Turkey - In-Situ Conservation of Genetic Diversity Project

Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: 19248 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT TURKEY IN-SITU CONSERVATION OF GENETIC DIVERSITY PROJECT GEF GRANT NO. 28632-TU April 30, 1999 Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development Unit Europe and Central Asia Region 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.  CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (as of March 31, 1999) Currency Unit = Turkish Lira US$1 = TL 357,859 TURKEY FISCAL YEAR January 1 to December 31 AVERAGE EXCHANGE RATES (per US$) Jan 1993 Jan 1994 Jan 1995 Jan 1996 Jan 1997 Jan 1998 Jan 1999 Mar 1999 8,694 15,164 40,157 60,291 111,652 211,141 320,299 357,859 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Metric System ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS GDAR - General Directorate of Agricultural Research GDF - General Directorate of Forestry GDNPGW General Directorate of National Parks, Game and Wildlife GEF - Global Environment Facility GMZ - Gene Management Zone IBRD - International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. ICR - Implementation Completion Report lMSC - Inter-Ministerial Steering Committee MARA- Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs MOE - Ministry of Environment MOF - Ministry of Forestry PIC - Project Implementation Committee RDF - Regional Directorates of Forestry SAR - Staff Appraisal Report SPO - State Planning Organization Vice President: Johannes F. Linn (ECAVP) Country Director: Ajay Chhibber (ECC06) Sector Director Kevin M. Cleaver (ECSSD) Sector Leader: John Hayward, (ECCSD) Team Leader: Nedret Durutan, Agriculturalist, (ECCTR)  FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT TURKEY IN-SITU CONSERVATION OF GENETIC DIVERSITY PROJECT GEF Grant No. 28632-TU Contents Preface .............................................................. i Evaluation Summary .............................................................. ii Part I. Project Implementation Assessment ..................................................... 1 A. Project Origin and Objectives .1 B. Achievement of Project Obectives. 2 C. Iniplementation Record and Major Factors Affecting the Project. 6 D. Project Sustainability. 8 E. Bank Peformance. 9 F. Borrower's Performance .10 G. Assessment of Performance and Outcome . 10 H. Future Operations.1 I. Key Lessons Learned .II Part II. Statistical Tables ............... . 14 TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENTS .14 TABLE 2: RELATED BANK LOANS/CREDITS .1 6 TABLE 3: PROJECT TIMETABLE .17 TABLE 4: LOAN DISBURSEMENTS:CUMUI.ATIVE ESTIMATED AND ACTUAL 17 TABLE 5: KEY INDICATORS FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION .17 TABLE 6: KEY INDICATORS FOR PROJECT OPERATION ............................... 17 TABLE 7: STUDIES INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT. 18 TABLE 8A: PROJECT COSTS ..................................................................... 19 TABLE 8B: PROJECT FINANCING .1 9 TABLE 9: ECONOMIC COSTS AND BENEFITS. 19 TABLE 10: STATUS OF LEGAL COVENANTs .20 TABLE I1: COMPLIANCE WITH OPERATIONAL MANUAL STATEMENTS.. 21 TABLE 12: BANK RESOURCES: STAFF INPUTS . 21 TABLE 13: BANK RESOURCES: MISSIONS .22 Appendices: A. Borrower's Contribution to the ICR . Map IBRD 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 autiorization.  IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT TURKEY IN-SITU CONSERVATION OF GENETIC DIVERSITY PROJECT GEF Grant No. 28632-TU Preface This is the Implementation Completion Report (ICR) for the In-Situ Conservation of Genetic Diversity Project for which GEF Grant No. 28632 in the amount of 3,710,000 SDR equivalent (US$5,194,000) was approved on 03/11/1993 and made effective on 03/25/1993. The Grant was closed on September 30, 1998, instead of September 30, 1997, the original Closing Date. A total of US$5,125,520 was disbursed. The remaining undisbursed amount of $148,103.87 will be canceled. The ICR was prepared by Nedret Durutan, Task Team Leader in the Turkey Field Office, and reviewed by, Gottfried Ablasser, Portfolio Manager, John F. Stewart, Biodiversity Specialist (ECSSD), Mahesh Sharma, GEF Coordinator (ENV), and Bee Ban Gooi, Senior Operations Analyst (ECC06). Ministries of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Forestry and Environment jointly provided written comments on the draft ICR that are included as Appendix A to the ICR. The preparation of this ICR is based on the material in the project file and the Final Progress Report prepared by the three line agencies. i  IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT TURKEY IN-SITU CONSERVATION OF GENETIC DIVERSITY PROJECT GEF Grant No. 28632-TU Evaluation Summary Introduction 1. Diverse geological and climatic conditions of Turkey have given rise to unique plant species represented nowhere else in the world. Over 30% of the 8,800 species found in the country are endemic to Turkey. The country is the center of origin and a source of genetic diversity for globally important plants which were first domesticated from wild species and still exist in Turkey. There are also unique adaptations of woody species which occur at the extreme geographical limits of their distribution and are found nowhere else. Primitive landraces and wild crop relatives from Turkey continue to provide new sources of important traits needed to maintain and improve agricultural production worldwide. To continue this, these plants need to be maintained in their natural settings (in-situ) where they continue to interact with their natural pests, predators and the environment. 