Guinea - National Agricultural Services Project

Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No. P-6835-GUI MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS ON A PROPOSED CREDIT OF SDR 23.6 MILLION TO THE REPUBLIC OF GUINEA FOR A NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT MARCH 12, 1996 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 Currency Unit = Guinean Franc (GNF) US$ 1.00 = GNF 978 (as of December 26, 1995) WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Metric System FISCAL YEAR January I to December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS BCPA - Bureau de Coordination de la Politique Agricole (Agricultural Policy Coordination Office - MAEF) CfD - Caisse fran,aise de Developpement EU - Union Europeenne (European Union) DNA - Direction Nationale de I'Agriculture (National Agriculture Department) DNE - Direction Nationale de 1'Elevage (National Livestock Department) IRAG - Institut de recherche agronomique de Guinee (Agricultural Research Institute). LPDA - Lettre de Politique de Developpement Agricole (Letter of Agricultural Development Policy) MAEF - Ministere de l'Agricuiture, de l'Elevage et des Forets (Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Forests) MC - Ministere de la Cooperation Fran,aisc (French Ministry of Cooperation) M&E - Monitoring and Evaluation System NASP - National Agricultural Services Project PNAE - Programme National d'Action Environnementale SMS - Subject Matter Specialist SNPRV - Service National de la Promotion Rurale et de Vulgarisation (National Rural Development and Agricultural Extension Service) SNSA - Service National des Statistiques Agricoles (Agricultural Statistics Office - MAEF) SPAAR - Special Program for African Agriculture Research T&V - Training and Visit Extension USAID - United States Agency for International Development  - 11 - FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT CONTENTS Page No. CREDIT AND PROJECT SUMMARY .............................................. iii Country/Sector Background .......1....................................... Project Rationale ..............................................3 Project Objectives ...............................................3 Project Description ..............................................4 Project Implementation .............................................. 5 Lessons Learned from Previous Bank/IDA Involvement ............................................... 5 Rationale for IDA Involvement ...............................................6 Agreed Actions ...............................................6 Environmental Aspects . .............................................. 6 Program Objective Categories ...............................................6 Participatory Approach .............................................. 7 Project Benefits ...............................................7 Project Sustainability ..............................................8 Risks ...............................................8 Recommendation .............................................. 9 SUPPORTING TABLES AND ANNEXES .............................................. 10 Schedule A - Estimated Costs and Financing Plan ......................................... 10 Schedule B1 - Economic Benefits and Costs ......................................... 11 B2 - Financial Sustainability ......................................... 12 B3 - Key Performance Indicators ......................................... 13 Schedule C - Procurement Methods ......................................... 15 Disbursements .......................................... 16 Schedule D - Project Key Processing Events .......................................... 18 Schedule E - Status of Bank Group Operations ......................................... 19 Action Plan to lmprove lImplementation ......................................... 22 Map IBRD 27658 This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipicntis only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed withotit World Bank authorization.   - jjj - REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT CREDIT AND PROJECT SUMMARY Borrower: Republic of Guinea Implementing Agency: Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Forests (MAEF) through the Agricultural Research Institute (IRAG), the National Rural Developrne; t and Agricultural Extension Service (SNPRV), and the Livestock Department (DNE) Beneficiaries: Farmers and herders Poverty: Not applicable Credit amount: SDR 23.6 million (US$35.0 million equivalent) Terms: Standard IDA terms, with 40 years maturity Commitment Fee: 0.50 percent on undisbursed credit balances, beginning 60 days after signing, less any waiver Onlending Terms: IDA funds for agricultural research would be made available to IRAG as executing agency in the form of a grant. Financing Plan: See Annex 1 Net Present Value: N/A Staff Appraisal Report: 15216-GUI Map: IBRD 27658 Project Identification Number: 1081   MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE PRESEI)ENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS ON A PROPOSED CREDIT TO THE REPUBLIC OF GUINEA FOR A NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT 1. I submit for your approval the following memorandum and recommendation on a proposed development credit to the Republic of Guinea for SDR 23.6 million, the equivalent of US$35.0 million, on standard IDA terms with a maturity of 40 years to help finance a National Agricultural Services Project. Cofinancing totaling US$27.8 million would be provided by the European Union, the French Ministry of Cooperation, and the Caisse fran,aise de Developpement. 2. Country and Sector Background. Guinea is richly endowed with renewable natural resources, high rainfall and rivers with considerable potential for irrigation and power generation, land that can be further developed, and forests that are important assets nationally and internationally. Guinea has a population 6.2 million with an annual growth rate of about 2.8 percent. From the late 1950s through the mid-1980s Guinea's policies were designed to assert central control over the economy. In 1985, a change of government and adoption of an economic stabilization and adjustment program led to implementation of policies to promote sustainable growth by reducing the role of the state in the economy and instituting market-based economic management. From 1988-1994, real GDP grew at an average of 4.1 percent per year compared to an average rate of 2 percent during 1958-1984. However, although Guinea's GDP per capita of $510 in 1994 is higher than the average for Sub-Saharan Africa, income distribution is highly skewed with agricultural incomes about one-third the national average and Guinea has some of the lowest quality of life indicators in the world. 