Ghana - Coastal Wetlands Management Project

Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: 20668 GH IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT (TF-28619) ON A GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL TRUST FUND GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR5.0 MILLION (US$7.2 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA FOR A COASTAL WETLANDS MANAGEMENT PROJECT June 30, 2000 Rural Development m Country Department 10 Africa Region This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.  CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective December 31, 1999) Currency Unit = Cedi (C) C 1,000 = US$ 0.38 US$ 1.00 = C 3,450 FISCAL YEAR January 1 December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ADB Agriculture Development Bank CEDEP Center for the Development of People CISF Community Investment Support Fund CWMP Coastal Wetlands Management Project CWPOC Coastal Wetlands Project Operations Committee CZIMP Coastal Zones Indicative Management Plan DANIDA Danish International Development Agency DRIF District Rural Infrastructure Fund EPA Environmental Protection Agency GEF Global Environment Facility GET Global Environment Trust Fund GOG Government of Ghana GWD/WD Ghana Wildlife Department/Wildlife Department GWS Ghana Wildlife Society ISODEC Integrated Social Development Center KVIP Kumasi Ventilated Improved Pit (latrine) LI Legislative Instrument NEAP National Environmental Action Plan NGO Non-Governmental Organization PC Program Coordinator PMU Project Management Unit RSPB Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (UK) SMC Site Management Committee VIP Village Infrastructure Project WMU Wetlands Management Unit WRI Water Research Institute Vice President: Callisto Madavo Country Manager/Director: Peter Harrold Sector Manager/Director: Jean-Paul Chausse Task Team Leader/Task Manager: Patience Mensah  FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY CONTENTS Page No. 1. Project Data I 2. Principal Performance Ratings I 3. Assessment of Development Objective and Design, and of Quality at Entry 2 4. Achievement of Objective and Outputs 4 5. Major Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcome 15 6. Sustainability 16 7. Bank and Borrower Performance 18 8. Lessons Learned 21 9. Partner Comments 21 10. Additional Information 24 Annex 1. Key Performance Indicators/Log Frame Matrix 26 Annex 2. Project Costs and Financing 28 Annex 3. Economic Costs and Benefits 30 Annex 4. Bank Inputs 31 Annex 5. Ratings for Achievement of Objectives/Outputs of Components 33 Annex 6. Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance 34 Annex 7. List of Supporting Documents 35 Annex 8. Beneficiary Survey Results 36 Annex 9. Stakeholder Workshop Results 40 Annex 1O. Mission Aid Memoire 46 Annex 1. Borrower's Contribution 55 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.   Project ID: P000833 Project Name: COASTAL WETLANDS MANAGEMENT Team Leader: Patience Mensah TL Unit: AFC1O ICR Type: Intensive Learning Model (ILM) of ICR Report Date: June 29, 2000 1. Project Data IVame: COASTAL WETLANDS MANAGEMENT L/C/TF Number: TF-28619 CountryiDepartment: GHANA Region: Africa Regional Office Sector/subsector: AA - Agriculture Adjustment KEY DATES Original Revised/Actual PCD: 04/15/91 Effective: 03/12/93 03/12/93 Appraisal: 02/29/92 MTR: 10/01/96 10/01/96 Approval: 08/28/92 Closing: 12/31/97 12/31/99 Borrower/lImplementing Agency: GOVERNMENT OF GHANA/Ghana Wildlife Department/Wildlife Division and Environmental Protection Agency Other Partners: Ghana Wildlife Society STAFF Current At Appraisal Vice President: Callisto E. Madavo Edward K. Jaycox Country Manager: Peter C. Harrold Magdi Iskander Sector Manager: Jean-Paul Chausse John Joyce Team Leader at ICR: Patience Mensah Ian Hill ICR Primary Author: Lucie Tran 2. Principal Performance Ratings (HS=Highly Satisfactory, S=Satisfactory, U=Unsatisfactory, HL=Highly Likely, L=Likely, UN=Unlikely, HUN=Highly Unlikely, HU=Highly Unsatisfactory, H=High, SU=Substantial, M=Modest, N=Negligible) Outcome: S Sustainability: L Institutional Development Impact: M Bank Performance: U Borrower Performance: U QAG (if available) ICR Quality at Entry: S Project at Risk at Any Time: Yes - Outcome is rated as satisfactory since the funds were usedfor the purposes intended; project activities were carried out and work well and the global objectives of the GEF were met. - Sustainability is likely given further donor support to be obtainedfronm the Netherlands, and the arrangemlents nmade for a cost center within the Government's medium-term framework for Wetlands Conservation. Salaries and basic recurrent costs for WD are being provided for annually (see Partner Comments - Section 9) and all CWMP staff are retainedcfor continuationj of project activities.  3. Assessment of Development Objective and Design, and of Quality at Entry 3.1 Original Objective: To maintain the ecological integrity of five key coastal wetland areas by involving the people who derive their livelihood from these ecosystems in the planning and implementation of management programs; to identify and monitor the common resources that benefit the human and bird populations in the wetlands, and manage them to maintain critical bird habitat without unduly restricting the options of people to derive benefit from the resources. The project would develop capabilities at government and community level for implementing the program, fund baseline and monitoring studies, and a study on development options that would be compatible with sustainable use of the environment. The project's objectives were clear, and consistent with the Bank's environmental conservation and development strategies in Ghana. The project's main objectives to preserve natural habitats, improve biodiversity conservation, and promote community participation were consistent with the primary objectives of the Bank's safeguard policies of "doing no harm" and sought to go beyond them in achieving beneficial outcomes. When this component of the Environmental Resources Management Project was being prepared it was selected as one of the innovative operations of the Bank. The objectives were more complex for the executing agency to implement than anticipated at appraisal because it required a range of policy changes and institutional improvements from the government and from various institutions and because activities covered under the project were dispersed over a wide geographic area making it difficult to use efficiently the limited resources available. The project's implementation unit, the Ghana Game and Wildlife Department (GWD) (later to become the Wildlife Department (WD)) had to transform its traditional command, control philosophy approach at the beginning of the project's life to a more collaborative, consultative approach during implementation. 3.2 Revised Objective: No change. 3.3 Original Components: The original project components as listed in the Staff Appraisal Report focussed on the following activities: (a) Project Management. This component supported the Wildlife Department (WD) of the Ministry of Lands and Forestry (MLF) for management of the coastal wetlands project, including staffing the WD, providing training, equipment and transport. The component funded baseline surveys and regular monitoring of ecological and socio-economic conditions in the coastal wetlands, and the status of lagoon fisheries. Monitoring was to be carried out by local consultancies (universities and other specialists), and would be closely linked to regular monitoring of environmental quality, supported under the Ghana Environmental Management Project (GERMP) of which this project forms a component. Some studies of the environmental implications of various development options were to be financed under GERMP and linked with studies to develop a national wetland conservation strategy. The project supported public awareness programs through training in environmental education to WD staff and the Wildlife Clubs of Ghana, a junior wing of the NGO, the Ghana Wildlife Society - GWS). The project would also finance production and dissemination of education materials, sponsor workshops and underwrite awareness and education activities to be organized by the GWS. (b) Site Management and Demarcation. Financing was made available for boundary surveys and demarcation. The project would also fmance the construction of observation posts, an education and a r esearch center at Songor, simple on-site education centers at other sites, habitat enhancement and -2 -  community development activities. The wetlands program was linked to community-based land and water management, supported under the GERMP, through the promotion of measures to reduce soil erosion and improve vegetative cover in the immediate catchments of the wetland sites. (c) Investment Support Fund. The project made available an investment support fund to finance income-generating options in the wetlands that are compatible with maintaining wetland ecology. (d) Sakumo Effluent Disposal. The Sakumo Lagoon, which lies on the westem margin of Tema, and a new sewage treatment plant at the time intended to discharge treated effluent into the lagoon. The natural outlet of the lagoon is severely restricted by a road and railway embankment. The project provided funds for the construction of a pipe and marine outfall that would discharge the treatment effluent into the sea instead of the lagoon. This was to have minimized the risk of nutrient build-up and consequent entrophication in the lagoon, with no adverse effects in the surf zone due to rapid dilution. The project also financed a study of the hydrology of the lagoon and possible effects of dredging and of modifying the existing sluice and culvert through the railway and road embankment to restore natural tidal flow and improve habitat and water quality. There were no Bank-financed projects in Ghana specifically for environmental operations at the time of project design. However, much of the previous IDA lending for sectoral projects had a direct impact on the environment, particularly through operations in agriculture, forestry mining and industry, and urban development. Experience with these types of operations demonstrated a need to work within an agreed national policy with clearly identified priorities, and within a stable macro-economic environment. Also important were the need to involve communities in the planning and implementation of sustainable resource use, providing institutional focus for the management of environmentally-related matters with agreed procedures for effective coordination, improving environmental management skills at district as well as central levels, and providing training and support to implementating agencies for procurement and disbursement. The project was also consistent with conclusions drawn from a broader Bank experience contained in the 1991 progress report entitled "The World Bank and the Environment". The grouping of project components was confusing and could have been arranged differently to better reflect the description of project objectives, e.g., as in the classification contained in the Grant Agreement: (a) Program Establishment and Operation, (b) Site Demarcation and Management, (c) Sakumo Lagoon Effluent Disposal, (d) Establishment and Operation of Investment Support Fund, (e) Development and Implementation of the Education and Public Awareness Program. 3.4 Revised Components: No change. 3.5 Quality at Entry: Quality at entry is rated as satisfactory. The project was submitted for two QAG reviews, one in February 1998 and another in July 1999. Although quality at entry was not rated by QAG, the first review did note that the project benefitted from strong ownership, vision and energy by the precursor to the Ghana Wildlife Society (GWS), from prior work done over six years with the support of international NGOs, and from an energetic environmental movement in Ghana which produced one of Africa's first, and best, NEAPs. The second review credited the GWS with the original project concept stating that it had made a strong case for community-based conservation efforts along Ghana's coastal lagoons. However, since the project was designed early in the GEF pilot phase (August 1992), the second review noted that neither the Bank nor the GEF had any mechanisms at that time to provide direct grant suppport to the NGO. Therefore, a larger plan was constructed to give a key role to the government's Wildlife Department and - 3-  the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The government agencies could then contract out services to the GWS. The project design also tried to build in social objectives through studies on the socio-economic and cultural uses of the lagoons in order to target the communities concerned to effect positive change. Community-based development, which was also considered original at the time, was implemented with difficulty by the GWD which lacked the necessary specialized skills and experience needed for this type of management. In the case of the Community Investment Support Fund (CISF), no implementation instructions or manual was available in the SAR or GEF Project Document. This slowed down implementation to the component since the manual had to be drafted before disbursements could begin. Although Government enthusiasm was high, in terms of counterpart contribution, the project was only allocated sporadic amounts for most of the implementation period. Overall, the project design underestimated the task ahead and overestimated the implementation capacities of the government and the WD to coordinate and implement the activities under the CWMP. 4. Achievement of Objective and Outputs 4.1 Outcome/achievement of objective: The project experienced late start-up, recruitment delays, staffing problems and chronic shortages of counterpart funding. The implementation record was slow for most of the components except for the education and public awareness sub-component and the community investment support program, both of which performned above expectations given the difficult circumstances under which they were executed. Despite these impediments, the project did accomplish important goals. The CWMP represented Ghana's first and most extensive experiment with true community-based, collaborative management of natural areas. Most notable has been the effective on-site collaboration between staff of the Wildlife Departnent (WD), the responsible NGO (GWS), and the local stakeholders such as the communities living in the wetlands. Under the project, the five project sites have been registered with the Ramsar Convention Secretariat and national gazettment of the sites under Ghanaan law has been achieved providing protection of wetlands where none was previously available, and identification of areas representing coastal wetlands ecosystems where none previously existed. Local by-laws to empower local communities in ensuring that they will have the legal statute for using traditional norms to regulate resource use within the Ramsar sites have also been developed. Passage of this needed piece of legislation as well as development and enactment of the local by-laws by the District Assemblies (DAs) were needed for regulating the use of the wetland sites in line with conservation objectives. A national wetlands conservation strategy has been prepared and approved by the Ministry of Land and Forestry. The Bank reviewed a draft of the Strategy (early-1999) and found that the quality of the report and the scope of planned consultations compared favorably with similar national strategies in other countries. Environmental awareness building efforts (long- and short-term) by the NGO implementation partner, the GWS, is one of the project's most successful outputs, as reflected in the numbers and diversity of constituents it involved, and the increasing institutional sophistication and scope of the GWS itself since the project began. Increased awareness of environmental protection by communities have reduced indiscriminate harvesting of mangroves for fuelwood, trapping of birds and turtles, reduced encroachment on the sites, cleared rivers and creeks, promoted biodiversity conservation activities, and monitored the over-harvesting of its lagoon resources. -4 -  The community infrastructure aspects of the project of providing sanitation units to local communities served a dual purpose of improving the health of the local communities as well as improving water quality and the general environment in the surrounding wetland areas. However, execution of other aspects of the civil works (education and visitor centers, Songor research center in particular) planned under the project was not completed. Staff accommodations fared better with most of the housing construction completed for all sites except Keta. The Community Investment Support Fund (CISF) for the support of micro-enterprises as part of the community development program performed well since disbursements began in early 1998. Demand for the funds by communities within the sites has been high and the fund is fully disbursed. The CISF started late because the operation manual was not ready (no specifications were available in the project's document) and the development options study which was to provide input into designing the fund was completed too late to be used. A subsitute assessment was used in the interim to identify the target groups and the mechanisms for the fund. Gender. (see Ratings for Achievement of Objectives Section). A Beneficiary and Social Impact Assessment Studywas carried out in January 2000 and its findings have been incorporated into the text of the report. The methodology and findings of the assessment is summarized in Annex 8 "Beneficiary Survey Results" and the full report is available in the project files. A Stakeholder Workshop was also held in December 1999 which provided input to the Beneficiary and Social Impact Assessment. The minutes from the workshop is available in Annex 9 and in the project files. The project's closing date was extended twice for a cumulative period of two years, during which time much of the project's progress and impact were achieved. Disbursement accelerated under the MLF, the Parliament endorsed the gazettement of the Ramsar sites and the local by-laws were effected, the National Wetlands Strategy was formulated and put into effect, the Community Investment Support Fund was fully disbursed, and the GWS was able to establish an additional 200 wildlife clubs. At the time when the project's closing dates were granted, Bank management acted on the recommendations of Bank staff who were familiar with Ghana's conditions, government, and institutions, and judged that the preparations in place were a good indication that the project's goals would be met. 4.2 Outputs by components. 1. PROJECT MANAGEMENT This component is rated marginally satisfactory. Overall, the project was successful in lending support to the WD in managing the CWMP. The WD evolved from a department under MLF with little experience in wetland management, to a department with an improved capacity for community-based management of wetlands. WD's capacity in the planning, coordination, participatory management, and monitoring aspects of its work on coastal wetlands issues has been strengthened and it can provide advice and feedback to MLF. Baseline studies have been carried out and regular monitoring contracts set up with three Ghanaan research institutions based on the studies' recommendations. The project's management departments and district and village level institutions have been exposed to systems for selection of development options, and the environmental awareness campaigns have shown results of reaching the different levels of government - 5 -  and academic institutions on conservation strategy and monitoring as well as sensitized the public to environmental issues. The Ministry of Lands and Forestry prepared a five-year management plan for the different sites as of December 1999 to integrate CWMP activities into its regular programs. Management and Coordination. Because of the government hiring freeze, the position of Executive Director for EPA was vacant at the time of project start-up. The CWMP, which was under the coordination and management auspices of the EPA, received no management guidance or support during that time and it was not until October 1994 that the vacancy was filled and the WD able to complete recruitment of qualified personnel to fill the department's posts (headquarters and site management. Management of the project ran into difficulties initially because of the lack of joint planning and understanding between the.different departments/institutions, and also because of staffing and structural problems, but the project did benefit from continuity in senior project leaders throughout the implementation period. Project coordination, planning, and implementation between the different implementation partners and elsewhere were weak initially for the following reasons: (a) different implementation teams did not have a common vision of the project's objectives, e.g., WD and GWS, (b) there was a lack of common understanding of the respective roles and responsibilities of different staff within the same department, e.g., between the Project Coordinator (PC) and the Senior Technical Advisor (STA) at headquarters, and between the site wardens from the WD and GWS liaison officers at the field level. This situation was later remedied when: (i) the WD, following Bank mission recommendations, clarified staff and management roles in project implementation and adopted a more team-oriented approach to project management; (ii) the Bank's supervision missions recommended a joint review of workplans and frequent reviews and exchanges of implementation experiences to remedy the problem, the project conducted planning workshops to help define the project's objectives and clarify responsibilities (GWS and WD); and (iii) a project management review revised the terms of reference for the PC and the STA, the Research and Eduction Liaison Officers and Site-monitoring coordinator. Also, the PC and STA at the time were only "half-time" employess contracted six months per year for the project. Following these changes, exchanges in workplans, and collaboration in the field, redefined teamwork between the WD and GWS improved project administration considerably. Structurally, the project was a separate component of the broader Ghana Environmental Resources Management Project (GERMP) which closed one year earlier on December 31, 1998, following which the lead responsibility for project management was transferred from the EPA to the Ministry of Lands and Forestry (MLF). Under this arrangement, a full-time PC was appointed and worked under the direct supervision of the Technical Director of the MLF, and the rate of implementation and site management, as well as the pace of construction improved markedly. Site Management Committees (SMCs) were formed under the project to facilitate inter-sectoral participation in decision-making and to ensure harmony in the management of the wetland sites, and memberships included a fair representation of all principal stakeholders from each site (local government, central government agencies, traditional council, trade associations) and later included a greater number of community members to encourage decentralization of management functions to grassroot level. The formulation of a wetlands strategy has been accomplished. The National Wetlands Strategy entitled "Managing Ghana's Wetlands: A National Wetlands Conservation Strategy" and dated 1999 was published by the MLF and was developed as a follow-up to the National Land Policy. - 6 -  Research and Monitoring. Overall, the project has been successful in meeting the project objectives and has been reasonably successful in setting up monitoring programs for the sites. Almost all of the studies were completed as planned, except for socio-economic studies of the two larger sites at Songor and Keta. For the Development Options Study, it was completed too late for the final results to be used during project implementation. Ecological and socio-economic baseline studies were completed for the three wetland sites of Muni-Pomadze, Densu Delta and Sakumo Lagoon in December 1994. Studies are listed in Section 10 "Additional Information" of the report. Similar ecological studies for the two larger sites, Songor and Keta were completed around December 1998. These culminated in a several seminars held on wetland ecology and management in Accra in March 1995, and with local communities at the Muni, Sakumo and Songor sites, to present findings and get feedback from local residents on the nature and type of interventions proposed and to sensitize these communities to the threats of waste disposals, sanitation, and land use practices to the lagoon ecosystem. The findings of the studies and recommendations were used in monitoring plans for the sites and ecological monitoring was contracted out to a three Ghanaian research institutions, the Zoology Department (University of Ghana), the Water Research Institute (CSIR), and the Ghana Wildlife Society. A computerized database has been set up to meet the need for effective administrative and technical coordination of the monitoring program, and to ensure that the WD can understand and keep abreast of the results of the monitoring program. Researchers felt that this was necessary to develop the technical capacity of the WD staff. To integrate monitoring information into a system, specifications for developing the geographic information database containing internal zoning, mapping, research and monitoring data has been developed. The project also showed good results in protecting water quality and resident bird populations in the project sites which were on the decline. A report issued by the WD on monitoring and waterbird statistics in July 1999 indicated that populations of waders and terns remained stable at most of the sites, and in the later years (1997, 1998) peak counts have been high in the Keta, Songor, and Sakumo sites. For example, at the Keta site, the number of waders increased from about 31,400 in 1986 to 96,661 in 1998, and tems at the Densu delta site increased from 4,900 in 1986 to 23,184 in 1998. Trapping of tems were reduced and encroachment from urban housing developers in the Sakumo site was arrested. An innovative aspect of the environmental monitoring aspect involved winning the collaboration of a private sector company in-the conservation of wetlands and roosting sites for the migratory birds. Panbros Salt, a salt processing company which was already established at the Densu site at the time the project began, has collaborated in managing its salt winning in such a way that certain locations which are crucial for migratory bird roosting and nesting are left untouched, and fishing lagoons are reserved for the local population. Panbros company expected to gain from this collaboration through legal protection of its property from encroachment under the Ramsar law. Panbros' security guards collaborate with the WD in monitoring the sites for encroachment, disturbances and resource over-exploitation. Under the project, critical nesting sites and predators of the existing species of the country's sea turtles were identified in the Songor, Keta and along the Muni-Pomadze sites. Four out of five species of sea turtles reported from the West African coast occur in Ghana waters and three of these (the leatherback, green, and olive ridley) nest along the Ghanaian coast. Encroachment of the turtle nesting sites by humans and domestic animals (pigs and dogs), and incidental catches of sea turtles by coastal fishermen, were threatening their survival. This information was shared with the local communities and led to a number of - 7-  activities: (a) the formation of small village groups or task forces for the protection of nesting sites for the sea turtles, (b) workshops for representatives of coastal communities in the most critical nesting sites, (c) meetings with villages along the coast with the other sites to discuss survey findings and involve communities in the development of a strategy for monitoring and protecting the turtles, and (d) to date, five community task forces have been formed with the assistance of the GWS liaison officers posted at the sites. At project design, the Development Options Study was to be carried out first, followed by the socio-economic studies. However, once completed the Development Options Study's results could not be used for identifying proposals for the CISF and had to be revised. Consequently, the socio-economic study for the two larger sites, which was postponed pending the findings of the Development Options Study were delayed, became obsolete, and had to be cancelled. In its place, a consultant identified essential indicators to be used in assessing changes in socio-economic factors at the sites as a basis for selection and implementation of the CISF. Public Awareness and EducationThis sub-component was particularly well executed, consistent with the QAG assessment. Under the project's implementation arrangements, the WD collaborated with the GWS as the implementation partner in designing and carrying out a range of environmental awareness, site management and community development activities. GWS was engaged because the WD at project start-up did not have the staff nor the skills required to execute the component. The component was designed to strengthen the institutional capacity of the two partners, community-based institutions and the local governments to cooperate and carry out the program. The project experienced some difficulties in the initial start-up because the roles and definitions of what was expected from the WD site wardens versus the GWS education/liaison officers was not clearly defined, as mentioned earlier, and this led to confusion and some duplication of efforts in the field. These weaknesses were later corrected and the partnership between the two institutions became productive and collaborative. The component maintained good progress throughout the project period. GWS met all its goals for school visits and new wildlife club initiation and development, public events, and training programs. By 1994, community education officers were on-site and participating in defining the community development aspects of the project, community-based seminars were planned, public events were initiated, and issues of the children's wildlife magazine, "Nko", were being introduced. Despite the considerable delays in project startup and implementation which has included long periods when project counterpart funds were not released (e.g., 1995), the GWS managed to carry on a range of monitoring and educational activities using funds from other sources. These efforts were critical in enabling the project to maintain the momentum at the field level. The GWS carried out its mandate by forming wildlife clubs in schools and carrying out a variety of community consultations, education, and promotional events such as: (a) publishing and distributing education materials, carrying out educational activities (field trips, conservation camps, training seminars and workshops) and indoor activities (quizzes and debates among wildlife clubs, "Wildfest", drama, arts and crafts, etc.), (b) developing important functional linkages with the communities and local government institutions, and (c) establihsing school projects (woodlot establishment, tree nurseries development, and wildlife farming, e.g., beekeeping, snail and grasscutter breeding). Through these programs, the youth in the project areas learnt of the importance of wetlands related to economic development, and some acted as ambassadors carrying the message to other communities. The GWS offered training to the club leaders in fnancial mobilization and club management and some club members also gained access and exposure to - 8 -  new techniques such as nursery and tree planting. Workplans were developed to guide the GWS education officers in community outreach programs, to create awareness of environment including workshops, personal interaction with local leaders, film showings, drama, public meetings and consultations. Public meetings and consultations were held in more than 90 percent of the communities in and around the fringes of the wetland sites and 10 seminars were held at the Ramsar sites, targetting the adult population and community leaders. As a result of these efforts, some members of the communities have mobilized groups to undertake clean-up activities on a regular basis and those who refuse to attend such communal efforts are sanctioned. Others have formed groups to patrol, arrest and prosecute environmental offenders within the wetland sites. Various communities have also mobilized to plant trees and establish woodlots in an effort to restore degraded coastal mangroves and provide a source of fuel. The Department of Community Development would assist in mobilizing the local people, the WD provided cleaning implements to the communities, and the Forestry Division provided free extension services with seedlings. By January 2000, about 30 percent of wetland communities have passed by-laws to control sanitation in the wetland areas. Mobilized groups have even assisted in rehabilitation of school buildings. Wildlife Club initiation often exceeded the target set at 30 per year. As of November 1999, the Wildlife Clubs formed in schools grew to about 600 accross the country from an initial level of 155 in 1992 (Source: Ghana Wildlife Society records) when the project began. The wildlife magazine, "Nko", was published three limes a year and circulation was estimated at about 5,000 copies per year. GWS produced and distributed flyers and calendars, and published a book entitled "Waterbird Ecology and Management of Coastal Wetlands in Ghana." Periodic events designed to promote public awareness and environmental conservation were conducted yearly together by the GWS and WD and as the Wildlife Club numbers increased, frequent visits by animators became necessary to stimulate the Clubs and ensure that they did not lie dormant. Training of trainers needed to be maintained to ensure continuity in the absence of the anirnators. Sustainable impact of the programs also required that environmental messages be reinforced continuously, particularly in areas where certain activities can mean livelihood for wetland inhabitants. All the activities necessary for a successful program depended on availability of funding, resources and personnel. As funding fell short towards the end of the project and after the contract between GWS and the WD came to an end, the GWS slowed down the activities. The beneficiary assessment in January 2000 found that many of the school clubs in the wetland areas were dormant and membership of the active clubs averaged about 20. The clubs could not organize quite a number of activities such as fieldtrips because of financial difficulties. However, GWS has recruited Regional Coordinators whose duties, among others, are to revive the dormant clubs. The GWS has developed linkages with other organizations in executing the education component, but in general, the participation of the stakeholders in planning, execution, funding and monitoring of the awareness campaign was weak. Consequently, following the withdrawal of GWS, the site wardens of the WD had little basis for continuity and have had to design their own programs to continue the education campaign. Despite this funding drawback, overall, the public awareness and education program has made important contributions to the project's objectives. Specifically it succeeded in: (a) increasing public awareness and understanding of wetlands management (e.g., organized maintenance of sites by local groups, club memberships, tree plantings by communities, etc.); (b) changing negative attitudes and practices of communities regarding the use of wetland resources (decreased negative practices, decreased encroachment of sites); (c) creating ownership as demonstrated by participation of communities in the conservation of wetland resources (local community cleaning up campaigns); and (d) encouraging cornmunity-based organization of wetland resource management (e.g., community-organized clearance of waterways, turtle monitoring groups). The GWS, in using the clubs as a channel for public awareness creation, was able to penetrate several schools with the conservation message and form a solid basis for an environmentally aware society of the future. Some impacts of the activities could have been strengthened -9-  and sustainability increased if local stakeholders were more involved in all stages of planning, particularly in: identification of problems, planning and design of community-based education interventions, execution of workplans (usually developed in Accra), funding of activities, and monitoring aspects, the influence of the activities on the local population in the long run could be remarkable. The QAG report of July 16, 1999 commended the project's role in raising public awareness of environmental issues and underlined that GWS gained significant experience through this effort. QAG estimated that this represented the key achievement of the project. 2. SITE DEMARCATION This component is rated as marginally satisfactory. All the objectives under this component were achieved, but with significant delay. The five Ramsar sites have now been surveyed and their maps updated and certified by the Survey Department. The sites have been registered with the Ramsar Convention. Physical demarcation of the boundaries of the sites with signposts and billboards have been accomplished, complemented with information posts located inside the sites in English and local languages. The total area covered by the five sites is about 1,685 km2. The draft legislative instrument (LI) for the legal establishment of the Ramsar wetland sites, submitted to Parliament for endorsement in mid-October 1999, was approved on December 2, 1999. Local by-laws, which complement the LI on conservation and use of the wetlands are being reviewed by legal committees of the district assemblies concerned. The by-laws will ensure local communities legal backing for using traditional norms to regulate use of the wetland resources and included inputs from consultations with DAs and the participation of local authorities to identify and compile an inventory of traditional regulations governing the use of the wetlands. Major habitat enhancement has been accomplished to improve breeding and roosting conditions for shorebirds including rehabilitation of degraded bunds of salt pans, providing mounts and boxes for nesting. Additional sign posts and billboards have also been erected around the sites to guide users of sites. Choked river channels and creeks are cleared to improve water transport, fisheries and crop production in some areas (4 km at Songor site, and 1.5 km at Muni-Pomadze). Community task forces are formed to protect the marine turtle breeding grounds and to prevent inappropriate exploitation of the wetland resources. Trees are being planted in different locations: Songor - 10 acres; Akatsi - 8 acres; Sakumo - 2 acres, and Muni-Pomadze - 2 acres. The Tema sewerage outfall is now diverted to the sea averting pollution to the Sakumo Lagoon. Staff housing accommodation with fences (not included at appraisal) has been constructed for 11 staff, as well as a boardwalk at Songor, and 10 refuse collection sites at various locations within the sites. Weak contract management led to a number of problems with the civil works consultant and the contractors, ranging from delays in delivering plans and documents for construction to the contractors abandoning the sites for the Songor research center and the units at Keta, and the contracts had to be terminated. WD had planned to call the performance bond and a Bank mission at the time, urged WD to report on the contarctor's performance to the Ministry of Works and Housing who is responsible for the classification of building contractors. The contract was subsequently reawarded and completed for the Keta site. Visitor centers for the education and public awareness promotion under construction at Keta, Ada-Foah, Sakumo and Winneba, were later suspended by the Bank because of poor design and lack of consultation with stakeholders, restarted after the MLF intervened with the Bank, then cancelled because the work could not be completed before the project closing date. - 10 -  Community Development Activities. This sub-component was well executed. Implementation of the community development activities was late in starting up because few of the project site staff had the educational background or work experience needed to promote community economic development activities. No such activities were identified until about 1995, when GWS education officers posted at the sites, together with the SMCs held community meetings and consultations and identified urgently needed improvement of sanitation facilities at three sites (Muni-Pomadze, Densu Delta and Songor). Community development activities and infrastructure under the project has mostly involved the construction of latrines, KVIP units, septic units, and the central waste disposal systems. Although the communities were enthusiastic about the facilities, their involvement in planning, design and implementation of the construction was low. The decision to construct such units was not based on a community needs assessment as such, but rather was identified at the project management level as a pressing sanitation, health, and environmental problem for all of the Ramsar sites. This forned the premise for identifying the communities' needs for facilities. Because of the low level of consultation cornbined with poor communication of the project's environmental purpose, communities' perceived the project's main objective initially as constructing sanitation facilities on the Ramsar sites. This perception was later changed as the project's aims became clearer to the communities. In all locations, the community chiefs and elders provided the land for construction of the facilities. Initially, communities contributed unskilled labor estimated to cost about US$30,000, increasing to US$919,000. However, mobilization of community labor and resources proved to be too slow leading to delays in implementation so that local contractors had to be hired for the construction to be completed on time. Currently, most facilities are fully used. Some communities have plans for their maintenance while others have not made any plans or have misconceptions about how the facilities are to be maintained. Others are experiencing water shortages or cannot obtain water regularly for the septic tanks. Therefore, while local contracting helped to complete construction of the facilities in a timely manner, it was evident that community ownership of the projects was weak, and input to and feedback from the SMCs was weak. SMCs were comprised mostly of central government agency representatives (65 percent), with only about 14 percent of the representatives being from local associations (fishermen, salt miners, farmers) and another 14 percent from local government. Currently, community representation is being gradually increased. In terms of achievements, the construction of these facilities contributed greatly to the communities' participation and involvement in development projects. The projects have established weekly clean up campaigns in some communities and contributed generally to increased awareness of sanitation and maintenance of the wetlands sites. 3. INVESTMENT SUPPORT - The Community Investment Support Fund (CISF) This component is rated satisfactory. Despite a long delay in CISF's start-up, demand from the recipient communities was high, disbursement moved faster than anticipated, and in two years the fund was fully disbursed. It exceeded most targets set except for that of timely loan repayment. Within the project period, the component also built capacity, prompted a general appreciation of support received, and reinforced the perception that the project was promoting a better livelihood for the people of the communities it targetted. However, it is too early to assess its full impact on the communities over a longer term and to assess the loan repayment records given that most of the funds have only been available for a year. - 11 -  Building on the broader objectives of the community development objectives, this component was to provide the investment fund to link communities' economic activities with biodiversity conservation activities. As mentioned above, the activities to be supported under this fund was identified before the Development Options Study could be completed. However, once completed, many of the activities supported by the fund were in agreement with the recommendations from the study. No procedures for the implementation of the CISF was included in the original project documents. This caused long delays in disbursement under the component. Consequently, the Bank collaborated with the PMU and the EPA to prepare a draft manual of procedures to define the eligibility criteria and the procedures for operating the investment fund. The manual drew on the experience gained from other rural development projects such as the Agricultural Sector Investment Project (ASIP), and GEF Small Grants Scheme, as well as from the small credit schemes under IFAD, the Agricultural Development Bank and the Rural Banks and includes profiles of micro-enterprises common in the communities to guide in reviewing the financial aspects of proposals. A key requirement for eligibility was for the proposals to be linked to biodiversity conservation activities at the sites, and micro-enterprises proposed would not have adverse effects on the ecology of the sites. Biodiversity conservation components of the proposals were considered as incremental costs to be supported with grants, revenue-generating components would be treated with terms similar to other rural development operations such as the Village Infrastructure Project (VIP), and ASIP, and beneficiaries were required to provide equity contributions in cash or in kind. Identification, first-level screening, selection and implementation would involve whole communities, or groups within communities, at the sites, the SMCs, and site personnel of the GWD and the GWS and fnal selection would involve a joint approval by project unit and EPA. The investment would target assistance to the poorest in the communities, hence most beneficiaries were expected to be women. Processing and preparation of community groups for the CISF began in 1997 and the first disbursement was made in September 1998 and the bulk of disbursements were made in 1999. As of October 1999, 72 groups of micro-enterprises numbering 1,706 individuals (1,001 women and 705 men), have received credit disbursements totalling about Cedis 992 million for developing such activities as farming, fishing agro-processing, cottage industries, and mixed activities of commercial farming/fishing including marketing of their produce. A large proportion of the fund was allocated to farming and agro-processing, important livelihood activities in the wetland sites. For farming activities, the extension agents of the Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MOFA) assisted in conducting physical inspections of the farm lands, to assess the proximity to water bodies, susceptibility to erosion, etc. as measures against these negative effects, and to advise farmers on appropriate cultural practices including use of pesticides and fertilizers. The fund is 99 percent disbursed at US$397,000 out of the total US$400,000 made available under the CISF. In terrns of linking the economic activities with biodiversity activities, the beneficiary groups were effective in establishing community projects for planting woodlots, forming groups for clearing and cleaning up sites or waterways, and becoming agents of change in their own communities. As a result, about 40 acres of tree plantations and woodlots at different sites have been established, five community task forces are formed to protect breeding marine turtles, their nests and habitats, and over 10 kilometers of choked river channels and creeks have been cleared to improve water transport, fisheries and crop production within the Songor site. Loans were to be repaid over one year within the project period at an interest rate of 20 percent. The repayment rate is lower than expected since disbursement began in September 1998, averaging 41 percent as of March 2000, and ranging from zero percent to 96 percent for some groups. This was due to a number of factors: (i) initial delays in disbursing the funds, (ii) timing and harvest of the fishing season not - 12 -  coinciding with the repayment period, (iii) droughts which result in lower crop yield, (iv) unavailability of natural raw materials (e.g., reeds for mat weaving), which can lead groups to delay the initial purchase of materials or can stockpiling their product for later sale, and (v) some groups accumulating monthly installments meant for repayment of the loans in group accounts rather than transferring them to the project account. In terms of capacity building, the project helped improve the technical and organizational capabilities of the community trade associations. Community groups have learnt to integrate environmental issues with economic activities on the sites and many of these groups have gained great credibility within their districts, enhancing their ability to make an impact on wetland conservation. Women's groups have been empowered to take part in decision-making within their communities and their involvement in implementing community projects. Training provided under the project for basic bookkeeping, management of inventory, crafts, tree planting, etc., have developed community members' skills, provided opportunities to develop local entrepreneurship, and enabled some groups to diversify their products for sale, and funded construction of storage areas. The CISF's success can be attributed to a number of factors: (i) the close involvement of local community leaders, administrators and stakeholders at all levels of operation from the beginning to ensure a smooth operation; (ii) meeting the training needs in terms of basic record keeping for both the field staff of GWS and GWD as well as the leaders of various community groups concemed; (iii) communication and promotion to raise awareness on biodiversity conservation and environmental protection issues raised enthusiasm for such activities. The continuing success of the program and improvement of repayment records will depend on the combined monitoring of the groups' activities by the WID, DAs, and Department of Cooperatives combined. To ensure the CISF's continuity once the project closed, it was proposed that the CISF be transferred under the management of the DAs who are already responsible for managing the District Rural Infrastructure Fund (DRIF) under the Village Infrastructure Project (VIP). 4. SAKUMO EFFLUENT DISPOSAL This component is rated satisfactory. It was completed on time and implemented satisfactorily. The study of the Sakumo lagoon was completed and the outfall funded by this GET grant was constructed in parallel with overall plant construction under the World Bank's Urban II Project. The GET grant originally would pay 100 percent of the incremental costs of the outfall up to a pre-fixed amount. The project has disbursed approximately 92 percent of the allotted funds by June 1995 and construction of the Tema sewerage treatment plant's ocean outfall was completed around April 1996. 4.3 Net Present Value/Economic rate of return: Not applicable 4.4 Financial rate of return: Not applicable. 4.5 Institutional development impact: Besides making important contributions to Ghana's environmental sector policies and management at the governrnent level, the project also made significant contributions to the establishment and strengthening of institutions and groups involved in the network of environmental conservation, and to the social, equity aspect and financial benefits of communities. Valuable information on the country's environmental problems has been generated and disseminated widely through a well-targeted education and public awareness program extending to the grassroots level. For example: - 13 -  * Community Impact. The community infrastructure and CISF components of the project built significant capacity at the community level by providing training to village groups in basic record keeping, management of a small business, reporting, analysis of local resources, problems and solutions. Viable economic groups were formed within communities for income generation, and biodiversity conservation, increased environmental awareness, responsibility in communities for resource use was introduced. The number of such groups is increasing to the point where DAs, in the transitional arrangements, are exploring additional sources of funding for the CISF to meet the increase in demand. Emerging groups and community-based organizations have leamt to integrate environmental issues into their economic activities, and opportunities for developing local-level entrepreneurship has been developed. Womens' groups have been allocated sizeable support. * District Assemblies developed linkages with the WD and partner agencies in wetlands management. * Site Management Committees (SMCs), which did not exist prior to the project, were formed to represent the interests of principal stakeholders composed of local government, central government agencies at the district level, traditional councils, women's groups and community members. SMCs are mandated to develop site management plans, decide on development of community infrastrastructure projects, disseminate management decisions regarding the Ramsar sites, assist the wildlife officers in managing the sites, the education officers in public awareness raising, and disbursement of the investment support fund. In the new decentralized structure, they will play an important part of decision-making and representation is expected to expand. * The GWS began as a small, loosely structured, national NGO numbering about three to five technical staff under the "Save the Seashore Birds Project." When the CWMP began, staff who were seconded to the GWS from the WD transferred to GWS, the core team recruited more staff, and the organization became more structured and formalized. The project provided support for training for short courses, funded two MSc. programs, and provided vehicles and equipment for offices. As of May 2000, GWS has 49 staff, is a well-recognized national NGO capable of outsourcing funds, subcontracts services, and has an operating budget of about US$200,000/year with an average project size of about $1.5 million/project. Wildlife clubs numbered 700 across the country, most of which occur along the coast, and membership number about 30,000 children. _ The project's implementation unit, the WD, has built capacity in a number areas as a result of the experience gained under the project. Staff of the WD have been exposed to wetlands resources and site management techniques, administration and computer skills. In their collaboration with the GWS, the WD site staff were trained by the GWS in identifying and counting the bird species for monitoring. The WD is now equipped with vehicles and equipment to do monitoring and evaluation in the field. Under the Bank's Natural Resources Management Project, the WD's financial and administrative capacity will be funther strengthened. * EPA, through its newly developed capacity and the network developed under the Environmental Resources Management Project of which the CWMP was a component, is now able to develop environmental policies and programs, monitor environmental problems and provide advice to the government at national and local levels. The role of EPA has evolved from one of advisory to one of coordination, regulating, enforcement of compliance and policy implementation as of 1995. - 14 -  5. Major Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcome 5.1 Factors outside the control of government or implementing agency: Unreliable contractors and management for the construction of staff housing prevented the timely completion of the lodgings. The poor performance of contractors delayed civil works. For the staff housing units at Keta site, the contractor abandoned the site and the contract was terminated and subsequently reawarded. The contractor for the research center at the Songor site also abandoned the site and the contract was terminated, but at a time that was too late to reaward to be completed before the project closing date. The visitors' centers, funded under the education and public awareness sub-component, were under construction at Keta, Ada-Foah, Sakumo and Winneba but were later suspended by the Bank because of poor design and lack of consultation with stakeholders. This was not completed. At the start of the project, Government was required to freeze hiring as part of a civil service reform program for Ghana. This impacted on the project start-up as the WD could not hire personnel for the first 18 months of the project's life. 5.2 Factors generally subject to government control: The slow release of counterpart funds greatly reduced the pace of project implementation and contributed to slow disbursement. When funds were released, they were in substantially lower amounts than requested and budgetted at appraisal. In 1995 - WD had received authorization for less than 25 percent of the required counterpart funding for the project although project management indicated that this would have a crippling effect on project implementation because of the relatively large (30 percent) requirement for counterpart funding in the infrastructure and recurrent cost-salaries category. (This percentage was later changed to 90 percent by the Bank). No counterpart funds were received for 1995, nor for 1999, the last year of the project. Other years received fluctuating amounts. Counterpart fund contributions, as a percentage of amounts requested by the project management unit, varied from 12 percent in 1996 to, at most, 49 percent of the amount requested in 1998. Disbursements accelerated in the final year of the project due to the fact that responsibility for the project transferred from one Ministry to another (the MLF) where the MLF took an active interest in the CWMP by attending wrap-up meetings and following up more closely on the project's development. However, by this time it was too late to budget additional counterpart funds. One of the fundamental objectives of the project, the gazetting of several protected areas under the Ramnsar Convention, was delayed significantly, leading to serious concems about achievement of the project's overall global development objective. Major reasons for the delay were: (i) slow pace of consultations, especially with traditional leaders and community members, about the proposed Ramsar law to avoid giving the impression that Government is taking away the land from the owners; and (ii) prolonged disgareements between WD and the Attorney General's Department on certain aspects of the law. However, the law was finally approved by Parliament on December 2, 1999. 5.3 Factors generally subject to implementing agency control: The initial delays in recruitment of the project Technical Advisor and establishment of the Project Operations committee which is to include membership from the Game and Wildlife Department and the EPC have resulted in delays in project start-up activities. Recruitment of the TA and establishment of the Coastal Wetlands Project Operations Committee (CWMPOC) were crucial activities which had to be accomplished during the first quarter before the project can go forward. Recruitment of site staff was delayed by two and a half years into project implementation which then delayed the establishment of a strong management presence on the wetland sites. As mentioned earlier, weak coordination and - 15 -  communication of planning and implementation of the education programs between the WD and the GWS, insufficient and unprecise job descriptions for site staff led to confusion between the respectives roles of the WD and GWS education officers, and lack of involvement of WD site officers by the GWS led to confusion, lack of ownership, and duplication of roles. There was also misunderstanding of the respective roles and specific responsibilities of the Project Coordinator and the Senior Technical Advisor at the WD resulting in a lack of coordination of project activities which delayed implementation on a number of major activities. 5.4 Costs andfinancing: The project closed at an estimated total cost of about US$6.90 million. GET financed SDR4.35 million (US$6.07 million) as of May 31, 2000, and the project disbursed about 85 percent of the originally approved amount of SDR5.00 million (US$7.20 million). Govermment contribution amounted to about US$200,000, and joint contributions from communities and their district assemblies (for construction of KVIP units) amounted to US$919,000. About SDR 651,000 (US$847,170 equivalent) remains undisbursed and will be cancelled. The Community Investment Support Fund disbursed around US$397,000 out of US$400,000 (99 percent) to 72 groups since funds became available in September 1998. The GET TF closing date was extended by two years. The rate of project implementation, indicated by the rate of disbursements, lagged appraisal estimates and was bunched into the later years of the project. The project's funds were not fully disbursed due to the slow project start up. By December 1998, only 60 percent of the project's funds were disbursed. This was due to several reasons: the delays in recruitment of key staff in the WD, weak communication between the Project Coordinator (PC) and the Financial Controller which meant that the PC was not well-informed about disbursement decisions regarding the project, slow processing of procurement and disbursement documents by EPA due to heavy work load on its staff, the lack of familiarity with Bank disbursement and procurement procedures by WD officials who send the SOE documents to EPA, and the SOE filing system not well organized. During the final year of project implementation, disbursement accelerated with 25 percent more disbursed by project closing. This was due to the transfer of responsibility for the CWMP from Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (EPA) to the Ministry of Lands and Forestry, where the latter showed an active interest in project activities. 6. Sustainability 6.1 Rationale for sustainability rating: Sustainability is likely, with further donor support. There are indications that some of the project's original activities could continue based on the transitional arrangements, e.g., some of the monitoring activities, others such as the education an public awareness activities, and the site management activities of the WD. Furthermore, based on the latest information made available from the WD (see Section 9 - Partner Comments) a cost center is being made available in the Government's Medium-term Expenditure Framework for wetlands conservation. There are also indications that other conservation partners such as Conservation International and the Netherlands Government are interested in collaborating or supporting activities sponsored by the National Wetlands Conservation Strategy. There are some indications of interest also from the private sector in participating in wetland site conservation. Apart from the Panbros Salt company which has reserved some of the salt ponds for the use of birds and is a member of the SMCs, the Standard Chartered Bank Ghana Ltd. has provided funds for activities for protecting sea turtles, and the Coca-Cola company has made resources available for supporting a monitoring program at the Sakumo site. Some of the CWMP's activities are being supported under the ongoing Natural Resources Management Project. - 16 -  On a national level, the National Lands Policy addresses wetlands issues, and the national conservation strategy provides an indication of the serious consideration given by the Government of Ghana to its conservation issues. The Government's non-allocation of counterpart funds was a setback to the project, and the delay in the gazettment of the sites cast doubts on Government ownership of the project as well as its long-term conmmitment to the objectives of the CWMP. However, the Government has provided other indications of commitment to conservation in the past through such actions as: (i) including over 5 percent of the national territory within the system of protected areas including the five wetland sites, (ii) fomulating the action plan to improve management of current protected areas under the Bank's Forest Resources Management Project, (iii) including a Coastal Zone Management Plan in the EAP for land use and development planning to maintain the ecological integrity of the coastal region; and (iv) gazettement of the coastal wetland sites to ensure continued wetland conservation under legal statute, and in general providing Ghana with a legal basis for handling conservation issues which, prior to the project, did not exist. Presently, Government has made provisions for the annual salaries and basic recurrent costs of the WD stafl and all the CWMP staff are retained on site for carrying on project activities. Although the sufficient counterpart funds may not be the only indicator of commitment, the WD, with the support of the Bank, could have lobbied more forcefully with its Ministry for its funds, particularly when the government is faced with competing development priorities in other sectors such as urban and transport. The WD will need further support to build its capacities to handle its new mandate under the MLF as a division which promotes community activities and a collaborative approach rather than its traditional policing role. Much has been achieved through the education and public awareness component which has laid the foundation for changing the perspectives of future generations on the use of natural resources such as the wetlands. It also contributed to the concepts of natural resource management and adaptation of new approaches for resource use, and created a sense of ownership in managing and monitoring the use of those resources by changing negative practices and attitudes of communities living in these areas, and promoted the formation of community groups for the purpose of solving some of the wetland problems. Under the investment support component, the project built strong community adhesion to the project goals and approach, addressed the priority needs of the community, promoted community unity, fostered strong leadership within the groups, and developed their capacity to undertake viable income-generating activities, and developed important skills in the communities. The CISF also established a new generation of community-based organizations that are financially viable and growing in importance. It has increased participation in community activities and generated interest in sustainable environmental management. Environmental management is a long-term objective requiring a long-term commitment spanning at least 10-15 years. In the short-tern, modest results are to be expected, particularly in countries where such management or priorities did not previously exist. 6.2 Transition arrangement to regular operations: Ecological nonitoring has been contracted to three Ghanaian partner research institutions - the Water Resources institute, Ghana Wildlife Society and the Zoology Department of the University of Ghana. Once the contracts ended in December 1998, a new arrangement was established. The underlying principle was to function as a partnership rather than the previous contractual arrangements. The institutions agreed with the WD to implement a revised monitoring program during 1999 which would be mainstream into their institutional programs and the activities would be carried out on a cost sharing basis with the WD. The institutions will fund staff costs while the WD will fund recurrent costs. The number of monitoring parameters, frequency of data collecion, will be reduced, to encourage site wardens to assist in data collection. To meet the need for effective administrative and technical coordination of the monitoring - 17 -  program, a computerized database would be set up to ensure that the WD can understand and keep abreast of the results of the monitoring program. Researchers felt that this was necessary to to develop the technical capacity of the WD staff. Education and Public Awareness. The community outreach and education program which was under contract with the GWS expired in December 1998. Since then, the WD has been implementing part of this program along with the active participation of the DAs. Continued operation of the education program on a cost sharing basis has been negotiated between these two institutions. Membership in the wildlife clubs has grown and, consequently, GWS is experiencing funding shortages to the point where it is unable to fulfill all of its commitments to the clubs. In the meantime, GWS has continued the education program on a scaled down basis. The Water Resources Commission (WRC) will absorb two components of the CWMP, (i) public awareness and environmental education, and (ii) restoration and rehabilitation of the waterways, which could be covered under the umbrella of future WRC activities to be funded under DANIDA (Denmark) assisted programs. Community Investment Support Fund (CISF). Transitional arrangements have been made which will link management of the CISF to the DRIF, a fund that is being managed by the District Assemblies under the Bank's VIP. The DRIF provides funding to rural communities for small-scale infrastructure projects and private goods (income-generating activities). However, to avoid confusion in the management and accountability of the DRIF and the CISF, separate bank accounts would be kept for the two funds at the DA level. Furthermore, there will be arrangements for the beneficiary groups to deposit payment directly into project accounts at the DA level. The arrangements is designed to follow the decentralized structure of governance being implemented by the GoG and will incorporate the elements of participatory evaluation. Under these arrangements, the district-level fund will be established by each DA to finance small-scale infrastructure and micro-enterprises by the community groups and associations. A district-level committee made up of representatives of local NGOs and local communities will form the decision-making body of the DRIF. The day-to-day management of the DRIF would be entrusted to a District Finance Officer. To ensure that the fund is used with environmental conservation in mind, the WD staff at each district should be made a member of the DRIF Committee, and that the WMU maintains a monitoring role over the funds to ensure it is used for the intended purposes. The VIP will be implemented over six years, which will give communities sufficient time to consolidate the projects already begun and fund any new projects planned. If the fund can be implemented under these premises of ownership and participation, the merger stands a good chance of being sustainable. A cost center has been created within the Government's Medium-term Expenditure Framework for Wetlands Conservation. The salaries and basic recurrent costs are provided for annually and the CWMP staff are retained to continue project activities on the sites. 7. Bank and Borrower Performance Bank 7. ] Lending: The Bank's performance during preparation and appraisal was satisfactory. The Bank provided adequate resources in terms of staff weeks and dollar amount during the lending phase to enable it to carry out the necessary preparation work for the project.The missions were adequately staffed with the appropriate technical skills to carry out the address the issues and GEF concerns. The project was innovative and its objectives were clear, and consistent with the Bank's environmental conservation and development strategies in Ghana at the time. The project also benefited from strong ownership, vision and energy by the precursor to the Ghana Wildlife Society (GWS), and from prior work done over six years - 18-  with the support of international NGOs. Risks. The project correctly identified the risk that recognition of the five coastal wetland sites under the Ramsar Convention may not be achieved, although it wrongly assumed that this risk could be minimized by the availability of project funds for other activities such as site management, public awareness campaigns and the community participation in maintaining the ecology of the sites. Availability of project funds did not shorten the significant delay with which the gazettment of the sites was approved by the Government. In this respect, the project overestimated the level of Government ownership of the project as well as the availability of counterpart funds. 7.2 Supervision: Although site visits were carried out on a regular basis and the budget and skills mix during missions was appropriate for regular monitoring, it failed to address the more persistent problems with stronger measures at the Bank's disposal. As such, it is rated as unsatisfactory. During the project's implementation period, supervision was moved to the field and the quality of project supervision and problem-solving improved, particularly in the procurement and fiduciary aspects. This did acccelerate project implementation and conservation efforts which had been delayed for two years. QAG rated the financial management aspect of Bank supervision as "1", noting that the practice of having the project's financial statements and audits co-signed by both the controller and the director of the implementing agency as one to be encouraged. Supervision efforts achieved good results in 1998 and 1999 with respect to financial management and the EPA's role in this respect has been strengthened. Client relations, particularly with the environmental community was rated as "excellent" by the QAG. However, supervision could have been stronger in other respects, for example, the project could have benefitted from more management attention to the generic issues which needed to be solved at the country-wide or sector level. Supervision missions were unable to address adequately the constant funding shortages from the government despite regular letters reminding the government of its commitments in this respect. Furthermore, supervision ratings for overall implementation performance did not realistically reflect the problems experienced until much later into the project's life, which contributed to the lack of remedial actions on the part of the Bank. At the time of the MTR, the Bank had the opportunity to restructure the project to tum it around, and to add specialists to the supervision teams to address particularly issues (e.g., legal, judicial, social). During the later stages of the project, the Bank's management decided to extend the closing dates based on good indications that the preparations that were in place will lead to the achievement of project objectives within the extension period. Stronger consideration should have been given to the explicit conditionality for extending the closing date in order to remedy existing problems. The QAG reports speculated that because this was a GEF Grant, it may not have attracted the same monitoring or scrutiny from management as regular IDA operations. The Bank's proposal to convert the undisbursed balance of the grant into a trust fund to fund project activities over the long term was considered inappropriate because implemrentation was not progressing at a satisfactory pace at the time. 7.3 Overall Bank performance: The Bank's overall performance is unsatisfactory. Although the Bank's perfornance at project design and appraisal was innovative since it was conducted in a particularly participative manner involving all stakeholders, it underestimated the task ahead and overestimated Government anad the implementing agency's capacity to implement the project activities. As to supervision, while missions were carried out regularly and with an adequate skills mix for routine monitoring, they were not sufficient to deal with the more difficult legal, policy and government performance issues in the country which were slowing down - 19 -  implementation. Supervision missions may not have confronted the counterpart funds issue, in part because there were other indications of Governnent commitment to environmental management, and in part because of the overall budget constraints owing to the macroeconomic environment. QAG found that the Bank's management should have taken stronger remedial measures to ensure compliance and attainment of the project's long term development objective by recommending restructuring of the project or suspension of disbursements. Borrower 7.4 Preparation: At preparation, the GoG's and other stakeholders' performance was highly satisfactory. The project benefitted from a dynamic and energetic environmental movement in Ghana which produced one of Africa' s first, and best, NEAPs. In addition, GWS, a well-regarded national NGO in the country, was credited with the original project concept, having made a strong case for community-based conservation efforts along Ghana's coastal. 7.5 Government implementation performance: GoG's performance was unsatisfactory. Although the Govermment showed a strong national sense of ownership in the project, a strong political will to tackle the problems identified, and commitment to decentralization and public sector reform, counterpart funding throughout the duration of the project was highly unsatisfactory. The project suffered from chronic counterpart fund shortages. During the last year of the project (1999), no counterpart funds were received by the project from a Government approved budget of about Cedi 71.0 million. The project has been unable to make full payments for goods and supplies which relied on counterpart funds. This exacerbated an already deteriorating situation where from 1996 to 1997, the project received an average of 14 percent of the amount budgeted, and nothing in 1995. This meant that the project will be indebted to several suppliers following the project's closing. Overall, the project has received about US$0.2 million (18 percent) of the US$1.1 million equivalent requested by the implementing agency as Government contribution to the project. The project's history of inadequate counterpart funding could threaten the sustainability of activities and capacities built up in the institutions over the life of the project if it is not resolved. 7.6 Implementing Agency: The performance of the WD was marginally unsatisfactory. Although it experienced some difficulties initially, the WD amended the shortfalls quickly once the Bank's supervision missions identified the causes and made recommendations for improvements. In terms of financial management, the agency received weak support from EPA whose technical capacity needed to be improved. For example, bill preparation and payments by the accounting unit of EPA was insufficient to enable it to effectively plan and monitor payment requests, e.g., the GWD had several unpaid bills over C300 million were due to the GWD at a time when the SA had a balance of over US$80,000 (C180 million equivalent). The performance of the partner implementing agency, GWS was highly satisfactory. GWS consistently remained dedicated to its tasks and usually met or exceeded program targets that were set. It demonstrated commitment and was well experienced in executing the project activities. 7.7 Overall Borrower performance: The performance of the staff at the WD, GWS, district assemblies and EPA levels were satisfactory. Inexperience in handling certain aspects of the management and coordination work caused initial delays and some confusion, but actions were taken to amend them. The GoG's performance was unsatisfactory in terms of release of funds and slow pace in the gazettment of the Ramsar sites. - 20 -  Audits. Project accounts were audited regularly every year and the audits showed an adequate compliance with the administrative, accounting and financial requirements from the beginning of the project period. The audit report and management letter of auditors for the 1997 fiscal year audit was submitted ahead of schedule, and IDA's review did not identify any issues to be addressed in particular. The final audit for the project following its closing is in progress. Compliance with Legal Covenants was generally satisfactory. The main shortfalls were in the long delays in establishing the gazettment of the Ramsar sites and the partial compliance with the adoption of a detailed design and management plan for the education center at Songor. 8. Lessons Learned * Close involvement of stakeholders, community members, and administrators, at all levels of implementation is important in building support for and ensuring the sustainability of an operation (e.g., the CISF); measures to access social development outcomes need to be put in place during project implementation so that feedback can be used while the project is still active. * The composition of supervision missions should have been more flexible, adjusting the specializations and skills mix as needed to deal with persistent issues, e.g. legal expertise to deal with the delay in gazetting the sites, or social science expertise to develop a suitable methodology for monitoring community-level trends and their relationships to sustainable use of wetland resources. i Poor performance by central government agencies was tolerated in order to channel funds to a dynamic and committed NGO. To avoid this in the future, the Bank should focus its efforts in working directly with such NGOs for field-based activities while limiting central government agency initiatives to a clearly-defined policy agenda, handled through a different mechanism. With the experience gained under the CWMP and the basic framework in place for promoting environmental awareness, management and conservation, future consideration should be given to providing GWS with a medium-sized project under the GEF. Such a project allows an NGO to submit project concepts which are no more than US$1.0 million in GEF financing, are smaller in scope and can be implemented quickly and efficiently, targeting a narrower range of activities than that covered under the CWMP. The NGO would also be independently implementing the project in the field. * Environmental management is a long-term objective requiring long-term commitment spanning 10-15 years. In the short-term, modest results are to be expected, particularly in countries where such management or priorities did not previously exist. Therefore, consideration should be given to continuing to provide support for the core activities of the coastal wetlands sites under the ongoing Natural Resources Management Project. 9. Partner Comments (a) Borrower/implementing agency: Editorial comments from the implementing agency, the Wildlife Division (Forestry Commission) have been incorporated into the ICR. Other comments follow and a copy is available in project files. Letter dated June 26, 2000, from Mr. N.K Ankudey, Executive Director (Ag.), addressed to Ms. Patience Mensah, World Bank Office, Accra. Ref Ghana: Coastal Wetlands Management Project (GET-TF-28519-GH) - Implementation Completion Report. "Thank you for your letter of June 20, 2000 which forwarded a copy of the above-mentioned report for our - 21 -  comments. We take this opportunity to congratulate the authors for an excellent report. In line with your request as contained in the above letter, we provide the following comments on the report. It is agreed that the Project had a slow take off and faced many implementation problems. As you know, the Wildlife Division (WD) has been a para-military organisation with a command and control attitude towards protected area and natural resource management. This is the environment in which the Coastal Wetlands Management Project whose main feature is collaborative management was launched. Naturally, it took some time to effect attitudinal change within WD and also build mutual trust between WD and the Communities to ensure smooth project implementation. Coupled with this was the government ban on employment, which did not allow us to recruit for the first eighteen months of project life. We do not, therefore, hold the same view with the assessment that its sustainability is unlikely nor do we agree that the Bank's performance was unsatisfactory. The reasons for the contention are given below: (a) At the start of the Coastal Wetlands Management (CWMP) very few staff members of WD knew anything about wetlands. Within the Project life almost all members of WD staff have become conversant with wetlands, their functions, attributes and benefits and the objectives of the Project. Nationally, wetlands and their issues have become a household word in Ghana. (b) Within the Project life wetland issues have become enshrined in the National Lands Policy. (c) "Managing Ghana's Wetlands: A National Wetlands Conservation Strategy" document has been developed and adopted by Government. At a recent workshop organised in Ghana by Wetlands International in May 2000, to train wetlands practitioners in the West African sub region on Wetlands Policy Formulation, it was clearly revealed that only three (3) African states have either a Wetlands Policy or Strategy and Ghana is one such state. (d) Unlike most countries whose Ramsar sites are located in areas already designated as protected areas of one sort or the other, Ghana's coaster Ramsar Sites are found on privately owned land. Our "Wetlands Management (Ramsar Sites) Regulations L.I. 1659, 1999, were therefore crafted to make it possible for government and communities manage the sites collaboratively. The law further provides a platform for the enactment of local level by-laws to address wetlands conservation issues peculiar to each locality and also give legal backing to traditional conservation measures. These innovative approaches were pioneered in Ghana and were facilitated by the CWMP. (e) Very substantial capacity in wetlands conservation has been built within the country, W)D and at local community levels. Daily pronouncements in the media by the wider Ghanaian public on wetland issues clearly attest to this. The above named hallmarks chalked within a matter of seven years of a project life is no mean achievement. It will therefore not be fair to assess the performance of the key actors who made them happen as unsatisfactory. On the question of sustainability, perhaps a review of the following will help elucidate our initiatives to achieve sustainability: (i) On project closure WID succeeded in creating a Cost Centre within the GoG Medium Term -22 -  Expenditure Framework for Wetlands Conservation. Salaries and basic recurrent costs are being provided for annually. (ii) The entire CWMP staff are retained on site to continue the activities of the Project. (iii) Efforts have also been made to get other conservation bodies and development partners to help us continue and expand on what CWMP started. Conservation International (Ghana's) expressed interest to collaborate with WD on wetlands conservation and encouraging indications of the Netherlands Government to support in implementing the newly developed National Wetlands Conservation Strategy when overtures were made to them at the last Ramsar Convention Conference of Parties in Costa Rica in May 1999, attests to this. These concrete measures have been taken already and are yielding some positive results since project closure barely six (6) months ago. A Management Team to lead the implementation of the National Wetlands Strategy and Action Plan has been formed and this Team will be officially inaugurated during the public launching of the Strategy sometime in August, 2000. Sustainability of a closed Project with the above measures already in place cannot be described as "unlikely" in the least. ... At the time of preparing this report all Computerised and Geographic information databases have been completed." (b) Cofinanciers: No cofinanciers were involved. (c) Other partners (NGOs/private sector): Editorial comments from the NGO, the Ghana Wildlife Society have been incorporated into the report. An extract of the comments which are not editorial follow. The complete list of comments are available in project files. Letter dated June 29, 2000, from Mr. Samuel Kofi Nyame, for the Executive Director, Ghana Wildlife Society, addressed to The World Bank, Ghana Office, Accra. Attention: Ms. Patience Mensah, Re. Ghana: Coastal Wetlands Management Project (GET-TF-28519-GH) - Implementation Completion Report. "I write to acknowledge receipt of the report and to commend you and your team for an excellent work. I have perused the whole report and found it to be fine except for a few comments as outlined below. ... Your report referred to the Wildlife Clubs as an NGO (later to be known as Ghana Wildlife Society), I would like to point out that the Wildlife Clubs is the junior wing of the Ghana Wildlife Society and does not constitute an NGO by itself. So could you effect the change to reflect the true status of the Wildlife Clubs. ...The statement there implies that wader numbers increased gradually from 1986 to 1998. The statement would have been accepted if using the total cumulative sightings of waterbirds. The figures quoted represented the peak counts of the waders during those years (the peak count for 1998 for the Keta site is 96,661 and not 96,670). The total cumulative sightings of the waders were certainly more than the quoted figures. So I would like the second sentence to read "A report issued by the WD on monitoring and waterbird statistics in July 1999 indicated that populations of waders and tems remained stable at most of -23-  the sites, and the the later years (1997, 1998) peak counts have been high in the Keta, Songor and Sakumo sites. For example, at the Keta site, the peak count of waders increased from about 31,400 in 1986 to 96,661 and tems at the Densu delta site from 4,900 23,184 in 1998. ... However, GWS has recruited Regional Coordinators whose duties among others are to review the dormant clubs. ... Education and Public Awareness:... implies that th eincrease in the membership of the wildlife clubs is as a result of the activities of the WD and DAs. This is incorrect. Refer to page 47 point 20 and relfect the views held by GWS. That part makes it clear that it is the sussessful implementation of the education programme by GWS that has culminated in the increase in the club membership. So I would like the sentence ... to read... Membership of the wildlife clubs has grown as a result of GWS activities, and consequently, is experiencing funding shortages to the point where it is unable to fulfill all of its commitments to the clubs. In the meantime, GWS has continued the education programme on a scaled down basis." 