will also ensure that the CLPAs integrate these ZPPs into the consolidated local fisheries management plans they prepare (see component 1) and submit them to the Minister of Maritime Economy for official recognition (i.e. a Ministerial Decree specifying the limits of the zone and the eligible fishing activities). The ZPP management plans will also identify any potential alternative livelihoods to fishing and accompanying poverty reduction measures, which would be funded by the FRAP in component 3 of the project. 39. Activity 1.3 Conduct Feasibility Studies for Sustainable Financing Mechanisms for ZPPs. The project will fund feasibility studies, as well as follow-up activities, to establish a sustainable financing mechanism (e.g. established funds, revenue generating mechanisms, public-private partnerships, etc.) that can support the recurrent costs of management of the network of ZPPs after the close of the project. 40. Activity 1.4 Capacity-Building for Replication of ZPPs. The project will support stakeholders and decision-makers from different ZPPs in the network to exchange experiences, conduct study tours, etc. to ensure that lessons learned are replicated and shared. 41. Activity 1.5 Support Monitoring and Surveillance of ZPPs. The project will support the development of standards and instruments for monitoring and evaluation of the network of ZPPs, as well as surveillance, including (i) the definition of indicators and criteria for success for the group of ZPPs, (ii) a system of monitoring and evaluation (including a common protocol for monitoring among different ZPPs), and (iii) the definition of roles and responsibilities for different stakeholders in the monitoring. 42. Sub-component (2) Artificial Reefs (USS0.8 m GEF, US$0.13 m Government). The objective of this sub-component is to support the implementation of the Government s policy on artificial reefs, 37

48 as a tool to help rehabilitate coastal fisheries habitats in the context of co-management. To meet this objective the project will finance technical assistance (to finalize the selection of areas for immersion of reefs, the types of reefs to use, etc.), goods and equipment, works and operating costs. Outputs from this sub-component will include the immersion of artificial reefs in targeted project areas. Specific activities will include: 43. Activity 2.1 Selection of appropriate Sites for, and Immersion ox ArtiJicial Reefs. The project will support the necessary feasibility studies to examine the physical and chemical conditions of the potential sites, in order to determine the exact locations for the artificial reefs and to characterize the type of materials that will be used to construct the reefs. On the basis of the feasibility and conception studies, the project will fund the construction and immersion of artificial reefs, in consultation with local fishers and CLPs (in coordination with component one of the project). The communities of Bargny and Yenne will be targeted specifically by this activity, on the basis of the strong local interest of these communities to continue to co-manage artificial reefs already in place as a result of efforts by the Government and JICA. The support of the project will focus on expanding these reefs and ensuring their ongoing co-management. The creation, management, surveillance, and monitoring and evaluation of the artificial reefs under this activity will be integrated in consolidated local fisheries management plans prepared by the respective CLPA and/or the co-management agreements with the CLPs. 44. Activity 2.2 Support National ArtlJicial Reef Immersion Program of the Ministry of Maritime Economy. The project will provide technical support to the Government s program for artificial reef identification, immersion, monitoring and evaluation. This support will capitalize on the outcomes of the international conference on artificial reefs, held in Dakar in November 2008, in particular on the development and finalization of a national plan on artificial reefs. 45. Activity 2.3 Conduct Feasibility Studies for Sustainable Financing Mechanisms for ArtiJicial Reefs, The project will fund feasibility studies, as well as follow-up activities, to establish a sustainable financing mechanism (e.g. established funds, revenue generating mechanisms, publicprivate partnerships, etc.) that can support the recurrent costs of management of artificial reefs after the close of the project. 46. Activity 2.4 Strengthen Community-Based Management of ArtiJicial Reefs. The project will support the development of management and surveillance plans for the areas where artificial reefs are immersed, in the framework of consolidated local fisheries management plans prepared by CLPAs as well as co-management agreements with CLPs. 47. Activity 2.5 Deflne and Support Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation of ArtiJicial Reefs. The project will support the development and implementation of protocols and instruments for the monitoring and evaluation of artificial reefs, through (i) the definition of key indicators and criteria for evaluating the performance of artificial reefs, (ii) a system of monitoring and evaluation (including a common protocol for the monitoring of different reefs), and (iii) the definition of roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders in the implementation of system. 48. Sub-component (3): Introduction of Access Rights and Associated Management Instruments (USrSO.1 m GEF, US$0.5 m IDA-GIRMaC project, US$1.5 m EU, US$0.5 m Switzerland). The objective of this sub-component is to introduce access rights to coastal fisheries targeted by the project, in particular (but not exclusively) in the areas where ZPPs and artificial reefs have been created, in order to reinforce co-management. As soon as the co-management process described in component one is operational, so that a series of management and conservation measures will be implemented by communities to establish the principle of limited access to ZPPs, artificial reefs and specific fisheries, the project will test the creation and allocation of access rights to these areas, as planned in the Letter of Sector Policy and the new Fisheries Code currently being prepared. At the larger scale, this sub-component will also support the registration of small-scale fishing vessels as a necessary basis for management and development of access rights, through the Government s National Registration Program. Outputs from this sub-component will include the introduction of 38

49 access rights in selected fisheries conservation areas and artificial reefs. To meet this objective, the project will finance technical assistance, training workshops and operational support. 49. Activity 3.1 Definition of Access Rights. In collaboration with the fishers and stakeholders, the project will define the form of the access rights in the targeted areas and fisheries that will be tested, as well as the necessary regulations and procedures. These rights will be articulated in the context of the existing management instruments, for example small-scale fishing vessel registration, small-scale fishing permits, implementation of co-management agreements by CLPs and the consolidated local fisheries management plans by CLPAs. 50. Activity 3.2 Introduction of the Access Rights. The project will support communities and the DPM to test the introduction of access rights to areas and resources in appropriate sites (such as Bargny and Yenne in the case of artificial reefs) and in ZPPs Activity 3.3 Implementation of a Small-Scale Vessel Registration Program Cfinanced only by the Government of Switzerland). The project will support the implementation of the Government's national small-scale fishing vessel registration program (Programme National d 'Immatriculation - PNI). The project will finance technical assistance, training workshops and necessary equipment. The funds from the GIRMaC project will support this program specifically, together with support from the Government of Switzerland that is managed by the World Bank, to consult with small-scale fishers, vessel owners and other stakeholders to create and implement an information communication campaign on the program, supply registration plates and the electronic registration system of the Ministry o f Maritime Economy, and train local and regional fisheries administration staff, in order to register small-scale fishing vessels. The registration of all small-scale fishing and transport vessels in the central coastal region targeted by the project (between the Cap Vert Peninsula and the Saloum River Delta) will be completed by May Sub-component (4) Market Incentives for Sustainable Management for Targeted Fisheries (US$0.6 m GEF, US$O.12 m Government). The objective of this sub-component is to create the conditions necessary for eco-certification of one co-managed coastal fishery, according to the principles and criteria of the internationally-recognized sustainable fisheries certification body, the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). The coastal fisheries targeted by the project will be those most conducive to obtaining an eco-certification for being sustainably managed according to the MSC's international standards, as models that can be replicated. Managing multi-species fisheries such as the coastal fisheries of Senegal to such standards is inherently difficult. In order to reduce the complexity of the work and increase the chances of success, the project will favor those single species coastal fisheries that are geographically discreet stocks under systems of co-management (see component 1). On this basis, the fishery selected for support by the project is the lobster fishery in the coastal area stretching from Yoff to Terrou Baye Sogui in the western region of the Cap Vert peninsula. This region is under the jurisdiction of the West Dakar CLPA already created by the Government, and the species are already subject to co-management measures by the CLP in Ouakam. Outputs from this sub-component will be the preparation of at least one fishery for eco-certification, The subcomponent will finance technical assistance, training and consultations and operating costs. Specific activities will include: 53. Activity 4.1 Validation and Pre-Evaluation of Selected Fisheries. The requirements and standards of the MSC ecolabel will be presented to the stakeholders in the candidate fishery, as well as the objectives and definition of the certification and labeling process. The project will take as a starting point the lobster fishery identified in as the best candidate for eco-labeling in the context of preparation feasibility studies, verifylng that the necessary conditions for eco-certification are feasible. Toward this objective, the project will finance the necessary preliminary activities with stakeholders, including the private sector, respective Government authorities, and if possible, potential eco-certification clients. In particular, the project will finance a participatory analysis o f the fishery, considering the implementation of a co-management system and appropriate regulatory framework. The project will then finance a Pre-Evaluation of the fishery, as the preliminary step to obtaining the eco-certification. Furthermore, this activity will then finance a roadmap of actions necessary for 39

50 obtaining the eco-certification in each of the coastal fisheries selected, presenting the results to all stakeholders. 54. Activity 4.2 Study of the Prerequisites to Access Eco-certijlcation Markets. The incentive for the eco-certification for the fishers is the higher prices that the label commands in international markets. For this reason, the project will finance an analysis of the entire value chain, to ensure that the upstream management actions designed to add value are capitalized upon through to the final market, and that a strong demand exists. The study will result in an action plan for key actions at each step in the value chain, to ensure that the products originating from the targeted fishery can obtain an ecocertification and subsequent premiums on the market. 55. Activity 4.3 Monitoring and Coordination of Action Plan for Eco-certijkation of the Targeted Fishery and Restructuring of the Value Chains. The project will support monitoring, as well as coordination between the Government and stakeholders, of the progress of the fishers in the targeted fishery with the implementation of the action plan to obtain eco-certification. 56. Activity 4.4 Implementation of the Action Plan for Eco-certijkation of the Targeted Fishery. The project will help finance the implementation of the action plan for eco-certification of targeted fishery, including technical assistance, training and implementation activities included in the plan. 57. Activity 4.5 Certification and Promotion of the Targeted Fishery. If all of the conditions fixed in the action plans for eco-certification are satisfied in the targeted fishery, and the full value chains are structured according to the action plan to permit the products to reach the market, the project will finance the full evaluation of the fishery, as the final step to obtaining the certification by the MSC. 58. Component 3. Poverty Alleviation Measures for Fishing Communities and Alternative Livelihoods for Fishers, Fish Processors, and Fish transporters (mareveurs) (FRAP) (US$3.5 m IDA, US$0.46 m Government). The objective of this component is to offset any negative socioeconomic impacts for targeted fishing communities resulting from comanagement initiatives or management plans (including the introduction of instruments such as ZPPs, artificial reefs, eco-labels, etc.). This component will pilot and carefully monitor several alternative livelihood and poverty alleviation measures in the communities targeted by the project, and will work to identify, refine, and reinforce those which are most effective. The component thus supports activities which: (i) provide incentives for families and individuals -- whose livelihoods are adversely affected by reductions in fishing effort resulting from comanagement initiatives supported by the project -- to initiate andor deepen engagement in alternative income-generating activities; and, (ii) support individual fishers, small-scale fish transporters (rnareyeurs) and fish micro-processors (mainly women) who wish to exit the sector and pursue other, potentially more profitable and sustainable employment. 59. The component delivers this support through the establishment of an Alternative Livelihoods to Fishing and Poverty Reduction Fund (Fond de Reconversion des Artisans Picheurs - FRAP) that will be disbursed under two separate windows and, additionally, supports monitoring and evaluation and communications activities. One of the two windows (sub-component one) supports sustainable poverty alleviation measures for targeted communities which will suffer economically from comanagement activities (reduced fishing effort, introduction of ZPPs, eco-labeling, etc.). The other window (sub-component two) supports an integrated package of basic skills and small business training and microfinance for fishers, fish processors, and fish transporters (mareyeurs) wishing to exit the fishing sector to pursue other potentially more profitable and sustainable employment. The following activities will be funded under these respective windows: 60. Sub-component (1): (Window 1) Poverty Alleviation Initiatives in Project-Targeted Communities (US$2.0 m IDA, US$0.25 m Government). The objective of this sub-component is to pilot initiatives designed to alleviate and redress poverty in fishing communities targeted by the project, particularly for vulnerable fishers, women fish micro-processors, and fisher families. Communities access to this support will depend on their support for, and compliance with, comanagement and ecosystem rehabilitation measures being implemented under the project. CLPs in the communities, with assistance from the facilitators in the four initial pilot sites and additional 40

51 community co-facilitators that will be recruited, will play an important role in the management, oversight, and day-to-day monitoring of these initiatives. This sub-component will finance block grants, provision of micro-credit for women, and technical assistance. Specific activities will include: 61. Activity 1.1 Increasing Fish Products Derived from Co-Managed Sites. This activity will provide block grants to fishing communities targeted by the project to support local-level initiatives to improve the quality of fish products obtained from co-managed sites so income derived from the sale of these fresher, better-processed products is increased. The block grants will support local purchases of small-scale needs, including non-electrified ice boxes, ice purchases, payment for occasional rapid transportation of fish products to larger markets, etc. The CLPs, with community input, will decide how value-added block grants will be utilized and will manage the resources on behalf of the community. A maximum block grant amount of US$2,700 dollars per year will be available to each community to support this activity. The block grants, will be transferred to an account held in the name of the community CLP, and will be utilized and managed according to guidelines established in the Project Implementation Manual. To ensure transparency and accountability, the CLPs will be required to post infomation on block grant receipts and expenditures in a public place (e.g. maisons de pzcheurs where they exist or on the CLP notice boards). The facilitators in the four initial pilot sites and the new community co-facilitators will provide support to, and oversight of, CLPs on the quality improvement initiatives and on management and oversight of the block grant funds. 62. Activity 1.2 Expansion of Local Income-Generating Activities. This activity will provide block grants to poor fishing families in communities targeted by the project, in order to stimulate their deeper engagement in alternative income-generating activities to fishing, for which markets might be easily accessed and developed. A portion (20 percent) of the total block grant fund resources available for each community will be committed up-front by the FRAP and utilized to provide (i) technical assistance to communities and families in identifjmg viable and sustainable income-generating activities as alternatives to fishing, and (ii) on-going technical assistance to communities and families encountering difficulties in building their new income-generating activities. The CLPs, in consultation with the community, and with support from the facilitators and co-facilitators, will identify poor families who will benefit from these activities. To ensure transparency and accountability, the CLPs will post and maintain a list of beneficiary families and their approved income-generating activities in a public place (e.g. the maisons depzcheurs where they exist or the CLP notice boards). CLPs, with the support of facilitators and co-facilitators, and the entities providing technical assistance, will ensure that beneficiary families utilize the block grant resources appropriately and in compliance with agreements. Two types of annual evaluation activities will be supported under this activity, annual community-level self-assessments of progress, and an independent assessment of progress made under the initiative at large. The project will also finance technical support for communities and individuals in preparing the annual budget and implementation plans which must be submitted and approved before financing is released. The budget and implementation plans must receive the approval of both the CLP and the FRAP in order to receive financing, and must conform with the guidelines governing local income-generating activities as provided in the Project Implementation Manual. 63. Activity 1.3 Micro-Finance for Women. This activity will support access to micro-finance for individual women resident in the communities targeted by the project, to encourage small business development and expanded local product development, Micro-finance support will provide an additional safety net for communities and families negatively affected by co-management and ecosystem rehabilitation initiatives implemented through the project by supporting development of alternative or supplementary livelihoods. The activity will provide a line of credit to a wellestablished, national micro-finance institution with significant prior experience in providing microfinance support to the fishing sector. The micro-finance institution (MFI) will determine individual women s eligibility for micro-finance support, with input from the FRAP Support Institution, will be responsible for implementing and managing the activity, and will provide quarterly monitoring reports, which will report separately by targeted community and which will provide information on lending, repayment and default rates to the FRAP. The activity will also provide support to the microfinance institution to strengthen capacity to provide financial services to vulnerable fishing 41

