DOCSLIB.ORG

Project Document

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Project Document PROJECT DOCUMENT SECTION 1: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION 1.1 Project title: Community-based management of land and forests in the Grand Kivu and Lac Télé-Tumba landscapes in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) 1.2 Project number: GFL/ PMS: 1.3 Project type: FSP 1.4 Trust Fund: GEF 1.5 Strategic objectives: GEF strategic long-term objective: BD1 LD IP CCM Strategic programme for GEF IV: 1.6 UN Environment priority: Healthy and Productive Ecosystem; Ecosystem Governance 1.7 Geographical scope: National Democratic Republic of Congo 1.8 Mode of execution: External 1.9 Project executing organization: Ministry of the Environment and Sustainable Development (MEDD) 1.10 Duration of project: 60 months Commencing: Completion: 1.11 Cost of project US$ % Cost to the GEF Trust Fund 13,761,468 17.2 Co-financing Type of Co- Investment Sources of Co-financing Name of Co-financier Amount ($) financing Mobilized Multilateral Agency World Bank Grant Investment mobilized 8,766,944.26 Multilateral Partners WWF-FAO (CAFI) Grant Investment mobilized 10,000,000 International NGO WWF Grant Investment mobilized 7,895,435 National Government Ministry of Environment and In Kind Recurrent expenditure 3,000,000 Sustainable Development 1 National Government Ministry of Environment and Cash Recurrent Expenditures 2,000,000 Sustainable Development Contribution Regional Government Provincial Government of Sud In-Kind Recurrent Expenditure 3,000,000 Kivu Regional Government Provincial Government of In-Kind Recurrent Expenditure 3,000,000 Nord Kivu NGO REPALEF: Network of Cash Recurrent Expenditure 12,000,000 Indigenous Population for Sustainable Management of Forest Ecosystem of DRC International NGO CARITAS Sud Kivu Cash Investment Mobilized 6,876,434 Private Sector SAFBOIS S.A.R.L Cash Investment Mobilized 20,000,000 Total Co-financing 76,532,813.26 2 1.12 Project summary The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is one of the most diverse countries in Africa in terms of natural resources. It is home to the second largest rainforest in the world, and the largest in Africa. The huge forests of the DRC provide goods and services, as well as jobs that are critical to the livelihoods of millions of people living in rural and urban areas of the country. These include reliance on timber and non-timber forest products, supplies of wildlife for protein, as well as the benefits of water and soil protection, just to name a few. The project locations (the Lac Tumba Landscape and Grand Kivu) host an important community of indigenous people. These communities are very dependent on the forests as their only productive landscape that provide for their livelihoods. Beyond livelihoods, the indigenous communities have intimate social economic and cultural ties with forest spaces. In this regard, these are social forest spaces for the indigenous communities. Beyond local exploitation and the use of environmental resources by local communities, the private sector investment is equally active in different sectors of environmental resources exploitation in the same forest landscape. Hence, extractive resource zones of different stakeholders frequently overlap with local communities’ traditional resource use areas. This makes the forest landscapes in the DRC highly contested spaces between socio-cultural and livelihoods interests and economic interests of the private sector. Involving local populations in managing, conserving and protecting natural resources, as well as maintaining their access to natural resources should therefore be one of the development priorities in the forest landscape. In this regard, the private sector as well as policy makers need to engage local communities not as victims of forest exploitation, but as sustainable managers of forest landscapes. Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) promotes conservation through the sustainable use of natural resources; enabling communities to generate incomes that can be used for rural development, while promoting decentralization of natural resource management and governance through responsive local institutions. CBNRM aims to create the right incentives and conditions for an identified group of resource users within defined areas to use natural resources sustainably. This means enabling the resource users to benefit (economically) from resource management and providing strong rights and tenure over land and the resources. At the core, CBNRM encourages community participation in natural resource management while strengthening the sense of ownership which boosts sound stewardship practices in the exploitation of natural resources that underpin livelihoods and socio-cultural interests. The objective of this project is to scale up and improve the management of peatlands and forest landscapes through CBNRM in targeted transboundary landscapes. Implementation of this project will result in many local and global benefits. It will contribute to economic development and the alleviation of poverty in targeted landscapes. This will benefit not only the people in these landscapes, but also the country as a whole, the Congo Basin region, and the global community. It will do so by helping to conserve the forests and other biological resources that are essential for economic development in these landscapes through cross-sectoral integration of sustainable land management into plans, policies, strategies, funding mechanisms and multi-sectoral stakeholder groups. Direct beneficiaries include millions of people whose social and economic wellbeing depend on the forests in these landscapes. The local benefits will include: enhanced agricultural production through reduced land degradation; maintenance of the structure and functions of ecological systems to enhance the quantity and quality of ecosystem services; improvement in the health of peatland ecosystems (in the Lac Tumba Landscape) and rainforest ecosystems (in Grand Kivu) that are in turn critical for the tourism industry, fishing and, in the mid to long-term, avoiding catastrophic beach erosion. Additionally, the project will empower direct resource users and other stakeholders to participate directly in the conception, monitoring and adaptive management of land and resources – with special attention of the vulnerable in society (women and indigenous groups). 