Burkina Faso - Community-Based Rural Development Project

Report No. PID8358 Project Name Burkina Faso-Community Based Rural (@) Development (APL) Region Africa Regional Office Sector Decentralization; Institutional Development; Community Action Program; Natural Resources Management Project ID BFPE35673 Borrower(s) GOVERNMENT OF BURKINA Implementing Agency Address MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE (PNGT) Programme National de Gestion des Terroirs (PNGT) B.P. 1487 Ouagadougou 01 Burkina Faso Contact Person: Albert Djigma, Coordinator PNGT Tel: 226-32-47-53/54 Fax: 226-31-74-10 Email: albert.djigma@ agriculture.gov.bf Environment Category B Date PID Prepared November 5, 1999; revised July 30, 2000 Projected Appraisal Date January 24, 2000 Projected Board Date September 5, 2000 1. Country and Sector Background Rural sector issues2.1 The agricultural sector (crop and livestock) is the main source of employment and income for about 80 percent of the Burkinabe population and generates important growth and employment linkages with the potentially dynamic non-agricultural rural economy. The sector is made up of around 1.3 million farm households, largely subsistence oriented, with limited access to services, markets and basic socio-economic infrastructure. The sector is also the principal source of growth for the economy -- contributing 32 percent to GDP and 60 percent to export earnings in 1998. 2.2 Performance of the agricultural sector was erratic in the 1980s, but maintained an average annual growth rate of four percent. During the first half of the 1990s, growth was lower (around 2 percent), but increased in the post devaluation period, to more than 6 percent, largely as a result of a tremendous boom in cotton output and livestock exports. Annual per capita GDP growth reached 4 percent in 1995, 6 percent in 1996, 4.7 percent in 1997, and 6.2 in 1998. 2.3 In spite of these relatively positive 'macro-level' indicators, the incidence of poverty in rural areas remains high, particularly among food crop producers. Fifty-one percent of the rural population lives below the poverty line (versus 16 percent of the urban population) ; the incidence is higher among subsistence farmers (77 percent) than commercial farmers (42 percent). With a population of 11 million growing at about 2.7 percent per annum, intense pressure is being placed on the country's limited arable land resources. Shortened fallow periods, low use of  inorganic fertilizers, and overgrazing threaten an already fragile resource base and have resulted in serious soil degradation and conflict among different user groups. With limited arable land and rising population pressures, it is clear that intensification and technological change will be necessary to restore and increase the productive potential of the resource base. Yet, policy and institutional constraints (such as land tenure insecurity) often discourage farmers from making the productive investments necessary to reverse resource degradation, resulting in continued low productivity and increased poverty, rural and urban.2.4 In addition to their natural resources, the income earning potential of small farmers and wage laborers is strongly affected by their human capital. Improving the health status and cognitive skills of the rural population should be a top priority -- not only as a goal in itself, but as a cost-effective way of raising the productivity and incomes of the poor. The literacy rate in rural Burkina Faso is only seven percent compared with a national average of 20 percent and rural primary school enrollment is 19 percent compared with the national average of 36 percent. Health indicators place Burkina Faso among the lowest in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). More than one third of the children under five years of age suffer from malnutrition and Burkina Faso is strongly affected by the HIV/AIDS epidemic -- the prevalence is 7 percent among the general population; 13 percent in the transport sector. An analysis of these health indicators by socio-economic strata suggest large urban-rural disparities. 2.5 A poverty reduction strategy must give highest priority to rural development and its engine -- agricultural growth -- not because this is where the bulk of the poor reside, but rather because this is where the productive potential resides, where linkages with the local economy are strongest, and where growth can yield the largest impact on both rural and urban poverty. Efforts to improve the competitivity and productivity of the rural sector are at the core of the country's accelerated growth and poverty reduction strategy. However, the sector remains severely constrained by: (i) poor infrastructure (social and economic) leading to high input costs and low labor productivity, (ii) limited access to and use of improved technologies, (iii) land tenure insecurity, (iv) inadequate access to financial services, and (v) ineffective agricultural and social service delivery mechanisms. 2.6 Recent economic reforms have been favorable to rural development and agricultural growth through their price effects, however, they have been unfavorable through their public expenditure effects (reduced funding for rural infrastructure, agricultural research and extension). Coupled with reductions in foreign aid allocations to agriculture, the net impact has been a slowdown in rural growth and hence in poverty reduction. It is often assumed that opening the economy to market forces is sufficient to ensure rapid growth of the agricultural sector. Although reforms that facilitate the expansion of the export sectors are essential, specific characteristics of the rural sector such as: (i) a large number of smallholder farmers who are geographically dispersed and poorly organized, (ii) high exposure to multiple sources of co-variate risks (climate and market-related), (iii) complex institutional arrangements governing the markets for productive factors (e.g., land) and (iv) numerous market failures preventing their efficient operation suggest that, in addition to market reform, judiciously chosen public investment is needed. Specifically, public expenditure on rural infrastructure (hard and soft), technology generation, and institutional development/reform will be necessary for rural and agricultural growth to accelerate. 