52 communities. Additionally, it will finance community level training for women micro-finance recipients in basic money management and planning skills. 64. Sub-component (2): (Window 2) Support for Alternative Livelihoods to Fishing (US$l.O m IDA, US$O.I m Government). The objective of this window of the FRAP is to pilot an initiative to encourage young fishers (aged 18-45), women fish micro-processors, and fish transporters (mareyeurs) in the communities targeted by the project to pursue alternative livelihoods. The window will provide an integrated package of: (i) micro-finance; (ii) skills development and small business management training; and (iii) highly personalized technical assistance and support to individuals voluntarily opting to exit the fishing sector and pursue other viable and sustainable employment. 65. Alternative livelihoods support from the FRAP will be provided to individuals who: (i) volunteer with their local CLP to pursue livelihoods outside of fishing; (ii) are verified by the CLP as being active fishers, active women fish micro-processors, or active fish transporters (mareyeurs) in that community at the time of volunteering; (iii) certify with the CLP that they will begin to actively reduce their fishindfish processing efforts no later than six months after receiving FRAP support; (iv) certify with the CLP that they will cease fishinglfish processing activities one year after commencing FRAP support; (v) qualify to receive micro-finance support from the MFI; and (vi) who qualify to receive skills development training and personal support from an institution contracted by the project to provide technical assistance to the FRAP (known as the FRAP Support Institution). Candidates for support fkom this window of the FRAP will be required to agree to the pre-set conditions by signing an Alternative Livelihoods Agreement with the CLP and FRAP. Qualifjmg candidates who comply with the terms of their Alternative Livelihoods Agreement can continue to receive the full package of FRAP support for up to two years. The full guidelines for operation of the Alternative Livelihoods window will be provided in the Project Implementation Manual. 66. The CLP, with support from the facilitators and the FRAP Support Institution, will be responsible for monitoring candidates compliance with the terms of the Alternative Livelihoods Agreements. To ensure transparency in the selection of candidates for support under this window of the FRAP, and to foster their compliance, the CLP will post a live list of the FRAP candidates in that community in a prominent public place (typically on CLP notice boards) along with a standard Alternative Livelihood Agreement form. The list of candidates will also specify the date of commencement of FRAP support for alternative livelihoods for each; the six-month timeline when the candidate must have begun to show positive signs of attempting to reduce hisher fishing/fish processing/fish transporting effort; the one year timeline when the candidate is expected to cease fishindfish processing/fish transporting; and the two-year timeline during which the candidate is eligible to receive the full package of FRAP support. Women fish micro-processors who become candidates cannot simultaneously receive support under FRAP s Micro-finance for Women activity. 67. The activities to be supported under this sub-component consist of an integrated package of support, all three elements of which must be provided concurrently to each candidate. Candidates will not have the option of electing to receive some elements of the package while rejecting the others. 68. Activity 2. I Micro-Finance for Fishers, Women Fish Micro-Processors, and Fish Transporters (mareyeurs) opting for Alternative Livelihoods. This activity will provide a line of credit to a wellestablished national MFI, with extensive prior experience in delivering micro-finance to the fishng sector, so the institution can deliver micro-finance to individuals in the communities targeted by the project who want to exit the fishing sector and pursue other livelihoods. The MFI will determine individual candidates eligibility for micro-finance support, and will be responsible for implementing and managing the micro-finance support activity associated with the FRAP. Before proceeding to provide micro-finance to a candidate, the MFI will need to confirm with the CLP that that individual has formally opted to leave the fishery, and confirm with the FR4P Support Institution that that specific individual will receive their technical support. The MFI will provide quarterly monitoring reports to the COMO in DPM, with information on borrowing, saving, repayment, and default rates by target community. The MFI will also provide quarterly monitoring reports to the FRAP Support Institution on borrowing, saving, repayment and default for each candidate in each community so the Institution can tailor individualized support for each individual s needs. A Partnership Agreement 42

53 between DPM and the MFI will clearly specify the terms and conditions of operation of this microfinance initiative. This Partnership Agreement will comply closely with the guidelines for this activity provided in the Project Implementation Manual. 69. Activity 2.2 Basic Skills and Small Business Management Training. This activity will support the provision of basic skills development and small business management training for FRAP candidates by the FRAP Support Institution. The FRAP Support Institution will provide candidates with highly individualized training in basic skills development; in planning, money management (including management of bank accounts and relationships with the MFI), and small business development; and in problem-solving. 70. Activity 2.3 Ongoing Personal Support to FRAP Candidates. This activity will support the provision of ongoing, highly individualized support by the FRAP Support Institution to candidates so they are better equipped to deal with the full challenges involved in undertaking alternative livelihoods to fishing. The FRAP Support Institution will provide ongoing support on organization skills, life-management skills, and conflict management skills, amongst others. 71. Sub-Component (3): Capacity Building, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Communications (US$0.5 m IDA, US$O.l 1 m Government). The objective of this sub-component is to strengthen the capacity of the relevant specialists within DPM, to manage and effectively monitor activities supported by this component of the project, and support significant communications initiatives on the initiatives being supported under this component. Capacity-building activities will support formal training needs of FRAP specialists within DPM; purchase of essential office equipment and supplies (such as a vehicle dedicated for use by FRAP specialists, gasoline and vehicle maintenance, computers, printers, faxes, paper, essential office equipment, etc.). Monitoring and evaluation funds will be used to cover basic operational costs involved in overseeing component 3 activities (including travel costs to participating communities, telephone costs, etc.). The Monitoring and evaluation funds will also support the costs of an annual quantitative and qualitative assessment of progress being made under FRAP-supported initiatives. These annual assessments will be undertaken by a contracted independent entity with appropriate skills and experience in this area. The communications funds will be used to support significant communications initiatives on component 3 activities, including posters, community radio announcements, etc.). 72. Component 4. Institutional Strenptheninp for Fisheries Management. Proiect Management and Monitoring and Evaluation (US$2.5 m IDA-GIRMaC project, US$0.94 m GEF, US$5.1 m EU, US$O.15 m Government). The objective of this component is to support the Ministry of Maritime Economy to manage and implement the project in the context of the Letter of Sector Policy, and to monitor and evaluate results. This will include three sub-components: 73. Sub-Component (1) Development of a Fisheries Code and Support for the Implementation of Fisheries Management Plans, including research, policies, regulations and management measures (US$0.9 m IDA-GIRMaC project, US$4.4 m EU, US$0.28 m GEF, US$0.04 m Government). The objective of this component is to support the Government to develop a new Fisheries Code governing the sector, taking into account the results of the co-management pilots and the new vision for the resources established in the Letter of Sector Policy. The project will finance technical assistance, goods and equipment, training and consultations, and operating costs. Specific activities will include: 74. Activity 1.1 Support to Develop a New Marine Fisheries Code. The project will provide support for technical assistance and consultations for the Government to develop a new Fisheries Code to be passed into law before the end of the project. 75. Activity 1.2 Implementation of National Fisheries Management Plans. The project will provide support for development of national fisheries management plans, and for the implementation of the management measures included therein. 43

54 76. Sub-Component (2) Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation (USrSl.6 m IDA- GIRMaC project, US$0.7 m EU, US$0.6 m GEF, US$O.ll m Government). The objective of this subcomponent is to support the Directorate of Maritime Fisheries to ensure effective project coordination and monitoring and evaluation. GEF-hnded outputs will include the technical assistance and goods necessary to ensure a functional management and a monitoring and evaluation system for the project. 77. Activity 2.1 Project Management. This activity will support the Directorate for Marine Fisheries to manage the implementation of project activities, in coordination with support from various donors, in order to achieve the intended results. The project will finance technical assistance, training, goods and equipment and operating costs. 78. Activity 2.2 Monitoring and Evaluation. This activity will support the Ministry of Maritime Economy to periodically monitor and evaluate the progress of the project towards achieving its intended results, and to make any necessary adjustments. The project will finance technical assistance, training, works, goods and equipment and operating costs. 79. Sub-Component (3) Replication of Project Activities at the Sub-Regional and Regional Level (US$0.06 m GEF). The objective of this sub-component is to support the Ministry of Maritime Economy to help share lessons learned and encourage the replication of project activities in the subregion and region, including participation in regional fora and projects such as the CCLME. C. Sustainability Plan 80. The issue of sustainability is examined from the perspective of institutions, policies and individual sites. In terms of institutional sustainability, the project will work with partners to support the Directorate for Marine Fisheries in the implementation of the fisheries management aspects of the Letter of Sector Policy, to ensure that the progress made towards achieving the objectives of the Letter is continued by MEM after the project. Furthermore, the project is promoting the implementation of existing policies for co-management already established by the Government based in part on pilots financed to date by the GIRMaC. Thus, the policies supported by the project are fixed, and the institutions involved all subscribe to them. Lastly, in terms of individual sites, the project is designed to minimize the operating costs per site after the end of the project, and to ensure clear benefits are seen by the communities, who will themselves continue the coastal fisheries management activities long after the project. The project aims to empower stakeholders to take a greater role in the management of the natural resources, a model inherently more sustainable than a centralized, topdown system with high operating costs. D. Replication Strategy 81. The project was developed in response to a detailed assessment of threats, gaps and lessons fiom the past experience in the fisheries sector in Senegal. Several activities will be undertaken to ensure that lessons that emerge during and fiom this operation are captured and shared with relevant stakeholders. These stakeholders will include local, national and international participants. 82. Given its focus on results and its consistency with Governments, donors and the World Bank s growing preference for result-based interventions, the operation will prove to be highly replicable, both within the country and at the sub-regional and regional level. At the country level, the project will implement a model for co-management of coastal fisheries that can grow horizontally and be replicated to communities throughout the country, particularly as more and more are established. The reasoning for clustering project activities in the coastal region between Cap Vert and the Saloum is that in addition to the synergies captured between neighboring sites, the concentration of results and achievements in one region can act as an example that catalyzes similar actions in the northern and southern regions. The project will support MEM to promote these examples to other regions, including exchanges between individual fishing communities to share lessons learned. All of these activities are considered by MEM and the donors as initial examples of implementation of the Government s new Letter of Sector Policy for the fisheries, that if successful can be replicated more widely. Thus, the potential for replication within the country is high, as the project supports activities that are part of a nationwide policy. Collaboration between donors in tern of co-financing of investment support through this project for the implementation of this policy, would form the basis of 44

55 a potential Sector-Wide Approach (SWAP) in a second round of financing after the end of the project, in order to replicate results with more efficiency. Of course, actual replicability will ultimately depend on the success that the operation will be able to show. 83. The operation has been designed based upon the experiences of the GIRMaC as well as interventions by JICA in Nianing. Lessons learned from these will play a seminal role in designing similar initiatives in the sub-region. The project will serve as a pilot for the Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem Project. The project includes an activity in component 4 to support the staff of DPM to work with staff of the CCLME, and to participate in sub-regional fora sponsored by that project in order to share lessons learned with government officials from neighboring countries. Additionally, the seven member countries of the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission (Mauritania, Senegal, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Cape Verde and Sierra Leone) have asked the Commission to develop a strategy and logical framework for fisheries management activities in the sub-region, which includes various donor-supported activities such as this project, which could be shared and replicated by member states. 84. At the regional level, staff from DPM will work with the African Union through the Strategic Partnership for Fisheries in Mica, in order to share lessons learned and promote replication throughout the continent. Through the Partnership, the AU (supported by FA0 and WWF) will monitor the progress of the project, and disseminate lessons learned widely to member governments, through publications, workshops and ongoing policy dialogue. This project would form a case study by which ongoing policy dialogue on the sector by the African Union with its member states is informed. 85. Replication Plan: To achieve these levels of replication, the project will ensure a monitoring and evaluation system that feeds results into several distinct groups with the potential to draw lessons : Within the Ministry in charge of Fisheries, the recently established monitoring and evaluation committee for the implementation of the Letter of Sector Policy, and coordination of donor inputs; The informal group of fisheries donors in Senegal, co-chaired by the Government of France and the World Bank; The GEF-funded Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem project, which will be based in Dakar at the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission, and which will be targeted through activities of the project for outreach and communication; The Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission, which is also based in Dakar; and The African Union, as chair of the GEF-funded Strategic Partnership for Sustainable Fisheries in Africa, and specifically the Coordinator for the Regional Advisory Committee to the Partnership, who will use funds from the Partnershp to monitor the implementation of the project, share lessons learned and encourage replication. 86. In terms of the latter, part of the work program of the Coordinator for the Strategic Partnership, which is funded by a GEF Medium-Sized Project Grant, is to work with FA0 and WWF to liaise with the Ministry of Maritime Economy to compile project results data and information, conduct periodic reviews and independent evaluations of the project, and distill lessons learned. The project is expected to generate significant lessons which can lead to the development of strategies in other countries in the region for the long-term financing of sustainable fisheries. The African Union and its partners, FA0 and WWF, will therefore utilize the lessons learned from this project, and by the end of the project will have (through the GEF-funded MSP) aimed to assist at least 3 countries in the region to develop long-term strategies for sustainable fisheries management, based in part on the lessons from Senegal and this project. 87. An important output of the Strategic Partnership will be the strengthened regional partnerships between Government officials and decision-makers in Senegal, and other countries wishing to learn from their experiences through this project. The Strategic Partnership MSP will support regular meetings of the Regional Advisory Committee of the Partnership, which includes decision-makers from countries throughout Africa as well as donors, to share lessons learned from this project and promote replication. These enhanced partnerships and an enhanced donor coordination will create an 45

56 atmosphere of shared and evolving responsibilities and would prove to be a strong vehicle for future replication. The Strategic Partnership will also develop a communication strategy, with support from WWF, that will support replication of lessons learned from the project. This strategy should be completed by the end of the first year of the project and tested and ready to support dissemination of lessons learned. A communication strategy, that facilitates participation and knowledge transfer will also be tested. The approach will include facilitating exchange of information and good practices (knowledge transfer) through information dissemination workshops which include the publication of the project s result documents. Thus, approaches to project management and development, knowledge and information sharing and the M&E system that is developed will be replicable across other multistakeholder projects in the region. 88. Additionally, a public awareness campaign will be implemented through component 4 of the project to enable both increased awareness and behavioral changes in the fisheries. It will include media campaigns at the national level, production of fisheries-related education materials aimed at school children, and printed and audiovisual materials distributed through local media. 89. Budgetary provisions have been made for the derivation of lessons learned to be translated into guidance for replication under component 4 of the operation. Resources will mainly be applied towards capacity-building and knowledge dissemination practices which will be the primary vehicles. 46

57 a m m N N m 0 N m 0 N m 0 N 0 N if s g p s s m m m m m m N : N 0 N 0 N 0 N -0 E 13 I1 iz iz I1 - j N 0 a f m m 0 m 0 N s a N m 0 N a Q f f S f f N 0 0 : N a a 3 E E m m m 2 0 N a 8 m m 0 N.u E m 0 N a m 8 m E I E 2 : a 0 N E m 0 N a m m E m m m E Q E m t e, m 0 N B m H E n