3 The government agencies and Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) in the country as well in the Congo basin region will also benefit through knowledge exchange and information sharing linked to the Regional Project that will strengthen their capacity in natural resource management in general, and in particular, biodiversity conservation and fast-track climate action and Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) implementation. The work with government and CSOs to establish favourable legal frameworks for CBNRM (e.g. resource ownership, tenure and access.) will be an important pillar in the general implementation arrangement of the project. Thus, through its CBNRM participatory approach, this project will support stakeholder consultations for consensus-building around themes of common regional interest, including fostering transnational cooperation and regional stability and security – both of which are critical factors for sustainable economic development. In terms of overall environmental benefits, the project will aim to protect large swathes of intact forests, globally significant biodiversity, regional climate and prevent greenhouse gas emissions from the destruction and degradation of forests and peatlands. This project will work with national and sub- national level stakeholders to engage economic sectors to negotiate the application of biodiversity conservation and sustainable use measures, and bring about necessary changes in the model of natural resources management in the project locations. The project will work with local communities to strengthen conservation on the globally important peatlands of the Lac Tumba Landscape, protected areas1 and biodiversity reserves; and communal forest and productive lands of both project locations. Through strong collaboration with, and engagement of local communities and other key stakeholders operating at the local level, this project will contribute to addressing existing threats to biodiversity, ecosystem health and associated ecosystem services, as well as artisanal livelihoods and subsistence activities. The project will work with communities to establish and operationalise multi-use ‘Community Conservation Areas’ (CCAs), including putting in place measures to ensure the sustainable utilisation of wild resources and conservation-friendly farming practices. In order to secure the buy-in from local communities but also sustainability and part of the exit strategy, the project will support sustainable livelihood activities that effectively generate socio-economic benefits and build their capacity to achieve development goals. The project will contribute to 8,182,184 tCO2eq avoided emissions in terms of lifetime direct as well as consequential GHG emissions avoided over a time horizon of 20 years. 1 “a geographically defined area, which is designated or regulated and managed to achieve specific conservation objectives”. 4 Table of Contents SECTION 1: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION ............................................................................................... 1 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................... 7 Section 2: Background and Situation Analysis (Baseline
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EAZA Best Practice Guidelines Bonobo (Pan Paniscus)
    EAZA Best Practice Guidelines Bonobo (Pan paniscus) Editors: Dr Jeroen Stevens Contact information: Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp – K. Astridplein 26 – B 2018 Antwerp, Belgium Email: [email protected] Name of TAG: Great Ape TAG TAG Chair: Dr. María Teresa Abelló Poveda – Barcelona Zoo [email protected] Edition: First edition - 2020 1 2 EAZA Best Practice Guidelines disclaimer Copyright (February 2020) by EAZA Executive Office, Amsterdam. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in hard copy, machine-readable or other forms without advance written permission from the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA). Members of the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA) may copy this information for their own use as needed. The information contained in these EAZA Best Practice Guidelines has been obtained from numerous sources believed to be reliable. EAZA and the EAZA APE TAG make a diligent effort to provide a complete and accurate representation of the data in its reports, publications, and services. However, EAZA does not guarantee the accuracy, adequacy, or completeness of any information. EAZA disclaims all liability for errors or omissions that may exist and shall not be liable for any incidental, consequential, or other damages (whether resulting from negligence or otherwise) including, without limitation, exemplary damages or lost profits arising out of or in connection with the use of this publication. Because the technical information provided in the EAZA Best Practice Guidelines can easily be misread or misinterpreted unless properly analysed, EAZA strongly recommends that users of this information consult with the editors in all matters related to data analysis and interpretation.