2.7 - 2 -  The challenge, in an era of limited and shrinking resources, will be to increase the relevance and cost effectiveness of public sector expenditures. Past efforts to tackle the policy, institutional and technical constraints facing the rural poor have been centrally driven and sectorally focused. As a result their effectiveness has been low. Decentralized decision-making and economic empowerment of beneficiary communities is expected to improve the choice, relevance, cost effectiveness, and maintenance of rural infrastructure (see box for overview of decentralization in Burkina Faso). In addition, to meet the demands of the local population, the deconcentration of sectoral ministries (and engaging in public/private partnerships where appropriate) will improve the delivery mechanisms of public goods and services and make them more demand-responsive. Such a vision is described in the Government's Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper and the Letter of Decentralized Rural Development Policy it has prepared to support the proposed operation.Decentralization in Burkina Faso BackgroundDecentralization in Burkina has a long and arduous history. The first, closely controlled, communes were created under the colonial regime. Attempts at consolidating local organizations succeeded, but none managed to institutionalize locally elected councils and mayors. The process started anew in 1993 with the referendum on the Constitution that proclaimed decentralization as the country's mode of territorial organization and management. The Commision Nationale de la Decentralisation (CND) was created and charged with developing a framework for the decentralization process and advising the Government on its implementation.The CND and the Government worked for five years before the National Assembly passed the Textes d'Orientation de la Decentralisation (TOD) in 1998. The TOD sets up the fundamental principles guiding the organization and implementation of decentralization in Burkina. Decentralization, or the right for decentralized entities to freely manage their own affairs, has become an organizing principal for promoting development and democracy.The TOD envisions two levels of decentralization: the province and the municipality. Both urban and rural municipalities will exist, each headed by its own elected officials (mayor and council). An urban municipality is a community of at least ten thousand people able to mobilize a budget of at least fifteen million FCFA. A rural municipality is defined by a population of, at least, five thousand people and a minimum budget of five million FCFA. Deconcentrated entities include the province and the department.The provincial territory includes departments, municipalities, and villages. As a decentralized level, the province is headed by an elected provincial council and a president; as a deconcentrated entity, it is administered by a haut-commisaire, assisted in his/er work by a consolatory body named the Conference des Cadres de la Province. The territory of the department includes communes and villages and is administered by a prefet.Key Institutions National Commission on Decentralization (Commission Nationale de la Decentralisation,CND): The CND is under the patronage of the Prime Ministry but enjoys a good deal of autonomy in identifying its program and implementing them. The Commission is responsible for conceptualizing and piloting the decentralization process through a program of research-action, dissemination of information and training. With the design and implementation of rural decentralization still very much on the drawing board, it is likely to be major player. The CND is financed largely through a consortium of donors. Of particular interest are two pilot instruments developed and managed by the CND: the SAGEDECOM and the -3 -  FODECOM. The SAGEDECOM is helping municipalities identify, design, and co-finance their training plan. GTZ in particular is supporting this program. The FODECOM is a fund whose purpose is to help fledgling municipalities start functioning. It co-finances recurrent costs and basic infrastructures. In association with AFD, the CND is also involved in a study on communal sustainable financing, and with CIDA, in assessing the results of decentralization so far and design a program in support of urban municipalities. Ministry of Territorial Administration (Ministere de l'Administration Territorial, MAT): The MAT in charge of implementing decentralization; it takes up where the conceptualizing role of the CND stops. It is also the lead ministry (Ministere de Tutelle) for decentralization and is responsible for enforcing the laws and decrees. Government strategy for the rural sector 2.8 The PRSP places an emphasis on improving the revenues and living conditions of the rural population, particularly food crop producers who account for 75 percent of the rural poor. This is to be achieved by: (i) accelerating broad-based, equitable growth; (ii) increasing access of the poor to basic social services (health, education, safe drinking water); (iii) increasing the employment and income generating potential of the poor; and (iv) promoting good governance. 