58 Annex 5: Project Costs SENEGAL: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources Project Cost By Component and/or Activity Total Local Foreign USD USD million USD million million* A. Co-Management of Coastal Fisheries I. Promotion of Local Co-Management Initiatives in 4 Pilot Sites 2. Consolidation & Strengthening of Coastal Fisheries Co- Management 3. Institutional Support for a System of Local Fisheries Governance Subtotal Co-Management of Coastal Fisheries B. Rehabilitation of Ecosystems Essential for Coastal Fisheries I. Protected Fishing Zones 2. Artificial Reefs 3. Institutional of Access Rights & Associated Management Instruments 4. Market Incentives for Sustainable Management Targeted Fisheries Subtotal Rehabilitation of Ecosystems Essential for Coastal Fisheries C. Poverty Alleviation Measures for Fishing Communities and Alternative Livelihoods for Fishers, Fish Processors, and Fish transporters 1. Poverty Alleviation Initiatives in Project-Targeted Communities Support for Alternative Livelihoods to Fishing 3. Capacity Building, Monitoring and Evaluation, Communications Subtotal Alternative Livelihoods and Accompanying Social Measures D. Institutional Strengthening for Fisheries Management, Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation I. Development of a Fisheries Code and Fisheries Management Plans 2. Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation Replication of Project Activities at Sub-Regional Level Subtotal Institutional Strengthening for Fisheries Management, Monitoring and Evaluation Total Baseline Cost Physical Contingencies Price Contingencies Total Project Costs Total Financing Required * These amounts reflect IDA and GEF funding, as well as cofinancing described in the project description. 48

59 Annex 6: Implementation Arrangements SENEGAL: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources 1. The Ministry of Maritime Economy and Transport (MEM) is the project s executing agency, and more specifically the Directorate for Marine Fisheries (DPM) within the Ministry. The DPM already has a small project implementation unit (COMO) for the fisheries component of the GIRMaC, as well as another for the implementation of the EU-funded fisheries STABEX project. Additionally, the Sustainable and Equitable Management of Maritime Fisheries Sector Capacity Building Project, funded by the Agence Franqaise de Dkeloppement (AFD) is also managed by a coordination unit with technical assistance within DPM. The Directorate will expand the existing project implementation unit for the GIRMaC to manage the implementation of this project together with the GIRMaC, as well as to implement a standard monitoring and evaluation system for all of the various donor support received by DPM for the implementation of the action plan for the Letter of Sector Policy, as the first step towards a future sector-wide approach (SWAP). 2. This Project Implementation Unit (COMO) will actually be responsible for coordinating with the several different donor initiatives that are working together to help the Government implement the Letter of Sector Policy, including this project. The COMO will reinforce the synergies between these different donor-supported activities and strengthen monitoring and evaluation of the Ministry of both the results of the project and the Letter of Sector Policy, through the work of a full-time Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist in the unit. This COMO will also include fiduciary monitoring capacity, for both financial management and procurement. The Financial Management Specialist of the COMO will oversee the Financial Management aspects of the Project including the consolidation of financial statements for project activities, providing quarterly Interim Financial Reports, monitoring financial transactions on the project s account through the DDI (Direction de la Dette et de l hvestissement) and making the necessary arrangements for the annual financial audit. The part-time Procurement Specialist and full-time Assistant Procurement Specialist will ensure day-to-day monitoring of project procurement, according to Government and World Bank guidelines. The various specialists within the COMO, including the Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist, the Financial Management Specialist and accountant, the procurement Specialist and Assistant Procurement Specialist, would all report to a Project Coordinator in the COMO, who will be a staff member of DPM, appointed by the Director of DPM in terms satisfactory to the World Bank. 3. In terms of day-to-day management, the COMO will include a DPM manager responsible for each of the components and various technical programs supported by the project, including the Co- Management activities in components one and two, the FRAP in component three, and the development of fisheries management plans in component 4. The COMO will also provide fiduciary management support to the PNI within DPM. Experts and consultants will be recruited to support the COMO as needed. Thus, within the COMO and at a larger scale within DPM, there will be different roles and responsibilities for implementing the different components and sub-components: 4. Co-Management Activities (Components 1 and 2): The comanagement activities, including the various tools supporting comanagement such as ZPPs, artificial reefs, access rights and ecolabelling, will be supervised by a Manager (DPM staff) within the COMO. That person will be supported by a National Co-Management Specialist to be recruited through the project, as well the facilitators already recruited to work in the four initial pilot sites, and the community facilitators to be recruited in the 8 new sites. The activities providing various tools to be implemented through the comanagement system, more specifically the ZPPs, artificial reefs, access rights and ecolabelling, would be implemented with the support of an institution/ngo/company to be recruited by the COMO. The facilitators would be supervised by the Co-Management Specialist, who, along with the institution/ngo/company recruited for the activities of component two, would report to the Manager within the COMO. 5. At the community level in each site, project implementation will be supported by Local Fishers Committees (CLPs) within communities as legally-recognized private associations, and Local Artisanal Fisheries Councils (CLPAs) as organs of the Government operating at the supra-community 49

60 level. More specifically, CLPs are defined as legally-recognized private entities, composed of fishers and established per community. CLPAs are defined as local councils composed of representatives of local Government, senior traditional leaders, artisanal fishers, CLPs, fish processors and marketing professionals, and other stakeholders, established by the Government in order to advise the Ministry of Maritime Economy on management and conservation measures for coastal fisheries resources. The CLPs will work in collaboration with project-funded facilitators and with the technical assistance of a fisheries co-management specialist, in order to develop co-management initiatives (with each initiative corresponding to a specific management or conservation measure). The various comanagement initiatives proposed by CLPs would be consolidated into one sub-project for that community. A draft co-management agreement, with the sub-project (various co-management initiatives) as an annex, would then be submitted to the Minister of Maritime Economy, after having been reviewed by the CLPA representing that particular CLP (provided the CLPA has been legally established and is functioning effectively). The agreement would also be sent to the National Consultative Council for Marine Fishers (CNCPM) for any objections. The agreements would then be signed by the Minister of Maritime Economy and the President of each CLP, and implemented by the respective CLPs with the support of the Government. In the context of signing the agreements (and on the basis of the guidance received by the respective CLPA), the Minister will sign any Ministerial decrees (i.e. arre^tb ) necessary to support the implementation of the co-management initiatives. 6. Small-Scale Fishing Vessel Registration Program (PNI) (Component 2): The PNI activities will be managed by the office and Manager currently established within DPM to manage this program. Fiduciary management will rest with the COMO, which will also ensure that PNI activities are coordinated with other project activities towards achieving the intended results. The PNI is being financed only by the Government of Switzerland. 7. Alternative Livelihoods to Fishing and Poverty Reduction Fund (FRAP) (Comuonent 3): The FRAP refers to the package of activities in Component 3, financed solely by the new IDA credit. This credit and these activities will be managed by the COMO, under the supervision of a designated manager supported by a Community Development Specialist financed by the project. All of the activities of Component 3 are divided essentially into two categories or windows, based on the objective of each. The first window (sub-component 1) aims to support general poverty alleviation in the targeted fishing communities. The second window, (sub-component 2) aims to more specifically support alternative livelihoods to fishing for individuals in targeted communities. The three mechanisms of disbursement or costs in the FRAP for these two objectives and windows are (i) block grants, (ii) micro-finance, and (iii) technical assistance to support implementation and monitoring of the previous two. The COMO will manage and disburse directly the block grants, which are Activities and of Sub-component 1 (first window of the FRAP on general poverty alleviation activities). The COMO will use, through a subsidiary agreement based on the structure of recent agreements signed with other World Bank projects in Senegal, a micro-finance institution to implement the micro-finance, which is Activity of sub-component 1 and Activity of subcomponent 2. The design and management of the micro-finance activities complies with World Bank policy OP8.30 in that the micro-finance institution will be identified, assessed, and any necessary remedial action to the institution identified (which will involve grant support for the extension of its services to some of the newly identified fishing communities) by project effectiveness. The microfinance institution will not be providing subsidized interest rates, but will set interest rates which reflect nationally prevailing rates as established by the national bank. 8. Fisheries Management Plans (ComDonent 4) A Manager within DPM will supervise the preparation of the Fisheries Management Plans supported by component 4 of the project, as well as the replication activities at the sub-regional level. A Fisheries Management Specialist financed by the project will provide technical support to this work. 9. Operational Manuals will be prepared for the project, including a Project Implementation Manual and an Administrative and Financial Procedures Manual. Both manuals will be completed prior to effectiveness. Furthermore, the fiduciary capacity of the COMO will be established prior to effectiveness. The COMO will prepare an annual monitoring and evaluation report, together with an annual work program, budget and procurement plan, for submission to the World Bank each year. 50

61 r- 3 m I 1 r 1

62 Annex 7: Financial Management and Disbursement Arrangements SENEGAL: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources 1. Introduction 1. As part of the preparation phase of the Sustainable Management of Fish Resources Project a financial management assessment was carried out in accordance with the Financial Management Practices Manual issued by the Financial Management Board on November 3,2005. The objective of the assessment was to determine whether the implementing entity COMO/DPM has acceptable financial management arrangements, which will ensure: (1) the funds are used only for the intended purposes in an efficient and economical way, (2) the preparation of accurate, reliable and timely periodic financial reports, and (3) safeguard the entities assets. 2. Executive summary 2. The Country Financial Accountability Assessment (CFAA) of Senegal was conducted in The overall risk rating of the public financial management system was hgh. Since that exercise, the Government has created an Executive Secretariat under the Ministry of Economy and Finance to monitor the implementation of the CFAA action plan. The HIPC Country Assessment and Action Plan by the Bank and the IMF in November 2004 showed significant improvements in the areas of public expenditure tracking notably in the priority area defined in the PRSP, internal control and budget preparation. However, significant progress is still needed in internal and external controls of budget execution and state-owned enterprises. 3. The government has given priority to improvements in these areas as well as local governance finance reforms. A Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) was established to follow up on implementation of the reforms. A new Procurement Code has been adopted and entered in force in January A PEFA exercise was undertaken in 2007 and the report concluded that although there is some improvement in PFM reform implementation, key risks and challenges remain and require improvement in areas such as: (i) effectiveness of the internal audit system by the SAI (Cours des Comptes); (ii) reliability of data for monitoring the stock of arrears; and (iii) addressing the backlog of state accounts. 5. The Government is committed to conduct the PFM reform through the Creation of a specific body - PFM Reform Steering Committee - (under the Ministry of Finance) with representation by all Governmental departments responsible for specific reforms. The role of the Steering Committee is to: (i) coordinate the reforms to be undertaken; (ii) harmonize Government actions; (iii) monitor the implementation of the action plan; and (iv) hold different actors accountable for progress. 6. In dialogue with external partners, the Government is implementing the action plan resulting from the last PEFA framework to track progress in strengthening public financial management and to identify areas where country fiduciary systems are not yet in line with international standards. 7. The use of country systems, notably the Treasury Department and the Cours des Comptes, will be implemented progressively. In the meantime, implementation of project will be coordinated by COMO under the Directorate for Marine Fisheries (DPM) of the Minister of Maritime Economy (MEM). 52

63 3. Risk Assessment and Mitigation Risk Inherent Risk Country Level Entity Level Project Level - tisk tating S - S - S Risk Mitigating Measures incorporated into the Project Design The CFAA and PEFA action planis under implementation and the government has created an Executive Secretariat to follow up. While legal and Institutional framework is in place, implementation may be hampered by political interference on which attention will be paid The Project is not complex even if it is intended to involve multi donors supporting the LSP. More- over, the implementing entity (COMO) has experience with Bank financed projects. A recent FM supervision mission of the GIRMaC identified ineligible expenditures at the level of the project coordination unit for the GIRMaC, which has now been closed, with fiduciary management responsibilities transferred to the COMO. Conditions of Negotiations, Board or Effectiveness (Yes or No) No No No Remarks A MDTF has been set out for the reforms implementation purpose. FM arrangements for this project will rely on COMO administrative and financial procedures. Attention will be paid to Internal Control, Reporting and Auditing Process that will need to be judged satisfactory by the World Bank. Control Risk Budgeting Accounting [nternal Zontrol Funds Flow M - M - S - S - Annual work plans will be prepared and submitted to the Bank by November 30 of each year. Accounting fbnction will be led by qualified financial FM staff with relevant experience in accountancy and audit. However, there is a need to update the computerized information system to include this new Project. There is no Internal Audit function in place. However the Administrative and Financial procedures Manual will give a clear description of the Approval and authorization processes. A Designated Account will be ouened bv DDI (Direction de la No No No No Recruitment of a qualified FM Specialist. Project staff will need to be trained in Bank FM, Disbursement and Procurement procedures. The Bank will pay attention to the internal control system during supervision missions. Training of staff on Bank s FM, 53

64 Financial Reporting Auditing procurement and disbursement procedures, will be provided. The Bank will ensure that appropriate arrangements are in place for the Micro Finance scheme. L The COMO is already familiar with No The Bank will pay Dette et de I 'Investissernent) for the purpose of the Project. The Flow of funds scheme will involve an Institution of Micro finance which will facilitate credit to targeted communities. the format of the quarterly reports (IFR). M An external Auditor with experience No and qualifications satisfactory to the Bank will be recruited. attention the timely production of the IFR. 8. In view of the general country financial management issues and the issues peculiar to the project, the overall financial management risk rating for this project is Substantial. 4. Strengths 9. The financial management capacity built in the COMO under the GIRh4AC will be consolidated and used to manage the Financial Management System of the Project. 5. Weakness and FM Action Plan Weaknesses Action Responsible Completion Body Date No specific information Update existing software COMO/DPM Within first 2 system for the project TOMPRO to host project. months of project implementation Specific Administrative Update the existing COMO/DPM Within first 2 and Financial procedures Administrative and Financial months of of the project Procedures Manual project implementation Lack of Financial Recruitment of a qualified COMO/DPM Within first 2 Management Specialist and experienced FM months of Specialist project implementation 4 Absence of an External Recruitment of an External Auditor Auditor with experience and qualifications satisfactory to 1 the Bank COMO/DPM Within first six months of implementation 6. Implementing Entity 10. This Project Implementation Unit (COMO) will actually be responsible for coordinating with the several different donor initiatives that are working together to help the Government implement the Letter of Sector Policy, including this project. The COMO will reinforce the synergies between these different donor-supported activities and strengthen monitoring and evaluation of the Ministry of both the results of the project and the Letter of Sector Policy. This COMO will also include fiduciary monitoring capacity, for both financial management and procurement. The Financial Management Specialist of the COMO will oversee the Financial Management aspects of the Project 54

65 including Internal Control, the consolidation of financial statements for project activities, providing quarterly Interim Financial Reports, monitoring financial transactions on the project s account through the DDI (Direction de la Dette et de I Investissement) and making the necessary arrangements for the annual financial audit. The IDA and GEF hnds will flow from the World Bank to the Designated Account opened under the DDI at the Ministry of Economy and Finance. 7. Budgeting 1 1. The Financial and Administrative Manual will describe the budgeting process. The Financial team will finalize the Entity Action Plan and Budget, which will be submitted to a steering committee for approval. Also, the Non-objection of the Bank will be required before implementation of the annual action plan. 8. Accounting 12. The current accounting standards in use in Senegal for on-going Bank-financed project will be applicable. SYSCOHADA is the assigned accounting system in West African Francophone countries. The Credit will be accounted for by the project on a cash or accrual basis. This will be documented with appropriate records and procedures to track commitments and to safeguard assets. Accounting records will be maintained in local currency. The Chart of accounts will facilitate the preparation of relevant quarterly and financial statement including information on the total project expenditures, the financial contribution from IDA and other Donors and expenditure by componentlcategory. 13. An update of the Information System will allow production of all accounting and financial data required : Financial Statement, Bank reconciliation statements, all the books of accounts and all financial reports including the Interim Un-audited Financial Reports (IFR).Accounting procedures will be documented in the Financial and Accounting manual. 9. Internal Control and Internal Auditing 14. The Administrative and Financial Manual will provide a clear description of the approval and authorization processes in respect of the rule of segregation of duties. The Bank will pay attention to the adequacy of internal control during supervision mission. 15. At the national level, the Direction de la Dette et de I Investissement (DDI) controls ex ante all expenditures and withdrawal applications before sending them to the Bank. 10. Reporting and Monitoring 16. The COMO will be responsible for overall reporting on the project. The FMS will ensure that on a quarterly basis, the Interim Unaudited Financial Reports (IFR) are produced and transmitted to the Bank no later than 45 days from the end of the quarter. The first IFR shall be furnished to the World Bank no later than 45 days from the end o f the first calendar quarter after the Effective Date, and shall cover the period from the incurrence of the first expenditure under the project, through the end of the first calendar quarter. 17. The format and contents of the Interim Unaudited Financial Report (IFR) will be agreed on by effectiveness. 18. On an annual basis, COMO/DPM will also be required to produce, no later than June 30 of the following fiscal year, audited annual financial statements. 11. Funds Flow and Disbursement Arrangements Disbursement Methods 19. By effectiveness, the Project will use the Transaction-based Disbursement Procedures, i.e., replenishment, direct payment, reimbursement, and special commitments. When project implementation begins, the quarterly Interim Financial Reports (IFRs) produced by the Project will be 55

66 reviewed. If the reports are found to be adequate and produced on a timely basis, and the Recipient requests conversion to report-based disbursements, a review will be undertaken to determine if the Project is eligible for report-based disbursement. The adoption of report-based disbursements by the Project will enable it to move away from transaction-based disbursement methods to quarterly disbursements to the Project s Designated Account based on IF&. Detailed disbursement procedures will be documented in the procedure manual. Minimum Value of Applications 20. The Minimum Value of Applications for reimbursement, direct payment and special commitment is 20 percent of outstanding advance made to the Designated Account. Reporting on credit proceeds 21. In addition to SOE, records (i.e. copies of receipt, supplier s invoices, etc.) will be required to evidence eligible expenditures for payments against contracts valued US$300,000 or more for goods, US$l,OOO,OOO or more for works, US$200,000 or more for consulting firms and US$50,000 or more for individual consultants and a list of payments against contracts that are subject to the Bank s prior review. The supporting documentation for requests for direct payment should be records evidencing eligible expenditures (copies of receipt, supplier s invoices, etc). All supporting documentation for SOEs will be retained at by the accounts unit of COMO/DPM and will be made available for review by periodic World Bank review missions, internal and external auditors. Designated Account 22. To facilitate project implementation and reduce the volume of withdrawal applications, COMODPM on behalf of the Government, will open two Special Accounts (SA) in FCFA in a commercial bank on terms and conditions acceptable to IDA. The first Special Account (SA-A) will be used exclusively to finance all expenditures under the IDA Credit, and the second Special Account (SA-B) will be used to finance all expenditures under the GEF Grant. The authorized allocation for both SA-A and SA-B will be FCFA 200,000,000 and FCFA 350,000,000 respectively and will cover about four months of eligible expenditures. Upon credit effectiveness, IDA will deposit the initial deposits on the basis of a duly signed withdrawal request. 23. The Designated Accounts will be used for all payments in an amount below 20 percent of the initial deposit to the Designated Accounts. 24. These accounts will be managed by the director of DDI in coordination with the COMO/DPM. Designated accounts will be held in XOF and located in a Commercial Bank acceptable to IDA. (See Flow of Funds scheme in Appendix 1). Counterpart Funding 25. The Government contribution will be mobilized as co-financing and in form of fiscal revenues. That consists in taxes exemption on the overall loan proceeds. Monthly Replenishment Applications 26. The Designated Accounts will be replenished through the submission of Withdrawal Applications on a monthly basis by the accounts unit and will include reconciled bank statements and other documents as may be required until such time as the Recipient may choose to convert to reportbased disbursement. Disbursements by category 27. The following table sets out the expenditure categories and percentages to be financed out of the Credit /Grant proceeds. 56

67 Percentage of Category IDA credit GEF grant Expenditures allocation (USD) allocation (USD) to be Financed Component 1. Comanagement 1,240,000 of Coastal Fisheries 100 Sub-projects for Component 1 1,2 10, Component 2. Rehabilitation of Ecosystems 2,400, Component 3. Alternative livelihoods and accompanying 2,100, social measures Sub-projects for Component 3 1,400, Component 4. Institutional Strengthening for Fisheries 910, I Management and Monitoring I I I I 1 Total Amount 3,500,000 6,000, Auditing 28. Independent External Auditor with qualification and experience satisfactory to the Bank will conduct an annual audit of the project s financial statements prepared by COMO/DPM. This audit should be carried out in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (ISA) issued by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), and will include such tests and controls as the auditor considers necessary under the circumstances. 29. In addition to the audit report, the auditors will be expected to prepare reports on internal controls (management letters) giving observations and comments, as well as provide recommendations for improvement in accounting records, systems, controls and compliance with financial covenants in the Financial Agreement of the Bank. The auditor reports should be furnished to the Bank within six months after the closing of each fiscal year. 30. Tern of Reference (TOR) will be prepared for the appointment of the external auditor who meets the Bank s criteria for selection of consulting firm. 13. Supervision Plan 3 1. COMO/DPM will be subject to periodic supervision missions. Given the Substantial FM risk rating, supervision will be intense the first year of the project. This intensity will be accommodated according to the evolution of the FM risk rating. 32. Supervision activities will include review of quarterly FMRs; review of annual audited financial statements as well as timely follow-up of issues arising; transaction review; participation in project supervision missions as appropriate; and updating the FM rating in the Implementation Status Report (ISR). 33. Particular attention will be paid in the implementation of the Agreement between DPM and the Institution of Micro-Finance which will be involved in the Micro Credit to targeted communities. 57

68 z n. 8 I d......! [ w a... :;':.....

69 Annex 8: Procurement Arrangements SENEGAL: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources A. General 1. Procurement in the context of the country. Following the Government's approval of the 2003 CPAR action plan, the Government has adopted in 2007 a new Procurement Code (decree no dated April 25, 2007) which complies with the WAEMU's Procurement Directives and best international practices. In accordance with this code, (i) a Public Procurement Directorate was created in 2007 (decree No dated April 25, 2007) for controlling procurement transactions of any public contracting authority and (ii) a Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (Autoriti de R.igulation des Marchb Publics - ARMP) was established up in 2007 (decree no dated April 25, 2007) for handling policies, complaints and audits. These two entities are to date operational. In addition, the Government has already prepared main national bidding documents and is still in the process to validate and adopt them. There is no major deviation of the national Code from the Bank's Guidelines, but to allow a full application of the provisions of World Bank's procurement and selection and employment guidelines, IDA will provide to the borrower the list of the national procurement clauses which are partially or entirely inconsistent with World Bank's guidelines. Applicable Guidelines 2. Procurement for the proposed project would be carried out in accordance with the World Bank's "Guidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits" dated May 2004 and revised by October 2006; and "Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers" dated May 2004 and revised by October 2006, and the provisions stipulated in the Legal Agreement. The various items under different expenditure categories are described in general below. For each contract to be financed by the CrediUGrant, the different procurement methods or consultant selection methods, the need for pre-qualification, estimated costs, prior review requirements, and time frame are agreed between the Borrower and the Bank in the Procurement Plan. The Procurement Plan, defining the procurement and selection methods and the requirement of IDA prior review, will be updated at least annually or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements in institutional capacity. Procurement Documents 3. The procurement will be carried out using the World Bank's Standard Bidding Documents (SBDs) or Standard Request for Proposal (RFP) respectively for all ICB for goods and works and recruitment of consultants. For National Competition Bidding (NCB), while waiting for the Government and the Bank to respectively validate and give the no objection on the national bidding documents in preparation, the Borrower will use the World Bank's SBD for ICB for goods and works, and the Bank's RFP for recruitment of consultants. In the same vein, the Sample Form of Evaluation Reports developed by the World Bank, will be used until the new national samples are reviewed and satisfactory to the Bank. Advertising procedure 4. General Procurement Notice (GPN), Specific Procurement Notices (SPN), Requests for Expression of Interest, results of the evaluation and contracts award should be published in accordance with advertising provisions in the following guidelines: "Guidelines: Procurement Under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits" dated May 2004 and revised by October 2006; and "Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers" dated May 2004 and revised by October

70 Procurement methods 5. General Procurement Notice (GPN), Specific Procurement Notices (SPN), Requests for Expression of Interest, results of the evaluation and contracts award should be published in accordance with advertising provisions in the following guidelines: "Guidelines: Procurement Under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits" dated May 2004 and revised by October 2006; and "Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers" dated May 2004 and revised by October Procurement of Works: No civil works have been identified to be procured under this project. 7. Procurement of Goods: Goods procured under this project would include (but are not limited to): computer hardware; office supplies; monitoring, control and surveillance equipments; and vehicle. The procurement will be done using the Bank's SBD for all ICB and National SBD if agreed with or satisfactory to the Bank. Contracts estimated to cost less than US$300,000 equivalent for goods available locally would be procured under NCB procedures. Small articles and office supplies as well as small equipment and furniture available locally and whose estimated cost is less than US$50,000 may be awarded through Shopping, in accordance with the Bank's procurement guidelines (section 3 S). National Competitive Bidding processes may be adjusted to ensure that: (i) bids are advertised in national newspapers with wide circulation; (ii) bid evaluation, bidder qualification and award criteria are specified clearly in the bidding documents; (iii) bidders are given adequate response time (minimum four weeks) to prepare and submit bids; (iv) bids are awarded to the lowest evaluated bidder proven this bidder is qualified; (v) eligible bidders, including foreign bidders, are not precluded from participating; and (vi) no preference margin is granted to domestic suppliers. 8. Procurement of non-consulting services: This will include training and capacity building. For contracts estimated to cost the equivalent of US$30,000 and above, NCB will be carried out. For contract estimated to cost less than US$30,000, shopping procedures may be used, in the same way as for the procurement of goods. 9. Selection of Consultants: Activities needing selection of consultants include, but are not limited to the selection of consultants for: the process of creation, management and monitoring-evaluation of ZPP, the pre-evaluation of the fishery candidate, achieving comprehensive assessment of the fishery and the value chain, selection of a micro finance institution to manage the credit line conversion MF, selection of an institution to support the conversion IAR, annual Auditing, recruitment of a consultant for drafting the manual execution of FRAP, selection of a communication agency for the development and implementation of the communication strategy of FW, recruitment of a specialist in comanagement of fisheries, selection of consultant for the study of institutional framework for local governance of fisheries. Consultants will generally be selected through Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS). In some special cases which will be detailed in the procurement plan, the following methods may be used: (i) Selection based on the Consultants' Qualifications (CQS); (ii) Selection based on Fixed Budget, (iii) Least Cost based Selection (LCS), (iv) Individual Consultants, (v) Single Source Selection. 10. Short lists of consultants for services estimated to cost less than US$200,000 equivalent per contract may be composed entirely of national consultants in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2.7 of the Consultant Guidelines Operating Costs: Operating costs financed by the project are incremental recurrent expenditures including office equipment and supplies, office rental, communications, vehicle maintenance costs, all needed for the supervision of the project. They may be procured according to shopping procedures, grouping together when possible and using shopping for repetitive goods and services. These procedures will have to be detailed in the Project Implementation Manual. 60

71 The procurement procedures and SBDs to be used for each procurement method, as well as model contracts for works and goods procured, will be presented in the Project Implementation Manual and acceptable to IDA. B. Assessment of the agency s capacity to implement procurement 12. Procurement activities will be carried out by the Project Implementation Unit (COMO) within the Directorate of Marine Fisheries (DPM). The COMO has gained extensive experience in IDA procurement procedures through GIRMaC project. It participated in handling satisfactorily the implementation of the first component of the GIRMaC Project (sustainable management of fisheries). 13. The COMO is staffed by a Coordinator, a Financial Management Specialist, an Administrative Assistant, a Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist, and the procurement function will be staffed by a parttime Procurement Specialist and a full-time Procurement Assistant who will ensure day-to-day monitoring of project procurement, according to Government and World Bank guidelines. 14. An assessment o f the capacity o f the Implementing Agency to implement procurement actions for the project has been carried out by World Bank procurement specialist on June 12, The assessment reviewed the organizational structure regarding project implementation, the interaction between those staff members responsible for procurement and their level of autonomy with regard to the Ministry s office role in the procurement process. 15. The key issues and risks concerning procurement for implementation of the project have been identified and include possible delays and interference in procurement decisions of the Procurement Committee (Cellule de Passation des Marchis) of the Ministry. 16. The corrective measures which have been agreed are: (i) restrict the responsibility of the Ministry Procurement Committee only to quality review of the procurement document not responsibility in evaluation; and (ii) the Ministry should draw up a circular committing the Cellule de Passation des Marchis to provide its clearance in the ten days following submission of procurement files by the COMO. 17. The overall risk for procurement in this project is currently high until the procurement staff is recruited and the interaction between the COMO and the Cellule des Marchis of the Ministry is clearly defined. In consideration of this level of risk, the assessment recommended two supervision missions per year. C. Procurement Plan 18. The Borrower, at appraisal, developed a procurement plan for project implementation which provides the basis for the procurement methods. This plan has been agreed between the Borrower and the Project Team on October 24, 2008 and is available at DPM. It will also be available in the project s database and in the Bank s external website. The Procurement Plan will be updated in agreement with the Project Team annually or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements in institutional capacity. D. Frequency of Procurement Supervision 19. In addition to the prior review supervision to be carried out from Bank offices, the capacity assessment of the Implementing Agency has recommended supervision missions every six months to visit the field and to carry out post review of procurement actions. 61

72 E. Details of the Procurement Arrangements Involving International Competition 1. Goods, Works, and Non Consulting Services (a) List of contract packages to be procured following ICB, NCB and direct contracting: Ref. Contract Estimated Procure- p-q Domestic Review N~. (Description) Cost ment Preference by Bank US$ Method (yesho) (Prior I Post) 01 Equipment 200,000 NCB NO NA Post Monitoring Control Surveillance (8 sites) Expected Bid- Opening 03/16/2009 COmments I I Vehicle4X4 I 3,0253 I NCB INO INA I Post Double Cab Various 200,000 NCB NO NA Post I equipment I (b) ICB contracts estimated to cost above $300,000 per contract and all direct contracting will be subject to prior review by the Bank. 2. Consulting Services (a) List of consulting assignments with short-list of international firms I Ref. No. Description of Assignment Consultant for creation, management and monitoringevaluation of ZPP Micro finance institution to manage the credit line conversion IMF Selection of an institution Estimated cost 615,555 1,333,334 QCBS 266,666 QCBS Selection Review Expected Method by Bank Proposals (Prior I Sub- Post) mission Date QCBS Prior 02/04/2009 Prior Ol2009 Prior 04/30/2009 Comments 62

73 to support the conversion IAR Selection of 08 community leaders Recruitment of a specialist in comanagement of fisheries Selection of a consultant for the annual evaluation of initiatives funded by the FRAP 117,333 IC Prior 09/10/ ,3 60 IC Prior 09/10/ ,000 IC Prior (b) Consultancy services estimated to cost above US$200,000 per contract and single source selection of consultants (firms) for assignments will be subject to prior review by the Bank. (c) Short lists composed entirely of national consultants: Short lists of consultants for services estimated to cost less than US$200,000 equivalent per contract may be composed entirely of national consultants in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2.7 of the Consultant Guidelines. 63

74 Annex 9: Economic and Financial Analysis SENEGAL: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources 1. Economic Analysis. The project is essentially a framework -type project, where the majority of the investments by targeted communities, e.g. the co-management activities in component one, the establishment of marine protected areas in component two and support for alternative livelihoods in fishing communities in component three. For this reason, indicative cost-benefit analyses of representative examples of these investments are presented in each case, as proxies to illustrate the basis for deciding on the merits of the project. 2. In terms of co-management activities in component one, an indicative cost benefit analysis has been carried out, based on data collected from similar activities in communities supported by the GIRMaC project. In the pilot site at Foundiougne, investments in co-management supported the communities to implement management measures for the shrimp fishery such as seasonal and monthly closures to allow the catchable individuals to grow to larger sizes. The relationship between prices in the local, national and international markets for shrimp and the size of individual products (i.e. size of shrimp caught) is not linear. Prices for larger individuals may be two or three times greater than prices for smaller individuals, such as juveniles. Thus, as a result of the measures taken by the communities, total production from the shrimp fishery increased (from 170 tons annually to 340 tons annually), average size of the shrimp caught increased (fiom 200 individuals per kilogram to between 60 and 80) and significant benefits were realized (global gross income doubled, see figure 1 below). Similarly, the environmental sustainability of the catch increased as well, as the species were given more time to reproduce and grow. Figure I: Evolution of Shrimp Catches, Gross Income, Price in Foundiougne, Senegal Evolution of shrimp catches, gross income, price (Foundiougne site) Year Average -Gross price income 3. In terms of the activities to establish protected fishing zones (ZPPs) in component two, significant benefits are also expected to come fiom the voluntary closure o f key habitats and spawning areas to fishing by communities (i.e. marine reserves). Such ZPPs are expected to help stabilize coastal demersal fish yields in targeted areas, in comparison to the without project scenario where yields are expected to continue to decline over time (see figures 2-4 below). The graphs give both a central case as well as a more optimistic and a more pessimistic case, to mimic the uncertainties regarding the benefits of ZPPs. 64

75 , Figures 2-4: Indicative fisheries benefits f?om establishment of ZPPs and associated loss ofproduction over first several years due to closures Lost Roduction Alternative Income -0- w khout' -A- w kh' - high estimte -m- w kh' - central estimate -e- w kh' low estimate c P 1.: E Long Term Benefit fr i I \ I \ i' ft 0 Catch-per-unit-Effort (CPUE) The Profitability of the Coastal Fisheries CPUE measures the fish harvested per unit of fishing effort, i.e. the costs a fisher or group of fishers will incur to harvest an amount o f fish for wholesale or consumption. The more overexploited the fishery, the more effort (and costs) a fisher will have to expend to capture a dwindling amount (and returns) of fish. However, reducing pressure on the fisheries and allowing fish stocks to recover can help to increase CPUE, increasing the profitability of the fishery and incomes o f the fishers. 4. To illustrate these indicative benefits, an example from similar investments and analyses conducted in the preparation of the second phase of the Coral Reef Rehabilitation and Management Project (COREMAP 11) are shown below. While the conditions and assumptions are obviously quite different from Senegal, they present an indication of the rates of return from similar World Bank investments in other countries. In this example, over 125,000 fishers in the six COREMAP I1 project districts studied were involved in coastal fishing. According to the analysis, their incomes were expected to stabilize as compared to the 'without project' case, where incomes were decreasing every year, with a 50 percent or more drop assumed over the next 25 years 'without' the project. Table 1: Economic Rates of Return for the 6 COREMAP 11Project Districts in Indonesia Pangkap Selayar Buton Raja Ampat Biak Sikka EIRR 'central' (%) EIRRhigh (%) EIRR low (%) undefined undefined 4 1 undefined undefined 65

76 Annex 10: Safeguard Policy Issues SENEGAL,: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources 1. The project been classified in Safeguards Category S2 and Environmental Assessment Category B. The project builds upon the Environmental Management Framework prepared for the GIRMaC, and has conducted an Environmental Assessment (EA) to identify any safeguards that could be triggered by the activities additional to the GIRMaC introduced by this project. This assessment showed that the key safeguard issue (and the reason for which the involuntary resettlement safeguard applies) is the potential restriction of traditional access to coastal and fish resources that may be introduced by the project in targeted communities, in order to reduce fishing effort to allow the stocks to rebuild. Currently, the resources are utilized through a system of open access that has allowed essentially more fishers and fishing pressure than the resources can sustain. The project addresses this in the central coastal region by supporting co-management of the coastal fisheries, as a precursor to a community level rights-based system. It is from this transition away from open access to more regulated fisheries, that the key risks are created. These risks are largely social, because the implementation of co-management and rights-based systems imply that access to specific areas or types of fisheries will be restricted. The project-wide instrument to address this risk is the FRAP in component three of the project, which will compensate fishers for potential losses as a result of reduced fishing effort. This instrument will address these risks wherever they may emerge in local project sites. From a safeguards standpoint, the FRAP will utilize a process framework prepared by the project, to ensure that decisions concerning restriction of access to fish resources are decided on the basis o f consensus of stakeholders, in accordance with OP/BP In addition to the key social risks posed by the implementation of co-management through the project, there are potential safeguard risks that may arise in the context of sub-projects financed through the FRAP. However, the Sustainable Management of Fish Resources is a framework-project in which the specific safeguard applicable activities to be financed by the FRAP cannot be known at the time of Appraisal. Their impacts, therefore, cannot be fully analyzed during project preparation. In such cases, the Bank requires a framework document that sets out the policies and procedures to be followed during program implementation to insure safeguards compliance. An Environmental Management Plan (including an Environmental and Social Management Framework) has been prepared for the project and particularly the FRAP, as a framework to ensure individual sub-projects are screened for any potential impacts through safeguards, particularly under the natural habitats safeguard (OP/BP 4.04). The natural habitats safeguard was triggered in the EA because the project is oriented towards the conservation of natural habitats. However, the project is expected to have beneficial impacts on targeted natural habitats, and any activities with potential negative impacts would not be financed by component The Environmental Management Plan, including the Environmental and Social Management Framework, for the project will be annexed to the Government s project Operational Manuals, so that this framework can be utilized as the main vehicle for communicating the safeguards requirements o f subprojects financed by the FRAP. The framework is essentially a roadmap for the review of FRAP-funded activities as well as screening procedures to ensure application of sound environmental practices to these activities. 4. The key stakeholders identified in the project are the fishing communities in the central coastal region of the country, as well as those fishers that utilize these resources. The Government conducted consultations on the draft EA and EMP in a sample o f these communities, including Foundiougne, Joal, Cayar, Ngaparou and, Ouakam. Community facilitators working in targeted communities will work together with the Department of Marine Fisheries to ensure that compliance with safeguards issues are monitored throughout the project. 5. Safeguards compliance will be the responsibility of the COMO (Project Implementation Unit) within the DPM, who will ensure that the framework is applied to all investments made by the FRAP. At a more 66

77 general level, the COMO will monitor the co-management investments of the project in components one and two, to ensure that the FRAP is used to help address and mitigate any social risks that may arise from increased resource management and reduced fishing effort. 6. The Environmental Assessment and the Process Framework was made available to the World Bank by the Ministry of Maritime Economy on June 9,2008, and to the InfoShop on July 8,

78 Annex 11 : Project Preparation and Supervision SENEGAL: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources Planned Actual PCN review 07/24/ /24/2006 Initial PID to PIC 08/05/ /10/2006 Initial ISDS to PIC 08/05/ /10/2007 Appraisal 07/21/2008 July 21 - August 1, 2008 Negotiations 10/06/2008 October 22-29,2008 BoardIRVP approval Planned date of effectiveness Planned date of mid-term review Planned closing date 12/18/ /24/ /30/ /31/2012 Key institutions responsible for preparation of the project: 0 Ministry of Maritime Economy, Directorate of Marine Fisheries (DPM); through a Project Implementation Unit (COMO) within the Directorate. Bank staff and consultants who worked on the project included: Name Title Unit John Virdin Task Team Leader AFTEN Cedric Boisrobert Junior Professional Officer AFTEN Xavier Vincent Sr. Fisheries Specialist AFTEN Yves Prevost Lead Environment Specialist AFTEN Liba Strengerowski Operations Analyst AFTEN Virginie Vaselopulos Language Program Assistant AFTEN Anta Tall Diallo Team Assistant AFTEN Carolyn Winter Sr. Social Development Sp. AFTCS Demba Balde Social Development Specialist AFTCS Michael Tubman Consultant AFTCS Nathalie Munzberg Sr. Counsel LEGAF Patrice Talla Counsel LEGEN Ronnie Hammad Sr. Operations Officer AFTRL Wolfgang Chadab Sr. Finance Officer LOAFC Saidou Diop Financial Management Specialist AFTFM Sidy Diop Procurement Specialist AFTPC Bank funds expended to date on project preparation: 1. Bank resources: US$199, Trust funds: US$256, Total: US$456,204 Estimated Approval and Supervision costs: 1. Remaining costs to approval: 0 2. Estimated annual supervision cost: US$lOO,OOO 68

79 Annex 12: Documents in the Project File SENEGAL: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources 1. Evaluation Sociale, Economique et Politique des Sites Pilotes du GIRMaC (2008) Agriconsulting Maroc, Senagrosol Consult. Dakar, Senegal 2. Etude des Perceptions des Communaute's de P&he sur la Cogestion et les Perspectives de Reconversion (2008). Monnet, M. and 0. Niang Mbodj. Dakar, Senegal. 3. Programme d'immersion de Recifs Artijkiels pour une Gestion Durable de la Pkhe au Se'ne'gal(2008). Sene, C and K. Sane. Dakar, Senegal. 4. Etude sur la Faisabilite' de I'Ecolabellisation duns les sites pilotes du GIRMaC (2008). ENDMPAO. Dakar, Senegal. 5. Proposition d 'un Programme Pilote pour 1 'Ecolabellisation des Produits de la P&he Artisanale au Se'ne'gal (2008). ENDMPAO. Dakar, Senegal. 6. Etude de base sur les me'thodes, les technologies de capture et les pratiques en usage duns les pzcheries industrielles crevettidres c6tidres et sur leurs proble'matiques d 'exploitation, d 'ame'nagement et de contrdle (2008). Faye, B. Dakar, Senegal. 7. Analyse cotits bkne'fices des impacts d'une re'duction des subventions a la p&he artisanale (2008). Seck, P. D. Dakar, Senegal. 8. Cre'ation d'un Re'seau National des Aires Marines Prote'ge'es pour une Gestion Durable de la PGche au Se'ne'gal(2008). Sene, C. Dakar, Senegal. 9. Guide de Cre'ation et de Gestion D %'res Marines Prote'ge'es pour la Gestion de la P&he au Se'ne'gal(2008). Sene, C. Dakar, Senegal. 10. Proposition d'un Cadre Le'gislatif et Institutionnel pour la Gestion des Aires Marines Prote'ge'es au Se'ne'gal(2008). Sene, C. Dakar, Senegal Etude de faisabilite' de la mise en place au sein de la Direction des P2ches Maritimes d'une Unite' de coordination des activite's des donateurs duns le domaine de I'amknagement et la gestion durable des pzcheries maritimes (2008). Lo, M. Dakar, Senegal. 12. Etude de Faisabilite' d'un Fonds de Soutien 2 la Gestion des Ptcheries fonde'es sur les critdres du de'veloppement durable (2008). Mbaye, A. Dakar, Senegal. 69

80 Annex 13: Statement of Loans and Credits (As of November lgth, 2008) SENEGAL: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources Original Amount in US$ Millions Difference between expected and actual disbursements Project ID FY Purpose IBRD IDA SF GEF Cancel. Undisb. Orig. Frm. Rev d P SN-En. Sec. Recov. Dev Policy Financing PO West Africa Regional Productivity Program PO SN-Nutr Enhanc. Prog I1 - APL (FY07) PO SN-Quality EFA APL 2 (FY07) PO SN-Local Authorities Development PO Program Senegal River Basin Multi-purpose Water OO PO Resources Dvt. Project OMVS Felou Hydroelectric Power PO SN-Agr Markets & Agribus Dev (FY06) PO SN-Participatory Loc Dev Prgm (FY06) PO SN-Agr Svcs & Prod Orgs APL 2 (FY06) PO SN-Africa Emergency Locust Project PO SN-GIRMAC SIL (FY05) PO SN-GEF INT Marine Coastal PO SN-Elec. Sew. for Rural Areas (FY05) PO SN-Elec Sec Effi. Enhanc.Phase 1 APL PO SN-Casamance Emerg Reconstr Supt PO (FY05) SN-Priv Sec Adj Crdt (FY04) PO SN-Priv Inv Promotion SIL (FY03) PO SN-HIV/AIDS Prevent & Control APL (FY02) PO SN-Long Term Water Sec SIL (FYOl) Total: SENEGAL STATEMENT OF IFC Held and Disbursed Portfolio (in Millions of US Dollars) Committed Disbursed IFC IFC FY Approval Company Loan Equity Quasi Partic. Loan Equity Quasi Partic BHS Ciments du Sahel GTI Dakar GTI Dakar Kounoune SEF Royal Saly Total portfolio:

81 Annex 14: Country at a Glance Senegal at a glance 911 6/08 Key Development Indicators (2007) Population. mid-year (millions) Surface area (thousand sq. krn) Population growth ( Oh) Urban population ( Oh of total population) Senegal Sub- Saharan Africa , LOW income Age dlstrlbution I Male Female GNi (Atlas method, US$ billions) GNI per capita (Atlas method, US$) GNI per capita (PPP, international 5) GDP growth (%) GDP per capita growth (%) , , I 2o oercent (most recent estimate, ) Poverty headcount ratio at $1.25 a day (PPP, O h) Poverty headcount ratio at $2.00 a day (PPP, O h) Life expectancy at birth (years) Infant mortality (per 1,000 live births) Child malnutrition (Yo of children under 5) Under-5 mortality rate (per 1,000) 200, Adult literacy, male ( Oh of ages 15 and older) Adult literacy, female ( Oh of ages 15 and older) Gross primary enrollment, male (% of age group) Gross primary enrollment, female ( Oh of age group) Access to an improved water source ( Oh of population) Access to improved sanitation facilities ( Oh of population) (3 Senegal 0 Sub-Saharan Africa Net Aid Flows ' (US$ millions) Net ODA and official aid Top 3 donors (in 2006): France United States Germany Growth of GDP and GDP per capita (Oh) I Aid (% of GNI) Aid per capita (US$) Long-Term Economic Trends Consumer prices (annual % change) GDP implicit deflator (annual O h change) eo GDP - GDP per capita Exchange rate (annual average, local per US$) Terms of trade index (2000 = 100) Population, mid-year (millions) GDP (US$ millions) Agriculture Industry Manufacturing Services , ,717 4,692 (% of GDP) , (average annual growth %) Household final consumption expenditure General gov't final wnsumdtion exdenditure Gross capital formation Exports of goods and services Imports of goods and services Gross savings Note: Figures in italics are for years other than those specified data are preliminary... indicates data are not available a. Aid data are for Development Economics. Development Data Group (DECDG). 71

82 Senegal Balance of Payments and Trade (US$ millions) Total merchandise exports (fob) Total merchandise imports (cif) Net trade in goods and services Workers' remittances and compensation of employees (receipts) , ,628 3, Governance indicators, 2000 and 2007 Voice and accountablllty Political stability Regulatory quality Current account balance as a % of GDP , Rule of law Control of corruption Reserves, including goid W Central Government Finance (% of GDP) Current revenue (including grants) Tax revenue Current expenditure Overall surplusldeficit Highest marginal tax rate (Oh) individual Corporate External Debt and Resource Flows (US$ millions) Total debt outstanding and disbursed Total debt service Debt relief (HIPC, MDRI) , , Country's percentile rank (0-100) hghw "CJLes imfdy Mer ratings Source Kaufmann-Knay-Mastrurri WoM Bank Technology and Infrastructure Paved roads (% of total) Fixed line and mobile phone subscribers (per 1,000 people) High technology exports (%of manufactured exports) Environment Agricultural land (% of land area) Forest area (%of land area) Nationally protected areas (Oh of land area) Total debt (YO of GDP) Total debt service (% of exports) Freshwater resources per capita (cu. meters).. 2,192 Freshwater withdrawal (% of internal resources) 8.6 Foreign direct Investment (net inflows) Portfolio equity (net inflows) Composition of total external debt, 2006 Shofi-fem, 85 rcero, o C02 emissions per capita (mt) GDP per unit of energy use (2005 PPP $ per kg of oil equivalent) Energy use per capita (kg of oil equivalent) u Ellaera!. 717 Other nlylti. imer3.493 Private Sector Development Time required to start a business (days) Cost to start a business (% of GNi per capita) Time required to register property (days) Ranked as a major constraint to business (% of managers surveyed who agreed) Access tolcost of financing Tax rates Stock market capitalization (% of GDP) Bank capital to asset ratio (Oh) (US$ millions) IBRD Total debt outstanding and disbursed Disbursements Principal repayments Interest payments IDA Total debt outstanding and disbursed 1, Disbursements Total debt service IFC (fiscal year) Total disbursed and outstanding portfolio of which IFC own account Disbursements for IFC own account 5 13 Portfolio sales, prepayments and repayments for IFC own account 2 4 MlGA Gross exposure 0 0 New guarantees 0 0 Note: Figures in italics are for years other than those specified data are preliminary... indicates data are not available. - indicates observation Is not applicable. 9/16/08 Development Economics, Development Data Group (DECDG) 72

83 Millennium Development Goals Senegal With selected targets to achieve between 1990 and 2015 (estimate closest to date shown, +I- 2 years) Goal 1: halve the rates for extreme poverty and malnutrltion 1990 IS Poverty headcount ratio at $1.25 a day (PPP, % of population) Poverty headcount ratio at national poverty line (% of population) 33.4 Share of income or consumption to the poorest qunitile (%) Prevalence of malnutrition (% of children under 5) Goal 2: ensure that children are able to complete prlmary schooling Primary school enrollment (net, %) Primary completion rate (% of relevant age group) Secondary school enrollment (gross, %) Youth literacy rate (% of people ages 15-24) Goal 3: ellmlnate gender dlsparlty in education and empower women Ratio of aids to bvs in orimarv and secondarv education 1%)., Women kployed'in the nonagricultural sector (% of nonagricultural employment) 11 Proportion of seats heid by women in national parliament (%) Goal 4: reduce under4 mortality by two-thirds Under-5 mortality rate (per 1,000) Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) Measles immunization (proportion of one-year olds immunized, %) Goal 5: reduce maternal mortality by three-fourths Maternal mortality ratio (modeled estimate, per 100,000 live births) 980 Births attended by skilled health staff (% of total) Contraceptive prevalence (% of women ages 15-49) Goal 6: halt and begin to reverse the spread of HlVlAiDS and other major diseases Prevalence of HiV (% of population ages 1549) o Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 people) Tubercuiosis cases detected under DOTS (%) Goal 7: halve the proportlon of people without sustainable access to basic needs Access to an improved water source (% of population) Access to improved sanitation facilities (% of population) Forest area (% of total land area) Nationally protected areas (% of total land area) 11.2 C02 emissions (metric tons per capita) GDP per unit of energy use (constant 2005 PPP $ per kg of oil equivalent) Goal 8: develop a global partnershlp for development Telephone mainlines (per 100 people) Mobile phone subscribers (per 100 people) Internet users (per 100 people) Personal computers (per 100 people) iducatlon indicators (%) 25 =7== neasles immunization (%of lyear olds) '0 1 IIC1 indicators (per 1,000 people) I,1 0 2wo 2wz 20w 2w6-0- Primary net enrollment ratio -0- Ratio of girls to boys in primary 8 secondary education OSenegal OSubSaharan AMca Note: Figures in italics are for years other than those specified... indicates data are not available. 9/16/08 Development Economics, Development Data Group (DECDG). 73

84 Annex 15: Incremental Cost Analysis SENEGAL: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources 1. Combined Project/Global Objectives 1. The combined development objective/global objective of the project is to empower communities to reduce fishing pressure on the fish stocks supporting the central coastal fisheries of Senegal (from the Cap Vert Peninsula to the Saloum River Delta). The project would achieve this objective by (i) promoting comanagement of the coastal fisheries, (ii) contributing to the rehabilitation of the essential ecosystems for the coastal fisheries, and (iii) supporting alternative livelihoods and accompanying poverty reduction measures in targeted poor fishing communities. Successful experiences would be used to draw lessons for potential replication at a later date to the coastal fisheries in the other regions of the country. 2. Status Quo 2. Scope and Costs. In the absence of GEF assistance under the baseline scenario, the project will be implemented without particular attention to (i) critical ecosystems that support the fisheries in the targeted central coastal region and rural communities, or (ii) to expanding models of collaborative fisheries management (i.e. co-management) to a larger scale to reduce fishing pressure and restore stocks. Rather the project would be implemented with an emphasis on economic growth and diversification in the targeted areas, and on maintenance of the four existing pilot sites for fisheries co-management with no broader replication. (i) Component 1 : Co-Management of Coastal Fisheries. Without GEF funds, this component would focus solely on maintaining the four pilot sites for fisheries co-management initiated under the GIRMaC project, with no replication by the Government. The baseline costs for this component are estimated at approximately US$5.5 million, of which US$2.9 million IDA would finance the maintenance of the 4 pilot sites. (ii) Component 2: Rehabilitation of Ecosystems Essential for Coastal Fisheries. Without GEF funds, this component would focus solely on reducing the impact of offshore industrial shrimp fisheries on the ecosystems and implementing a national fishing vessel registration system. The baseline costs for this component are estimated at approximately US$3-2 million. (iii) Component 3 : Poverty Alleviation Measures for Fishing Communities and Alternative Livelihoods for Fishers, Fish Processors, and Fish transporters. This component will focus on establishing and strengthening revenue-generating activities in targeted fishing communities, in particular for fishers and their families, in order to offset any negative socioeconomic impacts resulting from fisheries resource management measures. The baseline costs for this component are estimated at approximately US$3.5 million. No GEF resources will be applied as co-financing to this component. (iv) Component 4: Institutional Strengthening for Fisheries Management, Project Management and Monitoring and Evaluation. Without GEF funds, this component will focus on supporting the Ministry of Maritime Economy to manage and implement the project in the context of the Letter of Sector Policy, but without significant attention to monitoring and evaluation of results, as well as information-sharing and replication. The baseline costs for this component are estimated at approximately US $6.7 million. 3. Benefits. Implementation of the baseline scenario investment program described above will be expected to generate national benefits as a result of the increased economic development of rural fisheries communities in the central coastal region, as well as continued implementation of local fisheries management pilot sites and national vessel registration. Most of the coastal communities in the region targeted by the project are almost entirely dependent on the overexploited fisheries, so that the activities of the project to encourage alternative livelihoods to fishing will help diversify these economies and 74

85 provide new sources of revenues. The baseline scenario would therefore lead to increased investments in local economic development in targeted communities, along with continued support for pilot examples of collaborative fisheries management systems to reduce overexploitation. These key features of the baseline scenario would provide significant support to improved livelihoods, as well as ongoing support to pilots in collaborative fisheries resource management in rural fisheries communities in Senegal. 4. The baseline scenario would, however, be insufficient to produce the global benefits arising from reducing the overexploitation of the fish stocks supporting the coastal fisheries of Senegal, by failing to replicate the good examples of co-management from the pilot sites to other communities in order to firmly establish fisheries management measures in previously open access fisheries, as well as to implement measures to protect the health of the ecosystems which support these fisheries, and specifically the critical habitats present in these areas. Communities would not be empowered to more sustainably manage the fish resources, nor to incorporate the identification and protection of critical coastal habitats into project-supported development efforts. Similarly, they would not have funds to establish protected fishing zones as part of the project, focusing more on poverty alleviation activities. Nor would these efforts address the wider relationship between coastal fisheries and ecosystems, and particularly between the role of habitats and fish stocks. Thus, several potential global benefits of more sustainably managing the coastal fisheries resources would be overlooked, including: The protection of the significant ecosystem services provided to fisheries and rural communities by critical habitats; The mitigation of potential threats to critical habitats and species that may arise directly or indirectly from the economic development of targeted fisheries communities if habitat and ecosystem conservation is not factored into local development; and The significant opportunities for replicating and further developing the pilot sites for empowering communities to reduce overexploitation of the fish stocks, and coupling these management measures with habitat and ecosystem protection, thereby supporting both development and global environment objectives. GEF Alternative 5. Scope and Costs. With support from the GEF, an expanded program could be undertaken comprising activities focused on empowering communities and local governments to work together to reduce overexploitation of the targeted fish stocks, and to identify and conserve critical coastal habitats in parallel with rural community development and fisheries co-management efforts. Essentially, the GEF alternative would build fishing effort and overexploitation reduction efforts into the local economic development activities of the project, including the following incremental activities: (i) Replication of successful models of collaborative, or co-management of the fish resources to help reduce fishing effort and overexploitation of these globally significant fisheries. Approximately US$2.65 million in GEF resources would be applied to empower interested communities in the central coastal region of Senegal in order to replicate and implement successfully-tested models of co-management. This would include empowering communities to reduce fishing pressures, and to sign legal agreements with the Government to take measures towards this end, that would be funded by the project. (ii) Support for rehabilitation of critical coastal habitats in order to help restore the depleted fish stocks. Approximately US$2.85 million in GEF resources would be applied in the central coastal region targeted by the project in order to: identify and establish protected fishing zones, restore reef ecosystems to help replenish the fish stocks, encourage the introduction of access rights to these critical habitats, reduce the by-catch and impacts on the ecosystems of coastal industrial shrimp vessels, and introduce global market incentives to help encourage long-term sustainable fishing practices. 75

86 (iii) Establishment of a monitoring and evaluation system in the Ministry of Maritime Economy that can incorporate information on results into real-time management decisions, particularly by ensuring that management decisions are taken on the basis of information on the protection of key habitats. More specifically, US$0.5 million in GEF resources would be allocated to help establish a real-time monitoring and evaluation system, which can also feed information to the communities to inform their decision-making, as well as support overall institutional strengthening and project management in the Ministry of Maritime Economy. 6. Benefits. In addition to the national benefits associated with the baseline scenario, global benefits of the GEF alternative include: (i) mainstreaming community-based efforts to reduce overexploitation of the fish stocks into the broader economic development efforts and production sectors promoted in rural coastal communities by the project, and (ii) ensuring that the rehabilitation of ecosystems and conservation of critical coastal habitats underpins any fisheries management efforts in the central coastal region of Senegal, as a model that would be replicated to both the northern and southern regions of the country. 7. Incremental Cost Matrix. The total cost of the baseline scenario is estimated to be US$18.9 million. The GEF alternative is estimated at US$24.9 million. The incremental cost of the GEF alternative is therefore estimated at US$6 million. I Component cost I US$ Domestic Benefit Global Benefit Alternative!S '. < - Maintenance of pilot activities in I Some modest reduction co-management of fish stocks, of fishing effort on the national vessel registration fish stocks. program. Replication of successful models of Reductions in fishing co-management of the fish pressure on globally resources to help reduce fishing significant but heavily effort and overexploitation of these overexploited fish stocks. globally significant fisheries. I Alternative Incremental I 2.36! Livelihoods and Accon Baseline I 4.00 :id for Coastal Fisheries Reduced by-catch in the offshore industrial shrimp fisheries Increased protection of spawning grounds for key fish stocks, higher yields and profits fkom the fisheries. panying Social Measures Increased local development in diversification, reduction of I I Protection of critical habitats and rehabilitation of ecosystems essential for supporting healthy fish stocks. I Reduction in number of on the fish stocks. Alternative Incremental I 0 76

87 4. Institutional Strengthening for Fisheries Management, Project Management, and Monitoring and Evaluation 1 Baseline I 7.74 With GEF Alternative 8.66 I Development of a new I Strengthened institutional Fisheries Code, and national resource management plans Implementation of a results-based monitoring and evaluation system, uroiect management and policy framework for management of the fisheries and fish stocks Transmission of information on fish stock recovery and management, replication of lessons learned I Baseline I 20.4 I With GEF Alternative Incremental Lastly, with the GEF scenario above, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has agreed to implement a component of the upcoming Wula Naafa I1 project ( ) in collaboration with the project. Wula Naafa I1 will support rehabilitation of coastal fisheries through comanagement in the southern region of the country, and will seek to replicate lessons learned fiom the project and vice versa. Wula Naafa I1 is providing US$3.0 million in funding to the coastal fisheries of southern Senegal, in collaboration with the project. 77

88

89

90 Annex 17: Senegal Fisheries and Aquaculture Sector Policy Letter Republic of Senegal One People - One Goal - One Faith Ministry of Maritime Economy and Maritime Transport Fisheries and Aquaculture Sector Policy Letter APRIL