10. Additional Information Studies Included in Proiect Type of Study Sites Purpose Status Baseline studies: (a) . Limnology Three smaller Baseline studies to identify Studies for all five sites sites: (Muni- major factors acting on completed. . Aquatic Ecology Pomadze, Sakumo, coastal ecosystems; develop Densu) data on present productivity Reports published. Ilydrology of the systems; identify options to mitigate negative . Plant Ecology impacts from present or potential future activities; . Lagoon Fisheries develop models affecting system stability; provide basis . Soil erosion/Land for interventions for degradation Two larger sites: improvement of wetland (Keta, Songor) productivity. Basic survey (b) . Aquatic ecology and collection of inventory | Terrestrial ecology data to formulate development and management * Lagoon fisheries plans. | Ornithological Studies - Keta, Songor Understand better seasonal Completed. Report Waterbird ecology and and spatial patterns of published. management of coastal wetland use by bird species; wetlands in Ghana. provide more accurate data for sanctuaries. Status and Development of Entire coast of Identify nesting beaches Completed. Report marine turtles Ghana including within Ransar sites and published. the five wetland coast. Identify requirements sites for protection of nesting beaches and regulation of turtle harvesting. - 24 -  Beneficiary and Social Impact All five sites Study to assess the impact of Completed. Findings Assessment the environmental education discussed with and community development beneficiaries. Report activities on beneficiaries. published. Socio-economics and Land Use Muni-Pomadze, Studies forming base for Completed. Report for National Wetlands Strategy Densu, Sakumo determining socio-economic submitted. status of local communities within sites and formulation of national wetlands strategy. Socio-economic Studies Songor, Keta Studies focusing on the small Canceled. Too late to farming and fishing use. communities along sand bar between lagoons and ocean or lower catchment area of the lagoons to provide basic data on demographic characteristics, residence and employment patterns. Input into annual project monitoring activities. Ecological Monitoring All 5 sites Results from baseline studies Monitoring programs Programs (lagoon fisheries, would define requirements for form part of contractual water birds, aquatic biology). annual monitoring and arrangements for formats for annual reporting monitoring activities of results. between WD and 3 Monitoring includes lagoon Ghanaian research fisheries, water birds, water institutions (zoology quality, faunal diversity, etc. dept./Univ. of Ghana, Water Research Institute, GWS). Annual reports have been submitted. Development Options Study All 5 sites Identify environmentally TOR revised to cover 3 compatible economic sites. Final output not development options for the acceptable for guiding CWMP to support in the five proposal identification. wetland sites. National Wetlands Strategy All Ghana's Review existing wetland Broad participatory wetlands including resources data and identify process adopted in the 5 sites gaps and critical factors preparing the strategy. affecting wetlands/constraints National Wetlands to improving management Conservation Strategy practices. Input into published and adopted formulating national strategy end 1999. for conservation of the wetlands. -25 -  Annex 1. Key Performance Indicators/Log Frame Matrix Outcome I Impact Indicators: Water quality and biological indicators of Ongoing. Ongoing. ecosystem integrity are stable/ improving. Better understanding and appreciation of the Communities are actively involved with the Various initiatives and activites linked to, benefits of improved environmental project and its goals. Communities initiated by, or sponsored under the project management by local residents at the project organized independent cleaning campaigns, have been met with activity participation from sites task forces to protect wildlife and breeding the communities and public (e.g., public grounds, actively participate in conservation awareness campaigns, festivities, wildlife activities sponsored by the GWS and WD, magazine subscriptions, community are enthusiastic in demanding community sanitation facility construction, clearance of infrastructure, demand for the community waterways, planting of eroded areas and investment fund is high. woodlots, regeneration of mangroves, etc.). Wildlife club activities are carried out and Membership expected to reach 600 across Wildlife club memberships reach 700. Due reaches communities in rural areas and targeted areas with activities designed to to GWS ending contract with GWS at project Ramsar sites in particular. promote environmental awareness. closing, some activities had slowed down due to lack of funds. New arrange- ments being negotiated with GWS. Baseline reports are completed and form Monitoring activities contracted to three Arrangements established for cost sharing basis for monitoring activities. Ghanaian research institutions. between institutions participating in monitoring activities. Legislative and administrative actions taken Draft Li for the legal establishment of the Gazettment of Ramsar sites approved by to establish legal entity of Ramsar sites and sitesto be submitted to Parliament for Parliament December 2, 1999. promote protection of site habitat and approval. By-laws complementing the LI on inhabitants. conservation and use of the wetlands are being reviewed by legal committee of the DAs concemed and will be enacted. A draft wetlands strategy is being prepared. National Wetlands Conservation Strategy Draft strategy to be finalized and approved by National Wetlands Conservation Strategy reviews existing data on wetiand resources the MLF. established and published by MLF. and identifies gaps in knowledge of critical factors affecting improved management practices. Output Indicators: Project operations committee and site POC and SMCs established at 5 sites, No change. management committees established. functioning regularly and regular meetings of SMCs held. Role for POC in project management is clear for decisions to be taken. Membership in SMCs expanding to include representation from sites. Completion of baseline studies. Establish Studies completed and recommendations for No change. monitoring activities based on monitoring have been established into work recommendations programs. National and community seminars held. Program design for monitoring activities approved. Studies and training completed. Annual reports of results are produced. -26 -  Establish extension/community liaison All personnel recruited and on-site. GWS No change. for: Education programs, GWS liaison officers also posted at sites for contract/wildlife clubs education programs and activities. Wildlife club activities carried out regularly as membership grows often exceeding targets. Ongoing community activities (cleanup campaigns, children's theater, turtle task forces.) Complete boundary surveys, site Some planting at Sakumo site and plantings Markers and signboard erected at all sie demarcation, border planting in selected locations only. locations, including some logos and signs in local languages. Total area covered - 1,685 km2. Construction of habitat infrastructure 8 observation posts constructed, habitat 50 partitions for establishing roosting islands (observation posts, roosting islands, access enhancements, roosting islands, etc. at Sakumo and Densu, community task trails, habitat enhancements, staff lodging, established, staff lodging completed at most forces formed to protect breeding grounds education centers, etc.) sites. for wildlife, tree plantations established, clearance of waterways initiated. Infrastructure investment as part of Projects for infrastructure completed 84 latrines completed by 10/99. community development efforts following consultation with communities Communities organized regular cleanups at regarding their needs. some of the sites. Conduct Development Options study Study completed and was to be linked with No change. community investment program. Establish Pilot community investment fund. Criteria for eligibility established, review 72 community group investments completed process initiated, community projects with 99 percent of fund disbursed. ongoing. Biodiversity activities by communities include clearance of waterways, mangrove regeneration, establishing woodlots, with plantings in: Sakumo - 15 acres, Songor - 34 acres, Muni-Pomadze - 10 ares, Keta - 75 acres. Contruction of ocean outlet for Tema Ocean outlet pipe constructed and discharge No change. Sewerage treatment plant at Sakumo is directed to sea rather than lagoon. Lagoon. End of project -27 -  Annex 2. Project Costs and Financing Project Cost by Com onent (in US$ million uivalent) Program Management 2.20 1.86 85 Site Demarcation and Management 3.60 2.97 83 Investment Support 0.50 0.40 80 Sakumo Effluent Disposal 0.40 0.37 93 Total Baseline Cost 6.70 5.60 Physical Contingencies 0.50 0.40 80 Price Contingencies 1.10 0.90 82 Total Project Costs 8.30 6.90 Total Financing Required 8.30 6.90 Pro-ect Costs by Procurement Arranements (Appraisal Estimate) (US$ million equivalent) v>}v~~~~~~~~~t h er _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. Works 0.50 2.50 0.00 0.00 3.00 (0.40) (2.20) (0.00) (0.00) (2.60) 2. Goods 1.00 0.20 0.50 0.00 1.70 .______________________ (1.00) (0.20) (0.30) (0.00) (1.50) 3. Services 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.00 1.50 Consultants and Training (0.00) (0.00) (1.50) (0.00) (1.50) 4. Investment Support 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.60 Fund (0.00) (0.00) (0.50) (0.00) (0.50) Incremental Recurrent 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.00 1.50 Costs (0.00) (0.00) (1 .10) (0.00) (1 .10) Total 1.50 2.70 4.10 0.00 8.30 _ _ __ (1.40) (2.40) (3.40) (0.00) (7.20) Project Costs b Procurement Arran ements (Actual/Latest Estimate) (US$ million e uivalent) 1. Works 0.50 1.68 0.00 0.00 2.18 (0.38) (1.46) (0.00) (0.00) (1.84) 2. Goods 0.17 0.76 0.80 0.00 1.73 (0.17) (0.76) (0.54) (0.00) (1.47) 3. Services 0.00 0.00 2.01 0.00 2.01 Consultants and Training (0.00) (0.00) (2.01) (0.00) (2.01) 4. Investment Support 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.50 Fund (0.00) (0.00) (0.41) (0.00) (0.41) - 28 -  Incremental Recurrent 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.48 Costs (0.00) (0.00) (0.34) (0.00) (0.34) Total 0.67 2.44 3.79 0.00 6.90 (0.55) (2.22) (3.30) (0.00) (6.07) ' Figures in parenthesis are the amounts to be financed by the IDA Credit. All costs include contingencies. 21 Includes civil works and goods (vehicles, equipment and materials) to be procured through national shopping, consulting services, services of contracted staff of the project management office, training, technical assistance services, and incremental operating costs related to (i) managing the project, and (ii) re-lending project funds to local government units. Project Financing by Component in US$ million equ .vil Xnt Percentage of Appraifa1 .- ~ ~_ _ _ .D -ov : QJF.t C .1; IDA i CF- DA vt C.)A Gov__ Program Management 2.40 0.35 0.00 2.28 0.05 95.0 14.3 0.0 Site Demarcation and 3.75 0.57 3.00 0.05 80.0 8.8 0.0 Management Investment Support 0.55 0.10 0.00 0.41 0.05 0.00 74.5 50.0 0.0 Sakumo Effluent Disposal 0.45 0.08 0.36 0.05 80.0 62.5 0.0 - 29 -  Annex 3: Economic Costs and Benefits Not applicable. - 30 -  Annex 4. Bank Inputs a)Missions: Stage of Project Cycle No. of Persons and Specialty Performanc Raing (eg. 2 Economists, I FMS, etc.) Implementation Development Month/Year Count Spectalty Progress Objective Identification/Preparation 10/90 6 IML, ISOC, IECN, S S 2ENV, 1DM 05/91 6 IML, IECN, IENV (pollution S S specialist), I ENV, 2DM Appraisal/Negotiation 03/92 4 1ML, ISOC, IECN, IECL S S 08/92 S S Supervision 05/93 3 1ENB, AE, ICOF(ODA) S S 01/94 8 IAE, IPO, IEN, IENL, IFO, S S IAG, IAN 11194 3 IENB, 1AE, IPO 06/95 2 I EN3, I PO S S 04/96 3 1PO, 1AE, IENB S S 10/96 (MTR) 3 1ENB, ICD, IPO S S 05/97 S IPO, IPROC, IFA, IENB, IRF S S 11/97 5 1PO, IPROC, IFA, 1ENB, IRD S S 05/98 6 IPO, IPROC, IFA, IER, 1ENB, U S IEN 10/98 6 IPO, IPROC, IFA, 1RF, 1ENB, U S lEC 01/99 5 IAE, IPO, IFA, IPROC, IRF U S 03/99 5 INRM, ISOP, IPROC, lFA, U S 1RF 10/99 6 1AE, ISOP, lFA, IPROC, IRF, U S IOA ICR 10/99 6 IAE, ISOP, IFA, IPROC, U S IRF, IOA AE Agricultural Economist FA Financial Analyst/Financial Management Specialist AG Agriculturalist FO Forestry Specialist AN Agronomist ML Mission Leader COF Cofmancier Representative (organization) OA Operations Analyst CD Community Development Specialist PO Projects Officer DM Data Management Specialist PROC Procurement Specialist ECL Ecologist RD Rural Development Specialist ECN Economist RF Community/Rural Finance Specialist ENB Environmental Biodiversity Specialist SOC Sociologist ENL Environmental Specialist (land and water management) SOP Senior Operations Officer ENV Environmentalist (b) Staff: - 31 -  Stage o<f Pjc ycle0 i;; n' ActalLaes l0 Esti::, a Identification/Preparation 23.9 59.9 Appraisal/Negotiation 23.6 65.6 Supervision 114.7 205.0 ICR 14.2 35.4 Total 177.7 365.9 - 32 -  Annex 5. Ratings for Achievement of Objectives/Outputs of Components (H=High, SU=Substantial, M=Modest, N=Negligible, NA-Not Applicable) Rating Z Macro policies O H OSUOM O N * NA Z Sector Policies O H *SUOM O N O NA RI Physical O H OSU*M O N O NA I Financial OH OSUOM O N O NA I Institutional Development 0 H O SU * M 0 N 0 NA M Environmental O H * SU O M O N O NA Social ER Poverty Reduction O H OSUOM O N * NA I Gender OH *SUOM ON ONA O Other (Please specify) E Private sector development 0 H O SU * M 0 N 0 NA F Public sector management 0 H O SU *M 0 N 0 NA n Other (Please specify) Gender: The CISF targetted assistance to the poorest in the village communities, hence most beneficiaries targetted were women. In all, 72 groups of micro-enterprises numbering 1,706 individuals (1,001 women and 705 men), have received credit disbursements totalling about Cedis 992 million for developing such activities as farming, fishing agro-processing, cottage industries, and mixed activities of commercial farming/fishing including marketing of their produce. The activities funded include: Fishing, mainly men ( 7 groups); food processing (kenkey, gari, fish-smoking/drying) involving mostly women (25 groups); cottage industry (mats, bags, batik, tie-dye), women (5 groups); food marketing, men and women (3 groups; farming, men and women (28 groups); and mixed activity (fishing, farming, marketing), men and women (4 groups). Women's groups are also represented in the local Site Management Committees. Private Sector Development: GWS is considered private sector and its capacity increased and was strengthened during the course of the project. - 33 -  Annex 6. Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (HS=Highly Satisfactory, S=Satisfactory, U=Unsatisfactory, HU=Highly Unsatisfactory) 6.1 Bank performance Rating