    [Show full text]
  • Bonobo Conservation Assessment
    Bonobo Conservation Assessment November 21-22, 1999 Kyoto University Primate Research Institute Inuyama, Japan Workshop Report Sally Coxe, Norm Rosen, Philip Miller and Ulysses Seal, editors A Contribution of the Workshop Participants and The Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (IUCN / SSC) A contribution of the workshop participants and the IUCN / SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group. Cover photo ©Frans Lanting Section divider photos: Sections I, V courtesy of Sally Coxe Sections II – IV, VI ©Frans Lanting Coxe, S., N. Rosen, P.S. Miller, and U.S. Seal. 2000. Bonobo Conservation Assessment Workshop Final Report. Apple Valley, MN: Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (SSC/IUCN). Additional copies of the publication can be ordered through the IUCN / SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, 12101 Johnny Cake Ridge Road, Apple Valley, MN 55124 USA. Fax: 612-432-2757. Send checks for US$35 (for printing and shipping costs) payable to CBSG; checks must be drawn on a US bank. The CBSG Conservation Council These generous contributors make the work of CBSG possible $50,000 and above Gladys Porter Zoo Ouwehands Dierenpark Hong Kong Zoological and Riverbanks Zoological Park Chicago Zoological Society Botanical Gardens Wellington Zoo -Chairman Sponsor Japanese Association of Zoological Wildlife World Zoo SeaWorld/Busch Gardens Gardens and Aquariums (JAZA) Zoo de Granby Kansas City Zoo Zoo de la Palmyre $20,000 and above Laurie Bingaman Lackey Evenson Design Group Los Angeles Zoo $250 and above Minnesota Zoological Garden Madrid Zoo-Parques
    [Show full text]
  • The Worst Place in the World to Be a Woman?: Women's Conflict
    DePauw University Scholarly and Creative Work from DePauw University Student research Student Work 2016 The orsW t Place in the World to be a Woman?: Women's Conflict Experiences in the Democratic Republic of the Congo Megan Bailey DePauw University Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.depauw.edu/studentresearch Part of the Peace and Conflict Studies Commons Recommended Citation Bailey, Megan, "The orW st Place in the World to be a Woman?: Women's Conflict Experiences in the Democratic Republic of the Congo" (2016). Student research. Paper 43. This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Work at Scholarly and Creative Work from DePauw University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Student research by an authorized administrator of Scholarly and Creative Work from DePauw University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Worst Place in the World to be a Woman?: Women’s Conflict Experiences in the Democratic Republic of the Congo Megan Bailey Spring 2016 Prof. Brett O’Bannon (sponsor) Prof. Tamara Beauboeuf Tiamo Katsonga-Phiri 3 Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to thank my committee members for the constant support they have given me during the past two semesters. You’ve taken so much time out of your busy schedules to help me, and I couldn’t be more appreciative. A special thank you to Prof. Brett O’Bannon, for telling me that it’s okay to have feelings about difficult topics and that this work is most definitely important. To Prof. Tamara Beauboeuf, for always asking the hard questions and pushing this project to be the best it can be.
    [Show full text]
  • Ocha Drc Population Movements in Eastern Dr Congo October – December 2009
    Population Movements in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo OCHA DRC POPULATION MOVEMENTS IN EASTERN DR CONGO OCTOBER – DECEMBER 2009 January 2010 1 Population Movements in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo 1. OVERVIEW The humanitarian situation and movement of populations in 2009 have been heavily influenced by military operations and the still prevailing insecurity in a number of areas in the eastern provinces. Between January 20 and February 25 2009, the Forces Armées de la République Démocratique du Congo (FARDC) and the Rwanda Defence Forces (RDF) conducted joint operations (Umoja Wetu) in North Kivu against the Forces Démocratiques pour le Liberation du Rwanda (FDLR). In March 2009 a second military operation (Kimia II) was launched in North Kivu and South Kivu. Lubero, Rutshuru, Masisi and Walikale are the territories in North Kivu where major displacements have been reported since March 2009. In South Kivu the most affected areas are Kalehe, Uvira and Shabunda. The attacks carried out by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), a Ugandan militia, in the Orientale province since September 2008 have spread from the Haut Uele district to the Bas Uele in 2009. The population is victim of atrocities and acts of extreme violence: killings, rapes, kidnapping and looting leading to population displacements in many locations of the districts. N. IDPs per Province 800 000 767 399 730 941 700 000 600 000 Haut Uele 500 000 Bas Uele Ituri North Kivu 400 000 South Kivu Equateur 239 210 Katanga 300 000 165 472 200 000 58 937 60 000 100 000 14 000 0 Note: Ituri, Haut Uele and Bas Uele are districts of the Orientale province During the reporting period (October ‐ December 2009) some displacements have been reported in the Katanga province where about 14.000 people have moved from South Kivu due to the military operations in the area bordering Katanga.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Annex