91 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ADEPME AGS APA CEP CITES COMHAFAT COPACE CSRP CTI DITP DPCA DPM DPSP ECOWAS EPA EU FPE GIRMaC HACCP ICCAT IDR OMVG OMVS PDPCA PNAE PNASA PNDA PO PRSP QIT scs SME TAC TRIE UCAD WAEMU WTO ZEE Development and Supervisory Agency for Small and Medium-size Enterprises Accelerated Growth Strategy Aquaculture Promotion Agency Studies and Planning Unit Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wildlife and Flora Ministerial Conference on Fisheries Cooperation among African States Bordering the Atlantic Ocean Centre-East Atlantic Fisheries Committee Sub-regional Fisheries Commission Inter-Ministerial Technical Committee Department of Fisheries Processing Industries Department of Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Department of Maritime Fisheries Department of Fisheries Protection and Surveillance Economic Community of West Afncan States Economic Partnership Agreement European Union Economic Promotion Fund Integrated Management of Marine and Coastal Resources Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas Institute for Development Research Gambia River Basin Development Organization Senegal River Development Organization Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Master Plan National Environmental Action Programme National Food Security Programme National Aquaculture Development Programme Professional Organizations Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper Transferable Individual Quota Monitoring, Control and Surveillance Small and Medium-size Enterprises Total Allowable Catch Inter-State Road Transport UniversitC Cheikh Anta DIOP West African Economic and Monetary Union World Trade Organization Exclusive Economic Zone 81

92 1. INTRODUCTION 1. In 2000, the Government of Senegal organized countrywide consultations on fisheries and aquaculture to revisit the development strategy for the fisheries sector implemented over the past two decades and make appropriate adjustments to better meet the new challenges and stakes of the sector. 2. The national consultations on fisheries and aquaculture in 2000 helped to define the major strategic pillars that would guide reform work in the fisheries and aquaculture sector, namely: ensure sustainable management of fisheries and aquaculture, while maintaining their economic viability; satisfy domestic demand for fishery products; improve and modernize the conditions for the practice of small-scale fishing and subsistence aquaculture; increase the added value of fishery products; develop a sustainable system for fisheries and aquaculture activities; strengthen bilateral, sub-regional, multilateral and international cooperation in fisheries and aquaculture. 3. Since the adoption of the sustainable development strategy in 2001, the fisheries sector has recorded significant developments as a result of internal sector changes, progress in the implementation of the strategy, as well as new missions assigned to the sector in national government policies (PRSP, AGS). 4. In January 2004, an implementation status assessment of the development strategy for the fisheries sector was conducted in a meeting attended by all the fisheries and aquaculture stakeholders (the administration, professional organizations, NGOs and donors of the sector). The meeting marked an important stage in the fisheries policy as it enabled the authorities of the Ministry to define a voluntarist and coherent reform policy anchored on giving priority to the development of fisheries. Indeed, it was decided that the priority choices in the programming of Government and donor activities should henceforth be geared towards the following strategic areas: - - give priority to issues relating to the reduction of excess capacities, control of access to resources, control of the fishing effort, and enhanced empowerment of fishers; develop a government policy aimed at placing fishers at the core of the reform. 5. In addition to this major reflection on policies relating to fishing, the Government decided in 2005 to concurrently implement an accelerated aquaculture development policy, justified by the objective limits of growth in fish production and by the existence of a hydrographic potential conducive to this new activity. 6. The development of aquaculture mainly seeks to offset the decline in fish production, which is a serious threat to food security and supply of proteins of animal origin to the Senegalese population, a threat that is also compounded by population growth and its consequence, as well as increased food requirements. 82

93 7. The economic and social importance of fishing in Senegal has also given the sector a key position in the current macroeconomic policies. 8. PRSP 1 ( ) therefore included fisheries as one of the key aspects of the wealth creation pillar of the strategy, thereby giving it a key role in poverty reduction efforts. This role assigned to the sector has been consolidated by PRSP I1 ( ). 9. The national accelerated growth strategy (AGS) promoted by PRSP I1 is also based on the cluster of sea and aquaculture products in the 5 national high potential economic sectors that boost accelerated growth of the national economy. 10. These recent trends of the sector policy marked by: (i) the refocusing of priorities on the development of fisheries; (ii) the promotion of aquaculture ;(iii) the development of fishery products; and (iv) optimal contribution by the sector to growth and poverty reduction, have enabled the Government to prepare a sector policy letter with the following objectives: 1 - Define the Government s strong political options on the bass of an updated diagnosis of the situation in the sector and good understanding of the current stakes; 2 - Have a reference framework to guide and ensure consistency of interventions by the Government and development partners in the fisheries and aquaculture sector over the next three years; 3 - Improve the effectiveness of the sector policy by laying down conditions for monitoring the implementation of priority actions and measures. I - Diagnostic Assessment of the Sector I. 1 - Current Situation and Context 11. The fisheries sector makes significant contribution to the country s economy, and this can be measured through a few key indicators. It accounts for about 2% of the total GDP, and provides direct and indirect jobs. It accounts for 32% of the country s total exports. Fishery products also play a key role in the diet of the populations, contributing 70% of the proteins of animal origin. 12. Conscious of huge potential of the sector, the Government of Senegal has, since independence, been implementing policies that can help to support and develop fishery activities. The objective of these policies is to enable this branch of the Senegalese economy to contribute to the diet of the populations, create jobs, and generate foreign exchange through the export of fishery products. 13. The fisheries sector is currently facing a serious environmental and socio-economic crisis, which threatens the survival of the fishing communities and could compromise the supply of fish to the populations and the fishery industry, as well as the contribution by the sector to economic growth and poverty reduction, more generally. 14. Indeed, between 1988 and 2003, the catch of demersal fish species, which provide most of the added value of the sector, declined by 32% on average. Exports of fish products also declined sharply, by about 26%. 15. This unfavorable trend is mainly due to poor fishing practices and overcapacity, leading to excess harvesting of the major coastal demersal fish species. The crisis in the sector i s currently compounded by 83

94 the fact that it has become difficult to redeploy the national industrial and artisanal fleet in the countries of the sub-region of policies that restrict access to fish resources in the EEZ of these countries. 16. With respect to inland fishing, it should be noted that successive shortages of rainfall (drought) over the past few years and the changes in the water levels of the major water ways (construction of dams and irrigation schemes) have led to significant reduction in catches. 17. Although aquaculture has existed for a long time as an activity, it has not gone beyond the embryonic stage because of many constraints that impede its development. It is a potential alternative to the decline in fish production because all over the world the volume of fish catches has remained stagnant, with landed fish attaining the exploitable potential. On the other hand, the annual growth in aquaculture production is far higher than that of sea and inland fish catch as well as livestock meat production. Consequently, appropriate efforts should be made to ensure that like in the rest of the world, aquaculture in Senegal also contributes to increasing fish production, since fish catches have obviously reached their limits. 18. At the international level, the fisheries sector is facing new challenges as regards trade, especially the new WTO trade requirements following subsidies to fisheries, the disappearance of trade preferences, the obligation of competitiveness, the advent of the EPA in 2008 and the opening of regional and subregional markets to international competition, Furthermore, access by Senegalese fish products to traditional export markets (EU in particular) will become increasingly difficult in view of the growing demands of these markets in terms of health standards. 19. This context calls for vigorous and urgent reforms to rehabilitate and develop the fisheries sector, as well as promote the development of aquaculture so that this branch of the economy should remain in the forefkont of wealth-creating sectors and participate sustainably in poverty reduction efforts. 20. The Government has already taken appropriate measures to implement these reforms, in particular: the definition of new conditions for access with the introduction of small-scale fishing permits, the opening of large worksites in the control of fishing capacities (preparation of the Sea Fishing Capacities Adjustment Programme, the National Registration Programme for small-scale fishing vessels, and audit of the coastal demersal fishing fleet), improvement of governance in the sector by introducing comanagement and creating Local Fisheries Councils, further reinforcement of the operational resources of fisheries surveillance, implementation of resource and marine environmental protection (institution of biological rest, creation of artificial reefs, integrated management of marine and coastal resources, and creation of protected areas), creation of an industrial restructuring unit and preparation of an industrial restructuring plan, actions to ensure upstream compliance with standards in the sector, creation of an Agency for the Promotion of Aquaculture (MA) and preparation of a priority programme for the development of inland fisheries and aquaculture in Senegal The sector policy letter seeks to accelerate these reforms, increase their effectiveness by considerably enhancing the consistency of government interventions, projects and programmes on the basis of clearly defined and prioritized objectives. It also aims at bringing together all initiatives by the Government and development partners (donors, NGOs) around a consensual reference document. I. 2 ANALYSIS OF MAJOR CONSTRAINTS ON THE SECTOR 22. The major constraints on the sector are technical, economic, institutional and socio-cultural in nature. They could be summarized as follows: (i) Constraints relating to exploitation of fish resources and its impacts on the marine environment: 84

95 High fishing capacities leading to overexploitation and degradation of the main deep sea stocks with the risk of collapse for some and fbll exploitation for others; Existence of an inadequately controlled access system to small-scale fishing, resulting in uncontrolled expansion of the canoe fleet; Increase in conflicts between the various types of fishing because of very high production capacities in comparison to the scarcity of fish resources; Steady degradation of marine habitats and coastal areas due to pollution and coastal erosion; (ii) Constraints relating to the current fish resources management system: - Poor fisheries management system and lack of a development system based on the integrated management of the various national fisheries using technical, social and economic measures focused on clear fisheries management objectives; - Low research capacities and financial dependence of research programmes on funds of the fishing agreement with the European Union. There is also limited scientific howledge on the major stocks caught, their exploitable potential and the allowable fishing effort on the fish resources of the national EEZ; - Lack of a coherent fisheries surveillance policy based on specific development objectives; inadequate effectiveness of the current fisheries surveillance policy; (iii) Constraints relating to the practice of small-scale fishing and its related activities: - Unsuitable and inadequate basic infrastructures in fisheries centres (landing areas, processing areas, facilities for products conservation and transport, and production channels) ; - weak fishery infrastructures management policy in terms of standards, hygiene, and traceability of products, which today clearly poses the problem of upstream compliance with standards in the sector; - poor hygiene in small fish products processing sites, with health risks for the populations; High post-catch losses; - Non-compliance with the standards, by transport vessels and facilities involved in the export of fish products to Europe; Inadequate training and poor organization of stakeholders of the various sub-sectors; Lack of regulations and control of the practice of professions relating to small-scale fishing (small-scale processing, marketing of fish) ; Financing system for activities does not contribute to effective modernization policy; Low propensity of small-scale fishers to apply safety measures at sea and adopt appropriate fishing practices; (iv) The specific constraints of the industrial sector: - Dilapidation of the industrial fleet partially accounting for the low technical performance of the fleet with a very high average age; - Steady decline in economic outputs, due to increase in fishing costs (increase in fuel costs) and decline in physical outputs. This situation is compounded by the reduced radius of action of trawlers due to restriction of shipping activities in the waters of neighboring countries. - Risks of lack of authorization to export to European markets for deep freeze ships due to non-compliance with health standards; 85

96 - - Low contribution of some segments of the fleet to the creation of added value on the national territory (deep freeze ships) ; Oversizing of inland processing plants within a context of declining fishery supplies; Decline in competitiveness of inland enterprises due mainly to increasing costs of raw materials; the situation is compounded by the low level of processing of exported products; - Continued unhealthy practices or situations for survival of some enterprises undermining the proper development of the industrial sector (sub-contracting, fraudulent bankruptcies, non-compliance with the legal standards of corporate financial management, etc.); - - Difficulties of access to stable and sustainable financing; Structural crisis in the tuna sub-sector. Constraints peculiar to inland fisheries: - Sharp decline in fish production due to successive shortage of rainfall (drought) over the past decades and changes in the water levels of the major water ways (constructions of dams and irrigation schemes) ; Obsolescence of current national regulations; Lack of complete and recent statistical data on all water expanses; Inadequate training and poor organization of stakeholders; Lack of interest by credit institutions in the sub-sector and difficulties of access to credit for fishers; Constraints relating to practice of aquaculture : - Limited knowledge on availability of water and water potential, as well as lack of studies on the aquaculture potential of some fish species and breeding sites; - Low yields of aquaculture operations; - Inadequate number of pilot farms required for extending the experiments, and providing the inputs and close guidance; Inadequate number and quality of supervisory stafc - Difficulties of access to land; Inefficient coordination between Research and Development ; - High costs of aquaculture operations and inputs (feed) which affect the production costs and profitability of the activity; - Lack of an enabling environment for the private sector, skills, and medium and longterm capital; - High competition from the other types of activities (agriculture, stockbreeding or fisheries) deemed more profitable; - Poor commercial positioning of livestock products on the markets, particularly in comparison to fishing products (prices, distribution network, promotion, especially for new products in relation to existing eating habits); Institutional constraints on the sector: - Inadequate number and quality of technical, administrative and financial supervisory staff for the sector given the current challenges, particularly those concerning management and development of fisheries, the restructuring of the sector downstream and ensuring compliance with hygiene and sanitation standards, the development of aquaculture; 86

97 - Failure to adjust institutions in the sector to the new challenges of fisheries development. This delay has resulted in latent difficulty for the administrative, professional, co-management and research structures in optimally carrying out the new fisheries development missions. It also sometimes reveals inconsistencies in the practices of these institutions ; Low analysis, monitoring and coordination capacity o f administrative structures; Inappropriate administrative institutions and financing systems for small-scale inland and industrial fishing activities ; Diversity and lack of coordination of interventions by government services, NGOs and donors in the sector; Poor information systems to support sector analysis and planning, particularly as regards the economic aspects. I1 - DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES OF THE SECTOR Development Obiectives 23. The current fisheries context in Senegal is marked by national government policies that give priority to poverty reduction. These government policies are consistent with the current diagnosis of the sector, and present the sector challenges and stakes. PRSP 11, an economic and social policy document for growth and poverty reduction, is the reference framework for activities by the Government, development partners and other stakeholders (civil society and private sector, in particular). 24. The poverty reduction strategy paper (PRSP) includes fisheries as one of the strategy s pillars for creating wealth, thereby assigning it a key role in the poverty reduction drive. 25. The strategic objectives of the sector in PRSP I1 are to: (i) ensure sustainable management and restoration of fishery resources; (ii) satisfy domestic demand for fish products; (iii) develop fishery resources and modernize small-scale fisheries; (iv) promote professionalization and better qualification of stakeholders of the fisheries and processing sector; (v) improve the financing system of fisheries and aquaculture activities; and (vi) strengthen regional and subregional cooperation in fisheries. 26. The accelerated growth strategy, which is part and parcel of PRSP 11, has particularly reinforced the role and position of fisheries and aquaculture activities by including the sector in the group of 5 high potential growth clusters with proven growth generating effect on all the other economic sectors. 27. For the fisheries sub-sector, the main challenge o f the sector policy as defined by the AGS is the regeneration of fishing income and increased value added of inland activities. The nature of this challenge is clearly indicated in the AGS paper as follows: The development model used in the fisheries sector for the past many years has certainly led to dissipation of fishing income (value o f natural resources). The income and economic benefits that can be derived from the exploitation of fish resources through efficient as well as job and value added creating activities today constitute the main challenge o f the cluster. Good management of fish resources based on sustainability principles (economic, biological and social) would help to meet the challenge of growth posed by the Accelerated Growth Strategy project. Consequently, the capacity to enable the sector to produce wealth consistent with the intrinsic value of the natural resources is the cornerstone o f the accelerated economic growth policy for Senegalese fisheries. 87