2.9 The strategy for accelerating broad-based, equitable growth and increasing the employment and income gernerating potential of the poor relies heavily on improving the competitivity and sustainability of the crop and livestock sectors. This is to be achieved by addressing overall policy and institutional issues such as liberalization of the transport sector and reform of the public sector, as well as sector specific natural resource, production and marketing constraints. The government's agricultural strategy for the 2000-2010 period, the Document d'Orientation Strategique (DOS) and Plan Strategique Operationnel (PSO), outline the sector specific technical, policy and institutional actions needed. They are summarized in the following five priority action plans: Modernization of Agriculture: The main goal is to induce a fundamental shift from a low input, low output agriculture into a higher input (seeds, water, fertilizers, farm equipment), higher yield agriculture, in order to increase labor productivity and incomes. A special effort is required to identify and promote intensification technologies, appropriate to the country's various production zones. This calls for strengthening semi-formal savings/credit channels and requires a special effort on seed selection/distribution and in quality control of inputs. Soil Fertility: The main goal is to restore the nutrient content of the soil, a prerequisite for promoting agricultural intensification and land productivity increases. The strategy would comprise an incentive and institutional package designed to lower the price and improve the distribution of chemical fertilizers; the promotion of complementary organic fertilization technologies based on a greater integration of livestock into the farming systems; and the execution of various small scale soil erosion control structures and bush/tree plantings at the village level. Food Security: The main goal is to increase the production of local staples in which the country has a comparative advantage (millet, sorghum, maize) through better research and extension (service delivery) and to create an incentive framework favorable to the increased involvement of the private sector in the transport, storage and marketing of cereals. Support to Producer Organizations (POs): The main goal is to strengthen producer organizations so that they can: (i) participate in the formulation of sector and subsector policies and in the choice of public investment priorities; and (ii) organize the provision of key - 4 -  services and inputs to their members. Institutional Development: The main goal is to create public sector institutions that are well adapted to the redefined role of government, i.e. a role refocused on policy, regulation, planning, monitoring and the provision of demand-driven public services, consistent with a decentralized rural development strategy in which the resources and decision-making power is in the hands of the rural population.A variety of National Action Plans specifically focused on natural resource issues, e.g. the National Environment Action Plan (NEAP), the National Desertification Action Plan (PAN/LCD) and the National Soil Fertility Action Plan (PAGIS) are in direct support of these sectoral action plans.2.10 Given that land and labor are the principal income earning assets of the rural poor, increased access to basic social services and infrastructure is important not only as a stand-alone poverty reduction objective, but is also as an essential ingredient to increasing the productivity, and hence growth, of the rural sector. The social sectors have set ambitious poverty reduction goals. For example, the government's education objectives over the next 10 years include: (i) increasing at a reasonable cost, the primary school educational level from 40 to 70 percent, particularly in rural areas and especially girls and (ii) providing literacy training and increase the literacy rate from 22 to 40 percent. In terms of drinking water, the government's goal over the next 10 years is to have a majority (over 90 percent) of villages in all 45 provinces having one watering point for each 500 inhabitants, at a distance of no more than 500 meters from the residence, with sufficient capacity to provide 20 liters of water per capita per day. The social sector strategies have each emphasized the need for a decentralized approach in order to meet their targets. For example, the health sector aims to: (i) improve health coverage by decentralizing the provision and management of services to the district level, and (ii) improve the quality of health services by reinforcing the participation of users and communities in the management of health services. 2.11 Decentralization and participation are the fundamental guiding principals of the LPDRD, they are also the key to good governance as noted in the PRSP. Decentralization plays an important role in a rural poverty alleviation strategy, by placing key decisions and funds in the hands of those who stand to directly gain or lose from the results of development actions. Effective allocation and management of public resources must be done through a decentralized, participatory process in which beneficiaries are empowered to define their priorities and manage the supply of the services needed; and service providers, including public institutions, are responsive to beneficiary requests. This implies a devolution of responsibilities to the rural population for managing their own local development and a re-focusing of the role of the state on providing a supportive policy and institutional framework . The transfer of responsibilities must be accompanied by a transfer of resources, and at least a partial transfer of technical services. The government also has a role to play in compensating for market and social failures. 