3. The First Republic (1958-1984) taxed agriculture heavily and provided little support for technology development and dissemination or rural infrastructure. Consequently, agriculture's performance was poor and the agricultural trade balance became negative. With economic liberalization, agriculture has grown since the late 1980s by over 3 percent p.a., reaching a peak of 5.1 percent in 1994. Agriculture has great potential for increased production and income generation through yield increases, given Guinea's favorable climatic and agro- ecological conditions, and the currently low levels of technology. Guinea's agriculture today is characterized by small holdings (70 percent of farms have less than 2 ha), and very low labor and land productivity. Consumption of fertilizers is only about 8,000 tons per year, and pesticide consumption is negligible. Average yields for the major crops are 600-1,500 kg/ha for paddy, 900 kg/ha for corn/millet and sorghum intercropped, 600 kg/ha for groundnuts, and 7,000 kg/ha for cassava. Yields are low due to declining natural soil fertility, low input use, poor seed quality, and poor husbandry practices; production increases have been mostly due to area expansion. Over the years, the agricultural trade balance has deteriorated as rice imports increased and agricultural exports stagnated. In 1994, rice imports totaled about US$50.0 million, five times the value of major agricultural exports.  - 2 - 4. The Government's goals and strategy for the agricultural sector are articulated in its 1991 Letter of Agricultural Development Policy (LPDA), which was submitted to IDA as part of the National Agricultural Export Promotion Project (Cr. 2407-GUI). The overall goals are to: (i) promote food security and reduce food imports (especially of rice); (ii) promote agricultural exports (coffee, fruits, and cotton); (iii) provide essential support services to rural producers, and (iv) ensure a rational management of natural resources. The strategy to achieve these objectives is to: (a) pursue the macro-economic reforms agreed under the SAL and sector adjustment programs to reinforce the market economy; (b) continue to disengage the State from productive activities and from services that can be privatized; (c) improve business conditions to attract private agricultural investments, (d) improve agricultural research and extension, and develop a seed industry; (e) improve rural infrastructure, and (f) build up local administrative capacity. 5. The 1995 IDA/Government public expenditure review raised the following issues concerning agriculture: (a) public sector involvement is disproportionately large -- the functions, structure and size of the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Forests (MAEF) need to be reexamined, particularly as producer organizations, village associations and small enterprises are increasingly able to carry out activities formerly provided by the Government; (b) the pattern of funding is untenable -- salaries take up 97 percent of MAEF's recurrent budget while donors finance 85 percent of investment and 80 percent of recurrent expenditures, leading to a donor- driven and fragmented investment program; (c) too little attention is paid to operation and maintenance -- strategies for maintenance and cost recovery are needed, especially for rural infrastructure; and (d) the cost of public investment is high (including large expenditures for technical assistance) and its impact is limited -- criteria are needed for accepting and ranking projects, and for ensuring that they fit into the core investment program, that their numbers remain manageable, and that their development impact is commensurate with the expenditure made. As implementation capacity in MAEF expands, and to accelerate this process, public sector projects should be integrated into national programs under the line departments. All of this will require a new partnership between MAEF and donors, in which the role of long-term technical assistance is reduced and replaced, over time, with national staff and short-term consultancies, ad hoc missions or periodic support missions, whenever outside expertise is needed. 6. The Government is aware of these issues and has started to rationalize public investment in agriculture, and to coordinate the interventions of different donors more closely. Two steps in this direction are: (a) development of the National Agricultural Services Project (NASP) as a tool to rationalize public expenditures and harmonize donor support; and (b) formulation of an agricultural sector policy note (Annex 5 in the Staff Appraisal Report). The agricultural policy note, which is an integral part of this operation, states the Government's position regarding: (a) respective roles of the public and private sectors in agricultural development; (b) improvements in the quality of individual investment projects and in the agricultural public investment program as a whole; (c) cost recovery and recurrent cost financing; (d) technical assistance; (e) input supply; and (f) updating the Agricultural Development Policy Letter. In the policy note, MAEF states that its primary role is to encourage private sector initiative and investments by creating an enabling environment and by limiting itself to the provision of services and infrastructure that have a public goods nature. The agricultural policy letter referred to in para. 4 will be formally revised by December 31, 1996, by which time the Government, after consultation with IDA and other donors, will organize a donors' meeting to  - 3 - review investment needs not covered by this project. Main areas for investment are rural infrastructure (rural roads, village water supply, and small-scale irrigation), and credit. The agricultural sector policy note will form the basis for the revised letter. MAEF is determined to transform the managerial administration of a bloated public sector under the First Republic into a lean, technically competent development organization. To this effect, MAEF has carried out an institutional analysis of all its units and their staff and is in the process of readjusting the staffing of the Ministry in accordance with a more narrowly defined mandate. The proposed project will help accelerate this process and promote a viable solution to the problem of overstaffing within the Ministry through voluntary staff reductions. 7. Project Rationale. The agricultural sector in Guinea has great potential for responding rapidly to a carefully designed investment program with special emphasis on the provision of agricultural services (technology generation and dissemination, and improved animal health and husbandry practices). Agriculture can play a significant role in the economic adjustment process by providing the initial supply response needed to stimulate economic activities, and also by reducing food imports and providing a sustainable source of export earnings to support long-term economic growth. If the anticipated growth is to materialize, MAEF's policy formulation and coordination capacity needs to be strengthened, and greater efficiency in service delivery and responsiveness to producers will be essential. Donor support to Guinean agriculture also needs to be well coordinated and MAEF needs to regain control over externally funded projects. Under the NASP, there would be a partnership between the Government and donors for the provision of agricultural services. The Government would be responsible for identifying and preparing its priority programs, and would work with donors to improve the efficiency and sustainability of those programs, without sacrificing ownership. 