    ICC-01/04-01/10-396-Anx 02-09-2011 1/6 CB PT Public Annex ICC-01/04-01/10-396-Anx 02-09-2011 2/6 CB PT I. General contextual elements on the recent FLDR activities in the KIVUS: 1. Since the beginning of 2011, the FARDC conducted unilateral military operations under the “AMANI LEO” (peace today) operation against the FDLR and other armed groups in North Kivu, mainly in Walikale and Lubero territories, and in South Kivu, mainly in Fizi, Uvira and Shabunda territories. 1 2. The UN Group of Experts in its interim report on 7 June 2011 states that the FDLR remain militarily the strongest armed group in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.2 3. The UN Secretary-General further reported on 17 January 2011 that “the FDLR military leadership structure remained largely intact, and dispersed”.3 The FDLR established their presences in remote areas of eastern Maniema and northern Katanga provinces 4 and have sought to reinforce their presence in Rutshuru territory.5 4. The UN GoE reported as late as June 2011 on the FDLR’s continued recruitment 6 and training of mid-level commanders 7. The FDLR also 1 Para 5, page 2 S/2011/20, Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 17 January 2011 (http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/2011/20 ), Para 32, page 9, S/2011/345 Interim report of the Group of Experts on the DRC submitted in accordance with paragraph 5 of Security Council resolution 1952 (2010), 7 June 2011 (http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/2011/345
    [Show full text]
  • Ituri:Stakes, Actors, Dynamics
    ITURI STAKES, ACTORS, DYNAMICS FEWER/AIP/APFO/CSVR would like to stress that this report is based on the situation observed and information collected between March and August 2003, mainly in Ituri and Kinshasa. The 'current' situation therefore refers to the circumstances that prevailed as of August 2003, when the mission last visited the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. This publication has been produced with the assistance of the Swedish International Development Agency. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the Swedish Government and its agencies. This publication has been produced with the assistance of the Department for Development Policy, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the Finnish Government and its agencies. Copyright 2003 © Africa Initiative Program (AIP) Africa Peace Forum (APFO) Centre for Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR) Forum on Early Warning and Early Response (FEWER) The views expressed by participants in the workshop are not necessarily those held by the workshop organisers and can in no way be take to reflect the views of AIP, APFO, CSVR and FEWER as organisations. 2 List of Acronyms............................................................................................................................... 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Democratic Republic of Congo Constitution
    THE CONSTITUTION OF THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO, 2005 [1] Table of Contents PREAMBLE TITLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS Chapter 1 The State and Sovereignty Chapter 2 Nationality TITLE II HUMAN RIGHTS, FUNDAMENTAL LIBERTIES AND THE DUTIES OF THE CITIZEN AND THE STATE Chapter 1 Civil and Political Rights Chapter 2 Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Chapter 3 Collective Rights Chapter 4 The Duties of the Citizen TITLE III THE ORGANIZATION AND THE EXERCISE OF POWER Chapter 1 The Institutions of the Republic TITLE IV THE PROVINCES Chapter 1 The Provincial Institutions Chapter 2 The Distribution of Competences Between the Central Authority and the Provinces Chapter 3 Customary Authority TITLE V THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL TITLE VI DEMOCRACY-SUPPORTING INSTITUTIONS Chapter 1 The Independent National Electoral Commission Chapter 2 The High Council for Audiovisual Media and Communication TITLE VII INTERNATIONAL TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS TITLE VIII THE REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION TITLE IX TRANSITORY AND FINAL PROVISIONS PREAMBLE We, the Congolese People, United by destiny and history around the noble ideas of liberty, fraternity, solidarity, justice, peace and work; Driven by our common will to build in the heart of Africa a State under the rule of law and a powerful and prosperous Nation based on a real political, economic, social and cultural democracy; Considering that injustice and its corollaries, impunity, nepotism, regionalism, tribalism, clan rule and patronage are, due to their manifold vices, at the origin of the general decline
    [Show full text]
  • Confirmed Soc Reports List 2015-2016