98 28. It therefore appears clearly that in the prioritization of strategic objectives of the fisheries sector, the AGS gives top priority to the objective of sustainable management and restoration of fish resources which, if achieved, would generate the largely dissipated fishing income. The sector policy takes into account this expression o f priority, and will ensure that the actions of the Government and development partners, as well as the available facilities, are adjusted and made consistent with this necessity. 29. As regards aquaculture, the implementation of the sector policy will be based on the National Aquaculture Development Programme (PNDA) which has already been validated in an inter-ministerial council. The resources to be mobilized for the aquaculture AGS will contribute to the implementation of the PNDA. 30. The overall goal of the PNDA is to revitalize and popularize aquaculture to make it a quick alternative in the poverty reduction drive. Specifically, the objectives of the PNDA are to: - Contribute to increasing aquaculture production to tons / year by 2010 ; - Contribute to reducing the fishing effort; - Contribute to narrowing the diet gap of the populations ; - Establish breeding techniques in rural areas; - Develop interest among the people in the practice of aquaculture ; - Increase the incomes of the disadvantaged populations by creating jobs and productive and sustainable wealth (reduction of rural exodus) ; - Revitalize the oyster farming sub-sector Development Strategies Objective 1 : Sustainable manapement and restoration of fish resources and their habitats: 31. To achieve this objective, the Government will give priority to strategies centred on the following areas: a) Control and management of maritime fishing capacities to meet the allowable catch potentials: To that end, emphasis will be laid on the following actions deemed to be of priority: a.1 Adjustment of maritime fishing capacities: There is already wide consensus among the stakeholders of the sectors on this action, and has already resulted in a programme that will help to quickly and considerably reduce the fishing effort and adopt support measures for the sector. Mobilization of development partners to finance this programme i s one of the current priorities of the Government. The adjustment of fishing capacities will also take into account the results of the audit of the coastal demersal fishing fleet intended to verify the technical characteristics o f ships and their compliance with the laws and regulations governing registration and fishing permits. a.2 Registration of small vessels through the National Vessels Registration Programme a.3 Consolidation of the national fishing vessels register. a.4: A national fishing capacity management plan will be prepared, and it will be used by the Government as a framework for controlling fishing capacity in the future. b) Control of access to fishery resources: The control of access to fishery resources will give priority to: 88

99 b.1 Dissemination and effectiveness of small-scale fishing permit: The institution of a small-scale fishing permit and its effective application are urgently required for control of access to fishery resources in the small-scale fishing sub-sector. b.2 Establishment of an access rights concession system for fishery resources so as to regulate access according to zones and groups of species. In small-scale fishing, the recipients of user rights concessions will be the new local institutions created to empower, support and ensure the participation of fishing communities in the management of fisheries (local fisheries councils, national fisheries consultative council, co-management structures, other grassroots initiatives, etc.). A contractual framework governing the conditions under which fishing communities will benefit from user rights concessions will be prepared by the fisheries government services in consultation with users representatives. 32. The establishment of a concession system for access to fishery resources in small-scale fishing will also be considered as a means of accelerating and facilitating the introduction and management of fishing permits within the framework of transfer of responsibility. As regards industrial fishing, the preparation of fisheries development plans will help to define possible and required improvements to the current fishing rights concession system (licences), taking into account the set objectives and improvement measures (management by TAC, QIT, etc.) c) Introduction of fisheries development plans: The gradual introduction of fisheries development plans, starting with the most endangered stocks, is the only way of ensuring sustainability of fishery resources and activity (biological, economic, and environmental sustainability). These plans will crown the adjustment of fishing capacities and access control measures; d) Promotion of a policy of conservation of marine habitat and fishery resources under the integrated management of coastal areas: This is an abiding concern, in view of the gradual degradation of marine ecosystems. The Government will, in consultation with development partners, professional institutions and the civil society, ensure rational, integrated and sustainable development of the marine and coastal environments. 33. Furthermore, the Government will develop a national strategy based mainly on the immersion of artificial reefs and creation of a network of marine protected areas; these instruments should be considered as development tools, and will therefore be included in the development policy and the general user rights concession plan. The resource conservation policy will also be promoted through ecosystem approaches. e) Enhancement and adaptation of fisheries research: Fisheries research, which is intended to play a key role in the development of fisheries, will be reinforced and geared mainly towards the development of fisheries, taking into account the scarcity of some species, the inflow of new operators, and multi-faceted threats and aggressions of the marine ecosystem. 34. However, it should be noted that in view of the serious difficulties facing fisheries research in Senegal over the past few years, it is necessary to take stock of the situation as soon as possible by examining the scientific, institutional and human constraints and weaknesses so as to define a restructuring and capacity building plan, and thereby improve its contribution to the management of fisheries. Taking stock of the current situation will mainly concern the CRODT, as well as reflection on contribution to national fisheries research efforts in Senegal, particularly the IRD and UCAD. 35. The Government is committed to providing appropriate, stable and regular resources for fisheries research as soon as the activity is diagnosed and restructured. f) Optimization of fisheries monitoring, control and surveillance resources: Fisheries surveillance has absorbed a lot of resources over the past five years in terms of unprecedented investments by the 89

100 Government: procurement o f 6 seaward patrol crafts, construction of new generations of shore stations, installation of a coastal radar system, installation of the VMS, procurement o f a new aircraft, etc. 36. However, the results obtained are still unsatisfactory. In the short and medium term, emphasis will be laid less on increasing investment resources than on turning them to account through rational use of existing resources. It will be necessary, in particular, to provide budgetary allocations required for their smooth operation. It will also involve reviewing surveillance in order to increase its efficiency and effectiveness. 37. To that end, strategic reflection will be conducted on strategic and operational surveillance options, the selection of resources, as well as the appropriate institutional framework so as to place fisheries surveillance at the service of institutions responsible for fisheries development. Obiective 2: Satisfaction of domestic demand 38. Promote the inland fisheries and aquaculture sector: The Government will revitalize inland fisheries by boosting inland fisheries research, protecting fishery reserves and spawning grounds, creating a statistical database, and regulating access. 39. As regards aquaculture, priority will be given to subsistence aquaculture because the related production will increase supply of the products, as well as guarantee food security and supplies to industries. 40. The Government will promote its development in areas with high fish-farming potential, on the basis of technical and economic studies that guarantee profitability. The sector policy will be based mainly on the implementation of the PNDA. The Agency for the Promotion of Aquaculture will be the linchpin of the implementation of this programme. Priority will also be given to creating conditions conducive to the development of aquaculture in Senegal, in particular: - acceleration of the implementation of cross-cutting reforms concerning the effective implementation of land security measures; - emergence of new feed manufacturing operators for the production of feed with high protein content; - exemption of inputs from taxes; - construction of basic economic infrastructures especially to ensure access to water, the development of ponds, oyster farming parks, distribution facilities (access roads, markets and - processinglstorage areas, etc.) ; training and support for pilot fish farmers. 41. Reduce post-catch losses: The satisfaction of domestic demand will also require minimization of post-catch losses through increase in fresh fish conservation infrastructures in coastal areas as well as in the hinterland. The refrigeration programme, the first phase of which has been completed, will be one o f the instruments for implementing this policy. The implementation of the second phase requires the mobilization of development partners. The promotion of smallscale processing, through the development of quality infrastructures and improved production technologies, will also contribute to reducing post-catch losses. Obiective 3: Optimal development of resources 90

101 42. In view of the scarcity of fishery resources, the fisheries development policy can no longer be based on increasing fish landings, but rather on better conservation of production, as well as promotion of aquaculture products. Further contribution by the sector to the creation of national wealth and satisfaction of domestic demand for fishery products requires increased conservation of resources. This idea is one of the key aspects of the sector accelerated growth strategy. 43. The theme of conservation of resources is also a key challenge in view of the growing demands for compliance with health standards on conventional export markets. To that end, special emphasis will be laid on safeguarding and maintaining approval for export to EU markets. The following strategic activities will be carried out in the conservation of resources: 44. As reaards small-scale fisheries. The construction of infrastructures to conserve production and enable small-scale fisheries professionals to carry out their activities under the best working, hygiene and quality conditions. Henceforth, infrastructures to be constructed will strictly comply with the standards so as to guarantee quality, hygiene and in the medium term, traceability of products. Special emphasis will be laid on the health conditions of vessels, as well as production and small-scale processing sites. 45. Future investments by the Government will also be devoted to the rehabilitation of existing infrastructures to ensure that they comply with the standards. Gradually, and in a realistic and methodical manner, the HACCP concept will be extended to the small-scale fisheries sub-sector. Efforts will be made to improve fresh products processing and marketing conditions, with special emphasis on preserving hygiene and quality, as well as reducing losses through improved production, processing and marketing methods. Rehabilitation of the processing and marketing professions by preparing and implementing regulations that define the conditions for access and practice of these professions. Access to these various professions will also be regulated by introducing professional cards. 46. As reaards industrial fisheries The sector policy will give priority to maintaining the achievements of the policy to ensure that enterprises comply with the standards. The sector policy will in the short term be mainly based on the implementation of the emergency programme to safeguard national approval, in particular: enhancement of the performance of the competent grassroots authority; upgrading of production plants (establishments and deep freeze and ice vessels) ; strengthening the capacity of technical staff of the fisheries industry through training activities for better understanding of the HACCP system; reinforcement of the regulatory framework by issuing a number of Orders on the control of fishery products; awareness campaigns and support for laboratory officers in the quality assurance process for accreditation; 47. Rehabilitation and restructuring of the industrial processing sector on the basis of actions identified by the sector accelerated growth strategy. The actions will concern: - the preparation of a restructuring programme and establishment of an industrial restructuring fund; - the conduct of legal, accounting, fiscal and real property assessments required for projects to restructure enterprises in the form of mergers, repurchases, equity participations, joint-ventures, etc. - the reinforcement of controls and introduction of sanctions for unethical practices (subcontracting) ; 91

102 - the freeze on the establishment of new industrial plants for a period of three years in niches considered as saturated; - Facilitate, through intermediation (information and guidance platform), access by enterprises to the current support mechanisms (upgrading programme, FPE, etc.) 48. Improvement of the functioning of the industrial processing sub-sector through incentives for landing of fishery products; Revitalization of the industrial processing sub-sector, as soon as it is restructured and rehabilitated. The Government will make efforts to mobilize long-term resources from donors to support the development of enterprises; Revitalization of the tuna sub-sector, focusing mainly on the merger of the tuna platform. Obiective 4: Qualification of professionals in the sector 49. Literacy education, as well as the upgrading and improvement of the qualifications of professionals of the sector, constitute a key factor for supporting the proposed reforms and achievement of the sector development objectives. Consequently, the Government will initiate training and further training programmes for the various stakeholders of the sector. Pnority will be given to themes on the management of fishery resources, responsible fishing practices, the safety of small-scale fishers, hygiene and quality of products during production, handling, processing and marketing, the acquisition of basic knowledge required for the various professions (fishers, fish traders, as well as fish processors and distributors). Obiective 5: Financing of activities 50. This will involve providing professionals of the sector with financial instruments to meet investment and operating requirements under conditions compatible with sustainable exploitation of the resources and financial viability of fishery activities. As regards small-scale fisheries, the Government will look for and put in place lines of credit to finance the professionals. These financial resources will in priority be geared towards micro-finance institutions and decentralized financing systems that are currently operating in the sub-sector and have demonstrated their dynamism and efficiency With respect to industrial fisheries, the Government will put in place an appropriate financing system based on long-term resources to support the restructuring and modernization of the fisheries industry, as well as short-term resources to meet the cash requirements of enterprises. To that end, the financing structures will be used to finance and promote SMEs (FPE, ADPME). The Government will also look for new specific lines of credit from development partners, and domicile them in appropriate financing institutions Policies and Support Measures 52. To guarantee its efficiency, the proposed reform policy will be based on renovated and operational fisheries services and legal and institutional framework. It will also involve participatory management, coupled with strong and representative professional organizations and the establishment of access rights concessions for users of resources so as to ultimately achieve effective co-management o f the sector. 53. Lastly, in view of the difficulty, and in particular, inefficiency of fisheries management on purely national bases, iaternational cooperation, and particularly sub-regional cooperation, will be required. The proposed policies and support measures will be defined around the following pillars: 54. Building the-capacities of the administration : The fisheries and aquaculture administration will be provided with adequate human and material resources to meet the current challenges and priorities: new fisheries management and development policy, appropriate maritime surveillance, enhanced fisheries 92

103 research, promotion of subsistence aquaculture, restructuring and modernization of the fisheries industry, ensuring compliance with hygiene and quality standards in the production, transport, processing and marketing sub-sectors, and promotion of a more efficient monitoring, planning and evaluation mechanism. 55. The Government will ensure that these priorities are fully taken into account in budget programming, training of human resources, and the recruitment of new employees. 56. Improvement of the institutional mechanism. The current institutional mechanism will be adjusted to increase the efficiency of administrative structures and streamline them. The proposed reform will ensure that the newly created structures best reflect the key missions assigned to the Ministry of Fisheries and the structures to be put in place. It will take into account the limited human resources constraint, and consequently avoid any dispersal that could undermine the efficiency of the structures put in place. The new institutional division will adequately cover the missions, optimal use of available human resources, clear responsibility assignment between the structures, as well as coordination and synergy of interventions. 57. The fisheries legal framework will be revised and supplemented to adapt it to developments, and take into account the new fisheries management and development measures, as well as the Government s option to promote aquaculture activities. 58. The new mechanism will help to ensure the proper implementation of development plans, and in particular modify the conditions of access to fishery resources by introducing an equitable and transparent user rights concession system and taking into account all the uses (conservation, recreational uses, and commercial uses). The revision will also concern the practice and development conditions of the aquaculture activity. 59. Capacity building for professional organizations.-professional organizations (small-scale and industrial) will play a key role in the implementation of the new fisheries and aquaculture policy. Consequently, the Government will make efforts to enhance the dynamic role of these organizations by giving them technical and financial support to enable them to develop the various sub-sectors of the sector, represent more effectively the fishing and fisheries breeding trades, and participate in the management of the sector. 60. However, like the administrative institutions, the professional organizations will be placed within a new paradigm, determined mainly by the development of fisheries. They must be prepared for changes which will certainly occur in representation procedures (producer organizations) as well as in the transfer of responsibility from the Government as regards management on the basis of specifications Strengthening of cooperation. The policy to strengthen cooperation will continue with international, regional and sub-regional organizations, especially within ICCAT, COMHAFAT, WAEMU, ECOWAS, OMVS, OMVG and the Sub-regional Fisheries Commission (CSRP), etc. for the following reasons: (i) the existence of shared stocks or stocks of common interest; (ii) the mobility of national industrial and small-scale fleets; (iii) Fisheries agreements; (iv) The common problem of adjustment of institutions to the new conditions of scarcity of fishery resources and the increasing role of Regional and Sub-regional Fisheries Organizations in the countries of the sub-region. 93