8. None of the alternative channels through which agricultural services have been delivered in Guinea in the past have yielded satisfactory results in terms of broad based productivity increase and financial sustainability. Agricultural extension and applied research undertaken in the context of commodity development (filiere) projects traditionally have a high overhead, reach too few farmers, and are mono-crop specific. When undertaken in the context of area development projects, the delivery of these services loses in professionalism and creates parallel structures with conflicting approaches (a source of confusion to farmers). In addition, area development projects, by internally undertaking activities that could best be delivered by other (public or private) operators are often sources of scope diseconomies. Private extension in Guinea currently does not seem feasible. 9. Project Objectives. The NASP's overall development objective is to improve nationwide agricultural productivity and production, incomes of farmers and food security. The operation is designed to: (i) reshape the public sector's role to complement the private sector and support private sector led growth; (ii) develop human capital, i.e., the knowledge and skills of both professionals (researchers, extension agents and livestock specialists) and farmers; and (iii) improve MAEF's capacity to provide services that are 'public goods" and to arrest environmental degradation. The project's implementation objectives are to: (a) strengthen the field presence and technical capacity of MAEF in the areas of sectoral policy formulation, project and donor coordination, and agricultural statistics; (b) strengthen agricultural extension to accelerate the dissemination of appropriate and sustainable technologies, and increase land and labor productivity; (c) improve agricultural research's output of appropriate technologies for increased  - 4 - productivity; (d) improve animal production and veterinary support services to herders; and (e) increase responsiveness to social and gender issues as well as environmental concerns. 10. Project Description. The NASP would expand the scope of agricultural services throughout the country. It is a direct successor to two ongoing operations financed by IDA and other donors -- the Livestock Sector Rehabilitation Project (Cr. 1725-GUI) and the Agricultural Research and Extension Project (Cr. 1955-GUI) -- and would build on their achievements. It would also be closely coordinated with the IDA-financed Rural Resources Management Project which is scheduled for Board presentation in FY1997. The NASP has four components: (a) institutional capacity building in MAEF: (i) support to the Agricultural Policy Coordination Office (BCPA) to carry out priority studies; (ii) support to the MAEF's agricultural statistics office to produce reliable data; (iii) rehabilitation of MAEF's office space for staff at the regional and departmental levels; and (iv) implementation of a pilot operation (entrepreneurship capacity building scheme) to encourage MAEF employees to leave the public sector and become private entrepreneurs. (b) agricultural extension: provision of a continuous flow of appropriate extension recommendations to Guinea's 670,000 farm families; (c) agricultural research: building of a sustainable research capacity within Guinea's agricultural research institute (IRAG); and (d) livestock and animal health: increased vaccination coverage, and improvements in animal production systems and livestock infrastructure. 11. The program is being supported by the European Union (EU), France (MC and CfD), and IDA. The EU is financing animal health, genetic selection of milk cattle, animal traction, and slaughter and marketing facilities in certain parts of the country, as well as agricultural research in one of the six research stations. France is financing technical assistance for IRAG through its Ministry of Cooperation (MC), and the component to strengthen producer organizations and support to the development of poultry and small ruminants through its Caisse francaise de Developpement (CfD). IDA support would cover the remaining gaps for policy analysis, project coordination, and agricultural statistics; agricultural extension; agricultural research in the remaining five research stations; and animal health and livestock marketing and processing in the areas not funded by EU. This four-year, US$90.5 million program (about US$22.6 million/year) represents about 40 percent of the Government's annual public expenditure in agriculture, and will give farmers throughout the country access to quality agricultural services. No investments in extension, research or livestock services over and above the NASP would be made unless they meet agreed criteria of economic return and the funding required to cover their recurrent costs is assured. All project components include actions to improve the social and gender responsiveness of the agricultural services. A small unit will be created inside the SNPRV at the national level and selected agents will act as socio-cultural Subject Matter Specialists at the regional level. All extension agents will receive training in dealing effectively with different target groups. Transformation and conservation technologies (typically women's activities) will be introduced into the research and extension agendas; promising income-generating activities will be tested with women's groups; and female leaders will be trained in group and financial management. All project components also include actions to reduce possible negative effects of  - 5 - agricultural production technologies on the natural environment and to enhance their positive impact. A Project Preparation Facility advance of $1.0 million was granted in October 1995 to finance project start-up and prepare project executing agency staff for integrating previous projects' activities into the new national program. 12. Project Implementation. MAEF would have overall responsibility for implementing the project and no parallel administrative project units would be created. Each of the executing agencies, i.e., BCPA, SNPRV, IRAG, and DNE would be responsible for the execution of their respective components. To coordinate implementation of all NASP components, the Borrower will establish by June 30, 1996, and thereafter maintain: (a) (i) a Project Steering Committee; and (ii) a Project Technical Committee; and (b) ensure that each technical department of MAEF responsible for carrying out any part of the Project is headed at all times by experienced and qualified staff. The chairman of the NASP Steering Committee would be the Secretary General of MAEF and members would comprise the Directors of the executing agencies, the Director of the Rural Resources Management Project, senior officials from the Ministries of Plan and Finance, and representatives of the private sector (farmers' organizations). BCPA would be responsible for consolidating the annual work program, preparing sector budgets for approval by the NASP Steering Committee, and would coordinate with donors on annual reviews, supervision missions and implementation issues. The Steering Committee would have a sub-committee on environmental impact monitoring, composed of the Directors of BCPA, the Rural Resources Management Project, the PNAE, and the NGO Guinee Ecologie. The Project Technical Committee would be composed of the Directors of the executing agencies. 