    Confirmed State of Conservation Reports for natural and mixed World Heritage sites 2015 - 2016 Nr Region Country Site Natural or Additional information mixed site 1 LAC Argentina Iguazu National Park Natural 2 APA Australia Tasmanian Wilderness Mixed 3 EURNA Belarus / Poland Bialowieza Forest Natural 4 LAC Belize Belize Barrier Reef Reserve System Natural World Heritage in Danger 5 AFR Botswana Okavango Delta Natural 6 LAC Brazil Iguaçu National Park Natural 7 LAC Brazil Cerrado Protected Areas: Chapada dos Veadeiros and Natural Emas National Parks 8 EURNA Bulgaria Pirin National Park Natural 9 AFR Cameroon Dja Faunal Reserve Natural 10 EURNA Canada Gros Morne National Park Natural 11 AFR Central African Republic Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park Natural World Heritage in Danger 12 LAC Costa Rica / Panama Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves / La Amistad Natural National Park 13 AFR Côte d'Ivoire Comoé National Park Natural World Heritage in Danger 14 AFR Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve Natural World Heritage in Danger 15 AFR Democratic Republic of the Congo Garamba National Park Natural World Heritage in Danger 16 AFR Democratic Republic of the Congo Kahuzi-Biega National Park Natural World Heritage in Danger 17 AFR Democratic Republic of the Congo Okapi Wildlife Reserve Natural World Heritage in Danger 18 AFR Democratic Republic of the Congo Salonga National Park Natural World Heritage in Danger 19 AFR Democratic Republic of the Congo Virunga National Park Natural World Heritage in Danger 20 AFR Democratic
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary
    Monthly Protection Monitoring Report – North Kivu September 2015 Executive Summary 2845 incidents have been recorded in September 2015. The number has decreased by 6,3% compared to August 2015 pendant, when 3037 incidents were reported. The territory Incidents per territory of Rutshuru has had the BENI 369 highest LUBERO 369 number of MASISI 639 incidents in NYIRAGONGO 133 September RUTSHURU 919 2015 WALIKALE 416 TOTAL 2845 Incidents per Incidents per alleged perpetrator category of victim Nombre des cas par type d’incident The majority of incidents in September 2015 were violations to the right of property and liberty PROTECTION MONITORING PMS Province du Nord Kivu 2 | UNHCR Protection Monitoring Nor th K i v u – Sept. Monthly Report PROTECTION MONITORING PMS Province du Nord Kivu I. Summary of main protection concerns Throughout September 2015, the PMS has registered 59,8% less internal displacement than in August 2015. This decrease can be justified by the relative calm perceived in significant displacement areas. On 17 September 2015, alleged NDC Cheka members pillaged Kalehe village to the Northeast of Bunyatenge and kidnapped around 30 people that were forced to transport the stolen goods to Mwanza and Mutiri, in Lubero territory. II. Protection context by territory MASISI The security situation in Masisi was characterised by clashes between FARDC and FDLR, between two different factions of FDDH (FDDH/Tuombe and FDDH/Mugwete) and between FARDC and APCLS. These conflicts have led to the massive displacement of the population from the areas affected by fighting followed by looting, killings and other violations. In Bibwe, around 400 families were displaced, among which 72 households are staying in a church and a school in Bibwe and around 330 families created a new site, accessible by car, around 2km from the Bibwe site.
    [Show full text]
  • Of the United Nations Mission in the DRC / MONUC – MONUSCO
    Assessing the of the United Nations Mission in the DRC / MONUC – MONUSCO REPORT 3/2019 Publisher: Norwegian Institute of International Affairs Copyright: © Norwegian Institute of International Affairs 2019 ISBN: 978-82-7002-346-2 Any views expressed in this publication are those of the author. Tey should not be interpreted as reflecting the views of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs. Te text may not be re-published in part or in full without the permission of NUPI and the authors. Visiting address: C.J. Hambros plass 2d Address: P.O. Box 8159 Dep. NO-0033 Oslo, Norway Internet: effectivepeaceops.net | www.nupi.no E-mail: [email protected] Fax: [+ 47] 22 99 40 50 Tel: [+ 47] 22 99 40 00 Assessing the Efectiveness of the UN Missions in the DRC (MONUC-MONUSCO) Lead Author Dr Alexandra Novosseloff, International Peace Institute (IPI), New York and Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI), Oslo Co-authors Dr Adriana Erthal Abdenur, Igarapé Institute, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Prof. Tomas Mandrup, Stellenbosch University, South Africa, and Royal Danish Defence College, Copenhagen Aaron Pangburn, Social Science Research Council (SSRC), New York Data Contributors Ryan Rappa and Paul von Chamier, Center on International Cooperation (CIC), New York University, New York EPON Series Editor Dr Cedric de Coning, NUPI External Reference Group Dr Tatiana Carayannis, SSRC, New York Lisa Sharland, Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Canberra Dr Charles Hunt, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University, Australia Adam Day, Centre for Policy Research, UN University, New York Cover photo: UN Photo/Sylvain Liechti UN Photo/ Abel Kavanagh Contents Acknowledgements 5 Acronyms 7 Executive Summary 13 Te effectiveness of the UN Missions in the DRC across eight critical dimensions 14 Strategic and Operational Impact of the UN Missions in the DRC 18 Constraints and Challenges of the UN Missions in the DRC 18 Current Dilemmas 19 Introduction 21 Section 1.