2. In 1991, the World Bank/UNDP mission provided information on the GEF program, and assisted the Government in selecting several projects of priority to Turkey to be further developed for GEF funding. It was agreed to prepare a project for "in-situ coonservation of plant genetic diversity". A project preparation mission was conducted in the spring of 1992. The Project, which was appraised in June 1992 and became effective in March 1993, was the first of its kind to protect both woody and non-woody wild crop relatives from a multi-species approach. It provided a model applicable in other parts of the world. Project Objectives and Components 3. The objectives of the Project were; (i) to identify and establish in-situ conservation areas for the protection of genetic resources and wild relatives of non- woody and woody species and associated forest germplasm (ii) to develop institutional capacity for preparing and implementing a national strategy for in-situ conservation. The Project had 5 components: i) site surveys and inventories, ii) gene management zones, iii) data management, iv) national plan for in-situ conservation, and v) institutional strengthening. The aim was to test and develop a new approach for the conservation of genetic diversity never tried before on a large scale anywhere else in the world. 4. The Project objectives were realistic in terms of the Borrower's capabilities. Turkey, through the Plant Genetic Resources Research Institute of the Ministry of ii  Agriculture and Rural Affairs (MARA), had considerable experience with ex-situ conservation to maintain landraces and wild relatives of crops which are available to national and international crop improvement programs. For woody species, the experience was limited to areas managed by the Ministry of Forestry (MOF); to conserving. rare and unique species and few specially protected areas by Ministry of Environment (MOE) and to protecting rare species which fall outside the traditional interests of MOF and MARA. However, for these areas, no detailed studies were conducted. The Project therefore initiated and developed a mechanism to foster the on- going national programs for identifying, designating and managing areas for in-situ conservation of nationally and globally significant species. 5. The Project objectives were met. Under (i) above, detailed survey and inventory work was carried out in 3 priority areas located in Aegean, Mediterranean and ',outheastern Anatolia Regions, and the amount and distribution of genetic diversity were assessed. As a result, 22 Gene Management Zones (GMZs) were established as in-situ conservation areas to protect genetic resources and wild relatives of non-woody and woody species for permanent protection and management as natural areas. The project can play a major role in developing new, more productive strains of economically and ecologically important crops and trees. 6. Under (ii), the institutional capacity in Turkey was developed for preparing and implementing a national strategy for in-situ conservation. The technical assistance, training and preparation of the National Plan enabled MARA, MOF and MOE to; i) understand the importance of the existing genetic diversity and in-situ conservation, ii) prepare a strategic plan that would ensure the protection of wild crop relatives and forest genetic resources in their native habitat beyond this Project, iii) conduct survey/inventory work for in-situ purposes, iv) conduct genetic analyses to assess the amnount and distribution of genetic diversity, and v) manage data through a range of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Remote Sensing applications. The Project set up a coordination mechanism which enabled the line agencies to work together. I[mplementation Experience and Results r7. In the first two years of the Project, actual disbursements were lower than those predicted in the SAR. The delays were mainly due to insufficient/lack of experience in Bank procedures and the government's austerity measures. In spite of these initial delays, the overall implementation record was good. Excellent project management, particularly in MARA and MOF, and later in MOE helped in overcoming these (lifficulties. 