2.12 The Government of Burkina Faso has decided to adopt a measured pace of implementation, consistent with the country's limited capacity to manage such a complex institution building process. It is expected that the first rural municipalities will be created in about three years' time. The Textes d'Orientations de la Decentralisation (TOD) states that: (i) elections for urban communes will take place no longer than two years after the publication of the TOD (i.e. before the end of 2000); (ii) before 2003, provincial elections must be organized for the totality of - 5-  the country; (iii) simultaneously, elections for rural communes will be organized for existing rural communes (if separate elections are needed, they will be organized before 2005). The first rural municipalities will be created in three year's time and full coverage of the rural areas will take many more years. In order to develop the management capacities at the local level, the Government strategy foresees the immediate devolution of responsibilities for local investment planning and execution to village organizations, along with the necessary financial resources. 2.13 There are 8000 administrative villages in Burkina Faso with populations ranging from a few hundreds inhabitants to a several thousand. Village organization varies across the country depending on ethnicity and history, but is often highly structured on the basis of ranked lineage, gender and age. The Village Chief is generally the head of the main lineage and rules with the help of an elders council. The Land Chief may or may not be the Village Chief, and may even live in another village. Since independence, the Government and various projects have attempted to build a village institution that would be their interlocutor at the local level and be composed of members of the different socio-cultural groups. The 1996 Agrarian Reform gave a legal existence to village level committees (Commissions Villageoises de Gestion des Terroirs, CVGT) that were to play a role into land evaluation, allocation and withdrawal. In February 2000, the Government passed a decree broadening the CVGT's range of development responsibilities and enabling them to manage public funds. The CVGTs will facilitate the transition towards rural communes, in particular since they will be able to federate into inter-village committees (CIVGT). CVGTs and CIVGTs however, will not substitute for rural communes once the latter are in place. Thus, the approach tested under the first phase of the proposed Program is expected to pave the way for the creation of the country's future rural municipalities. 2. Objectives 2.1 The overall Program objective is to reduce poverty and promote sustainable development in the rural areas. Specific phase I (Project) objectives are to build local capacity to plan and implement rural development, accelerate the pace of public transfers for decentralized rural development, and support the implementation of the country's decentralization framework.2.2 The Project development objective is to increase the productive capacity of the rural sector and improve the effectiveness of public investments by developing the institutional and organizational capacity necessary to enable local communities to plan, implement and mange their own development process. The end of the first phase will see the emergence of rural municipalities with functioning provincial level coordination forums and a facilitatory framework (regulatory, institutional, and fiscal) at the national level. 3. Rationale for Bank's Involvement 5.1 The Bank, due to the scale and range of its mandate and services, is in a unique position to support Government policy and institutional reforms on a national scale, articulate macro-economic issues (such as fiscal transfers), and establish the necessary linkages and synergy between reforms and investment activities. In addition, the Bank is able to support long-term institutional reforms and investment programs through APLs. 4. Description -6-  Overviewl.1 The approach followed by the Program is based on the empowerment of rural communities for decisions concerning their own local development. It is demand-driven and inclusive, i.e., based on a participatory needs assessment that seeks to involve all societal groups, however marginalized. It ensures the relevance, cost effectiveness and accountability of key investment decisions and management responsibilities by delegating them to the lowest level possible (i.e., as close as possible to the intended beneficiaries). It closely links agro-sylvo-pastoral development and socio-economic infrastructure and services, thereby recognizing that rural development needs multi-sectoral interventions. Accordingly, the range of village (and inter-village) level investments is wide and will include productive sub-projects, in particular those associated with natural resource management (e.g., soil and water conservation infrastructure), as well as sub-projects aimed at improving access to social infrastructure and services. Details can be found in Annex 2. 1.2 Effective decentralization to rural community groups will depend upon the latter's capacity to manage increasingly complex development activities. Hence, capacity building will be a fundemental component of the Program. Intensive training efforts will be undertaken, directed at communities and intermediaries (service providers such as NGOs, private contractors, and public services which will be in direct contact with the communities). As indicated in the components table below, the bulk of project funding will be for development of local and institutional capacity (34 percent) and local investments (54 percent). The first phase of the Program will be co-financed by IFAD, the Government of the Netherlands, and the Government of Denmark. 1. Local Capacity Building 2. Local Investment Fund (LIF) 3. Institutional Capacity Building 4. Land Tenure Security Pilot 5. Program Coordination, Administration, Monitoring/Evaluation 6. Physical contingencies 7. Price contingencies 5. Financing Total ( US$m) GOVERNMENT 16 IBRD IDA 55 GOVERNMENT OF DENMARK 4 GOV. OF THE NETHERLANDS (EXCEPT FOR MOFA/MIN.OF DEV.COOP.) 9 INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT 11.5 LOCAL GOVTS. (PROV., DISTRICT, CITY) OF BORROWING COUNTRY 7.6 BILATERAL AGENCIES (UNIDENTIFIED) 8.02 Total Project Cost 111.12 6. Implementation Implementation Period4.1. The Program is scheduled to be implemented over a fifteen-year period, of which the proposed five-year Project represents - 7 -  only the first phase. In line with the flexible approach taken under APL, the actual duration of each phase will depend on the progress made in attaining the agreed targets and meeting the stipulated triggers. Subsequent credits will be extended in conformity with agreed milestones and triggers.Program (PNDRD) Coordination4.2 At the national level, the PNDRD supports the implementation of the overall decentralized rural development strategy presented in the Government's Policy Letter. Several projects/programs, with the common central objective of supporting rural decentralization and local development but adopting different designs, are currently in execution within this overall framework. A national forum will be put in place to harmonize various approaches to decentralized rural development, the Cadre National de Concertation des Partinaires de Developpement Rural Decentralise (CNCPDRD). The forum will play an important role in the exchange of ideas and experiences, the medium-term goal being the adoption of best practices by all donors and the evolution of the various on-going operations towards a single national program.4.3 Within each province, a framework for coordination among all development partners in the province will be established in the form of a Cadre de concertation. The composition and mandate of the Cadre de Concertation Technique Provincial (CCTP) is described in the Government's Policy Letter. The Project will provide operating support and basic equipment to enable the Cadre de concertation to carry out their mandate in all provinces where the Project or other donors, that have agreed to a common approach to community development, intervene. Project (CBDRD) Management and Administration4.4 Project Oversight: A specific Inter-ministerial Steering Committee will be established to guide the program's implementation and review and approve CBRDP's annual work programs and budgets. The approved work program and associated budgets and procurement plans would be submitted to IDA after approval by the Steering Committee. 4.5 Project Management: Day-to-day management of the Project will rest with (i) a national coordination unit and (ii) operational/coordination units established at provincial level. At national level, the Project CoordinatonUnit (Unite de Gestion Operationelle, UGO) main responsibilities will be to: (i) manage the work program at the national level, (ii) ensure that funds from Government and donors contributions are made available to the beneficiaries in a timely manner and in accordance with the signed agreements with each donor, (iii) carry out agreed upon annual procurement plans, (iv) provide technical support to the provincial operational units during the start-up phase of the Project,(v) organize workshops at the national level and regional level in support of the PNDRD; and (vi) and monitor and evaluate the implementation of the work program and its impact. 4.6 The Project will establish 26 Operational Units (Unites Operationelle, UO) at the provincial level. The responsibilities of the UOs will be to (i) assist the CCTP in the coordination of the Program at the provincial level, (ii) provide support to the CCTP in its review of village/intervillage or terroir level development plans, (iii) enter into contracts with and supervise service providers hired by the Project to execute specific activities (e.g. training of beneficiaries, participatory needs assessments, project proposal formulation, execution of the annual investment plan (AIP), and (iv) implement the monitoring and evaluation system at provincial level. 4.7 Project Monitoring: Project execution and impact data will be collected at the community level by the beneficiaries themselves. In order to do so, they will receive training from the project. The data thus collected by the beneficiaries is analyzed and aggregated by the UOs - 8 -  and made available to the CCTP and the DREP. At this level, the information is used to plan the work program (supervision, approval of new investment budgets, ...), improve coordination between development projects, NGOs and public agencies, and monitor development impact. A copy of the report is provided to the beneficiaries for information and feedback. After initial compilation and analysis by the UOs, the data is forwarded to the monitoring and evaluation staff at UGO to be further aggregated and analyzed at the national level. The findings will be used in the progress report and the national and regional workshops. Cofinancing Arrangements 4.8 The project will be co-financed by a number bi-lateral and international donors. IFAD's co-financing will be on a pari passu basis. The Government of the Netherlands and the Government of Denmark will provide joint co-financing -- each is providing support for specific components of the Project. 7. Sustainability 1.1 As previously noted, institutional sustainability of development actions is the main objective of the first phase of the Program. Considerable resources will therefore be directed to institutional strengthening at all levels. At the sub-project/community level, sustainability also depends on the degree to which beneficiaries have ownership of the Project. This sense of ownership is an essential goal of the participatory process. The contribution required from beneficiaries, on average 20 percent in cash or in kind, helps achieve this sense of ownership and therefore supports the sustainability of the investment. Where essential and feasible, community contribution for recurrent maintenance will be a condition of sub-project funding. 8. Lessons learned from past operations in the country/sector Community-Driven Development3.1 In many countries, limited government success in managing natural resources, providing basic infrastructure, and ensuring primary social services has led to the search for alternative institutional options. One of these options is participatory community-driven development. The substantial experience of what works and does not work which has been accumulated to date has been drawn upon in designing the proposed program. In particular, for the government and outsiders to induce community-driven development on a large scale requires agencies to invest in local organizational capacity and support community control in decision making. Also, experience shows that community-driven development does not automatically include marginalized groups, the poor, women and ethnic minorities unless their inclusion is especially highlighted as a goal at the agency and community level. Finally successful community-driven development is characterized by five main factors: local organizational capacity or the existence of viable community groups, the appropriate fit of technology to community capacity, effective outreach strategies, client responsive agencies, and enabling higher government policies and commitment. All these factors have been built into the design of the proposed program. Specific features related to demand-driven funds, local institutions and representativity are discussed hereunder. Demand-Driven Funds3.2 Experience regarding procedures and mechanisms for successfully funding micro-projects shows that micro-projects must be identified, planned, implemented and managed at the local level; procurement procedures have to be simplified and ex-ante controls replaced by ex-post controls, finally, a co-financing matrix can be used for adjusting levels of co-financing according to the -9-  type of investments and regional poverty levels. The CBRDP incorporates good practices from a range of international experiences on rural funds.Decentralization and Local Institutions3.3 A key to successful and sustainable operations is to build on countries' institutions. Burkina's recent reforms on decentralization and land tenure fully inform the design of the CBRDP. The program will prepare and pilot rural decentralization by strengthening local institutions' capacity to manage their own development in an equitable and sustainable fashion. The CBRDP also gives a content to the land tenure framework by working with Village Land Committees (CVGT) and consolidating their role. Additionally an approach to resolving land tenure conflicts and to promote security of tenure will be tested.Representativity and Accountability3.4 Lessons learned from participatory strategies show that all efforts at devolving authority and resources at the local levels would fail if local institutions (traditional and modern) were not sufficiently representative of the rural population and accountable to them. The CBRDP has developed an array of methods for participatory planning to ensure that all segments of village society are given a voice. These methods are being further refined based on the outcome of the social assessment carried out during project preparation. Future rural communes will build on these participatory tools and develop local governments that are better accountable. 9. Program of Targeted Intervention (PTI) Y 10. Environment Aspects (including any public consultation) Issues The project has a Category B rating. Indeed, the investments/sub-projects proposed under the Project are very small-scale and many of them are in fact aimed at restoring the productive capacity of the natural resource base. The review of actual experience under the predecessor project found that only very few of the investments had had a negative impact and that the mitigating measures included in the Project Implementation Manual and the sub-project technical design manuals were satisfactory. An EA was prepared for the proposed program by a team of international and local consultants. The EA classifies the sub-projects in two categories: (a) projects that have a negligible or a positive environmental impact only (e.g. soil fertility and forest and biodiversity management); and (b) projects that may have a negative environmental impact. For project types in the latter category, which represent very few of the 250 sub-project types eligible for financing under the program, an environmental mitigation plan has been developed. The main elements of this plan are: (i) identification of pre-identified environmental impacts of each kind of project, (ii) assessment of the impacts in each sub-project, and (iii) mitigation measures (standard and sub-project specific). Most negative impacts are water related: diseases such as malaria or diarrhea, erosion, water pollution from pesticides and fertilizers, salination. Other major impacts come from the changes in the original flora and fauna through projects like construction of small bridges on rural tracks, soil and water conservation, irrigation or low-land development. Projects that present unusual environmental or social impacts and that are judged too complex to be implemented by the beneficiaries or too costly (more than 10 percent of the investment) would not be eligible for financing. 11. Contact Point: - 10 -  Task Manager Jane C. Hopkins The World Bank 1818 H Street, NW Washington D.C. 20433 12. For information on other project related documents contact: The InfoShop The World Bank 1818 H Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20433 Telephone: (202) 458-5454 Fax: (202) 522-1500 Web: http:// www.worldbank.org/infoshop Note: This is information on an evolving project. Certain components may not be necessarily included in the final project. This PID processed by the InfoShop during the week ending August 25, 2000 - 11 -