13. Lessons Learned from Previous Bank/IDA Involvement. The proliferation of small, uncoordinated donor-financed projects has in the past overtaxed MAEF's sector management capacity, leading to parallel implementation arrangements, insufficient counterpart funds, lack of Government commitment, and contradictory philosophies of development. This approach needs to be replaced with long-term national programs. Synergy between agricultural services is best achieved when projects are under common management. Experience under the Gueckedou Agricultural Development Project and the First Agricultural Services Project (Credits 1635/1636-GUI), for which Performance Audit Reports are available, shows that it is essential to: (a) have flexible and simple program designs with clear objectives and well-defined management structures; (b) ensure timely availability of counterpart funds; and (c) avoid complex co-financing arrangements. Draft Implementation Completion Reports are also available for the recently completed Livestock Sector Rehabilitation Project (Cr. 1725-GUI) and the National Seeds Project (Cr. 1864-GUI). The main lessons learned from the successful Livestock Rehabilitation Project are the importance of: (a) a proper macroeconomic incentive framework; (b) good identification and preparation which highlight the main difficulties facing the subsector; (c) regular supervision missions staffed with the right skills and including cofinanciers; (d) constructive dialogue with the line implementing agency; and (e) training for project staff and beneficiaries (herders). Experience with this project also highlighted the problems associated with inadequate counterpart funding. Major lessons learned from the less successful Seeds project are: (a) the need to create a demand for improved technology through effective agricultural support services (research and extension) and appropriate pricing policies; (b) the importance of involving private sector stakeholders at the outset to develop a private seeds industry; and (c) the importance of strong management based on the development of local capacity, with less reliance on expatriate  - 6 - technical assistance. All of these lessons have been incorporated in the design of the present project and plans for its implementation and supervision. 14. Rationale for IDA Involvement. The NASP is consistent with the Bank's country assistance strategy (CAS) for Guinea, which was presented to the Board in February 1994. It is the first step in a strategy to move towards integrated investment lending in the agricultural sector, and constitutes the first in a series of time slices financed under a long-term program. It is cofinanced by several donors and links key subsectors of the agricultural investment program more closely. IDA's strategy in supporting NASP is to: (i) focus on the provision of basic, core agricultural services, (ii) concentrate on systemic solutions in the form of time slices within long-term national programs, and (iii) assist the Government in mobilizing a concerted donor effort in these areas. 15. Agreed Actions. The Government has agreed to the following actions: (a) as covenants: (i) completion of several organizational and policy studies, and implementation of the entrepreneurship capacity-building scheme; (ii) measures to improve IRAG's performance; (iii) establishment of a Project Account with periodic replenishments; (iv) establishment and maintenance of a Project Steering Committee and a Project Technical Committee; (v) submission of work programs, investment proposals and related budgets; (vi) maintenance of policies and procedures to permit monitoring and evaluation of the NASP; and (vi) a joint mid-term review with the cofinanciers no later than March 31, 1998; (b) as conditions of credit effectiveness: (i) establishment of the Project Account with an initial deposit of US$300,000 equivalent; (ii) execution of a grant agreement on behalf of the Borrower and IRAG; (iii) contracting of independent auditors and certification by the auditors that the accounting system of each implementing agency is operational; and (iv) adoption of a Project Implementation Manual; and (c) as a condition of disbursement for the entrepreneurship capacity building scheme, receipt of a report and recommendations on implementation modalities and schedules satisfactory to IDA. 16. Environmental Aspects. The NASP is rated "B" for environmental assessment purposes, and an environmental analysis was carried out during August/September 1995. The assessment concluded that the NASP would have a neutral or positive impact on the natural environment, provided that the mitigation plan to be funded under the project is put in place and carried out. The plan consists of (i) a careful evaluation and selection of agricultural technologies that have a positive impact on the natural environment, with emphasis on soil and water conservation practices and agroforestry; (ii) environmental training for staff and a mass communications plan; (iii) training of farmers and their organizations to deal with soil degradation problems; (iv) environmental monitoring, and (v) adaptive research aimed at environmental sustainability. These activities will be carried out by staff of the implementing agencies and their performance will be assessed during the mid-term review. 17. Program Objective Categories. The program will contribute to broad-based reduction in poverty in the country through increasing crop and livestock production and diversification, increasing food security and improving nutrition levels. Women play important roles in Guinea's agricultural sector as farmers, managers, decision makers, and farm laborers, and are expected to be major beneficiaries of the NASP. Increased incomes for women should result in improved household food security, nutrition and health areas where women are largely the decision makers.  - 7 - 18. Participatory Approach. The design of the NASP is based on experience gained in the implementation of two, ongoing, IDA-funded projects where stakeholder participation is seen as one of the keys to success. Design of the agricultural extension component is based on Training and Visit (T&V) management principles that have been internalized, have proven effective, and are being applied flexibly. SNPRV now uses systematically a method for farmer participatory research which has been developed through pilot operations that were started in 1994. Hence, extension recommendations are developed jointly between researchers, extension agents and farmers and are situation-specific. This has been facilitated through considerable investments in training (abroad and in-service) of staff, especially Subject Matter Specialists. Special attention has been given to attune the extension service to women farmers' needs and to involve NGOs in service delivery. Finally, with support from CfD, producer organizations are being strengthened, which in turn facilitates the task of developing and providing extension advice. In the design of the research component, care was taken to address all the fundamental weaknesses of IRAG and to systematically build up its research capacity. Research priorities were defined through a participatory process that brought together all the major stakeholders. All activities under the livestock and animal health component are extension of activities that were already successfully carried out under the IDA financed Livestock Sector Rehabilitation Project (Cr. 1725-GUI). 19. Project Benefits. The NASP would benefit the economy in several ways. It would focus the role of the Ministry of Agriculture on the provision of key agricultural services, increase the efficiency and impact of these services, and reduce waste in public expenditures. The institutional improvements in extension, research, and animal health would translate into the widespread diffusion and adoption of better agricultural technology, increase farmers productivity, production and incomes, and accelerate agricultural growth. The main beneficiaries would be farmers and herders, including rural women. 20. The project's economic justification is based on (i) cost-effectiveness and cost- benefit analysis for the research and extension components combined, (ii) cost-benefit analysis for the livestock component, and (iii) fiscal impact for the whole project. For research and extension, assuming that the national agricultural extension service will cover 50 percent of the territory by the year 2000 (up from 30 percent currently), that about 70 percent of rice farmers (compared with less than 50 percent today) would adopt the improved technical messages (with corresponding increases for other crops), and that, based on monitoring surveys by SNPRV, yields will increase by about 30 percent for farmers having direct contact with the extension service, the estimated economic rate of return is 46 percent. Ex-post and independent measures of the economic impact of agricultural extension in countries with lower potential than Guinea suggest returns ranging from 70 to 100 percent. Under the recently completed National Research and Extension Project (Cr. 1955-GUI), it was estimated that to achieve a 25 percent ERR, aggregate crop yields would have to increase by 15 percent. Actual yield increases were much greater, suggesting that the 46 percent ERR is reasonable. Sensitivity analysis also shows that for the project to break even at a discount rate of 12 percent, benefits would have to decrease by 53 percent, or costs increase by 115 percent, or costs increase by 50 percent and benefits be delayed three years (for example, because of a shortage of counterpart funds). These events are considered unlikely based on experience with similar projects in Guinea and elsewhere in Sub- Saharan Africa, and historical movements in the international prices of the main project commodities over the past 40 years.  - 8 - 21. Most of the benefits from the livestock component would come from increased beef and milk production in cattle herds with better animal health and a more conducive institutional environment. The rate of growth of the cattle herd is assumed to increase from 1 percent in 1996 to 1.35 percent by 2009. Similarly, milk production would increase by about 30 percent over the same period. Under these assumptions, the National Livestock Department estimates that the economic rate of return would be 30 percent. An independent ex-post estimate of the ERR for similar investments under the Livestock Services Rehabilitation Project (Cr. 1725- GUI) was 18 percent. 22. In terms of fiscal impact, annual expenditures for the services covered by the project as a percentage of agricultural GDP in 1994 (US$750 million) are 0.7 percent for research, 0.8 percent for extension, and 0.7 percent for livestock services. These percentages are well within international norms. All three components were tailored to the absorptive capacity of the executing agencies, and the proposed investments represent least-cost solutions. Support to institutional strengthening, including the much-needed restructuring of MAEF, would have a positive impact on public finances and can be expected over time to lower the salary bill. By integrating investments in research, extension and livestock services into national programs, the unit costs for these services will be lowered significantly. Especially in the case of extension, the cost per farm family will be reduced from between US$20 - US$100, depending on the type of crop- or area-based project, to US$10. In the case of livestock, pharmaceuticals are sold on a commercial basis while herders pay half the cost of vaccination services. Overall, the project would generate an estimated annual incremental recurrent cost of US$6.5 million equivalent in 1995 prices, representing 6 percent of total public expenditures on agriculture in 1994. Given the low income of most of the rural population, cost recovery at this time would have adverse welfare implications and is not practicable. However, MAEF will analyze the possibilities for partial cost recovery for agricultural services as part of its review of the sector investment program, to be completed and submitted to IDA for review by end December 1997. 23. Project Sustainability. Alter studying the multiplicity of projects in extension, research and livestock development carried out in the past, the Government has, on the basis of results and least-cost considerations, committed itself to a national program which will integrate ongoing and future efforts in the provision of agricultural services. This approach will lower the unit cost of delivering these services and limit it to some US$20 per farm family or about 2 percent of agricultural GDP. Expenditures of this magnitude fit within the country's public finances and are likely to be sustained over the long term. Through the provision of more professional and regular agricultural services, the project will contribute to a growing confidence of the farming community in the administration, which should, if successful, ensure longer term sustainability of project efforts. Further, the Government will study the possibilities for cost recovery through introduction of a levy on commercial crops, and/or some cost recovery for extension advice. Finally, the Government will pilot initiatives for private sector/NGO participation in extension on a cost-sharing basis. Over time, it can be expected that improved prosperity of the farmning community will permit more cost recovery and generate a demand for extension services from sources other than those publicly funded. The institutional sustainability of the program is enhanced by the fact that there is strong government and beneficiary ownership; the program has been designed by Guineans and would use existing channels for implementation. 