8. The original Grant allocation included an amount of US$350,000 for civil works. At Project closing US$180,000 of this was disbursed to finance the renovation and rehabilitation of laboratories, greenhouses and the GIS Center. The Project provided lJS$2.6 million for goods, and with reallocations, a total of US$3,025,322, had been disbursed to finance; i) vehicles, ii) isoenzyme laboratories, iii) GIS Center, iv) office equipment and supplies, v) audio-visual equipment for extension and research work, and iii  vi) books and periodicals. In 1994, as a result of the Government's stabilization and reform program, restrictions were applied to vehicle procurement. The field work was therefore carried out by rented vehicles, or a limited number of institute pick-ups until 1997, when the planned vehicles were procured. 9. The original Grant allocation was US$1.7 million for technical assistance and training, US$1,455,216 was disbursed. The allocation for transport and accommodation was US$180,000. However, with reallocations, US$309,255 was used under this Category mainly to finance field trips and attendance to meetings. The Project allocated US$270,000 from which US$212,703 was used to finance the cost of operation and maintenance of goods purchased by the Project and the cost of labor for field and laboratory activities. 10. Project conditionality and legal covenants were satisfactorily adhered to. Progress reports and audits were submitted on time and in good order, and project administration was excellent. The Bank's performance in project preparation, appraisal and supervision was also highly satisfactory. During implementation, there was an overlap among team leaders, considerable team work, high quality and continuity of the Bank's input. This has contributed substantially to the mutual trust between the implementing agencies and the Bank. The transfer of task management responsibility to the field provided ; i) proximity to the client which enhanced client responsiveness and efficiency as well as cost savings, ii) continuous rather than episodic supervision. Monthly coordination meetings and procurement and disbursement workshops organized and hosted by the Bank's Resident Mission strengthened team spirit and helped the agencies to develop their skills in managing Bank supported projects. 11. The Project achieved its objectives because of the devoted, competent project staff in MARA and MOF. MOE's performance was less satisfactory than the others, despite committed staff at the working level. Frequent changes at the ministerial level in MOE resulted in i) varying levels of ownership and commitment to the Project, and ii) shifting of implementation responsibilities among various departments. However, most of the delays were compensated later with the designation of a competent coordinator. 12. The Project outcome is rated as highly satisfactory. It achieved all of its major objectives; in-situ conservation areas (22 GMZs) for target species were established, institutional capacity in Turkey for preparing and implementing a national strategy for in- situ conservation was developed. Due to biological and scientific reasons, the Grant Closing Date was extended for a year which unfortunately caused delays in the final selection of the GMZs. However, the extended period was fully utilized to complete the work and achieve the Project objectives. 13. In view of the growing public awareness about the conservation of natural resources, the Government will continue to be committed to the Project objectives and conserve the genetic diversity in the designated GMZs. Until the National Plan becomes effective, these areas will be managed following the GMZ Management Plans and the collaboration established during the Project. For designation of new GMZs, the National iv  Plan will provide the basis. The crucial issue will be the provision of recurrent budgets. However, governments within the fundamental reform program of the public sector, will continue to reduce state interventions. In addition to the Governments' provision of recurrent budgets, further key issues for the future include the continuing commitment of tho Turkish government, the commitment of users of the plant genetic resources and natural ecosystems, keeping staff skills current and the update of equipment. The National Plan foresees the establishment of a "National Fund" for the sustainability of the conservation of genetic diversity. Furthermore, since the ultimate goal was to provide on an. on-going basis for now and into the future, the broad genetic base needed globally for sustainable agriculture and forestry, ownership by the international community reflected by provision of grant fLnds will also secure sustainability. 14. Throughout history, Turkey has been at the crossroads of cultures from Europe, Asia and Africa where diverse ancient cultivated varieties or landraces have evolved under the influence of natural and human selection pressure. Landraces which provide useful genes in crop improvement programs were not included in the Project. However, there is a strong need to develop i) methods to promote conservation of landraces in the comniunities where they are cultivated, and ii) programs which require linking economic incentives with cultivation of traditional varieties. A follow-up project could be designed to address these needs and provide support for the participatory management of the GMZs established by the Project. 15. There are a number of lessons to be learned from this Project: