Senegal - Country environmental strategy paper

Report No. 13292-SE Senegal Country Environmental Strategy Paper June 30, 1994 Sahel Department Africa Region The World Bank Document of the World Bank  CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS Currency Unit = CFA franc (CFAF) US$1.00 = CFAF 592 (January 31, 1994) CFAF 1 million = US$ 1,687 (January 31, 1994) SYSTEM OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURE: METRIC Metric U.S. Equivalent 1 meter (m) = 3.28 feet (ft) 1 kilometer (km) = 0.62 miles (mi) 1 square kilometer (km2) = 0.39 square mile (sq mi) 1 hectare (ha) = 2.47 acres (a) I metric ton (t) = 2,205 pounds (lb) I kilogram (kg) = 2.2046 pounds (lb) FISCAL YEAR January 1- December 31  LIST OF ACRONYMS AGETIP Agence d'cxecution de travaux d'interet public AVHRR Advanced Verv High Resolution Radiometer BRGM Bureau de recherches geologiques et mini&res (France) CIDA Canadian International Development Agency CILSS Comite permanent inter-etats de lutte contre la secheresse dans le Sahel CER Cercle d'expansion rurale CONGAD Conseil des organisations non-gouvernementales d'appui au ddveloppement CRODT Centre de recherche oceanographique de Dakar Thiaroye CSE Centre de suivi ecologique DAST Direction des affaires scientifiques et techniques DAT Direction de l'amenagement du territoire ENDA Environnement et developpcment en Afrique FAO United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization FONGS Federation des organisations non-gouvernementales du Sendgal GEF Global Environment Facility IDA International Development Agency ISE Institut des sciences de l'environnement ISRA Institut senegalais de recherche agricole IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature and its Resources MAB Man and the Biosphere (UNESCO program) MNDR Ministere du developpement rural MDRH Ministere du developpement rural et de I'hydraulique MPC Ministere du plan et de la cooperation MPN Ministere de la protection de la Nature MTE Ministere du tourisme et de l'environnemcnt NEAP National Environmental Action Plan NCS National Conservation Strategy NGO Non-governmental Organization NOAA National Oceanographic and Aeronautical Agency NPA Nouvelle politique agricole ODA Overseas Development Administration, United Kingdom ORSTOM Office de la recherche scientifique et technique outre-mer (France) PDESO Projet pour le developpement de l'devage au Sendgal oriental PICOGERNA Projet integre de conservation et de gestion des ressources naturelles PNAT Plan national d'amenagement du territoire PNNK Parc national du Niokolo Koba PNVA Programme national de vulgarisation agricole PPF Project Preparation Facility SAED Societe d'amenagement et d'exploitation des terres du Delta SFAP Senegal Forestrv Action Plan SGN Service geographique national SICAP Societe immobiliere du Cap Vert SODESP Societe de developpement de l'elevage dans la zone sylvopastorale SODEVA Societe de developpement et de vulgarisation agricole SONEES Societe nationale d'exploitation des eaux du Senegal UNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and Development UNDP United Nations Development Program UNEP United Nations Environment Program UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNSO United Nations Soudano-Sahelian Office USAID United States Agency for International Development USGS United States Geological Survey UTIS Unite de traitement de l'information spatiale WRI World Resources Institute   TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION ...............1 II. KEY ISSUES ... 4 A. Resource Endowment .4 B. Population .7 C. Use of Land and Natural Resources. 9 D. Urbanization .21 E. Environmental Management Processes .24 F. Government Policy and Programs ....................... 30 III. BASIC PRINCIPLES ..................................................... 33 IV. TOWARDS AN ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEGY FOR SENEGAL: UNDERLYING FACTORS AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS . . 35 A. Management of Land and Natural Resources .35 B. Urban Environment .39 C. Biodiversity .41 D. Fisheries and Coastal Habitats .42 E. Coordination and Planning .43 F. Strategy for Bank Assistance .47 BIBLIOGRAPHY .....................................................50 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES TABLE 1. Protected areas of Senegal ................... ............................... 18 TABLE 2. Sample of land classifications ........................... ....................... 28 FIGURE 1. Average rainfall from 1960-1984 .................................................. 4 FIGURE 2. Changing population patterns from 1950-2015 .......................................... 8 FIGURE 3. Changes in the extent of the area planted in crops, from 1960-1990 .................................................. 10 FIGURE 4. Changes in agricultural yields from 1960-1990 .......................1................I 1 FIGURE 5. Human carrying capacity in the year 2015, according to different cereal production scenarios .................................................. 21   Preface This Country Environmcntal Strategy Paper (CESP) is one in a series of CESPs that aim to improve the Bank's understanding of environmental issues and strengthen policy dialogue on the environment. The document was prepared by Mr. Yves Prevost (AFTES consultant) for the Sahelian Department. Ms. Katherine Marshall is the Department Director and Mr. Emmerich Schebeck is the Projects Advisor. The report has benefited from the comments and suggestions of Katherine Marshall, Emmerich Schebeck and Sarah Forster (AF5DR), Bruno Boccara, Moniquc Garrity, Albert Osei and Hasan Tuluy (AF5CO), Abdclkrim Oka, Franz Schorosch and John Hall (AF5AG), Peter Watson, Jan Janssens and Robert Maurer (AF51N), Bruna Vitagliano (AF5PH). David Jones (AF5SE), Jostein Aarestad, Jan Bojo, Albert Greve, Jean Roger Mercier and Simon Rietbergen (AFTES), Willem Floor (IENPD) and Christian Pieri (AFGNR). Highly useful written comments wvere also received from Joy Hecht (independent consultant) and from various individuals in Senegal, including Mr. E.S. Diop (University of Dakar), Mr. Mamadou Dagobert Dieng (SER/MINT) and Mr. Pierre Pol Vinckc (Cellule Apres Barrage). The CESP wvas discussed wvith the Government of Senegal and donors in January, 1994 and has since been revised to takc into account their comments and concems. A particular thanks goes to Mr. Oussoubv Tourc. the Permanent Secretary of CONSERE (Conseil supericur des ressources naturelles et de l'cnvironnement) for his close collaboration and valuable input into this report.   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Synopsis of Key Issues 1. This Countrv Environmental Strategy Paper (CESP) argues that Senegal will soon be facing an overwhelming environmental crisis. which w,ill restrict and shape its economic development. The facts are unequivocal: Given the high rates of population growth, the limited resource base, and the low level of technological development, there is no realistic scenario by which Senegal could achieve self- sufficiency in food and fuel by the year 2015. Even if improved agricultural practices lead to significant increases in yields, high demand will force direct trade-offs between food, cash-crops and wood fuel production. Focus will necessarily shift to satisfying basic needs at the expense of concerns about environmental quality. biodiversitv, or the acknowledged cultural, aesthetic and spiritual values of natural resources. Moreover, by the vear 2015, nine million people, of a total population of 16 million, will live in urban areas, of which 5 million are expected to live in Dakar alone. This rural exodus will certainly lessen the population pressure in rural areas. However, it will exacerbate current problems in urban areas, which are already serious. 2. The question is not whether Senegal will become even more dependent on imported food and fuel, but rather howv much more dependent it will become and how the country will handle the situation. The main issue for Senegal is to earn enough foreign currency to import the food and fuel it needs. This is the only wav to reduce the pressure on its own limited natural resources. Sound environmental management practices must not only be adopted by all sectors of society, they must become second nature. Government policies across the board will have to take into consideration the scarcity of basic environmental resources and the need for their conservation and management, in order to maintain what is already a barelv satisfactory quality of life for a large part of the Senegalese population: - population growth will have to be slowed through family planning, and major improvements in education, particular of girls, and in health conditions; - economic activities will have to be diversified into light industry and exportable goods and services. at the same time, Senegal must capitalize on the competitive edge it earned following the FCFA devaluation to become more competitive on the international market in order to finance the import of external inputs necessary in the long-term for agricultural intensification" - agricultural yields will have to be improved through better natural resource management practices, such as water harvesting, anti-erosion measures (small earth or rock dams, composting) and the integration of livestock and agriculture, all of which will succeed only with clear ownership and rights of land and resources for farmners and herders, - forests will have to be managed for more efficient and more sustainable output; clear ownership is again key to successful forest management as are pricing reforms to price fuelwood at its scarcitv value; - extension services will have to deliver a coherent rural development package that unites agriculture, forestrv, and livestock around the land use theme; - water will have to be conserved, in order to avoid depleting groundwater reservoirs; - cities w~'ill need to be planned and equipped with better urban services; - waste from urban areas and industrial activities will have to be disposed of without threatening public health or environmental sustainability.  ii 3 Sound cnvironmental management is not a luxury for Senegal. Until the whole country is fully integratcd into the global economy and reduces the relative importance of its primary scctor, environmental management wvill bc its lifcline, and its only means of bridging the devclopment gap. And should the country succecd in meeting this challenge over the next 25 years, environmcntal management, in urban as well as rural areas, will have become a pcrmanent fixturc in the nation. Purpose of the Report 4. This document serves two purposes. The first is to improve the Bank's understanding of environmental issues in Senegal and place them within the ovcrall development contcxt. The second is to strengthcn policy dialogue between the Bank and Senegal on environmcntal issues and provide an input into Scnegal's ongoing NEAP process. The document provides a review of available evidence of present and future environmental problems and challenges facing Senegal. It identifies and highlights the kcy issues and tradc-offs that will require development of a national consensus as regards priorities. It also suggcsts broad clements of a strategy to remedy current problcms and minimize futurc ones. Structure of the Report The documcnt is divided into three sections. Section I puts environmental issues into the Senegalese context and discuss the meaning of environment for a country such as Sencgal. Section II (paras. 2.1 - 2.130) discusses the key environmental issues in Senegal. It first looks at the country's resource cndouvment (paras 2.1-2.19) highlighting the harsh climate with high tcmperatures and low to moderate rainfall, which sevcrely constrains Senegal's development options, and the rapidity of population growth which is putting increasing pressures on the resource base and urban infrastructurc (paras. 2.20-2.24) It thcn cxamines the two major environmental challenges facing Senegal: use of land and natural rcsources (para. 2.28-2.77) and urbanization and urban environmcntal problems (para. 2.78-90). This is followed by a discussion of the Government of Senegal's institutional and policy framework for environmental management (para. 2.93-2.130). Section III provides a rationale for the strategy that follows. The strategy itself, proposed in Section IV, represents a fundamental shift away from the command and control approach to environmental management that has driven Govcrnment's handling of environmcntal issucs to a more decentralized approach within which pcople are given the legal rights and cconomic incentives to manage resources more efficicntly. A policy matrix of the strategic recommendations is provided in Annex 1. Implications for the Bank The Government of Senegal is in the process of developing a NEAP within which it is hoped many of the strategic recommendations wvill be addressed. Country ow-nership is essential for NEAP succcss. The Government should therefore focus on the process of developing the NEAP, ensuring that thcre is broad participation so as to build up ownership and consensus among diffcrent stakeholders. The most obvious and immediate role for the Bank is to continue to play an active role in the NEAP process in coordination with other donors. Ultimately, the lack of an environmental policy with strong political backing is one of the main constraints to environmental management. The NEAP process provides an opportunitv to define such a policy and develop a national consensus as to where the priorities lie. as regards both the issues and the appropriatc actions to take. Within the NEAP process, thcrc arc several issues in addition to those raised in the strategy that need to be addressed. These includc:  11! * The impact of the devaluation on the environment, particularly the impact on producer incentives (livestock/rangelands, crops/soil fertility, fuelwood /reforestation). The NEAP provides an opportunity to introduce any necessary preventative or compensatory measures. * Valuation of the costs of environmental damage and its prevention or alleviation. Damage to the environment has three potential costs: (a) human health may be harmed; (b) economic productivity may be reduced; (c) the pleasure of satisfaction obtained from an unspoiled environment, often referred to as the "amenity value", may be lost. All are difficult to measure, particularly the third. However, it is vital that environmental costs are quantified as much as possible so as to help decision-makers prioritize environmental issues and make explicit the potential trade-offs between economic development and environmental protection and minimize their consequences. Analytical frameworks exist to carry out such valuation and prioritization which could usefully be applied as part of the NEAP process. Such exercises must be viewed as part of a long-term process of building-up national capacity in environmental analysis and planning. The immediate constraints to be overcome are (i) lack of reliable data and (ii) the shortage of trained personnel who can carry out this type of work. * Broadening of the environmental debate beyond the Ministry of Environment to other Government agencies, local authorities, community and associative movements, and clarification of the institutional structure and functions of environmental management. In this regard, the Bank's experience with institutional capacity building for environmental management in the Gambia may be usefully shared with the Senegalese. 6. This document has highlighted the need to take an intersectoral approach to the environment and to promote a more decentralized and participatory approach to environmental management. This has important implications for the Bank. It will require more active collaboration between the different sectors, in particular, a strengthening of the linkages between projects that touch on the different facets of the same environmental issue. Another important implication is the need to increase stakeholder participation in the development and implementation of projects, and to encourage Government to redefine its role and to provide incentives to individuals to encourage better resource management.  At. - iAl CiLJINrTRY ENV(IZONMlFN1 tV RAT!tiY PAI'T | LR()NNILN "AL POLIC Y MATRiX _~~~~- __ __.__ _ _ __ _~ a t c o tj rneii _ _____________ _____ _____I__ lvi aica~t e ne iii _______ ______ ____i _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Re rllll!}Cr)li t-ll-.b NIrrchlnl Oblje-tive Lcgal |Intstitutio)nal ilc"v.l:i ctral frt acwobrk framcwmit rlity bu.:s ntion !Maillagrlcllll o, aiald lil)llrt)vc tile , sec.g i.,x ihc leralhty of r t) ...... ,ic Isl I'm er the supcr ibioi, o land I l -iillliiatc staic wontroels oii wcx dfucl 1Iliort Uural r-urccInlugc 1luicl i lst |aid nlatural sustainabdiity of land rights of thc p Iplalion to tie fuill and natural resource nianiagcncnt pnces, sf) diat they be govenecd by (NklR) in all desclopincnt prtjccta reaour-ce naii nalural rcsource extenut of the land anid natural from thc State to rural supply anid demand. _. ______ tartageltlent restijrces Iba( IheV urse ciminmiites. l icilitatc tie U cvo IiOll O,r laiid usC Strcngtheni the land and dtriatural eiCcive extensiton pmglrllti [tic rights into) cithcr comim on or resourcer niaiagemcnt capashilitics guiding principle of tdie civirtoniiiiciial iLidividual titles that arc transfcrablc. of rural councils. sustainability of production sy stniis in ___________________d mnld. Substitute the cuirenit forestry pemnit Review Lie function. niandate anid Greatly iicrease Central Govellitticnit and fee systeni with a forestry or rural organization of the Forcstry support to extensionl services, wilh the cadastre based on lanid registration. Departmenit so that it becomes an objetive ol incirasinig tlie covcrarc if i __________________________ _sdvi sory hod y to rural 1(p ipat ionis. Xt c sxteno -r_ Merge existing extension servia.es i an1c1 woie s r)it bi d Illtdiii i into a sinigle rural develitpiciit Hysteins by niakiiig Lticiii the prilinc extension gervice tfargl c f C5ttr i e*!biotis liave (iovernnment cillaborant FO1 LIs research programits Icss oit closely with NGOs concertimtg speciflc rcsources And more tol the j ______ _ __ _______ ____________________ rural extesiett n Systeitic a i[cctr fr tnl f c:si-ltti ntttt Ulbin arcas litprove ltie quality of Rcdutce waste proJLrctl i by tiakiitg Decentralize maniagemilent dlie Assist local autlirilies to dray up_ ihfe those responsible liii pollution pay for managemncit of urban areas by ilmedium tcnn (' t o 10 years) the damagc it causes to the delegation of power to development plaits to retiiedy the