24. Risks. The risks foreseen include: (i) ineffective management and training of widely scattered extension, research and livestock agents; (ii) the failure of Government and/or donors to  - 9 - sustain the long-term commitment required to achieve durable improvements in the effectiveness of agricultural support services; and (iii) shortage of counterpart funds and long-term fiscal sustainability. Concerning agricultural services, good management and improvements in staff quality are expected as a result of the application of T&V management principles. Performance of the project executing agencies will be assessed through the monitoring and evaluation arrangements and through joint support missions in the field by IDA and the co-financiers. The multi-donor annual review of work plans and budgets, as well as the mid-term review, will allow fine-tuning of programs. The combination of these measures should lead to visible impact on farmers' yields, production, and incomes and thereby ensure long-term commitment to agricultural support services by Government and donors. Regarding counterpart funds and fiscal sustainability, the reduction of independent projects and the reorganization of the Ministry of Agriculture will significantly reduce the unit costs of these services, and thereby increase the capacity of the Government to fund the single national agricultural services program. Also, it is expected that the review of the agricultural sector investment program will identify new possibilities for cost recovery, and that accelerated agricultural growth and exports will increase fiscal revenues. 25. Recommendation. I am satisfied that the proposed credit would comply with the Articles of Agreement of the Association and I recommend that the Executive Directors approve it. James D. Wolfensohn President Attachment Washington, D.C.  - 10- Schedule A REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT Estimated Costs And Financinz Plan A. Estimated Costs IDA Funding National Agricultural Services Program (including Local Foreign Total contingencies) Project Component ------------------------US $ million---------------------- A. Institutional Support to Ministry of Agriculture 1. Agricultural Policy Coordination Bureau (BCPA) 0.4 1.0 1.4 1.3 2. National Directorate of Agriculture (DNA/SNSA) 1.3 1.0 2.3 1.6 3. Support to Regional Directorates 0.8 0.6 1.4 1.3 4. Pilot Operationto Reduce StaffofMAEF 1.1 0.8 1.9 2.0 B. Extension 1. National Level " 14.6 1.5 16.1 2.32' 2. Regional Level 4.1 4.6 8.6 9.1 3. Supportto Farmers' Organizations 2.2 2.8 5.0 -- C. Research 8.1 12.2 20.4 8.4 D. Livestock 13.4 7.1 20.5 5.8 E. Gender in Development and Environmental Action 1.1 0.7 1.8 2.1 F. PPF Refinancing 1.0 -- 1.0 1.0 Total Baseline Costs 48.1 32.3 80.4 -- Physical Contingencies 2.4 2.0 4.4 -- Price Contingencies 3.4 2.3 5.7 -- Total Project Costs/IDA Credit 53.9 36.6 90.5 35.0 1/ icludes salaries of all extension staff. 2/ Includes US$0.8 million for incremental salaries due to project. B. Financine Plan Local Foreign Total ---------------US $ million------------- Government 26.7 -- 26.7 Beneficiary Contribution 1.0 -- 1.0 European Union 6.5 4.4 10.9 Caisse francaise de D6veloppement 2.5 3.2 5.8 Ministere de la Cooperation Francaise 2.3 8.8 11.1 IDA 14.8 20.2 35.0 Total 53.9 36.6 90.5 Note: Does not include Government contribution in terms of duties and taxes foregone are estimated at about US$20.5 million.  Schedule BI REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT Economic Benefits and Costs Present Value of Flows (1996, in US$ Million) Benefits Research and Extension 197 Livestock Costs Research and Extension 92 Livestock Net Present Value Research and Extension 105 Livestock Internal Rate of Return Research and Extension 46% Livestock 30% Main Assumptions: All output prices are liberalized; 20% duty on imported rice Exchange rate is freely floating Discount rate - 12% Extension coverage - from 30% in 1996 to 50% in 2000 Adoption rate - from 50% of contacted farmers in 1996 to 70% in 2000 for rice Yield increase - from 1.2 tons/ha to 2.0 tons/ha for rice Livestock mortality rate - from 5% in 1996 to 4% in 2009 Herd growth rate - from 1.0% in 1996 to 1.35 % in 2009 Switching Values of Critical Items: (Research and Extension) - For NPV at 12% to become negative: incremental value of production (quantities and/or prices) would have to be 53% lower than expected; or incremental costs would have to be 115% higher than expected; or incremental benefits would have to be delayed 3 years and costs 50% higher than expected. Nature of Benefits: - improvement in agricultural public expenditure planning and monitoring; - incremental output of major food crops (rice, small millet, groundnut, maize, and cassava) and livestock products (meat and cow milk); - the project will extend improved crop and livestock husbandry practices to all 33 prefectures of Guinea as opposed to 20 currently; - improvement in Government coordination of donor activities in support of agriculture. Main Beneficiaries: Farmers and herders, including rural women.  - 12 - Schedule B2 REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT Financial Sustainability Proiections of Central Government Revenues and Cost of Agricultural Services (GNF billions) 1996 1997 1998 1999 1996 to 1999 Total Budgetary Revenue 420 461 493 560 1934 Total Budgetary Expenditures 735 829 917 1001 3482 Agricultural Sector Budget 114 129 142 155 540 Agricultural Services 19 22 24 26 92 Assumptions: - Base case projections for budgetary revenues and expenditures as per latest staff estimations in the Green Cover Public Expenditure Review (December 1995). These projections are lower than those presented in the Policy Framework Paper 1995-1998 (SECM-95/1173) which assumed that the Government will take stronger measures to enhance revenue mobilization. - Constant inter-sectoral share of public expenditures from 1996 to 1999. - Constant intra-sectoral share of public expenditures in agriculture from 1996 to 1999. Risks: Inter-sectoral allocation may change, leaving little margin for achieving project objectives. To mitigate this risk, annual reviews of sectoral public expenditures would result in rationalization of the expenditure program and limit waste. In addition, cost recovery, especially for animal health services rendered by the public sector, would be sought.  - 13 - Schedule B3 Page 1 of2 REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAI, SERVICES PROJECT Key Performance Indicators Sector Indicators Actual Estimated - NASP (Projected) i______________________ 1991 1992 [ 1993 1994 J 199511996 [ 1997 1 1998 ] 1999 2000 Agricultural GDP (1988 1 constant GNF billion) 303 317 333 35() 366 384 403 423 447 471 Total Value of agricultural exports (US$ million) 28 23 31 43 62 75 9 1(00 130 156 Food production index (1988= 100) 113 121 127 134 142 151 16') 17(0 18( 192 Land productivity l (cereal yield index: 94 100 94 95 98 103 1(8 113 119 125 1988 = 100) Forestcover('OOOha) 14520 14460 14400 14340 14279 14219 14159 14100 14041 13982 Fertilizer Use on Arable Land (Kg/ha) 3.17 0.82 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 5.0 A26rcultural Extension Indicators ] 1996 [ 1998 2000 (a) Project Inputs 1. No. of Agricultural Districts/Field Extension Agents 1080 1180 1300 2. No. of Contact Groups (CG) 10,800 14,000 20,000 3. No. of Demonstration Plots 15,000 22,000 34,000 (b) Project Outputs 1. No. of farmer families contacted 1(0,(00 120,000 160,000 (% of total) (15%) (18%) (24%) 2. % of farmers contacted who are women 5% 20% 40% (c) Project Impact* Adoption rate 30% 35% 50% * = Based on surveys  - 14 - Schedule B3 Page 2 of 2 REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT Livestock Current Mid-Tcrm Situation Indicators J Situation 1998 in Year (1995) j2000. I. Serology analyses perfonned 10,000/yr 15,000/yr 20,000/yr 2. Number of vaccinations: (a) CBPP 470,000/yr 700,000/yr 500,000/yr (b) PPR 200,000/yr 700,000/yr 300,000/yr 3. No. of private veterinary offices established 20 30 40 4. No. of vaccinations given by private _ 300,000 500,000 veterinarians 5. Consumption of veterinary phannacetiticals per 450 600 900 head of cattle in GNF 6. No. of herders associations in operation 200 300 500 7. National census of livestock by categories 8. Officially recorded slaughters, sales on the hoof, imports and exports I Azricultural Research Ind I ators J 199 19986 2000 o. of completed on-station trials per researcher 4 6 8 o. of completed on-fann trials per researcher 3 5 7 No. of joint field visits with extension per program 5 15 21 (No. of days)  - 15 - Schedule C Page 1 of3 REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT Summary of Provosed Procurement Arrangements (IJS$ rnillion equivalent including contingencies, net of taxes and duties) ._ _ _______US$ million. :,. :.: . : ,-. ;. '' .::.... -, ' -.': :-=.,. .. .. .I:I Pre e: e.t ICB NCB Other N.B.F.a Total 1. Civil Works 1.0 2.8 3.8 (0.7) (- (-) (0.7)l 2. Goods 2. 1 Equipment, Supplies and 9.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 9.6 Furniture (9.1) (0.2) (0.2) (--) (9.4) 3. Consultancies 3.1 Consultant Services 4.0 4.0 (4.0) (--) (4.0) 3.2 Training 4.9 5.3 10.2 (4.9) (-) (4.9)l 3.3 Technical Assistance 10.3 10.3 (--) (--)I 3.4 Entrepreneurship Capacity 2.0 2.0 Building Scheme (b) (2.0) (2.0) 4. Miscellaneous 4.1 Operating costs 15.1 10.0 25.1 (12.1) (--) (12.1) 4.2 Salaries (including incremental) 1.0 23.5 (c) 24.5 (0.8) (--) (0.8) 4.3 PPF refinancing 1.0 1.0 (1.0) (1.0) Total Costs 9.1 | 1.3 [ 28.2 51.9 | 90.5 Total Financed by the IDA credit* | (9.1) l (0.9) (25.0) l (--) l (35.0) Note: (a) N.B.F.: Not Bank-Financed. (b) Listed under consultant services (disbursement category (4)(e)). (c) Entirely financed by Government. * Figures in parentheses are the respective amounts financed by the IDA credit. * Figures may not add up due to rounding.  - 16 - Schedule C Page 2 of 3 REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT Disbursement Categories Amount of the Credit Allocated % of Expenditures to be Category (Expressed in Financed .............................................................................. ... ................................SD R E quiva.ent) 1. Civil Works 70% a. Institutional Capacity Building (MAEF/BCPA) 70,000 b. Agricultural Extension Services (SNPRV) 100,000 c. Livestock and Animal Husbandry (DNE) 170,000 d Agricultural Research (IRAG) 70,000 2. Materials, Equipment and Vehicles 100% of foreign expenditures a. Institutional Capacity Building (MAEF/BCPA) 610,000 95% of local expenditures b. Agricultural Extension Services (SNPRV) 2,150,000 c. Livestock and Animal Husbandry (DNE) 1,480,000 d. Agricultural Research (IRAG) 1,210,000 3. Training 100% a. Institutional Capacity Building (MAEF/BCPA) 240,000 b. Agricultural Extension Services (SNPRV) 1,550,000 c. Livestock and Animal Husbandry (DNE) 570,000 d. Agricultural Research (IRAG) 670,000 4. Consultant Services and Studies 100% a. Institutional Capacity Building (MAEF/BCPA) 540,000 b. Agricultural Extension Services (SNPRV) 740,000 c. Livestock and Animal Husbandry (DNE) 470,000 d. Agricultural Research (IRAG) 610,000 e. Entrepreneurship Capacity Bldg. (MAEF/BCPA) 1,210,000 5. Operating Costs 80% a. Institutional Capacity Building (MAEF/BCPA) 1,350,000 b. Agricultural Extension Services (SNPRV) 3,030,000 c. Livestock and Animal Husbandry (DNE) 2,350,000 d. Agricultural Research (IRAG) 1,350,000 6. Refinancing of PPF 710,000 7. Unallocated 2,350,000 TOTAL 23,600,000  - 17 - Schedule C Page 3 of 3 REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT Estimated IDA Disbursements IBRD fiscal year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 ------------------------------- US $ million --------------------------------- Annual 3.5 7.0 7.0 10.5 7.0 Cumulative 3.5 10.5 17.5 28.0 35.0  - 18 - Schedule D REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT A. Project Key Project Processing Events 1. Time taken to prepare the project: nine months 2. Prepared by: Government, with assistance from the World Bank and the project's cofinanciers 3. First Bank mission: February 1995 (Identification) 4. Appraisal mission departure: July 1995 5. Negotiations: January 1996 6. Board Approval April 1996 7. Planned Date of Effectiveness: July 1996 8. List of PCRs/PPARs consulted: Loan/Credit No. Project PCR/ICR Date PCR No. Cr. 1635-GUI Gueckedou Agricultural 05/95 12545 Development Cr. 1636-GUI First Agricultural Services 05/95 13148 Cr. 1725-GUI Livestock Sector Rehabilitation Draft Cr. 1864-GUI Agricultural Seeds Draft This report is based on the findings of an appraisal mission that visited Guinea in July, 1995, comprising Franz Schorosch (mission leader), Mathurin Gbetibouo, Marie-H6lene Collion, and Lucie Tran (AF5AE); Noel Chabeuf (AF3AE); Joseph Toledano (Resident Mission, Conakry, Guinea); Daphne Spurling, Pierre Rondot, Hannibal Muhtar (consultants). The mission was joined by Liba Feldblyum (LOAAF) and Bernard Abeille (AF5DR). The following representatives of cofinanciers participated in the appraisal: P. Remy, A. Borderon, R. Gouin (French Cooperation); J. Dean (USAID); and F. Viault (European Union). The document was cleared by Messrs. R. Harris (Division Chief, AF5AE) and B. Fredriksen (Acting Director, AF5).  - 19 - Schedule E Page 1 of 5 REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT AF5DR - Western Africa Department Status Of Bank Group Operations In GUINEA PFDBR25 - Suxmiary Statement Of Loans and IDA Credits (LOA data as of 1/31/96 - MIS data as of 03/06/96) By Country Country: GUINEA Amount in USS million (less cancellations) Loan or Fiscal Undis- Closing Credit No. Year Borrower Purpose Bank IDA bursed Date Credits 35 Credits(s) closed 541.57 6.35 C19150-GN 1988 GUINEA HIGHWAYS IV 55.00 7.14 12/31/96(R) C19850-GN 1989 GUINEA WATER II 40.00 6.75 10/31/96 C20680-GN 1990 GUINEA FORESTRY & FISHERY M 8.00 .85 06/30/96(R) C21060-GN 1990 GUINEA NAT RURAL INFRASTRUC 40.00 7.46 12/31/96(R) C21120-GN 1990 GUINEA SECOND URBAN 57.00 34.64 12/31/96(R) C24070-GN 1993 GUINEA AGR.EXPORT PROMOTION 20.80 16.68 12/31/99 C24160-GN 1993 GUINEA POWER II 50.00 30.20 12/31/97 C24440-GN 1993 GUINEA TELECOMMUNICATIONS 14.60 5.58 04/30/96(R) C25740-GN 1994 GUINEA HEALTH/NUT.SCTR. 24.60 23.35 06/30/01 C26530-GNIS) 1995 GUINEA FINANCIAL SECTOR 23.00 13.31 03/31/97 C27190-GN 1995 GUINEA EQUITY AND SCHOOL IM 42.50 40.66 06/30/01 C C27870-GN 1996 GUINEA HIGHER EDUCATION MAN 6.60 6.54 06/30/00 TOTAL nLraber Credits 12 382.10 193.15 Loans 3 Loans(s) closed 73.50 All closed for GUINEA TOTAL nurber Loans - TOTAL*** 73.50 923.67 of which repaid 73.50 10.09 TOTAL heLd by Bank & IDA .00 913.58 Amount sold of which repaid TOTAL undisbursed 199.50 Notes: * Not yet effective ** Not yet signed *** Total Approved, Repayments, and Outstanding balance represent both active and inactive Loans and Credits. (R) indicates formally revised Closing Date. CS) indicates SAL/SECAL Loans and Credits. The Net Approved and Bank Repayments are historical value, all others are market value. The Signing, Effective, and Ctosirg dares are based upon the Loan Department offical data and are not taken fioom the Task Budget file.  - 20 - Schedule E Page 2 of 5 Status Of Bank Group Operations In GUINEA PFDBR25B - List of CLosed SALs and Secals By Country Country: GUINEA Amount in USS million (less canceLLations) Loan or FiscaL Undis- Closing Credit No~ Year Borrower Purpose Bank IDA bursed Date CA0110-GN 1986 GUINEA SAL I 17.00 .00 12/31/1988(R) C16590-GN 1986 GUINEA SAL I 25.00 .00 12/31/1988(R) C19260-GN 1988 GUINEA SAL If 65.00 .00 12/31/1993(R) C21550-GN 1990 GUINEA EDUC SEC ADJ PROGRAM 20.00 .00 06/30/1994(R) C21480-GN 1990 GUINEA PRIVATE SECTOR PROMO 50.00 .00 12/31/1992(R) C19261-GN 1993 GUINEA SAL 11 .10 .00 05/07/1994 Total GUINEA 177.10 .00  - 21 - Schedule E Page 3 of 5 REPUItLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAI, AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT Statement of IFC Investments As of.January 31, 1996 (1US$ Millions) Oripinal Gross Commitinmits Fiscal Years Obligor Typu ofBuisiness IFC IFC Ptpnt. Totals Held by Heldby Undisb Coimmitted Loan Equity IF,C Ptpnt. idcl. Ptpnit. 1983 a Socite Mixte Ardor-Guine S.A. Mining and [;traction of 13.61 1.23 14.84 / Metals and Otther Ores 1987 Banquelnternationale pour le Commerce Financial Seivcs 1.(( 1.(0 1.0( et l'Industrie de la Guin6e 1987 a Societe Intemationale des Granits, Cemeint and Constniction 0. I 0.11 Marbres et Roches Assimilees S. Materials 1988 Societe Aurifere de Guinee S.A. Mining and Extraction of 8.25 8.25 7.59 Metals and Other Ores 1994 Ciments de Guinee Cement and Constniction 1.50 1.50 1.35 Materi ils 1995 Societe Guineenne d'H6tellerie et Hotels and Tourism 3.66 0.56 4.22 4.22 3.41 dinvestissements Total gross commitments b/ 27.13 2.79 29.92 Less cancellations, tenninations, repayment & sales 17.53 -1.77 15.76 Total commitinents now held c/ 9.6(0 4.56 14.16 14.16 3.41 Total undisbursed comnitments 3.41 3.41 a/ Investments which have been fully cancelled, tenminated, written-offm sold, redeemed or repaid. bS Gross commitments consist of approved and signed projects. c/ Held commitments consist of disbursed and indisbtursed investernents.  REPUBLIC OF GUINEA NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT Action Plan to Improve Implementation -- { RATINGS FY Credit Project I)evelopmcnt Implementation Cumulatihe Problems and Proposed Actions Board No. Name Objectivc Progress Dishi rsenaent k AlM)Eo ;a _ La; (%/) _,_. 1990 2112- Second S S 52.2 The project's procurement and disburscimciit delays are related to GUI Urban country issues: lack of counterpart funds, the disqualification of a consultant firm, the creation of a central procurement agency (ACGP) for procurement, and a new decree on the inclision of taxes in the contractor's price and bid. However, an $1 1.0( million contract for Conakry roads was approved in December 1995; bids for a $4.5 million contract for other Conakry roads have been finalized; and a $3.0 million contract for secondary cities has been prepared. This, plus actual disbursements, amount to 80% of the credit. An action plan has been agreed w ith the Government to extend the closing date for one y ear. 1992 2398- Public U U The Credit was closed on 12/31/95. Implementation w-as GUI Enterprise unsatisfactorv and the project did not achieve its objectives. The Reform _ __ ICR is under prep ration. 1993 2407- Agric. U U 41. 1 In the mid-term review of Feb. 1995, thc Government and IDA GUI Export agreed to reduce project scope and focus the project on activities Promotion directly affecting agricultural exports. The contract delegating managemenit of the project to an expatriate firmi w-ould be terminated. Actions taken include wsarning of suspcnsion should the agreed action plan of February 1995 fail to be implemncited by end- April 1996. A mission is planned for end-April 1996 to follow-up on progress with the action plaii. 1993 2416- Pow%er 11 S U 36.6 Problems include: largc private customier arrears, non-adjustment of m GUI tariffs, cash flow difficulties of the privale operator, outstanding atidit, lack of counterpart funds, and poor financial management of energy sector and ENELGUI. A mid-termi review planned by end- o _April, 1996. The Government has been advised that futiure m  financing of the project will be difficult to justify if substantial progress on these items is not made. 1995 2653- Financial S S 52.3 This adjustment operation became effective in December 1994 and GUI Sector the first tranche was released in January 1995. Most conditions for the release of the second tranche have been or are being met. However, there are two outstanding problems which may delay second tranche release: (i) the third year ESAF program supported by IMF resources is off-track; talks with the IMF are scheduled to begin March 20, 1996 on a shadow program; and (ii) the Government has not reduced its majority share in the Banque Internationale du Commerce et de l'Industrie en Guinee (BICIGUI) to the required maximum of 39%. IDA is working with the Govermnent and IFC, a 9% shareholder in BICIGUI, to help reduce _________ _________ _________ _ _______ ______ ______ ___ Governm ent share. (DL Ci   IBRD 2765E MAURITANIA t12- ID 276. 'SENE ,rGA_L_ S E N E G A L j GUINEA - SENEGAL v ~M A L I r _ St\E SLIRtlNEAL _ B * Ir o NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT oulnrA rn ~ sI rFASO /X~ ~~>/<_ SIERRA!LEON - -Tr DCIVOIRE GHANA N. McI, 12- ,-- . Nauo Tein I< -- Pr4ctr Boudoir .j j r.ekf- _ IIEI ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 12'O A~~~~A R --U~~~~~~l 1 E A .i Rain Forest . - Region Boundories y t\<T\ , > Bush to Tree Savannah L i G i _____Fouta Djaobn (hilly, lightly forested, upland plateau) )~u KILOMETERS