    [Show full text]
  • ACTIVE USG PROGRAMS for the DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC of the CONGO RESPONSE Last Updated 07/27/20
    ACTIVE USG PROGRAMS FOR THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO RESPONSE Last Updated 07/27/20 BAS-UELE HAUT-UELE ITURI S O U T H S U D A N COUNTRYWIDE NORTH KIVU OCHA IMA World Health Samaritan’s Purse AIRD Internews CARE C.A.R. Samaritan’s Purse Samaritan’s Purse IMA World Health IOM UNHAS CAMEROON DCA ACTED WFP INSO Medair FHI 360 UNICEF Samaritan’s Purse Mercy Corps IMA World Health NRC NORD-UBANGI IMC UNICEF Gbadolite Oxfam ACTED INSO NORD-UBANGI Samaritan’s WFP WFP Gemena BAS-UELE Internews HAUT-UELE Purse ICRC Buta SCF IOM SUD-UBANGI SUD-UBANGI UNHAS MONGALA Isiro Tearfund IRC WFP Lisala ACF Medair UNHCR MONGALA ITURI U Bunia Mercy Corps Mercy Corps IMA World Health G A EQUATEUR Samaritan’s NRC EQUATEUR Kisangani N Purse WFP D WFPaa Oxfam Boende A REPUBLIC OF Mbandaka TSHOPO Samaritan’s ATLANTIC NORTH GABON THE CONGO TSHUAPA Purse TSHOPO KIVU Lake OCEAN Tearfund IMA World Health Goma Victoria Inongo WHH Samaritan’s Purse RWANDA Mercy Corps BURUNDI Samaritan’s Purse MAI-NDOMBE Kindu Bukavu Samaritan’s Purse PROGRAM KEY KINSHASA SOUTH MANIEMA SANKURU MANIEMA KIVU WFP USAID/BHA Non-Food Assistance* WFP ACTED USAID/BHA Food Assistance** SA ! A IMA World Health TA N Z A N I A Kinshasa SH State/PRM KIN KASAÏ Lusambo KWILU Oxfam Kenge TANGANYIKA Agriculture and Food Security KONGO CENTRAL Kananga ACTED CRS Cash Transfers For Food Matadi LOMAMI Kalemie KASAÏ- Kabinda WFP Concern Economic Recovery and Market Tshikapa ORIENTAL Systems KWANGO Mbuji T IMA World Health KWANGO Mayi TANGANYIKA a KASAÏ- n Food Vouchers g WFP a n IMC CENTRAL y i k
    [Show full text]
  • 620290Wp0democ0box036147
    Public Disclosure Authorized WORLD DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2011 BACKGROUND CASE STUDY EMOCRATIC EPUBLIC OF THE ONGO Public Disclosure Authorized D R C Tony Gambino March 2, 2011 (Final Revisions Received) The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the author. They do not necessarily represent the views of the World Development Report 2011 team, the World Public Disclosure Authorized Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent Tony Gambino has worked on development and foreign policy issues for more than thirty years. For the last fourteen years, he has concentrated on the problems of fragile states, with a special focus on the states of Central Africa. He coordinated USAID’s re-engagement in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) in 1997 and served there as USAID Mission Director from 2001-2004. He began his work in the Congo in 1979. The author wishes to thank Gérard Prunier, René Lemarchand, Ivor Fung (Director of the UN Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa), Rachel Locke, (Head, Africa Team, Office for Conflict Mitigation and Management, Bureau for Africa, USAID), and Thierry Vircoulon (Project Director, Central Africa, International Crisis Group) for their thoughtful, insightful comments. The paper was greatly improved as a result of their questions, concerns, and comments. Remaining flaws are due to the author’s own analytical shortcomings. This paper was largely Public Disclosure Authorized completed in early 2010. Therefore, it does not include information on or analysis of the change from MONUC to MONUSCO or other important events that occurred later in 2010 or in early 2011.
    [Show full text]