enviromuncntt. representative local governseitis I develhpmniet probIcitis otf the insaiii utbaniLed areas. Strengthen the planninig anid Encourage die ctnstructictit of tic management capacities of htousitng developmtents, especially lby municipal govcmnuents. placitig new laud ot die iiCrktit a dtt providinig a mrinitiuni of conuttunity ________________________________._____,cI facilitie8. Encouragc local participationl in Rcduce subsidies for dniikitig water Rcutilizc, aftcr ireatnoicit, urbani 6sCage waste nmnagcment through public astd allow the cost of wate- to re(ect watera for garden fariiiittg. education campaigns and greater its true valuc. represenLation at the ncighborhoid I ______________ _ level. I_______________________________ ______________________________le el Biodiversity Preserve natural Strictly apply regulations governing Provide econonic incentivcs to local Set a viable political strategy alid liutoly| biodiversity markcts and boundaries with respect populations by promoting die abidc to it. to the protection of biodiversity. development of areas surroun ding biodiversity conservation areas.  SENEGAL COUNTRY ENVIRONM1ENT STRATEGY PAPER ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY MATRIX IIT Pecrrnrnicdali ns Problems Objec ivea Legal | Insiltutw il | Ma.r.rconornic Sctmral .... j - framiework I fran-ev'wirk 1dicy ter ii Fisheries and Precrvc sea resoUrca (a) reduce flshinlg eflirt, coastal areas (b) rinlpive knrrw ledgc oif hti- k s alid I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~the ir flictuatroris, (c) set upl a system to il irrit e tI I CCorloilnic aspects of the fi img __Ju ~7' ~ iConscrc *easial arcas Intra -lt legislatio_n lo _tect Co_astal_ Lnirt piojc,as ii fragdc leaics _ _ | sbil_s s~rnr1il withs the nat(il siria to the.t C_SEE rrliis.pii plarririuig I Coatal- 'ta - - -rttrrrserlSOii ,toeruac ieaiv nlIo. Ii plarn .l tferral cy i rallP,hbr,a cornstrucnli.n in arrav wrla a __ _ _ _ _ crosluc , n _ ! fvi11e f li-l. o) f rv i r q tc;Lrreial Inroltvc [liec Rcvl;w existinig legishlalot Iso dihat ~all Lslabhsh a blyher level bt-dy, l reIacp, an N,i AI' - -itl, a c-iX ,lal ,n slid corordirn,,6,n and 1,- l w mpl y Willi ihe nail r tat sinmdar Io dic CJN5ELRE's "s(ilt hi"lpin. ay r1 sllh arl planlllrig Ida-inlrg 1 gereCral cnvmr nmritaaI r)(IlV - litllerililislerial e}l ltd rl"<itira"CH the h.l"v illll cnivironniental pohtly |wr;atil dicillplcnlcrlialvmrl o>f all 4i -r ico, andi I- iis ,g ii _ | M~~~~~~~~~~~~~ale clivirolrr cllVol irnpia,t Trans tn he ukrrcent ( )NSiLYL I 1:ll8bhl,l a iric.haSl"sllb 1, a:I; lw:ir I cy asscsnicnits conripulsory for all secrctanatr irnto a perriiancrit e,iimenlal iridilai rh in a lici r-k devclopimrnct projcciJ tcchiical secretariat, vIl0h vould if represcntativc sk,1ijp;eC 1-IIs provide te,.hirial Lord0 ufratioin. oversce regulatory nuatters report on the state of the erivirorrrncirt, arnd lead a public cducatirir _____________ _prrolrnn a rn envinrilliitl ni s _-u_ Clarify thc maridate of dthc tti1allue aild uriplllcricirt pi! I | irviitotnenit Dcparnucilt. awarcires prr graris rin crivirr ireriital Create an iispectorate that will Ilace all land ard niatural rtl..urvea obscrve and document infractions nuaiiagciireit project wirlin loral I to the environimetital legislatir n aldministrative 6ra uricwr iW )| rivir,)it ricntal Improve Ilild demand by defininig niinitiiuin Ensurm coordination in lncrease tire coriplirtrliiIy ofl t ic vail ul inifounrLatioi etvironinelntal infornation requirements for environmental infornation matters types of cnvironterital iirnlriratir ri austairutlbility by better cnvironniental inipact asacssmnenta. through periodic consultation tirough the estabrslrirecirt arid adpl tiOllr | use of inforireation among the network of all partners. by all involved of a cormmahonrn inforrrratiron irifrastnric lire Ensure that public inistitutions do not Strengthen, rehabilitate or Facilitate thc cnicrgcnce of service Facilitate the usc of env,roririerital try to derive incotne from the reorganize key institutions, much aa suppliern from tie national private inforenatirin by prriiciri1 or cnrrivertri^: inf,rnmation they possess. the Service g6Sographique national, sector by opcning pubiic narkets, kcy data sets a.cording ti nrc c,in mnirir thriough the use uuf tcnders, with I arrh cburre, arid lrerahzilig accces, ) + __ regarda to geographir inft r nphatroir r. r,i conditions. ___rdrr . ____ _ __ ___ ___ _ _ __ I i rn,tnrir _ Ir ;slenia u c ,fr ! ~~~I .....!. ,.frIu,,,zl,, ,, j I i ; rfrrrua'in r;r :iiry |to Or ! | 1 i 1 _ , i_1 - 91~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~rrIu . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~